A Fish Story (The Washington Monthly)

Re:A Fish Story (The Washington Monthly) by ggchappell on Friday May 11, 2012 @05:39AM (#3958417)

I don't know if over- or under-reaction is really the issue here. I think you are confusing "constitutional" with "good".

Whether something is in accord with the U.S. Constitution depends on what the Constitution says, and not on what would be the best thing to do. You've made a reasonable argument, but it is one that is irrelevant to questions of constitutionality.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Fish Story (The Washington Monthly) by duncanbojangles on Friday May 11, 2012 @01:25PM (#3960277)

You're completely right, I was assuming that what is good for nature is what should be law. I'm having such a hard time wrapping my head around the short-sightedness shown by these mega-corporations and lawmakers. We're just humans, doomed to die, but whole species are stake here. I don't feel that fishing a species to extinction could be that beneficial to so few people in the short run.

[ Parent | on HN ]