</a JR Holmes Oil Company </a Shark Guard Southeast Woods and Whitetail Mayer Insurance Services LLC
Aldeer Classifieds
Iso ruger american ranch
by AustinC. 03/27/24 08:20 PM
Ruger M77 6mm heavy barrel with Nikon Monarch
by bradbathome. 03/27/24 04:42 PM
Carpet Installation Equipment
by hunter84. 03/27/24 07:12 AM
$20013hp all-power side shaft generator motor
by HollerHunter. 03/26/24 07:43 PM
250 gallon propane tank $225
by HollerHunter. 03/26/24 07:30 PM
Serious Deer Talk
The Hollywood Buck.
by Tree Dweller. 03/28/24 02:38 AM
For the Don’t Shoot Does Crowd
by Mbrock. 03/27/24 07:53 PM
High Fencing
by RareBreed. 03/26/24 10:45 PM
Who's got the best deer hunting in AL
by TensawRiver. 03/26/24 01:26 PM
What makes you happy?
by Fishduck. 03/26/24 10:25 AM
March
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Land, Leases, Hunting Clubs
West Jefferson County hunting club
by Jmfire722. 03/18/24 08:36 AM
Western Ky farm
by todd w. 03/15/24 01:23 PM
Information on bibb county hunting club
by quickshot. 03/10/24 01:46 PM
Hunting Club
by Hibby. 03/08/24 04:34 PM
Mississippi club
by Gobl4me. 03/07/24 09:55 PM
Who's Online Now
87 registered members (mossyback, dustymac, ALMODUX, NoHuntin, Bustinbeards, AustinC, Okalona, imadeerhntr, Shotts, Flyliner, Backwards cowboy, Semo, catdoctor, AU338MAG, Exhoosier, bayouturkey, dagwood, bambam32, BPI, Young20, capehorn24, brett.smith, kyles, fillmore, BamaBoHunter, Rockstar007, Shmoe, Prohunter3509, cullbuck, Bread, HoofNSpur, hippi, brokefixer, buck_buster, turkey247, HappyHunter, Gobl4me, globe, AMB, MarksOutdoors, Whiskey9, Noler_Swamp, G/H, roll_tide_hunts, Hoytdad10, BamaPlowboy, Sgiles, Joe4majors, TurkeyJoe, RebFormanUDA, snakebit, Kdog, Irishguy, DoubleShoalsJR, leroycnbucks, HOWTON21, sj22, having fun now, bamaeyedoc, blade, AWT6, Paint Rock 00, Roondog, eclipse829, crenshawco, sw1002, Coosa1, turkeychaser, RCHRR, CCC, crocker, cartervj, foldemup, Crawfish, Solothurn, 12 invisible), 426 guests, and 0 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Amendment 3 #1129064
10/29/14 05:36 AM
10/29/14 05:36 AM
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,002
Millbrook, AL
L
leroyb Offline OP
8 point
leroyb  Offline OP
8 point
L
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,002
Millbrook, AL
I don't want to hijack the Amendment 5 thread so lets here your thoughts about Amendment 3

Amendment 3 provides that every citizen has the fundamental right under the State Constitution to bear arms in
defense of himself or herself and the State. Amendment 3 also provides that this right would be entitled to the
highest protection of the law.
Amendment 3 also protects a citizen from being compelled by any treaties or laws of another country to take an
action which would prohibit, limit, or otherwise interfere with his or her right to bear arms if that treaty or law
would violate the United States Constitution.
If Amendment 3 IS PASSED, the right to bear arms will be elevated under the State Constitution to a fundamental
right and given the highest possible protection. This right will also be provided with additional protection from
potential interference by international treaty or foreign law.
If Amendment 3 IS DEFEATED, the right to bear arms in Alabama will still exist in the State Constitution, but it
will not be declared a fundamental right and may not be subject to the highest possible protection. The right to bear
arms will also not be protected from potential interference by international laws and treaties.


"Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." ~Thomas Jefferson
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: leroyb] #1129076
10/29/14 05:49 AM
10/29/14 05:49 AM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 24,761
Buc-ee’s Beach Express
leroycnbucks Online happy
Freak of Nature
leroycnbucks  Online Happy
Freak of Nature
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 24,761
Buc-ee’s Beach Express
It's got my vote Leroy.


Proud Army and ALNG veteran
God Bless America!
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: leroyb] #1129082
10/29/14 05:53 AM
10/29/14 05:53 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,874
Alexander City
T
TR62 Offline
I like pretty colors
TR62  Offline
I like pretty colors
T
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,874
Alexander City
I'm in.

