Am I thinking wrong

[maineguy110]

A old high school friend of mine is a game warden. He Nailed a guy that I use too hunt with and I mean use too. The guy was drinking and had shot a deer out of season of course he had a drinking buddy with him. The game warden let the oui go they got a 1000.00 fine and lost there hunting lic for a year. I think this is way to soft punishment. I feel they should of lost there vehicle and (hunting lic for life )and the firearms taken away. The only reason i feel it is alright to shoot a deer out of season is if it is hurt or u really need to put food your table to feed your family because u dont thave the money to buy food. So am i wrong in thinking we need tougher laws and make them inforced

[Rocky Raab]

I can't speak for Maine, but in most states, the laws are certainly there.

But almost all laws give judges some degree of discretion in sentencing. Judges are supposed to...well, judge. For a first offense, they may give the least possible sentence in hopes that a lesson was learned.

I'd hope that if I ever came up before a judge for anything at all, that'd be his or her judgement. Just getting there would have taught me a lesson, I guarantee.

[MarkL]

A $1000 fine isn't exactly trivial. It's enough to keep most people from breaking a law, even one they don't agree with. I don't think anything would really be served by confiscating a person's vehicle for the relatively minor crime of shooting a game animal out of season (compared to, say, armed robbery).

The punishment is supposed to be commensurate with the crime. The way some people call for more and more draconian punishments, we'll end up executing people for speeding.

[fabsroman]

I have seen judges give light sentences and harsh sentences in cases. Luckily, none of my clients have been on the receiving end of a harsh sentence.

In calling for harsher sentences, I think we forget that harsher sentences affect more people than just the defendant. For instance, what if the person is a single father and the only one that works in the household (i.e., he has minor children). Would it really be just to take away his vehicle and/or firearms?

I truly believe that the punishment should fit the crime. If you kill somebody on purpose, you should be sentenced to life in prison at the minimum, if not execution. For killing a deer out of season, it would depend on what all the circumstances are, but I think $1,000 fine is pretty stiff. That is about the equivalent of taking away the guy's firearm, and might be the equivalent of taking away a person's vehicle. A little over 7 years ago I used to go hunting with a 1980 Ford Fairmont with 200,000+ miles on it. I don't think that car was worth $300 dollars. Back then I was hunting with a Browning BPS, which probably cost $400. So, if they took the car and the gun in lieu of the fine, that would suit me fine. Then again, there were some days where I was hunting doves with a Beretta 686, and it would have hurt if they took my gun then. Sad thing is that I had a couple of run ins with the game wardens 10 and 8 years ago. I was fined $225 for hunting doves over bait, irregardless of whether or not I knew the bait was there. I paid the fine like an idiot instead of going to court and asking for Probation Before Judgment ("PBJ"). That was my first week of law school.

I represented a client last week on a DWI. It was his second within 8 years, but he didn't have an attorney for the first and he didn't know that he should request a PBJ. Hence, he merely plead guilty and took it all. Is it really fair that he received a harsher punishment on his first offense than most people would? Probably not, so I brought it up at his current sentencing and while the Judge found him guilty and gave him 18 months of probation with a 6 month suspended sentence, she said she would be open to changing the sentence to a PBJ if I filed a Motion for Reconsideration near the end of the 90 day period (i.e., she wants to see how my client does with alcohol class and the rest of his life for three months).

Let's throw another wrench in this whole thing. Should the poor be fined the same amount as the rich. Would Donald Trump really care if he was fined $1,000 for shooting a deer out of season? Probably not, he could look at the harshest monetary penalty for shooting deer out of season and scoff at it. Of course, there is always the jail time portion that makes those people think twice.

Criminal sentencing is a very tough issue. What should a person get for his fourth DWI where he runs his F-150 through a red light at 70 mph in a 40 mph zone, T-Bones a Honda Civic, puts the woman driving it, a mother with a newborn, in a coma for 3 days and sends her to the ICU for a week and rehab for about a year. The paramedics at the scene didn't even think she was going to live.

Well, he ended up getting a 10 month jail sentence with 6 months of it on work release (i.e., home arrest). So, he only had to spend 4 month in jail for his crime and he almost killed a human being. If we compare that to the crime of killing a deer out of season, the $1,000 fine looks like a lot.

At the end of the day, I think the $1,000 fine is plenty for that guy. A friend of mine got caught shooting over the limit on ducks. I got him a PBJ and he had to pay $250.

[bosveldjag]

Personally I think you are wrong with this part of your reasoning:

The only reason i feel it is alright to shoot a deer out of season is ............. .... u really need to put food your table to feed your family because u dont thave the money to buy food.

If that is a legitimate excuse to hunt out of season all conservation exercises can be quit straight away!

