FOR THE HATERS AMONG US!

[NineseveN]

The next time a hunting-guns-only type or sport-shooting-only type has a fit over military-looking weapons, he should be reminded that:

There is no overt constitutionally protected right to sport shooting...

There is no overt constitutionally protected right to hunt...

It's funny that you mention that, because there used to be in our state constitution:

Section 43. Under THE OATH OR AFFIRMATION OF OFFICE
“The inhabitants of this state shall have liberty to fowl and hunt in seasonable times on the lands they hold, and on all other lands therein not inclosed; and in like manner to fish in all boatable waters, and others not private property.”

Our original Section 21 (RKBA) read as:

Chapter I.
A DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OR STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

"XIII. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power."



It is of note that our constitution served in a large part as the framework of the actual U.S. Constitution. Also of note is that the Vermont state constitution directly or closely copied our original constitution, however, they kept the text seen above that affirms the right to hunt whereas we did not, and out right to bear arms was revised in a constitutional convention from XIII above to what see currently in Section 1, Article 21 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 1790:

Under Article IX:
That the general, great, and essential principles of Liberty and Free Government may be recognized and unalterably established, WE DECLARE--

"To bear arms.
Sect. XXI. That the right of the citizens to bear arms, in defence of themselves and the state, shall not be questioned."


In 1838, it was untouched.

In 1874, it was moved to Section I, Artcile 21 under the "DECLARATION OF RIGHTS" where it remains today.


So at one time, the constitution of this state did in fact recognize the right to hunt in some manner, but that was removed and replaced with language that did more justice to the intent of the right to bear arms, the foundation of that right is liberty and the ability for the free people of this country to stand against tyranny in bearing arms against their aggressors.



I’m not a hunter (I went hunting once, many, many years ago), but I just though that this would be a good time to educate both sides of the debate.

For reference:
http://www.paconstitution.duq.edu/index.html

[Spectre6]

Because I am.

Unless you guys actually look up to people like Zumbo, and thr rest of the fudds out there? It's sort of like the guy that RO's the range near Wexford. He'll let any guy with a bolt action in, but if you bring an AK, you can't shoot there. You can own as many guns as you like, but once you start supporting the ban for any type of weapon you don't own, people will start to hate you. therefore, I hate fudds.

Larry has no problem with any type of rifle at that range, as long as it is less than .50 cal. He has more FALs than you would beleave..

The only way you get kicked off that range is by being a dick, or not following the rules.

3 in a rifle, 6 in a handgun.

[JustinM]

Wow, is this thread still alive?

[ChamberedRound]

Wow, is this thread still alive?

Yessir, this thread is your cross to bear

[JustinM]

Yessir, this thread is your cross to bear

http://www.pafoa.org/forum/general-2...ers-pafoa.html

[ChamberedRound]

http://www.pafoa.org/forum/general-2...ers-pafoa.html

It was a joke dude (see the smiley at the end?).

I read the thread above, and appreciated it very much.