Re: Amendment 3 [Re: leroyb] #1129085
10/29/14 05:54 AM
10/29/14 05:54 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093
McCalla, AL
johnnyreb Offline
10 point
johnnyreb  Offline
10 point
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093
McCalla, AL
I'm concerned about the way it is worded. Strictly read, it says that any infringement on the right to bear arms will be subject to strict judicial scrutiny. I understand that is a legal term with specific implications. And in the current environment that may be fine......but what happens should the court go liberal at some point in the future? Would this be the thing that allows the court to be used to infringe upon our right?

I like "shall not be infringed" better.

I still don't know what to do with this one


"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."

George Orwell
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: leroyb] #1129087
10/29/14 05:55 AM
10/29/14 05:55 AM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,797
Smith Lake
3
300Ruger Offline
10 point
300Ruger  Offline
10 point
3
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,797
Smith Lake
I don't know why any of that should matter. That's all covered in the Second Amendment.

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Re: Amendment 3 [Re: leroyb] #1129100
10/29/14 05:58 AM
10/29/14 05:58 AM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,894
Cullman
C
CKyleC Offline
(Can't Keep It Up...)
CKyleC  Offline
(Can't Keep It Up...)
C
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,894
Cullman
I'm voting no on 3 and 5. As I understand it, right now its a right, period, no ifs ands or buts. This changes it to subject to strictest scrutiny, whatever the hell that is.

If I'm wrong, enlighten me.


"In Alabama, we prefer to kill small bucks on big properties"-Turkey247
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: leroyb] #1129105
10/29/14 06:00 AM
10/29/14 06:00 AM
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899
Huntsville AL
Rocket62 Offline
14 point
Rocket62  Offline
14 point
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899
Huntsville AL
Quote:
Amendment 3: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to provide that every citizen has a fundamental right to bear arms and that any restriction on this right would be subject to strict scrutiny; and to provide that no international treaty or law shall prohibit, limit, or otherwise interfere with a citizen's fundamental right to bear arms. (Proposed by Act 2013-267)


That appears to be adding provisions that would prevent the U.N. from monkeying around with our rights at the state level ... aint that a good thing?




I don't want to pass quietly into the night. I want to slide in sideways kickin and screamin
Life really is awesome ... Soak it up while you can ...
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: leroyb] #1129111
10/29/14 06:04 AM
10/29/14 06:04 AM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,033
Port St Joe, FL
Moose24 Offline
10 point
Moose24  Offline
10 point
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,033
Port St Joe, FL
This is very interesting. I would do some research before you jump on a "Yes" vote.

The real kicker that is causing alarm is the wording "....that any restriction on this right would be subject to strict scrutiny".

This wording seems to open the door for rulings affecting our right to bear arms where no such "open door" previously existed.

http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/10/proposed_statewide_amendment_3.html

This seems like a do-nothing bill that has more of a chance to do harm than good.

At this moment I am voting 'NO'.

Last edited by Moose24; 10/29/14 06:05 AM.

The Things You Remember in Life aren't Things at all.
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: Rocket62] #1129112
10/29/14 06:04 AM
10/29/14 06:04 AM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,797
Smith Lake
3
300Ruger Offline
10 point
300Ruger  Offline
10 point
3
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,797
Smith Lake
Originally Posted By: Rocket62
Quote:
Amendment 3: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to provide that every citizen has a fundamental right to bear arms and that any restriction on this right would be subject to strict scrutiny; and to provide that no international treaty or law shall prohibit, limit, or otherwise interfere with a citizen's fundamental right to bear arms. (Proposed by Act 2013-267)


That appears to be adding provisions that would prevent the U.N. from monkeying around with our rights at the state level ... aint that a good thing?


I may just not get it. How does the U.N. have jurisdiction over state or federal law? Has it ever happened?

I agree with the above post - I'm suspicious of the "scrutiny" part.

Re: Amendment 3 [Re: johnnyreb] #1129114
10/29/14 06:04 AM
10/29/14 06:04 AM
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,999
Holly Pond, AL
NightHunter Offline
10 point
NightHunter  Offline
10 point
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,999
Holly Pond, AL
Originally Posted By: johnnyreb
I'm concerned about the way it is worded. Strictly read, it says that any infringement on the right to bear arms will be subject to strict judicial scrutiny. I understand that is a legal term with specific implications. And in the current environment that may be fine......but what happens should the court go liberal at some point in the future? Would this be the thing that allows the court to be used to infringe upon our right?

I like "shall not be infringed" better.

I still don't know what to do with this one


Problem is scrutiny can come from the bench and who wants that? We do not need strict scrutiny from a liberal judge trying to make a name for themselves.

We have the second amendment and it works just fine.

