Aldeer.com Forums Alabama Deer Talk Aldeer General Forum Why should I pay the State of Alabama

My thoughts too. Neither extreme is good, bootlicker or anarchy.

But 'Merica , but muh freedom...

I have no problem paying for a hunting and fishing license. Nor registration fees for my boat. I get much more in return for the amount I pay.

The state put themselves in a little bit of a dilemma when, in order to protect hunting and fishing, they added them as rights to the state constitution a few years back. We, the people of this state actually voted this in. This was great as it protects us as hunters and fishermen, but at the same time, in my mind, that should limit the amount of restrictions that the state should be able to place on when, where, and how we choose to exercise this right.

And yes, I realize I'm opening a can of worms with this because this can be carried over to arguments about the US Constitution and the Right To Bear Arms and any other Right that has limitations.

Ain't a fish in that river that has ever generated power to my house. I also haven't seen a free power bill in my 46 years on this earth.

Of course they would. A lot of them do anyway.

True, which is why the Legislature is now trying to get Forever Wild to pay ad valorem taxes in counties where it has land. But state lands are exempt from taxes. If this current bill passes there'll be some serious lawsuits about it, not to mention a push to get taxes from the Governor's mansion and crappy beach property in Gulf Shores along with other state-owned lands.

You can't tax or get taxes from one thing just because you don't like the way it's funded -- i.e. Forever Wild's legal, voter-approved (twice) mechanism -- and ignore others. But the Legislature is trying to do that.

DCNR isn’t the only state agency that doesn’t operate or take money from the general fund. The one I work in doesn’t as well as others. Bet y’all didn’t know that.

If they stopped feeding the welfare animals there would be money to spare

It can be done by constitutional amendment. That's what the bills propose.

HB362

HB78

Well since the govt apparently own the wildlife, next time one of their deer runs into my truck they can pay to get it fixed. Maybe we can sue them to keep their deer on their property and quit letting them run loose and cause problems.

sbo1971, when the statement is made that the "State" owns the wildlife, it is the PEOPLE. Wildlife is held in a public trust, owned by the people, and regulated by the state's DCNR, at the will of the people. The people are the state, not the government agency. I know one gentleman I have had to remind of this fact often, and yet he still makes comments about the government owning the deer, as if I haven't said a word otherwise about it. I just wish people could understand that.

Exactly! I have to pay property tax in order to keep ownership of my property.
We have no idea what real freedom is anymore.
We accept legalized extortion as the norm.

I’m a striper fisherman. I gladly pay for my fishing license every year. Hey dcnr, thanks for stocking all those hybrids and stripers i love to catch so much. Thank you for outlawing and patrolling telephoning and gill netting. Folks, the dcnr does wayyyyy more positive stuff for your fishing than you would ever realize. I’m not sure but i believe they even stock alot of crappie and bass.

I'm proud of our nation's conservation system. Its one of the things we really got right. I'm proud of our conservation officers and I'm glad they're enforcing regulations because I want game and fish and I want my kids to have game and fish to catch and hunt. I think, on the state and federal level, our fish and game agencies do a tremendous job, with honesty and intergrity for apparently very little thanks. I'm even proud of ol' Mbrock for trying to explain it to us internet laymen. Steve Rinella does a good job too if you ever listen to his podcasts.

For all you anarchists out there, if you said you think its possible our state and federal governments misuse some of our taxes, I'd agree wholeheartedly. If you said you think its possible some of our government programs are unnecessary, I'd probably agree with that too. If you said sometimes our government is pitifully inefficient, hell yeah. If you said you wanted increased oversight on how and where your tax dollars are spent, fo' sho'. When you said you shouldn't have to somehow fund our nations conservation system at all you lost me. Funding the services we use and benefit from is a fact of life like gravity. If you want somthin' for nothing you should go whine and cry on the ground like the college kids are into these days.

'You're right if you say it ought not be. I agree reasonable people ought not have to be watched like kids to be sure they don't destroy sustainability. But lots of things that ought not be, are. Ought not be crime. Ought not be disease. Ought not be littering or dumped industrial waste. Ought not be child abuse or neglect. I don't waste time wishing what ought to be but isn't would change if i can't change it.

All this super libertarian pseudo-anarchy is just like pure communism, it sounds good enough to sell it but it'll never work like you say it would. There's a reason man rose up from anarchy and created civilization, barbarism is only fun if you've got the biggest stick.

Most folks realize we have to have a certain amount of taxes but it's the manner in which they are collected and the waste and spending that we have a problem with.

I think if we were more Libertarian we would me amazed at how much better our conutry would prosper.
The above statement proves we don't know any better.
I agree Alabama has a pretty good Conservation Dept but there is too much BS when it should be kept simple.

Too much BS and I shouldn't ever have to buy a license are two different discussions though.

More libertarian? Okay I'll agree some could work, but if you tried to do things using all the anarchist ideas I've seen advocated for on this site Alabama would look like Somalia in a year.

Exactly right.

Judges had even begun to refer to hunting as a privilege before the People cleared that up with the first Sportspersons Bill of Right amendment to our constitution back in the '90s. The DCNR still refers to hunting as a privilege on its website where licenses are sold, but that's wrong.

Think of how you put money in the bank for the bank to hold it in trust for you. You still retain ownership, but you delegate control of it according to the terms of your agreement with the bank. If the bank were to go above and beyond the terms of your agreement and start telling you how you could or could not use your own money, then you could step in and demand your money back. That's how constitutional and republican forms of government work. If you exercise your right and demand change, that's not anarchy. You're supporting your constitution.

If you've never read the Alabama Declaration of Rights, I recommend you read it with emphasis on Section 2.

There's a difference between Anarchism and Libertarianism.
We need basic common sense laws when it comes to conservation and government in general.
But, thanks to big gov politicians and judges that ignore the Constitution we have what we have today...a big political machine that is way out of control and a people that don't know any better.

To say that a lot of things shouldn't be but it's just the way it is, aint a good reason not to change things.
We are today exactly what most of the founders wanted to keep us from becoming.

Why did you change your screen name?