Constitutional Bears
BY Herschel Smith
2 weeks, 6 days ago
Judge: "Constitutionally protected resource like bears."
Me: Where in the constitution does it mention bears?
Alaska Judge Halts Bear Cull Program, Calls It Unconstitutional https://t.co/Mal83wDTDR
— CaptainsJournal (@BrutusMaximus50) April 3, 2025
On April 3, 2025 at 12:05 am, Georgiaboy61 said:
Re: “Alaska Judge Halts Bear Cull Program, Calls It Unconstitutional”
I’ve read, heard and seen a lot of idiotic things in my life, but that darn near takes the cake!
The Japanese sharply limit the number of people who can become lawyers in their society, seeing no reason to train an excess above what is needed. I used to reject that idea on general free market, laissez-faire grounds, but in light of this latest instance of judicial malpractice, maybe the idea deserves a second look….
Civil liberties advocates like John Whitehead have saying for years that judges and DAs have far too much power in our society, and they’re right… these tyrants in black robes need their wings clipped and like yesterday….
On April 3, 2025 at 1:21 pm, Mark Matis said:
Public hangings wold solve most of those problems!
On April 3, 2025 at 1:21 pm, xtphreak said:
The judge is obviously dyslexic.
He thought the 2nd Amendment says … The Right to Arm and keep Bears.
Have a Good Day
On April 3, 2025 at 2:51 pm, Dan said:
Amazing how leftists can find constitutional protections for all manner of things never mentioned in the Constitution while rabidly attacking actual specific Rights explicitly protected by that same document.
On April 3, 2025 at 3:06 pm, Echo Hotel said:
Is the judge referring to the US Constitution or the Alaska Constitution?
On April 3, 2025 at 5:09 pm, Herschel Smith said:
Probably Alaska, but it doesn’t matter. Neither one protects bears. See my additional comment at X to my post.
On April 3, 2025 at 5:16 pm, Paul B said:
Man. Sound like some one did not get his cream of wheat breakfast.
Here some really weird shit from those idiots on the bench.
On April 3, 2025 at 7:47 pm, Echo Hotel said:
So the judge is incorrect when he says the program violated the Alaska Constitution’s principle of sustained yield (The Constitution of the State of Alaska Art. VIII S 4. Sustained Yield, which states that “fish, forests, wildlife, grasslands and all other replenishable resources belonging to the state…”)? Do bears not fall under wildlife?
These are honest questions. I have no dog in this fight, but rather am trying to make sense of this issue. Yes, bears are not specifically mentioned in the AK Const., but I would think they would fall under the wildlife wording. And honestly, these days, this could go either way as to which party, the state or the granola folk, is full of shit. Perhaps they both are…
On April 3, 2025 at 9:21 pm, Herschel Smith said:
“Wherever occurring in their natural state, fish, wildlife, and waters are reserved to the people for common use.”
Alaska Constitution.
On April 4, 2025 at 9:36 am, Echo Hotel said:
Interesting. Who the hell creates a ruling document that is contradictory? Oh yeah, the government, that’s who! ;-)
Thank you for the info, Hershchel
On April 6, 2025 at 2:36 am, TheAlaskan said:
Yes, we have many many leftist tree hugging liberal cheechakos up here…Lisa Murkowski being another.
We have a rich history of aerial suppression of bears and wolves in this state. It’s a tried and true method to maintain large, healthy caribou herds in the interior. Left unchecked, herd numbers rise and fall due entirely to predation by mostly wolves, but also bears. In earlier times, Alaska Native Villages would suffer famine during these low numbers do to predation.
This liberal judge is from Anchorage. Us bush people have little influence over rulings coming out of Anchorage . The population majority of this state lives in Anchorage and it’s liberal. So these kinds of absurd rulings are typical of Anchorage.
On April 6, 2025 at 5:58 am, Latigo Morgan said:
Bears are protected by the Constitution – just like the “right” to abortion.