HB36

Gun Control, Hunting Rights - SPetrash, MShatokin Bill number - HB36 Sponsors - Gary Ackerman New York Republican, Mike Rogers Alabama Republican.

Issue category and Bill title - Gun rights/Fair Hunting

Purpose - Our bill is trying to protect the hunter and eradicate all unfair hunting laws.

Eligibility - All citizens that aren't felons. This bill ensures that all hunting laws that are unfair to hunters are eliminated, including those unfair laws of the past and of the new. We want hunting to be permitted in every state that the hunter lives in, and we want to keep hunting in those intellectual states that have it. Some states are on the verge of changing their status of hunting. Some states thinking of getting rid of hunting. This bill proposes that that would not be lawful. An example of this is in Ohio you can use a modern day rife on coyote, but you cannot use them on deer. There are more recorded attacks on humans by deer than by coyote, not to mention that people hit deer with their cars more often than coyote. Now why hunters not be allowed to use a stronger weapon on a stronger animal or on only one of them? Why would they allow us to use a strong gun on a weak animal, and not a strong gun on a strong animal? It doesn’t make any sense. We can only use certain pistols and certain shotguns on deer and deer like I’ve said before are responsible for more human deaths than coyote are, but the law about not being able to use a modern day rifle on a deer but you can use the same rifle on a smaller animal and have no restriction to the size of that rifle is just ridicules. For example, if you where legally able to obtain a .50 caliber rifle, and as far as I know you can in Ohio, that can shot for well over a mile, you could use that rifle for hunting coyote but not on deer you can also use any legally obtained firearm on a wild bore as well. ([|Http://www.ohio.com/news/break_news/64073112.html]) One more example of an unfair hunting law is the Sunday hunting restrictions and prohibitions that the states of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia. These laws were put in place in the 18th and 19th century when everything from shopping to fishing, and hunting was banned. All of these laws have slowly been eliminated with the exception of the Sunday hunting law. What good does that do for anybody? This bill states that no law newly made or made in the past, can treat hunters unfairly. There must be a good reason for the law such as people are in danger or dwindling animal populations. If the law doesn’t protect animals that are in danger of extinction or public safety will be deemed unfair to the hunter and will be subject to ether be changing or eradicated entirely. Hunting seasons are still lawful but they cannot be excessively short, must be longer than seven days if the season is dividing into separate parts such as gun and archery seasons, and does not have to last the entire year. The money that has to be spent on this bill is next to nothing because all that would have to be done is change some laws and that’s it. If the bill passes and the Sunday hunting laws in the 10 states that have them changed, you won’t even have to pay for that because rangers still work on Sundays for fishing so all that would be needed to be done is split those workers up to see who patrols hunting lands and who patrols fishing waters. Plus, in Ohio when the rifle law on deer is eliminated, the rifle and rifle ammunition sails will increase and firearms and ammunition are taxed, so that makes more money for the government instead of taking away. So how can this possibly hurt the government at all?

¨