ORIGINAL: iamyourhuckleberry
Private property is one thing, common domain is another. The wildlife is not owed by the individual landowner-it is not livestock. It belongs to each and every one of us.Think about it for a second. If you own a lawn mower, are you going to allow every John, Dick and Harry the right to operate it without proper training? What happens if they break it and it's use is lost forever? So are "we the people" going to allow just anyone to use our natural resources without the proper training? Seems silly to me if we all said yes. Your individual rights are not being stepped upon. Nobody is forcing you to hunt (I pretty much agree it is a priviledge). Nor is anyone telling you you cannot hunt. "We the people" are saying if you want to hunt, you must first learn how to properly use our equipment (analogy). And, you must demostrate that you fully understand. We take it a little further by asking that you understand the inherent dangers of hunting. This is done so that you do not become a burden on society. It is a very small price to pay to play. Frankly, I'm all for hunter's safety courses. I certainly do not see it as an erosion of my individual rights. Maybe we should let every John, Dick and Harry into the cockpit of an aircraft also (another analogy). Heck, anyone can walk off the street and fly an airplane, right? It's their right!
I was going to leave this, but, I asked my neighbors brother this evening who works for our DPW, and yes in fact they do have to have safety courses in all of their equipment ie; Lawnmowers, weed wackers, and the like. Hard hat, gloves, glasses, steel toed boots. It has nothing to do with rights, it's about safety. And, like I stated earlier, I "have" no proof yet, but maybe injury claims and law suits against the state, may have played a originating role in the decision to adopt the mandatory courses.