Colorado man gets lifetime hunting ban for poaching in multiple counties: 'His violations are among

How about throwing his sorry ass in prison for 20 years?

Yeah, this dirtbag seems under-impressed by mere laws about poaching.
I suspect more arrests are in his future.

I don't see how banning him from doing something he's been doing illegally for years is much of a deterrent. I think 20 years is too much, I'd rather see him working in some way to pay restitution than have tax payers support him for 20 years. A short jail sentence with a heavy fine would be better.

A ban from hunting to someone like him is like revoking a career DUI driver's license. They still drink and drive.
Hitting him hard in the wallet plus some jail time will not cure him but he will be less brazen.

I always am so confused by idiots like this. Then again if the situation was a father with no money bringing food home I would not care at all. Sometimes the reason doesn't matter at all. Sometimes the reason alone is enough.

The penalties for these types of infractions seem to not fit the crime. I say death by firing squad.

jmr40 said:

I don't see how banning him from doing something he's been doing illegally for years is much of a deterrent.

Click to expand...

They basically are banning him from being able to buy a license in 48 states. But as indicated, he already has been hunting without a license. In cases this severe, they should be a felony and that would ban him from ever legally possessing a firearm. Not that the law prevents felons from possessing firearms, but at least if he got caught hunting illegally with a firearm, it would mean a lot more time in jail.

jmr40 said:

I don't see how banning him from doing something he's been doing illegally for years is much of a deterrent. I think 20 years is too much, I'd rather see him working in some way to pay restitution than have tax payers support him for 20 years. A short jail sentence with a heavy fine would be better.

Click to expand...

Exactly what I was thinking.

In fact, they pretty much made it worse by nabbing him from legal hunting, because now all he has left that he can do is exactly what he was charged with...illegal hunting.

Perhaps we're missing more of the story here.

buck460XVR said:

In cases this severe, they should be a felony and that would ban him from ever legally possessing a firearm. Not that the law prevents felons from possessing firearms, but at least if he got caught hunting illegally with a firearm, it would mean a lot more time in jail.

Click to expand...

I like that very much, BUT...,

Actually, they don't need to lump the violation into the "felony" category.

That often results in the miscreant not being able to get better paying jobs as he ages and develops dependents, then ALL of the folks in his household end up on Entitlements, and it costs us the Taxpayers more "in the long run" to pay for that than his payment of restitution/fines (often not collected btw).

Federal Law (iirc) mandates that you are not allowed to possess firearms if you have been convicted of a crime where you could have been sentenced to more than 12 months in jail. Question 21 (b) of the 4473 form, ..., or any other crime for which the judge could imprison you for more than one year,... now West of the Mississippi it's normal for all crimes where you can get locked up for more than 12 months to be classified as "felonies" but this isn't the case in every state.., mine for example. Some of the Maryland misdemeanors carry max sentences of 5 years.

So..., simply add to the misdemeanor poaching law the max sentence of more than one year. Colorado's law on poaching (even for endangered or threatened species) limits imprisonment to 12 months, well they need to up that to 367 days...., and THEN anybody convicted of that law would lose legal gun ownership. The jerk only had to give up the guns he used in poaching..., adding the 367 day imprisonment limit (avoids the defense attorney from arguing about leap-years) would mean he gives up all his guns.

LD

Already a criminal and figures the laws don’t apply to him, maybe he should explore a career in politics...he’s obviously not very good at not getting caught. Might as well pick one where it doesn’t matter.

Loyalist Dave said:

I like that very much, BUT...,

Actually, they don't need to lump the violation into the "felony" category.

That often results in the miscreant not being able to get better paying jobs as he ages and develops dependents, then ALL of the folks in his household end up on Entitlements, and it costs us the Taxpayers more "in the long run" to pay for that than his payment of restitution/fines (often not collected btw).

Click to expand...

This guy has already plead guilty to wildlife crimes multiple times. He is considered by state officials to be the worst poacher they have ever seen in their state. He is a career poacher and the crimes he is convicted of are but a small fraction of what he has and will again, commit. Yet he only get 6 months in jail and a $5500 fine. If one considers the value of the animals poached, they are well into the category of Felony Theft, and that is what he has committed. Felonious Theft against the sate and every other hunter that hunts in Colorado. This guy is not going to turn his life around. With his ethics and morals, he is never going to be a caring and providing husband and father. Odds are his wife knew all along what he was doing too. You can't hide that sort of thing, along with all those trophy heads from everybody. Odds are, if he has kids, they have been taught his morals and ethics already and we will have to deal with them too in a few years. seems this guy had a chance after the first time he got caught and it only motivated him to poach more. As far as I'm concerned, this guy doesn't deserve anything more than to work the fryer at McDonald's or as a greeter at WalMart till the day he dies.

Far too many people don't consider crimes against wildlife and poacher as serious. For some reason they think it's just some poor slob trying to feed his family. The majority of the time, that's not the case. Most of the time it's a guy shooting out the window of his $45,000 truck so he can post pictures on social media to impress his friends or so he can have a mount and lie about how hard a hunt he had to get it. It's not the guy who got excited on his way to stand and shot the buck of a lifetime after 30 years of following the law. This is a guy who intentionally and meticulously plotted and planned to poach. He needs to pay a fair price for the acts he has committed.

