2nd amendment

[EatDeer]

Hunting isn't a "right" it's a privilege, and "god" isn't going to restore it if it's revoked by law. The consitution written in 1833 just about sums it up for me, how different it would be read if wrote in todays age and time.  Just like in the school's of today, the word "god" would not be found.

[Highlander Archery]

ORIGINAL: EatDeer

Hunting isn't a "right" it's a privilege, and "god" isn't going to restore it if it's revoked by law. The consitution written in 1833 just about sums it up for me, how different it would be read if wrote in todays age and time.  Just like in the school's of today, the word "god" would not be found.

Spot on, but many States have amended their Constitutions to codify Hunting and Fishing as Rights. Here is one from WI that passed in 2003

Right to fish, hunt, trap, and take game. SECTION 26.
[As created April 2003] The people have the right to fish, hunt,
trap, and take game subject only to reasonable restrictions as
prescribed by law. [2001 J.R. 16, 2003 J.R. 8, vote April 2003]

[Highlander Archery]

One of the realy good parts of the ruling is that when Scalia says that hunting was one of the more prominent reasons for the 2nd he implies that hunting is a protected reason to keep and bear arms, thus codifying hunting specifically for the first time ever.

[howhill1]

just because "mans" law doesnt have room for the word or the will of god doesnt change the fact that all we have comes from him.

[hunter480]

ORIGINAL: howhill1

just because "mans" law doesnt have room for the word or the will of god doesnt change the fact that all we have comes from him.

 
Well said......

[EatDeer]

I'm going to ramble now, you might want to skip this post.  So your rights, can be revoked through law, then is it really a right, or a instead privilege provided by abiding laws? Put it this way , at x-mas time you take a box and wrap it up nice a shiney. Your kids are going to think its a present, until they open it up and find nothing in the box. Hunting rights are kinda the same thing, They mean alot, until they are taken away.  Maybe I don't get the whole picture on this hunting right vs privilege issue, but I don't see how it could be relevent, if the country can revoke that right when you break the law. 

[EatDeer]

ORIGINAL: howhill1

just because "mans" law doesnt have room for the word or the will of god doesnt change the fact that all we have comes from him.

That is very true howhill1, but with all things that come from God , ther are many things in this world I would rather be without. 

[howhill1]

i think weve unwittingly uncovered the very point of this discussion. the things we hold so dear such as freedom of religion, gun ownership, hunting and fishing, etc etc......... are GOD given rights that can be wqiped away by the powers that be.........but only if we allow ourselves to be convinced that each other is wrong to point of dissention where we we will no longer stand together and say NO your not going to take that GOD GIVEN RIGHT  from me or my neighbor. make sense?

[JPH]

I ducked out of this thread a while back, but I'll give it another try.
 
Howhill1, I think you are on the right track but I do differ on a couple of technical points. If a right is "inalienable" it cannot be taken away, ever. It is stamped on our soul by our Creator. So the right to self-preservation can only be infringed upon, never taken. In other words, human beings in China have the same right, but it is infringed upon by the communists. Unfortunately (and I know I'll get bashed for this), I do not really see hunting, at least in modern America, as an inalienable right.
 
Make no mistake, I am very pro-2nd Amendment and pro-hunting. But when we begin to invoke the name of God, we have to be very careful not to use it loosely.

[Highlander Archery]

ORIGINAL: JPH

I ducked out of this thread a while back, but I'll give it another try.

Howhill1, I think you are on the right track but I do differ on a couple of technical points. If a right is "inalienable" it cannot be taken away, ever. It is stamped on our soul by our Creator. So the right to self-preservation can only be infringed upon, never taken. In other words, human beings in China have the same right, but it is infringed upon by the communists. Unfortunately (and I know I'll get bashed for this), I do not really see hunting, at least in modern America, as an inalienable right.

Make no mistake, I am very pro-2nd Amendment and pro-hunting. But when we begin to invoke the name of God, we have to be very careful not to use it loosely.

JPH, you are spot on in your analysis. Hunting to the general public is not a Right in the same context as the Bill of Rights, Neither is it a Right in the basic context of the word. Eat Deer is right, it is a privledge.

States that have amended their Constitutions to reflect a Right to hunt and fish are on the correct track, but even then, the fact that SCOTUS, in the analysis, mentions hunting specifically gives it some credence and teeth that never existed with the 2nd Amendment before. For the sport it bodes well in the fight against the antis, but it is still just a privledge.