NRA pushes “right to hunt and fish” amendments
Four ballot measures this election are part of the gun lobby's preemptive fight against animal rights groups
Topics: Nebraska, Humane Society, Idaho, Wyoming, 2012 Elections, NRA, Gun Control, Guns, Kentucky, Elections News, News, Politics News
In four states this November, voters will decide whether to institute a constitutional amendment ensuring the “right to hunt and fish.” These measures are being pushed by the National Rifle Association primarily as a way of preemptively protecting hunters and gun owners from “radical” animal rights groups.
Since 1996, twelve states have put into place constitutional provisions to ensure the right to hunt and fish. Vermont also has a measure in place, but it’s been around since 1777. In the other states, the measures represent a supposed fear that outdoorsmen’s rights could be at stake if animal rights groups have their way.
Next month Kentucky, Idaho, Wyoming and Nebraska all have ballot measures up for a vote after passing the bills out of their respective legislatures. In Nebraska and Kentucky, the measures carve out the right for people to “to hunt, to fish and to harvest wildlife”; in Wyoming and Idaho, the bills specify the right to “hunt, fish and trap.”
To most people, these amendments probably sound like a solution without a problem. But the NRA has been warning voters and state legislators that “radical” animal rights groups could come for their guns and traps any day now. As the NRA’s legislative arm, the NRA-ILA, wrote on its blog, it’s working to “protect the citizens’ hunting heritage from attacks initiated by well-funded anti-hunting extremists who have assailed sportsmen throughout the country in recent years.”
The main “extremists” the NRA-ILA refers to are PETA and the Humane Society of the United States (unrelated to the organization that runs local animal shelters but often attacked as radical for pushing for things such as crackdowns on puppy mills). But HSUS says it has no plans to go after hunting and fishing rights, and it called the Kentucky amendment “inconsequential and merely window dressing.”
Jillian Rayfield is an Assistant News Editor for Salon, focusing on politics. Follow her on Twitter at @jillrayfield or email her at jrayfield@salon.com. More Jillian Rayfield.





Please Don't Fire Howard Kurtz, CNN
Mitch McConnell Really Wants You To Know He Loves The Kentucky Derby
CNN Panelist Calls Mitt Romney A "Religious Fanatic" For Encouraging Mormon Graduates To Have Families
How The Supreme Court's DOMA Ruling Could Upend The Immigration Debate
Ken Cuccinelli Once Filed An Amendment To Change Virginia's State Song To The Beatles' "Taxman"

Comments
70 Comments