Vote for Your Right to Hunt and Fish in Arizona On November 2nd (professionals, law)

[Mouser]

Proposition 109 is a proposed constitutional amendment that would protect our hunting heritage from attacks by well-funded, anti-hunting activists who have attacked sportsmen throughout the country in recent years.

NRA-ILA :: Arizona: Yes On 109 (http://www.nraila.org/yeson109/ - broken link)

[observer53]

I don't see the need to amend the state Constitution to do this. Sometimes all these iniitiatives just make me want to leave them blank on the ballot, or "just vote no".

[JAinAZ]

Originally Posted by observer53

I don't see the need to amend the state Constitution to do this. Sometimes all these iniitiatives just make me want to leave them blank on the ballot, or "just vote no".

It wouldn't be necessary to propose these types of amendments if our freedoms weren't being challenged.

We should all be happy to see amendments proposed, even if we don't agree with them, because it shows that we as citizens of this state have the opportunity to effect change without having to rely solely on government officials.

You can leave them blank, that's your right, but please don't vote no to something you haven't researched just to voice your disapproval of the number of amendments. Use the amendment process to make YOUR opinions known (whatever they are), and to help shape the direction of Arizona. It is freedom/democracy at work!

[kdog]

Well here are some opposing thoughts.

"Prop 109 seeks to invest "exclusive authority" for wildlife policy-making in the legislature, making it more difficult for voters to decide these issues, and it could even require the Arizona Game and Fish Commission to gain approval from the legislature if it sets any rules governing hunting or trapping. In short, Prop 109 politicizes all wildlife policy-making issues, and it supplants science-based and citizen-based decision-making in favor of partisan politics. A special interest organization, the NRA, has managed to maintain a tight grip on the behavior of lawmakers, and the group believes that the best way to prevent citizens from having their say on wildlife issues is to put it in the hands of lawmakers whose loyalty they now command."

Source: Wayne Pacelle: Prop 109: A Power Grab Bad for Arizona Voters and Wildlife

[observer53]

Originally Posted by kdog

Well here are some opposing thoughts.

"Prop 109 seeks to invest "exclusive authority" for wildlife policy-making in the legislature, making it more difficult for voters to decide these issues, and it could even require the Arizona Game and Fish Commission to gain approval from the legislature if it sets any rules governing hunting or trapping. In short, Prop 109 politicizes all wildlife policy-making issues, and it supplants science-based and citizen-based decision-making in favor of partisan politics. A special interest organization, the NRA, has managed to maintain a tight grip on the behavior of lawmakers, and the group believes that the best way to prevent citizens from having their say on wildlife issues is to put it in the hands of lawmakers whose loyalty they now command."

Source: Wayne Pacelle: Prop 109: A Power Grab Bad for Arizona Voters and Wildlife

Thanks, kdog, for that info.

And let me make myself clear. First, I'm not just talking about constitutional amendments. Not all initiatives or referenda involve amending the state Constitution. Second, before the elections, I do make every effort to educate myself about what the propositions mean, and make a decision on how to vote based on that. Too many of the initiatives over the decades I've been a voter in this state have been, well, let's just say unsupportable, for a variety of reasons. And, the Legislature refers things to the people it does not have the courage to vote on itself, thus abdicating their own responsibilities.

If I'm not convinced it's the right change to make, then I vote no (or, AGAINST the proposition, whether that means a yes or no vote).

Vesting too much authority in the Legislature, as it's been operating over the last several years, (not to mention kowtowing to an organization that's had this legislature in its pocket for a long time) may be enough reason alone to vote against this one.

[kdog]

In fact, Arizona hunting rights have never been under attack. So what's the issue? If if ain't broke, don't fix it.

[azdr0710]

Originally Posted by kdog

In fact, Arizona hunting rights have never been under attack. So what's the issue? If if ain't broke, don't fix it.

all very true....let Game and Fish do their job....

and, yes, when there are too many amendments on the ballot, many people just vote "no" on all......

[roundball]

I would vote yes on this if it simply said we have the right to hunt and fish and the legislature can't pass a law taking that away from us. After reading the 2 articles and checking out Ballotpedia Arizona 2010 ballot measures - Ballotpedia , I find the wording to far reaching and vague.

I'm actually surprised that so many hunting organizations are supporting this. Maybe I read it wrong...I'll do more research in about a month.

[Ponderosa]

Don't give the legislature the authority to do anything! Vote NO! The AZ legislature is a gaggle of idiots. The only part of state government in AZ that is worth a damn is the corps of professionals in the various departments - including Game and Fish. Leave the decisions to them, not the buffoons in the capitol.

[rbohm]

prop 109 does allow the legislature to delegate authority to the game and fish office to make rules and regulations on hunting and fishing;

B. Exclusive authority to enact laws to regulate the manner, methods or seasons for hunting, fishing and harvesting wildlife is vested in the Legislature, which may delegate rule making authority to a game and fish commission. No law shall be enacted and no rule shall be adopted that unreasonably restricts hunting, fishing and harvesting wildlife or the use of traditional means and methods. Laws and rules authorized under this section shall have the purpose of wildlife conservation and management and preserving the future of hunting and fishing.

and considering who is against the proposition, human society, the animal defense league, and the sierra club grand canyon chapter, i am inclined to vote for the proposition. and by the way, our hunting rights have been under attack in the past, back in the 70's there was a move to prohibit hunting in arizona. the proposition was defeated then, and hopefully this one will prevent future attacks on hunters rights.