Privilege or right?

[sam barrett]

I wanted to post this in the pow wow, but thought it might get moved here anyway.  After reading Ray Hammond's thread today (and agreeing with) I started to think.  Is hunting a privilege or right?  I completely believe its a right.  We have the right to persue happiness in this country.  Also, our elected officials are to be "servants" to us, not ruling over us doling out whatever "privileges" they see fit for us, plus the bible, my own personal authority, says that man is to have diminion over animals and use to our benefit.  And finally if you believe hunting is a privilege then when did we become so screwed up in this country that killing a baby (abortion) is a right, but killing an animal is a privilege?  Thanks for your thoughts.

[BTH]

Sam, interesting post. Sure it's a right...unless the hunter breaks the law, negatively affecting another person, and then the right should be revoked. Splitting hairs? Maybe so. It should spark some discussion.

[Brian Krebs]

It is a right. I know many states consider it a privilege- but we have as humans; bowhunted for over 50,000 years. That is in a traditional manner. That I can defend.
 
 Traditional bowhunting honors bowhunting by staying within the limitations of the basic premise of a bow.

 Aldo Leopold said that there should never be so many bowhunters as to effect management of game; we should be as insignificant as normal mortality predators aside.
 So- when it comes to the right to bowhunt; I totally believe that traditional bowhunters have an inherent right to bowhunt.

 Hunting is a right; it is one we have to do in a responsible manner; and if someone is abusing wildlife; selling game= or shooting and letting it lay - or sawing off antlers and leaving the meat... well that is no more hunting: than rape is to consenting sex.

Sex is a primal instinct; bowhunting is a primal instinct; a connection to something outside of ourselves: is a primal instinct.

 There are those states that consider hunting a privilege and not a right.

 Well - lets look at what the reintroduction of the wolf has brought out- in us that are effected by it.

 Anti-hunters have pretty much ruled and controlled the wolf situation; and it has led to decreased and endangered elk populations in some areas.
 I think we can see that we cannot continue to hunt- without becoming involved in some way: politically.

 But too: I believe we can see how many people are irked about not being able to hunt - not only because of reduced numbers of elk and deer; but because the elk and deer are always on high alert.

 It has created a rumbling: that is not being ignored.

 To leave the right to hunt as a privilege- is to allow the possibility: that the right will not be protected as it should be.

 We can see that with other things; like gun control.

 How did we get so screwed up in this country Sam? Well we did it through apathy.

 When this country was formed; only 40 % of the people that lived here participated in any way shape or form- to separate from England: and become independent.
 That means 60 % of the people held no interest in having freedom and rights that England did not give them.

 That 60 percent was not asked to leave when the country was formed. They were not prevented from influence.
 So - why respect those that of the same ilk ?

 The right to hunt is part of the instinct of 'man'. It was not enumerated in the Constitution; because in my belief; nobody thought it was inconceivable that someone would try to stop hunting. At that time; game was plentiful somewhere. There were major other considerations; like the right to free speech; and the other things noted in the bill of rights.

 There had been a game law in a sense early on before the country was a country; and that was not to use some precious food fish for corn and crop fertilization. But it was not until hunters started getting political and stopped market hunting: that we saw a concern for wildlife.

 Hunters were the first to care about the loss of game animals; and the loss of game animals to anti-hunters is of no consequence now - as evidenced by the wolf situation we see in Montana; Idaho and Wyoming. Anti-hunters are willing to let all game die: to allow the wolf to roam.
 That is not conservation; it is not logical; it is not biological.
 Now; as in the time of Teddy Roosevelt - we hunters are the ones concerned with the wild.

 And that is because in part; of our instinct to hunt.

 That's all too much to be just a privilege.

Its a right.

 The older I get; the sorer my muscles at the end of the day; and the start of the next. Yes I see the fact for me personally; my drive to hunt becomes only the privilege- of my drive to stay healthy and alive.

 So Sam.. hunting is a right. An intrinsic human right. I treat it that way; and I will always consider it that way.

[Davo]

Hunting is a right in its purest form.  Man and woman have a right to sustain life to obtain food, water shelter.  Hunting was part of that right and is part of our history, heritage and how it is we survived as a species ourselves. If we did not hunt we would not live. At least that's what I think and I am rarely wrong just ask my wife.  As far as wolves look at WI, the wolf has dessimated the deer herd and any dog that get close in the northern half of the state.  Slim pickens north of hwy 8

[Don Stokes]

My interest in wildlife and hunting has been with me since I was born. As a small child I wore out the A and B volumes of the encyclopedia- animals and birds. When I got my first BB gun I became a hunter. At 14 I started bowhunting deer. It's not something I have done by choice- it's in my blood.

How could something like that be even considered as a mere "privilege"? For me, it goes even deeper than the concept of a "right". I think it's genetic.

"Let that boy boogie-woogie. It's in him, and it's got to come out!" Boogie Chillen', John Lee Hooker.

[sam barrett]

Thanks for the responses guys.  It is reassuring to find some like minded people.  What is scary though is that alot of people, on this site even who should know better, believe hunting is a privilege.  They will do whatever the gov't tells them without question.  Thanks again.

[Jeremy]

Whether we feel hunting is a right or privilege is immaterial in the eyes of the law.

In many states, hunting is a right protected by the state's Constitution.  It would take a constitutional amendment to change that.  The regulation of hunting however is a power granted to the game agencies and/or state legislature.  That's where we need to be active.

[GMMAT]

Whether we feel hunting is a right or privilege is immaterial in the eyes of the law.
 

Well said.

