"When will people finally get enough "common sense" to understand that bureaucrats will always use the word "privilege" instead of "right"! They can charge you for it being a "privilege" but they can not charge you if it's a "right'! Now you know why they want to keep calling your right to fish, a "privilege". It's all about money baby! "

They do not have enough money as it is to run the program properly. Are you proposing we now take what little we do give back through our liscense fees away?

You can also lead a dead horse to water but it too will not drink...

The Other Thread Was Better...

I need to go fishin'

CF 'Oh, God of common sense" ,In the Utopian world you seem to be stuck in --- each person would not abuse the "right" to fish. It seems the folks that abuse the resource [now and in the past] made it such that laws and rules were made [fishing became a 'priviledge'] so that we could all share the resource. With the laws and rules came the money grubbing government. A right became a priviledge. Seems simple to me but then again I'm not the God of common sence like you.

CF, your posts are by far the most one sided in this tread.

When the exersising of your rights infringe on my rights, then there is a problem. That is why there needs to be some management of these rights. So while it may be your "right" to fish, the execution of these rights must be treated as a privelege.

CFM ..... I'm kinda sorry you posted this topic. As an infrequent visitor to this site I've always enjoyed your posts on events impacting the Cowlitz, and I had assumed you were a reasonable and logical guy. Now I'll read them with a different view.

You asked a legal question, and you got a legal answer from an expert. The horse is dead.

Just like 4 salt you seem to be trying to turn this thread into something its not!

freedom of movement is a right and of course that right is regulated. Rights and what your talking about (anarchy)are two different things!

I am not a hippie and I dont live In a fantasy world.

All that I want is to have fishing officially called a right for every american and for that right to be undivided. I never said unregulated though really that would be nice but we would not have anything to fish for in a few years now would we!

Why is it so hard to get people to go along with whats best for us sheesh! Just pretend for crying out loud. Rights are not that bad are they?

Lets stick to fishing!!!!!! This isn't a #%!^*@% editorial/political chat room, Dig!

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by stlhdh2o:
<strong> You can also lead a dead horse to water but it too will not drink...

The Other Thread Was Better...

I need to go fishin'

CFM, is there a simple way to say you are talking about your beliefs? Not engaging a battle of semantics, Expressing your outrage to the Boldt case, or, saying you believe it is your "right" to fish any time, any place your heart desires.

All CFM is saying is that we have a right to be on this earth to fish, hunt, breath and enjoy all of the basic "rights" of living.

We all have the right to fish. It becomes the privalage of those who buy the license. The governments way of turning your rights into privlages. Just (2) cents.

RK43

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RK43:
=======================
All CFM is saying is that we have a right to be on this earth to fish, hunt, breath and enjoy all of the basic "rights" of living.
=======================

You're "getting it" but you're just not quite all the way there yet!

Please don't think that I am getting all upset about the "Boltd decision". It really has nothing to do at all with my belief that we do have a "right" to fish. The "Boltd decision was not brought up by me, it was brought up by someone else who was trying to prove that my opinion was wrong. I am not a native of Washington State, so it really didn't affect me like the people who have spent all of their life here.


Cowlitzfisherman

My contention is that the difference between a right and a privelege is so negligible as to be moot.

Suppose for a minute that you are correct. What does having the 'right' to fish gain you that merely having the privilege does not allow?

Last note...

CFM, of course I'm a licensed attorney, as all Assitant Attorney Generals are...

Now what?

Fish on...

Todd.

CFM --- As I said, the horse is dead. Give it a rest.

Seems kinda funny how some people around here think they need to do their best to end a thread.Why,Maybe its not going their way.I don't know.
Thats your privelege,but not your right.Know what I mean.
I may not agree with peoples ideas but I do try to respect them.
Because this thread hasnt ended yet I have learned a thing or 2.
I have always tried to appreciate everybodies right to express their thoughts.
Please don't try to put an end to a thread just because you dont like it.
An alternative is to stay away from it.
That is your right,and you know how to use it.

I am priveleged to have the rights I have. Others sometimes don't feel so privelged about my rights, and when they suspect my rights, I go with a left. Though no damage is usually inflicted, it affords me the priveldge of using my rights.

CF -

No need for name calling is there?

You've had your 'argument' exposed as not only a fallacy but flat wrong in the eyes of the law. Its in the RCW for cryin' out loud.

After which you try to discredit the member who posted the law and resort to namecalling when someone asks you a tough question....

The simple truth sir is that you can have both your rights AND your priveleges taken away at any time for any number of reasons. Arguing about whether or not fishing is a right or privelege is like arguing about whether the rainforest is wet or moist. In the end it doesn't matter because the result is the same.

If the sign says 'Closed to Fishing' you can't legally fish there.

Suffrage is a Federal right. The only time individual states can revoke voting rights is when allowed by federal law(14th amendment to our Constitution-criminals).