First question then. WHO determines then what is "right and wrong"? You? Me? The current majority?
I see your point about the Constitution, and do agree that when we deviate from that the wheels start to come off. But there's an awful lot of "grey area" in between.
I know there are two extremes within the world of hunting today....those who believe that the hunting of wildlife should be based on one thing and one thing only; the number of deer killed to maintain the resource within balance with the habitat. How, when, and where have no relevance whatsoever. There are those who look at hunting in the context of "sport" hunting, with the limitations that comes with it.
Most of us fall somewhere between the two, and that's where the trouble starts.
Hunting for many of us is based on TRADITION. That will differ among us based on where we were raised. What's acceptable and traditional in one area will differ from another. Hound hunting for deer is one example.
But you have to consider another factor...the non-hunting public. Like it or not, when it comes to hunting's fate being determined at the ballot box (and that IS where it will be determined), then it WILL be that sector of the voting public who determines it, because they are the vast majority.
We have no Constitutional right to hunt. Yeah, yeah...I know...some states have passed right to hunt laws, but all they do is to recognize that hunting is a traditional and accepted use of game management policy. The final say is STILL based on what that state's game and fish department have to say about it. When we are no longer acceptable to that sector, then we are finished.
So somewhere bewteen total anarchy and hunting with a pea-shooter while wearing a bllindfold and standing on one leg is where we need to be.
Offer No Apologies.....
NRA Endowment Life Member