Hunting and 2a-related ballot initiatives passed

[maximus83]

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2010/results/ballot.measures/

Highlights:

* Right to hunt measures passed in:
Arkansas
South Carolina
Tennessee

Note: Oddly, a RTH measure appears to be failing in Arizona.


* Right to bear arms measure passed in:
Kansas

[500grains]

Good!!

Not sure why RTH would fail in AZ. Maybe because the game is sparse due to the desert environment. Or too many libtards from the east coast.

[LHS]

Good!!

Not sure why RTH would fail in AZ. Maybe because the game is sparse due to the desert environment. Or too many libtards from the east coast.

I think a lot of it was due to the provision that the legislature would have exclusive rights to modify hunting regulations. The legislature here is somewhat... eccentric :)

Still, I voted for it. We're getting more and more libtards in the major cities, and we need to solidify our rights before they outnumber us.

[uwe1]

Good!!

Not sure why RTH would fail in AZ. Maybe because the game is sparse due to the desert environment. Or too many libtards from the east coast.


I think a lot of it was due to the provision that the legislature would have exclusive rights to modify hunting regulations. The legislature here is somewhat... eccentric :)

Still, I voted for it. We're getting more and more libtards in the major cities, and we need to solidify our rights before they outnumber us.

This was why I wasn't too thrilled with the provision. Hunting here has been fine for years....Why the hell do I want some stupid elected officials messing with it.

We have been getting a huge influx of people for California over the last five years. How secure are you in their political beliefs trending conservative?

[maximus83]

Hunting here has been fine for years....Why the hell do I want some stupid elected officials messing with it.


Here's the description that was provided of the amendment to the AZ state constitution:

"This measure would add a constitutional amendment stating that Arizonans have the "right to hunt, fish and harvest wildlife lawfully." It would also give the state legislature the exclusive authority to make laws regarding hunting, fishing and harvesting wildlife."

I don't know AZ politics that well, so you may have a valid point about leaving it alone. At the same time, the strategy here with the "right to hunt" law is clearly a protective/defensive strategy. In a similar example, think about the preemptive "right-to-carry" laws that have been enacted by many state legislatures recently. The purpose of these laws is to make it hard for local city and municipal governments to pass ordinances that conflict with the right to carry. Once you've amended your state constitution with a right to carry or a right to hunt, it is much harder for individual towns--for example a large town that gets infected with an influx of libtards--to create conflicting ordinances that restrict those rights.

I get it that you could also have a concern at the state level, just as you could at the city level. Still, in general, observing how things have worked in many states across the country, it seems like working at the state level has been a pretty good strategy to proactively create amendments designed to (1) protect rights that we know libtards are working hard to destroy, and (2) preempt local pockets of libtards from trying to restrict those rights by using city/municipal ordinances.