Bl rant

[BassYakR]

Originally Posted by Goooh

While it is personal property, I find it a bit different when you are out in the open harvesting something that has a set limit on it.

Come on fellas.

MG, if a guy was walking out of a marijuana field with a duffel bag and a fed was standing right there, would he not have a reason to look inside? If you were strolling by a pot field with a backpack on and a fed strolled by at the same time, would you not let him look inside if he asked and you had nothing to hide?


I wouldn't let them search my vehicle for a random stop, and wouldn't let them search my house. But checking a box on the water or a bag in the field is a different story.

Don't be a tard.

I agree with you on this Gooh... but u also have to think about where is the line drawn? If its ok to happen there then whos to say its not ok anywhere else.

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by BassYakR

I agree with you on this Gooh... but u also have to think about where is the line drawn? If its ok to happen there then whos to say its not ok anywhere else.

They ask if they can take a look, at least when I've been approached.

Anyone here told them no? If you haven't, then why not? I know when my rights are being infringed on, and know when to say no.

Anyone been beaten and tased by a game warden?

Here is a novel idea, have all your safety gear and don't be out of regs on your fish. Just like carrying insurance on your car and having all your crap working. Cops use radar to catch you speeding and prove you were, should game wardens have some XRay device to see in your boat from a mile away? Or should they just pull up politely and ask if they can see your fish?

Or how about this. No limits, no enforcement!!! Take em allllllllllllllll baby!

[BuckingFastard]

no different

[BuckingFastard]

why is it ok in any way? there has to be reason to do so. if they watched you catch more than a limit then yes.

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by BuckingFastard

why is it ok in any way? there has to be reason to do so. if they watched you catch more than a limit then yes.

How could they watch everyone catch a limit? How can they know if what you caught is under or oversized?

[SGib]

I think being on the water with a fishing pole is enough reason. Same as being in the woods with a gun. If you had no rods showing then no reason to search you if you say you aren't fishing.

[MathGeek]

Is the possession of a fishing pole probable cause that you have violated game laws?

The central question is

What circumstances justify waiving the Constitutional requirement of probable cause for a violation to conduct a search?

My answer is None.

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Is the possession of a fishing pole probable cause that you have violated game laws?

The central question is

What circumstances justify waiving the Constitutional requirement of probable cause for a violation to conduct a search?

My answer is None.

So what's your solution? Where exactly do you stand? Limits or management, but use an honor system?

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Goooh

So what's your solution? Where exactly do you stand? Limits or management, but use an honor system?

Require probable cause for involuntary searches, just as in every other area of law enforcement.

Certainly, game wardens may do a license check and request to look in an ice chest, live well, etc. just as LEOs can check your driver's license and request to search your car, or knock on your door and request to search your home.

They are also free to observe a person fishing using all available means and technologies. Florida officials are believed to be using drones to establish probable cause.

They are free to ask questions of people on the boat regarding how many fish were caught and how many were released.

Just as cities are free to put cameras at intersections, wildlife enforcement may put cameras on bouys, weirs, etc. if they find it to be cost effective and necessary for enforcement purposes.

Wildlife enforcement is free to peruse social media and discussion groups for pictures and accounts that may suggest wildlife violations. They can question processors and taxidermists.

They have many avenues of enforcement available to them that can be effective without violating the Constitutional standards of probable cause to proceed with an involuntary search.

Hunting and fishing are pursued outside, in plan view, in public. It's hard to hide violations from witnesses or diligent law enforcement.

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Require probable cause for involuntary searches, just as in every other area of law enforcement.



Certainly, game wardens may do a license check and request to look in an ice chest, live well, etc. just as LEOs can check your driver's license and request to search your car, or knock on your door and request to search your home.



They are also free to observe a person fishing using all available means and technologies. Florida officials are believed to be using drones to establish probable cause.



They are free to ask questions of people on the boat regarding how many fish were caught and how many were released.



Just as cities are free to put cameras at intersections, wildlife enforcement may put cameras on bouys, weirs, etc. if they find it to be cost effective and necessary for enforcement purposes.