Several years before this he was charged with identity theft. Appears to be a career criminal. And he wasn't poaching for food, most likely selling heads and antlers on the black market.

Loyalist Dave said:

I like that very much, BUT...,

Actually, they don't need to lump the violation into the "felony" category.

That often results in the miscreant not being able to get better paying jobs as he ages and develops dependents, then ALL of the folks in his household end up on Entitlements, and it costs us the Taxpayers more "in the long run" to pay for that than his payment of restitution/fines (often not collected btw).

Federal Law (iirc) mandates that you are not allowed to possess firearms if you have been convicted of a crime where you could have been sentenced to more than 12 months in jail. Question 21 (b) of the 4473 form, ..., or any other crime for which the judge could imprison you for more than one year,... now West of the Mississippi it's normal for all crimes where you can get locked up for more than 12 months to be classified as "felonies" but this isn't the case in every state.., mine for example. Some of the Maryland misdemeanors carry max sentences of 5 years.

So..., simply add to the misdemeanor poaching law the max sentence of more than one year. Colorado's law on poaching (even for endangered or threatened species) limits imprisonment to 12 months, well they need to up that to 367 days...., and THEN anybody convicted of that law would lose legal gun ownership. The jerk only had to give up the guns he used in poaching..., adding the 367 day imprisonment limit (avoids the defense attorney from arguing about leap-years) would mean he gives up all his guns.

LD

Click to expand...

I can agree with upping the sentence for poaching to a misdemeanor that exceeds the federal minimum for making someone a prohibited person, if they were to change the charges to something along the lines of simple poaching and malicious poaching or add varying degrees to the charge of poaching with the most egregious resulting in the loss of firearm rights. Knowing a few people who have been charged with poaching, all but one were actually mercy killings for animals that had been severely injured the one deserved everything he got and more, I would hate to see someone lose their hunting privileges and firearm rights because they didn't want to see an animal suffer.

At least I could in theory but not in actuality since I think anyone who is free to live on the streets should have access to whatever firearms they want and can afford, but that isn't a discussion for this part of the forum.

There is a local in my area. Who shoots more deer than he has tags for. Last year he shot his 1st bear. He actually was honest and reported it to the game commission. The game warden. Said ''I finally get to meet you'' The warden they were tracking him for 20 years. That is where the warden went wrong. The poacher read between the lines. And got rid off all evidence at his home. He had walls of racks in his garage. They came to his home. No arrest. This year he tells everyone he didn't get a deer. Im like yeah sure lol.

Make him ride around and collect road kill and the carcasses from turds dropping them off on the road for a couple years. Might change his tune. But I doubt it.

Some jail time and a decent size fine would be ok; but after the 2nd conviction take the drivers licence away for a few years.
Repeat again for the 3rd conviction take the drivers licence along with the hunting license away for fifteen years.
4th time ten years jail time and loss of hunting and driving for life.

Can't collect on the fines, sell the house, take the fines and give him whats left.

Loyalist Dave said:

I like that very much, BUT...,

Actually, they don't need to lump the violation into the "felony" category.

That often results in the miscreant not being able to get better paying jobs as he ages and develops dependents, then ALL of the folks in his household end up on Entitlements, and it costs us the Taxpayers more "in the long run" to pay for that than his payment of restitution/fines (often not collected btw).

Federal Law (iirc) mandates that you are not allowed to possess firearms if you have been convicted of a crime where you could have been sentenced to more than 12 months in jail. Question 21 (b) of the 4473 form, ..., or any other crime for which the judge could imprison you for more than one year,... now West of the Mississippi it's normal for all crimes where you can get locked up for more than 12 months to be classified as "felonies" but this isn't the case in every state.., mine for example. Some of the Maryland misdemeanors carry max sentences of 5 years.

So..., simply add to the misdemeanor poaching law the max sentence of more than one year. Colorado's law on poaching (even for endangered or threatened species) limits imprisonment to 12 months, well they need to up that to 367 days...., and THEN anybody convicted of that law would lose legal gun ownership. The jerk only had to give up the guns he used in poaching..., adding the 367 day imprisonment limit (avoids the defense attorney from arguing about leap-years) would mean he gives up all his guns.

LD

Click to expand...

From the instructions page of the federal form 4473
"Exceptions: A person is not prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm, if that person: (1) has been convicted of any Federal or State offense pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses considered relating to the regulation of business practices; (2) has been convicted of a State misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment of two years or less. Any persons subject to these exceptions shall answer "no" to the relevant question."

I believe that a conviction like that should carry with it a large fine and revocation of their drivers license for at least a year. Might discourage them from poaching. A firearms ban wouldn't prevent him from using archery equipment to poach.

SixteenGauge said:

I believe that a conviction like that should carry with it a large fine and revocation of their drivers license for at least a year. Might discourage them from poaching. A firearms ban wouldn't prevent him from using archery equipment to poach.

Click to expand...

A firearms ban wouldn't prevent him from poaching with firearms again, either. Which we both know.

Kinda like the armed burglar who can't own a firearm after conviction who never legally owned a firearm in the first place.