 |
|
Selected Articles from our
newsletter
The C.A.S.H. Courier
ARTICLE from the Fall 2008 Issue
The Constitution Does Not Protect Hunting
This Intentional Misinterpretation Has Led To Unconstitutional Laws
By Herman Lenz
Our lawmakers take an oath to uphold both state and federal Constitutions.
Yet they pass unconstitutional laws and allow unconstitutional actions to go
on. They and the law enforcement personnel KNOW the average citizen cannot
spend a million dollars or hundreds of hours in court.
A professional writer from Cedar Falls, IA, wrote an article in the Waterloo
Courier basically declaring the Constitution dead. He said,
Now the
Constitution is mostly a ceremonial object. We bring it out on special
occasions. People quote it when they wish to be seen as correct in an
historical or cultural sense. Other than that, it is a dead document.
Progressives already know it. Conservatives keep insisting it can’t be true.
Most in power don’t know or care what it says.
No Equal Justice under the Law
Law enforcement personnel point guns at, and even shoot, unarmed and
non-attacking people and pets, and no charges are ever filed. They are
acting within department policy. So, their policy overrides or overrules the
Constitution. Any common citizen would be fed to the lions for doing the
same to them.
The Iowa Constitution, Article 1-Bill of Rights, sec. 6 says: “The General
Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or
immunities, which, upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all
citizens.”
Yet, hunters are given special privileges or protections, making it illegal
to harass them, while there is no such law making it illegal to harass
animal rights activists, landowners, or residents. Recently in IA a law was
passed making it illegal to bully homosexuals. Public pressure added several
more classes of people, but NOT animal rights activists.
The hunter harassment law will have to go all the way to the US Supreme
Court. I say that because I believe the animal rights people will lose in
state court, as the hunting lobby and vested interests would be right there
to wear them down financially. But if ALL the animal rights organizations
were to unite in such a project, they could take that unconstitutional law
down.
I’m not “anti-gun,” having plenty myself, but I don’t like the way they get
used. Shooting paper and clay are okay, collecting is okay, but hunting is
not.
The primary purpose of the Second Amendment was not to protect sport
hunting, but was to insure that common citizens always had the means and
firepower to defend freedom and overthrow a despotic government that might
come into being. The founding fathers of America had just come out of a
system where only the police and top officials were armed, and they wanted
to be sure it didn’t happen again. The Declaration of Independence states it
is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such a government. The
National Guard, police, and Army aren’t going to “throw off” such
government. Rather they enforce the despotic laws the government tells them
to.
The Constitution and Bill of Rights have nothing to do with protecting
hunters’ rights, especially when the hunters are using this
misinterpretation to deny the homeowner and wildlife protectors their First
Amendment rights.
Herman Lenz is a long time C.A.S.H. member.
|
|
