Welcome
Welcome to SuiJurisForum.com --- You are currently viewing our boards as a guest. Members of this FREE Community are able to gain access to write capabilities, private messaging, a chat room, extra forums, and more!

***If you decide to Join our FREE Community... then DON'T FORGET to PASS/SKIP the multiple ADVERTISEMENTS during Registration that ask for Phone Numbers!! ***

State Constitutional Right to Hunt & Fish

Discuss anything about life situation.

Re: State Constitutional Right to Hunt & Fish

Postby palani » Sun Oct 26, 2014 4:27 pm

PHOSPHENE wrote:"Fishing" is not an un-a-lienable right. It's not protected by the Constitution. Otherwise, any dirty hippie could wander onto your property and take fish from your ponds, because it's his "birth-right".


You do know that natural law dictates that you may use as much of a thing as you need for your survival?

Now if dirty hippy were netting with the intention of selling fish into commerce that sort of activity could be a trespass on your (the land-owner ....(land produces few fish by the way) ... ) right to be free from the mischief of others.

In Arizona on public land (incorrectly identified as BLM ground) you may open (and hopefully close) any gate and if stopped and asked why you are there point to a distant mountain and say that you are on your way there to examine it more closely.
Make me one with everything.
-- Zen Master to the hot dog vendor
palani
Out of Commerce
 
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:46 am
Has thanked: 160 time
Have thanks: 465 time

 

Re: State Constitutional Right to Hunt & Fish

Postby PHOSPHENE » Sun Oct 26, 2014 4:33 pm

palani wrote:
PHOSPHENE wrote:"Fishing" is not an un-a-lienable right. It's not protected by the Constitution. Otherwise, any dirty hippie could wander onto your property and take fish from your ponds, because it's his "birth-right".


You do know that natural law dictates that you may use as much of a thing as you need for your survival?

Now if dirty hippy were netting with the intention of selling fish into commerce that sort of activity could be a trespass on your (the land-owner ....(land produces few fish by the way) ... ) right to be free from the mischief of others.

In Arizona on public land (incorrectly identified as BLM ground) you may open (and hopefully close) any gate and if stopped and asked why you are there point to a distant mountain and say that you are on your way there to examine it more closely.

As long as it's survival related, I may trespass on your property? That's kind of you. Commerce is part of survival BTW. Who decides how many fish I need to survive? You, me, the government, or nature? Sounds like you're cool with licenses, as long as you're the one issuing them.
"This Constitution is said to have beautiful features; but when I come to examine these features, Sir, they appear to me horribly frightful" - Patrick Henry (June 7, 1788)
User avatar
PHOSPHENE
Out of the State
 
Posts: 2776
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 4:31 pm
Location: Shell Beach
Has thanked: 103 time
Have thanks: 215 time

Re: State Constitutional Right to Hunt & Fish

Postby palani » Sun Oct 26, 2014 4:54 pm

PHOSPHENE wrote:As long as it's survival related, I may trespass on your property? That's kind of you. Commerce is part of survival BTW. Who decides how many fish I need to survive? You, me, the government, or nature?
As long as you are looking to survive only then you are not trespassing on any rights I claim. Ownership of land is a commercial concept. It is a 'title' and titles may be bought and sold. The things title holders engage in is called 'commerce'. They don't do this for their own survival. They play around in commerce to build an estate. Their heir(s) then get to play around with their own estate. Nobody interferes with people in survival mode. It comes under the heading of NECESSITY.


PHOSPHENE wrote:Sounds like you're cool with licenses, as long as you're the one issuing them.

I am ok with licenses as long as they don't interfere with my survival. As licenses are typically only used for regulating commercial activities I don't feel threatened by them so long as I am not engaged in any of these commerce plane activities.
Make me one with everything.
-- Zen Master to the hot dog vendor
palani
Out of Commerce
 
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:46 am
Has thanked: 160 time
Have thanks: 465 time

Re: State Constitutional Right to Hunt & Fish

Postby PHOSPHENE » Sun Oct 26, 2014 5:07 pm

palani wrote:Ownership of land is a commercial concept.

And that's the paradox with the theory about how un-a-lienable rights end at commerce. One of your un-a-lienable rights, is the unlimited right to contract. Contracts ARE commerce related. Commerce is part of survival.

Self-sufficiency is a myth, a pipe dream. There aren't enough hours in a day. Unless you wanna walk around in a leather loin cloth with a stone axe, you will need to trade for things you need to survive...like clothes, tools, etc. If I need to net an abundance of fish from your pond so I can buy some shoes, then that's survival related.

If "natural rights" are superior to "commercial rights", then your property rights are inferior to my right to take fish from your pond, or shoot deer, or trap rabbits, or whatever.
"This Constitution is said to have beautiful features; but when I come to examine these features, Sir, they appear to me horribly frightful" - Patrick Henry (June 7, 1788)
User avatar
PHOSPHENE
Out of the State
 
Posts: 2776
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 4:31 pm
Location: Shell Beach
Has thanked: 103 time
Have thanks: 215 time

Re: State Constitutional Right to Hunt & Fish

Postby palani » Sun Oct 26, 2014 5:28 pm

PHOSPHENE wrote: Land ownership is part of survival.

Really?

Leviticus 25:23
The land shall not be sold for ever: for the land is mine, for ye are strangers and sojourners with me.


