Poachers are the worst

[Officers'Wife]

No not really...., only in the minds of some people....particularly defense lawyers....

NEVER say a poacher is a type of hunter. Sorry, it blurrs the two activities in the minds of masses and those that make the laws. While both involve killing an animal, the former is done when it's illegal and not when it's for survival. You must have some odd game wardens where you are, as where I am when folks were taking deer without a license, or by the wrong method, if the warden knew they were taking it for food and not going on welfare..., they chose to not enforce the regulation.

LD

However, the fish and game laws are just that, laws. The office of the conservation officer or game warden is to enforce those laws. Deciding whether the circumstances warrant punishment or acquittal falls under the heading of the court system. For the game warden to "not enforce the regulation" is not husbandry but malfeasance unless the statute actually makes the exception in the code for that particular circumstance. This is what is meant by the phrase "laws not men." Not to mention the queer idea that all men are created equal. Equality under the law sometimes requires persons to explain their actions in a court of law. The lawyers in the group may now tear my argument apart at their leisure,

 

[kscharlie]

However, the fish and game laws are just that, laws. The office of the conservation officer or game warden is to enforce those laws. Deciding whether the circumstances warrant punishment or acquittal falls under the heading of the court system. For the game warden to "not enforce the regulation" is not husbandry but malfeasance unless the statute actually makes the exception in the code for that particular circumstance. This is what is meant by the phrase "laws not men." Not to mention the queer idea that all men are created equal. Equality under the law sometimes requires persons to explain their actions in a court of law. The lawyers in the group may now tear my argument apart at their leisure,

Yes, game laws are laws. Traffic laws are also laws. Is the traffic cop who stops you for going 4mph over the speed limit, then gives you only a verbal warning, also acting as the court system? If so, I reckon there are lots of LEOs who are guilty of "not enforcing the regulation". What I am saying is that you can't always say always...

 

[Officers'Wife]

Yes, game laws are laws. Traffic laws are also laws. Is the traffic cop who stops you for going 4mph over the speed limit, then gives you only a verbal warning, also acting as the court system? If so, I reckon there are lots of LEOs who are guilty of "not enforcing the regulation". What I am saying is that you can't always say always...

Again, I am only familiar with Indiana but here, the LEO is granted the discretion to write warnings or give verbal warnings in the regulation. I could easily be mistaken, but my meager understanding of the fish and game code does not grant the Conservation Officer that discretion.

 

[tarosean]

hope the vermin lose their trucks, guns and rights.

 

[Art Eatman]

That particular rack was worth a trip to a taxidermist. That was what caused my puzzlement.

 

[Kano383]

No not really...., only in the minds of some people....particularly defense lawyers....

NEVER say a poacher is a type of hunter. Sorry, it blurrs the two activities in the minds of masses and those that make the laws. While both involve killing an animal, the former is done when it's illegal and not when it's for survival. You must have some odd game wardens where you are, as where I am when folks were taking deer without a license, or by the wrong method, if the warden knew they were taking it for food and not going on welfare..., they chose to not enforce the regulation.

LD

I guess that you live in a kingdom where all the laws are wise and just, where peasants are not famished due to wild beasts reducing their labor to nothingness, where public officers’ greed doesn’t preclude you from enjoying your basic rights, where the pauper may see his day in court when the rich wants to rob him...

You are so lucky.

Unfortunately, in the wild world out there, it doesn’t always work this way... And when a law is unjust, would you tell someone “Sorry, man, the Book says your kids will starve tonight ‘cuz I’m takin’ yo’ behind where the sun shineth not...” even though you KNOW he’s been screwed left, right, and center and has absolutely no way to make ends meet?

His great-great-great-grandfather was hunting here, having his own tribal rules on when and what could be hunted, and having a pretty clear idea of how to manage his land, his crops, and his animals. Till the day some pale face from London came over with a big Martini-Henry boomer and decreed that henceforthwith he’d be allowed to do absolutely nothing at all - and that he would have to pay taxes for the privilege, in order to feed Her Majesty’s Officers...

Think again.

I do have to make the call on what is a poacher, and what is not, in real life - and there is dark (much darker than what happens Stateside, believe me), and there are nuances.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Think again.

I DID think, and YOU didn't read nor understand the whole post, so READ IT AGAIN...., for I objected to the Game Wardens where you are not tempering what was on paper with the reality of your "peasants", which they do where where I am. So as I pointed out, the game warden here would NOT tell a person his family should starve because of what the book says, and if you read what I wrote, I never suggested such...., and he wouldn't consider the fellow feeding his family, although in violation, a "poacher".

As for Officer's Wife's assertion about discretion, if the law doesn't specify it, yes in a laboratory type setting of the perfect world, if it isn't written it doesn't apply, so every law enforcement officer is guilty of malfeasance ...., BUT since laws are applied in the real world, what the game warden or any other LEO encounters, alone, is always up to her/his discretion..., as a fact.

LD

 

[Officers'Wife]

I DID think, and YOU didn't read nor understand the whole post, so READ IT AGAIN...., for I objected to the Game Wardens where you are not tempering what was on paper with the reality of your "peasants", which they do where where I am. So as I pointed out, the game warden here would NOT tell a person his family should starve because of what the book says, and if you read what I wrote, I never suggested such...., and he wouldn't consider the fellow feeding his family, although in violation, a "poacher".

As for Officer's Wife's assertion about discretion, if the law doesn't specify it, yes in a laboratory type setting of the perfect world, if it isn't written it doesn't apply, so every law enforcement officer is guilty of malfeasance ...., BUT since laws are applied in the real world, what the game warden or any other LEO encounters, alone, is always up to her/his discretion..., as a fact.

LD

However, the basis of the Constitution is that the fairness of laws are judged in the courts not the woods or the streets. This means your "real world" acceptance is de facto support of a nation of men not of laws.

 

[buck460XVR]

Reality is not the same everywhere, and between white and black there are many nuances.

But the killing of game animals as to in the linked articles is not grey. It is strictly a kill for thrill and wanton waste. It is theft on a huge scale from all of us that pay taxes, buy hunting licenses, purchase sporting goods and just enjoy the outdoors and those animals within it. I look at poachers the same way I look at pedophiles. Arrogant people with very low morals and ethics. They abuse and pick on victims that have little or no chance of defending themselves and derive their joy from the misery they induce on them. Very few poachers in the world are trying to feed their family....and yes, I too would look the other way in those scenarios. But those scenarios are very few and far between. The majority of poaching is done for greed and thrills, sometimes to boast, claiming the trophy was taken legally.

 

[Art Eatman]

There is a vast difference between the US and Africa, in that our welfare system obviates the need for any poaching for food.

Buck's post is a good closing statement.