Re: Amendment 3 [Re: 300Ruger] #1129132
10/29/14 06:21 AM
10/29/14 06:21 AM
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899
Huntsville AL
Rocket62 Offline
14 point
Rocket62  Offline
14 point
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899
Huntsville AL
Originally Posted By: 300Ruger
How does the U.N. have jurisdiction over state or federal law? Has it ever happened?

When Hillary Clinton signed the small arms treaty with the U.N. there was a lot of flap about Obama using this to get around the 2nd amendment to curtail private gun ownership.

I believe the resolution is that this little trick won't work but ... As long as we have such left minded people running our country who is to say that we won't sign an agreement with the U.N. to limit private gun ownership?

Anyway, I was just thinking out loud that maybe this amendment was targeting that possibility ...




I don't want to pass quietly into the night. I want to slide in sideways kickin and screamin
Life really is awesome ... Soak it up while you can ...
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: leroyb] #1129158
10/29/14 06:39 AM
10/29/14 06:39 AM
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,609
Alabama
R
Rmart30 Offline
10 point
Rmart30  Offline
10 point
R
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,609
Alabama
Here is a 20 minute podcast with Rep Mike Jones the Pro 2a sponsor of this bill who explains why the bill was introduced and its intent.
The host sorta hammers him about adding more amendments etc. He cuts him off for a break but then brings him back to finish the interview.. Host goes a little off topic toward the end but its a good listen.

He also goes into what strict scrutiny is and why it was put into it.

There are 3 levels of scrutiny in the judicial system.. rational intermediate, and strict with rational being the lowest.

Sen Scott Beason also did a interview on this amendment and he was 100% in on it. Beason is about a pro 2a politician as I have met. If there was anything in it that he remotely thought would hurt our 2a rights he would bring it up.


http://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=1291&c=6311&f=3544613


Ethical behavior is doing the right thing when no one else is watching - even when doing the wrong thing is legal. Aldo Leopold .. (except when it comes to trailer tags)
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: Rocket62] #1129171
10/29/14 06:50 AM
10/29/14 06:50 AM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 24,761
Buc-ee’s Beach Express
leroycnbucks Online happy
Freak of Nature
leroycnbucks  Online Happy
Freak of Nature
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 24,761
Buc-ee’s Beach Express
Originally Posted By: Rocket62
Originally Posted By: 300Ruger
How does the U.N. have jurisdiction over state or federal law? Has it ever happened?

When Hillary Clinton signed the small arms treaty with the U.N. there was a lot of flap about Obama using this to get around the 2nd amendment to curtail private gun ownership.

I believe the resolution is that this little trick won't work but ... As long as we have such left minded people running our country who is to say that we won't sign an agreement with the U.N. to limit private gun ownership?

Anyway, I was just thinking out loud that maybe this amendment was targeting that possibility ...


This is what I was thinking and why I would vote yes. Now I'm confused. Somebody please clear this up.


Proud Army and ALNG veteran
God Bless America!
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: Moose24] #1129175
10/29/14 06:54 AM
10/29/14 06:54 AM
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,002
Millbrook, AL
L
leroyb Offline OP
8 point
leroyb  Offline OP
8 point
L
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,002
Millbrook, AL
Originally Posted By: Moose24
This is very interesting. I would do some research before you jump on a "Yes" vote.

The real kicker that is causing alarm is the wording "....that any restriction on this right would be subject to strict scrutiny".

This wording seems to open the door for rulings affecting our right to bear arms where no such "open door" previously existed.

http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/10/proposed_statewide_amendment_3.html

This seems like a do-nothing bill that has more of a chance to do harm than good.

At this moment I am voting 'NO'.


The fact that the AL.com article is written in support of the amendment is enough to make lean toward voting No.


"Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." ~Thomas Jefferson
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: leroyb] #1129180
10/29/14 07:00 AM
10/29/14 07:00 AM
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 5,487
sellers, montgomery county
P
paulfish4570 Offline
12 point
paulfish4570  Offline
12 point
P
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 5,487
sellers, montgomery county
if i am interpreting this correctly, the amendment would require, in effect, the state supreme court to let stand this right no matter the intended interference by any municipal/county agency/government.
example: let's say the city of whoville, alabama, passes a city law that would cause an infringement of the state's interpretation of the second amendment, perhaps not allowing semiautomatic rifle/shotgun/pistol ownership in city limits. this city law would not stand strictest scrutiny, and would be struck down by the court.

but, hey, i could be wrong ...


paulfish4570
Joshua 1:9
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: leroyb] #1129185
10/29/14 07:03 AM
10/29/14 07:03 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093
McCalla, AL
johnnyreb Offline
10 point
johnnyreb  Offline
10 point
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093
McCalla, AL
I think that under strict scrutiny it becomes the burden of the state to prove to the court that any infringement is in the clear interest of the public good. If the court went liberal then that might not take much to do.