As a citizen of these United States of America, our "rights" are spelled out in our "Bill of Rights".  I don't see "hunting" listed.

I'm not saying it's specifically EXCLUDED, but it's not in the document.

If hunting was a "right", we'd have no restrictions on it.  We do (and plenty).  Privileges can be tightly regulated and, with little justification, taken away. "Rights" present greater obstacles to confiscation.

If something must be provided to us at the expense of someone else in order for us to have it, then it may be an entitlement, a privilage, or an act of charity – but it is not a “right”.

We're best served when we leave emotions out of such discussions.

[mrpenguin]

Originally posted by sam barrett:
 And finally if you believe hunting is a privilege then when did we become so screwed up in this country that killing a baby (abortion) is a right, but killing an animal is a privilege?  Thanks for your thoughts.

This hits the nail right on the head... well said, Sir, well said!

[GMMAT]

That question is suited for another thread, and has nothing to with whether HUNTING is a right or priviledge.

[Oregon Okie]

Thanks for posting this in the appropriate forum.

[mrpenguin]

Originally posted by GMMAT:
 

Whether we feel hunting is a right or privilege is immaterial in the eyes of the law.
 

Well said.

As a citizen of these United States of America, our "rights" are spelled out in our "Bill of Rights".  I don't see "hunting" listed.

I'm not saying it's specifically EXCLUDED, but it's not in the document.
[/b]

Yes, but there are several other rights that are rights not listed in the Bill of Rights.  Really, it boils down to interpretation of the law... which is what courts do.

In the final analysis, let's see how well the public supports anti-hunting legislation when they have to explain to their children why there are so many dead deer on the side of the road or why their cats keep being eaten by coyotes... OR black bears start roaming into their yards looking for garbage... OR deer eat all the money they invested in flowers and plants in their gardens... OR... need I go on??

PLUS, as I stated in another reply, big business runs this country, not the people... unfortunately (how else can we explain why a bunch of bankers can rob the country, get a 'bail-out', a bonus or golden parachute and continue to screw us?)... The good news about that is that hunting and fishing is a billion dollar business and there is NO WAY any legislator with even 3 functioning brain cells could possibly want to shut down that huge a sect of the market... it would have immense repercussions on the economy... no politician wants that on their resume come election time... and let's not forget the silent majority in the country, many of whom hunt or fish.

[Fletcher]

Morally, hunting is a right, IMO.  Legally, it depends on your state's Constitution.  Here in Illinois it is legally classified as a privilege; licensed and controlled.

If hunting were to become illegal, I would need to become better and more discrete.

[Brian Krebs]

Even among us there are those that would say hunting is a privilege and those that say it is a right.

 The muzzleloader man Jim Shockey says about hunting; 'for some its what they do; for others its what they are'.

 Keeping that in mind; you will get two different views.

 Not all rights that Americans have are spelled out or enumerated in the Constitution. There is no right to have sex. There is no right to breathe; there is no enumerated right: for a lot of rights we have.

[freefeet]

It's might that makes things allowable, not right.  Those with the might (usually government) dictate rights and privileges.  The mighty assign rights and privileges according to their whims, usually whatever allows them to maintain their grip on their might - ie, they want your votes.

For example, in Europe the mighty passed the "human rights act", and then the mighty told the masses what their human rights were.  The masses were never allowed to tell the mighty what their rights were.

In the uk it's illegal to bowhunt.  We've been shooting bows here longer than any human has live in North America, yet we have no right to continue to do so because the mighty have taken the right away.  They took it away because they could, because they had the might.

At the end of the day, nothing in Nature has any rights whatsoever.  Everything exists through it's might to do so.

IMHO      

[VAFarmer]

You are in the right frame of mind, politically and morally Sam.  

The problem is definition.  

How something is defined makes it a right, a priviledge, a misdemeanor, a felony, etc..........

Be advised, when it come to anything involving a tool that can be defined as a weapon, government is against it.  The folks over in the UK know this all too well.  
Tools/weapons in the general populations hands' is not popular with government-because armed folks are harder to control.
So be it sport shooting, hunting, swords, hatchet throwing........whatever.  A government is against that-or is steadily headed towards being against it.
This is often sold to us under the guise of safety or being a "more civilized society".

Franklin had several quotes-about governments rights in regulation of rights.   They are to the principal of government what the Proverbs were to the Bible in most cases.

Be afraid of any government that is afraid of you being armed.

God bless,

Farmer

[Davo]

I'm no preacher and I miss my fair share of church but I believe man has had a way of screwing up a lot of good things. One of those is the rights granted by God. Genesis 1:26-28 - From creation man was given dominion over all animals.  As far as privileges those that govern me have the privilege to do so and can be removed by a well educated group of hunters who hold their rights sacred. Emotion governs everything if it is no longer part of your discussion your dead.

[horatio1226]

I think that I have the right to feed my family.
I really don't care what the law says. If my family is hungry, I will feed them.

[NorthernCaliforniaHunter]

Control resources - food, water, shelter, access to information - and you control the lives of those who depend on those resources. That's slavery, pure and simple.

[freefeet]

Originally posted by NorthernCaliforniaHunter:
Control resources - food, water, shelter, access to information - and you control the lives of those who depend on those resources. That's slavery, pure and simple.

It's called "Hydraulic Despotism".  Read all the "Dune" saga by Frank Herbert.  He who controls the spice, controls the universe.

Basically, pick any essential that people need and control who gets it and how much in order to manipulate said people and you have "Hydraulic Despotism".

Once again, it comes back to who has the might.