Wildlife enforcement is free to peruse social media and discussion groups for pictures and accounts that may suggest wildlife violations. They can question processors and taxidermists.



They have many avenues of enforcement available to them that can be effective without violating the Constitutional standards of probable cause to proceed with an involuntary search.

Exactly. Who doesn't agree with this?

And BTW, probable cause can be anything... Statistical Included. Statistics support the fact that a fella in a boat holding a fishing pole, with a net close at hand, is probably fishing. Further, he probably has an undersized fish or too many...

This vague term "probable cause" is right there in your 4th amendment, there is no concrete definition of probable or how to determine whether a man holding a poll is probable cause or not.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Goooh

Exactly. Who doesn't agree with this?

And BTW, probable cause can be anything... Statistical Included. Statistics support the fact that a fella in a boat holding a fishing pole, with a net close at hand, is probably fishing. Further, he probably has an undersized fish or too many...

This vague term "probable cause" is right there in your 4th amendment, there is no concrete definition of probable or how to determine whether a man holding a poll is probable cause or not.

If over a season, a given enforcement agency looks in 1000 ice chests and finds fewer than 500 violations, then they do not have probable cause. Odds are they probably find violations in fewer than 10% of ice chests they look in.

How, exactly, is that probable cause?

By the way, my reasoning is exactly the same on drug searches where probable cause is given by a dog. If searches based on a given dog fail to find drugs more than 50% of the time, then that dog should no longer be used to establish probable cause.

[all star rod]

This thread is getting more pathetic then the GED = Engineer one.

[Goooh]

Maybe 52% of the time when checks are done on ice chests in boats with popping corks, tiller handles and a fat dip in the lip, they find illegal fish.

There's your probable cause.

What's anyone doing here besides complaining while standing on a hill with a powdered wig and the constitution under their arm? Nothing...

[BassYakR]

Since when is fishing a privilege?

[all star rod]

Originally Posted by BassYakR

Since when is fishing a privilege?

It is, since you have rules you have to follow? For example, being allowed drive a car is not a RIGHT either..

[T-TOP]

Originally Posted by all star rod

It is, since you have rules you have to follow? For example, being allowed drive a car is not a RIGHT either..

Then living in your house in Baton Rouge, or breathing every day are privileges too? Because if you break certain laws that will be taken from you too. Every single thing you do would be considered a privilege, looking at it that way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[T-TOP]

Hunting and fishing is my right. It is not a privilege. Breaking the law can prevent you from being able to do a lot of things in life. But you still can't say fishing and hunting is a privilege, makes you sound as left wing liberal as the people you were just talking about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[all star rod]

Originally Posted by T-TOP

Hunting and fishing is my right. It is not a privilege. Breaking the law can prevent you from being able to do a lot of things in life. But you still can't say fishing and hunting is a privilege, makes you sound as left wing liberal as the people you were just talking about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No i am not a liberal. But by your thinking i guess a person with 5 dui's has the right to drive if they want to. So hell lets just do away with all laws....and lets do whatever we want since we have the "right".

All I am saying is if we do thing like hunt or fish we are subject to things like getting checked and following rules. Hey do I like all the rules and such...no I do not.

Hey look next time you are fishing and a gw wants to check you tell them it is your right to fish and crank up you boat and leave and see what happens.

[T-TOP]

Originally Posted by all star rod

No i am not a liberal. But by your thinking i guess a person with 5 dui's has the right to drive if they want to. So hell lets just do away with all laws....and lets do whatever we want since we have the "right".

All I am saying is if we do thing like hunt or fish we are subject to things like getting checked and following rules. Hey do I like all the rules and such...no I do not.

Hey look next time you are fishing and a gw wants to check you tell them it is your right to fish and crank up you boat and leave and see what happens.

I agree, but you need to retract the one word "privilege" from your earlier statement.....

[all star rod]

Originally Posted by T-TOP

I agree, but you need to retract the one word "privilege" from your earlier statement.....

I agree I did not maybe use the correct word.