Federal Judge Rules: Second Amendment Doesn’t Protect Hunting

June 20 2014
by GSL Staff
Share This Post

Guns Save Lives is not supported by ads and is ran as an independent project. If you support this project please consider supporting us on Patreon. Registration takes just a moment and even $1 is a massive help in continuing our work. Thank you so much.

shotgun_stockWell, I’ve known that the Second Amendment isn’t about hunting, well ever since I was able to read and comprehend it. However, many people seem to think that the Second Amendment only protects Americans’ right to own firearms for hunting. You hear statements like, “Why do you need a 30 round magazine for hunting?” Well, I don’t, because the Second Amendment isn’t about hunting.

It would seem that a federal judge agrees, somewhat, with that statement. According to SFGate, a federal judge has essentially ruled that the Second Amendment’s protection does not extend to hunting.

According to SFGate/AP,

U.S. District Judge Yvette Kane made the ruling in a suit brought by the Lancaster County-based Hunters United for Sunday Hunting against the Pennsylvania Game Commission, the agency that enforces the state’s game code.

Kane said she could find no proof that courts have extended Second Amendment protections to include recreational hunting. She also found that the hunters could not prove that the law unfairly discriminated between classes of hunters or that the ban on Sunday hunting violates their religious freedoms.

So the next time someone tells you that the Second Amendment is about hunting, make sure to let them know that the courts have specifically said the opposite.

Of course, I do wish that PA would repeal that Sunday hunting thing and I feel bad for the hunters there, but in a way it’s almost good to hear a judge acknowledge that the Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting.

Bookmark this one and throw it out there whenever you hear the anti-gun hunting argument.

Disqus Comments

comments powered by Disqus