PHOSPHENE wrote:If "natural rights" are superior to "commercial rights", then your property rights are inferior to my right to take fish from that pond, or shoot deer, or trap rabbits, or whaatever.
Isn't that my point? Bone up on Law of the Forest and the find difference between a chase and a warren. People with commercial property rights have never had exclusive rights to hunt wildlife or over fish.

PHOSPHENE wrote:Self-sufficiency is a myth, a pipe dream. There aren't enough hours in a day. Unless you wanna walk around in a leather loin cloth with a stone axe, you will need to trade for things you need to survive...like clothes, shoes, tools, etc.
Why do you need to complain of a system that is regulating your activities by license when you are more than willing to regulate your own activities by your lack of imagination?
Make me one with everything.
-- Zen Master to the hot dog vendor
palani
Out of Commerce
 
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:46 am
Has thanked: 160 time
Have thanks: 465 time

Re: State Constitutional Right to Hunt & Fish

Postby PHOSPHENE » Sun Oct 26, 2014 5:44 pm

palani wrote: People with commercial property rights have never had exclusive rights to hunt wildlife or over fish.

Correct. People with guns have exclusivity. If a bunch of dirty hippies start fishing your pond, they'll get an opportunity to explain their natural rights to Smith & Wesson. And if a bunch of dirty civilians start fishing the government pond....you get the picture.
"This Constitution is said to have beautiful features; but when I come to examine these features, Sir, they appear to me horribly frightful" - Patrick Henry (June 7, 1788)
User avatar
PHOSPHENE
Out of the State
 
Posts: 2776
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 4:31 pm
Location: Shell Beach
Has thanked: 103 time
Have thanks: 215 time

Re: State Constitutional Right to Hunt & Fish

Postby palani » Sun Oct 26, 2014 6:19 pm

PHOSPHENE wrote: If a bunch of dirty hippies start fishing your pond, they'll get an opportunity to explain their natural rights to Smith & Wesson. And if a bunch of dirty civilians start fishing the government pond....you get the picture.


The beauty of necessity is that the blade cuts two ways. Necessity is a contest to see who gets to survive. Note I am using 'survive' in the natural law context rather than as defined in Bouviers

SURVIVOR. The longest liver of two or more persons.
Make me one with everything.
-- Zen Master to the hot dog vendor
palani
Out of Commerce
 
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:46 am
Has thanked: 160 time
Have thanks: 465 time

Re: State Constitutional Right to Hunt & Fish

Postby grndslm » Sat Nov 01, 2014 9:16 pm

Here's how the ballot initiative is worded....

"This proposed constitutional amendment establishes the hunting, fishing, and the harvesting of wildlife, including by use of traditional methods, as a constitutional right subject only to such regulations and restrictions that promote wildlife conservation and management as the legislature may prescribe by general law."

Umm.... no thanks.
A lawyer cannot claim that you have rights. -- U.S. v. Johnson, 76 F. Supp. 538

"When Tyranny becomes Law, Rebellion becomes Duty." -- Someone from the Confederacy, circa 1860
User avatar
grndslm
Out of the State
 
Posts: 2759
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 10:55 pm
Location: A Rebel Fort
Has thanked: 375 time
Have thanks: 203 time

Re: State Constitutional Right to Hunt & Fish

Postby PHOSPHENE » Sat Nov 01, 2014 11:38 pm

grndslm wrote:Here's how the ballot initiative is worded....

"This proposed constitutional amendment establishes the hunting, fishing, and the harvesting of wildlife, including by use of traditional methods, as a constitutional right subject only to such regulations and restrictions that promote wildlife conservation and management as the legislature may prescribe by general law."

Umm.... no thanks.

Yeah. They always add an "at the whim of the legislators" at the end. That's a deal breaker.

Kinda like what they did with the sweeping clause in the constitution. "Congress' powers are limited to this short list...and everything else that's necessary"
"This Constitution is said to have beautiful features; but when I come to examine these features, Sir, they appear to me horribly frightful" - Patrick Henry (June 7, 1788)
User avatar
PHOSPHENE
Out of the State
 
Posts: 2776
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 4:31 pm
Location: Shell Beach
Has thanked: 103 time
Have thanks: 215 time

Re: State Constitutional Right to Hunt & Fish

Postby grndslm » Sun Nov 02, 2014 5:50 pm

The be-all, end-all treatise surrounding the right to hunt & fish: https://www.animallaw.info/article/tthe ... nstitution

Moral of the story is that of "17 states have already passed this amendment", however THIS AMENDMENT is not identical in any of the 17 states. 12 of them turn the natural right to hunt, fish, and generally eat into a civil right, which can be removed at the whim of the legislators.

Only five states have reserved the right to hunt & fish alongside the right to bear arms, as legitimate rights that shall remain inviolable -- Deleware, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, and West Virginia.

The bandwagon effect is going to eat Mississippians for lunch and spit them out as inedible.
A lawyer cannot claim that you have rights. -- U.S. v. Johnson, 76 F. Supp. 538

"When Tyranny becomes Law, Rebellion becomes Duty." -- Someone from the Confederacy, circa 1860
User avatar
grndslm
Out of the State
 
Posts: 2759
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 10:55 pm
Location: A Rebel Fort
Has thanked: 375 time
Have thanks: 203 time

PreviousNext

Return to Living and Survival

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron
suspicion-preferred