I could be wrong though. Maybe one of our resident lawyers can explain it to us.


"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."

George Orwell
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: Rmart30] #1129186
10/29/14 07:03 AM
10/29/14 07:03 AM
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899
Huntsville AL
Rocket62 Offline
14 point
Rocket62  Offline
14 point
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899
Huntsville AL
Originally Posted By: Rmart30
Here is a 20 minute podcast with Rep Mike Jones the Pro 2a sponsor of this bill who explains why the bill was introduced and its intent.
The host sorta hammers him about adding more amendments etc. He cuts him off for a break but then brings him back to finish the interview.. Host goes a little off topic toward the end but its a good listen.

He also goes into what strict scrutiny is and why it was put into it.

There are 3 levels of scrutiny in the judicial system.. rational intermediate, and strict with rational being the lowest.

Sen Scott Beason also did a interview on this amendment and he was 100% in on it. Beason is about a pro 2a politician as I have met. If there was anything in it that he remotely thought would hurt our 2a rights he would bring it up.


http://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=1291&c=6311&f=3544613


Well I listened to it in full and I'm still confused ... Not sure I like Mike Jones' logic about carrying in the state legislature.




I don't want to pass quietly into the night. I want to slide in sideways kickin and screamin
Life really is awesome ... Soak it up while you can ...
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: leroyb] #1129197
10/29/14 07:15 AM
10/29/14 07:15 AM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,667
Central Alabama
QDMAV8R Offline
10 point
QDMAV8R  Offline
10 point
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,667
Central Alabama
Careful what you vote for: The litmus test should be as simple as this:
Have you lost any rights under the present constitution as written?
YES- then vote to change the wording.
NO-then don't give them the opporunity to change anything!


"Never met a deer that I didn't like" - QDMAV8R
Re: Amendment 3 [Re: paulfish4570] #1129205
10/29/14 07:19 AM
10/29/14 07:19 AM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 15,734
Elmore County
Frankie Offline
Old Mossy Horns
Frankie  Offline
Old Mossy Horns
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 15,734
Elmore County
Originally Posted By: paulfish4570
if i am interpreting this correctly, the amendment would require, in effect, the state supreme court to let stand this right no matter the intended interference by any municipal/county agency/government.
example: let's say the city of whoville, alabama, passes a city law that would cause an infringement of the state's interpretation of the second amendment, perhaps not allowing semiautomatic rifle/shotgun/pistol ownership in city limits. this city law would not stand strictest scrutiny, and would be struck down by the court.

but, hey, i could be wrong ...



my understanding they can't do that now .

i vote no .

Re: Amendment 3 [Re: leroyb] #1129218
10/29/14 07:29 AM
10/29/14 07:29 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 51,936
Over Yonder
C
Clem Offline
Mildly Quirky
Clem  Offline
Mildly Quirky
C
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 51,936
Over Yonder
Why are they jacking around with rights already established - firearms, hunting/fishing - and "reaffirming" these rights?



Hey, did you know you have the right to free speech?

Why, sure. It's covered in the First Amendment. I don't like some of the things about it, like pornographic speech, but I'd rather have freedom than censorship.

Great! We have an amendment that AGAIN says you have the right to free speech! It also has a few other things but it DOES REALLY SAY that you have the right to free speech in Alabama and no one else can take away that basic right.

So, I already have it. Just like the Second Amendment and the Right to Bear Arms. Or the "right to hunt and fish" approved by Alabama voters several years ago and spelled out again. But you're wanting me to vote on something that again reaffirms what I already have?

Yes! Because we need to keep the Godless Commies and "others' from harming your rights!

Um, don't I already have those rights spelled out in the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Actually, those just affirm what we had to begin with. Why the new amendment?

You should approve of this! Why don't you want to support America and your rights?

/circularBSargumentsensue/

Last edited by Clem; 10/29/14 07:30 AM.

"Hunting Politics are stupid!" - Farm Hunter

"Bible says you shouldn't put sugar in your cornbread." Dustin, 2013

"Best I can figure 97.365% of the general public is a paint chip eating, mouth breathing, certified dumbass." BCLC, 2020
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Aldeer.com Copyright 2001-2023 Aldeer LLP.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.1.1
(Release build 20180111)
Page Time: 0.137s Queries: 16 (0.040s) Memory: 3.2957 MB (Peak: 3.6037 MB) Zlib disabled. Server Time: 2024-03-28 11:19:17 UTC