One can always find a job, how small or simple it may be, to earn money to put food on your table.
That is the right thing to do.

[fabsroman]

"The only reason i feel it is alright to shoot a deer out of season is ............. .... u really need to put food your table to feed your family because u dont thave the money to buy food."

I meant to comment on that statement, but forgot to do so.

"Need" is a pretty subjective term. What will you based need upon? What if the guy owns a house and has equity in it but no cash in the bank? Does he really need to kill deer out of season to put food on the table or should he get a home equity loan to afford food for his family. What about the guy that doesn't own a home but owns a $40,000 SUV or Truck and has no money in the bank? How about the guy that has no home and a piece of crap vehicle, but has $5,000 in the bank beause he is saving up for his first home purchase and he doesn't want to spend the money on food so that he can eventually reach his goal of having at least 5% for a down payment on a home.

If we base shooting game out of season on need, I am sure that I could fit a lot of people into the need category unless "Need" is defined by the legislature. Even then, I would love to see how the legislature defines need. This gets very tough.

[Jabba]

And there are food stamps too.

If we were allowed to subsistence hunt, a lot of us could potentially "Go Hermit" live in the woods, subsistenc ehunt and farm a little. Would that be OK to ruin it for everyone else?

$1000 for the first time... OK, but I'd have thrown in alcohol class too.

I have two buddies, and they ARE buddies get pinched shooting a deer from a vehicle a few years ago. We are normally squeaky clean. These guys were on their way to drive toward me on a mini type deer drive. Well they saw the biggest buck they have ever seen, and the "bait" in my opinion made criminals out of honest guys. Now don't think I defend their actions. They should not have shot that deer. But they were not out looking to road hunt either. Short story they made a perfect shot on the DNR buck, got busted. The CO knew us fairly well and went pretty easy on them. Confiscated the guys Knight Muzzle loader... and actually cleaned it up for him so it would not rot while in evidence. He did not take the truck not the other rifle. Their sentance was about $750 total for the two of them. They Did learn their lesson. He got his rifle back as well.

Is it OK for DNR to bait people like that?

Jabba

[gspsonny03]

Jabba, they do that here in Wyo. to. I don't care for it much, but I suppose they think they have a good reason. They got my Son-in-law and his Dad and Brother-in-law that way two years ago. I think that it's a sneaky way to do business, but it's amazing how many people fall for it especially when they advertise it on the radio that they will be doing it. The thing that really upsets me is they seem to target nonresidents, although if a local is dumb enough to fall in the trap, they'll take him too. I think a $1000.00 fine is pretty stiff for a first timer. Now if you are a repeat offender, then maybe you take their gun and/or vehicle, but first time no.

[Wolvie]

If a person nowadays is going hungry and has a gun and ammo to hunt with,.well you can sale the gun and provide for your family.
Alot of people try to use hunting as a pawn to do something they think is right.
I don`t agree with shooting out of season,and I certainly don`t agree with drinking while hunting,driving,and with a firearm .

I read all the post and that was one object missed on and no one mentioned it.
The $1000.00 fine was enough for the hunting out of season,plus the liecense suspension.But with all the DWI`s,DUI`s,etc going on anymore,.drinking has to be like the number #1 killer out there!

I did something this past gun opener, that was totally a mistake,...I was scared of losing my hunting privilages,my truck,my gun,my whole life to be exact,and I wasnt drinking and i didnt mean to put a loaded firearm in the back of my pickups bed ,I got hurt while hunting and was in some pain,and needed to collect myself for a few seconds and I got busted for it.
I am still serving on my 6 mo ACOD,which by the way is up in July,but until it is I am unable to continue with my hobby and passion of teaching new hunters about safety.
I am not judging anyone,..but when alcohol is in the mix it cant be a good thing.And anything can or could have happened.Same as it could have when i put that loaded gun in my pickups bed.

Later All
SAFE HUNTIN~

[fabsroman]

Jabba and GSP,

Would your buddies not have shot that buck if it was a real buck? They would have. So, it really isn't baiting. Baiting is getting somebody to do something that they normally wouldn't do. I don't know how the law works where you guys live, but shooting from the truck here in Maryland is illegal and resting a loaded gun on the truck is also illegal. Now, the DNR agent could right me up if I used the hood of the truck as a rest to shoot an animal, but I am sure the judge would throw it out because the law is in place to protect people from being shot by loaded guns resting in or on vehicles while people do not know they are loaded.

We can also get into whether or not the people were hunting with the aid of a vehicle, but I don't think that is illegal here in Maryland. You can pretty much drive a truck or 4 wheeler to your hunting spot, get out of it, and hunt all you want, you just cannot shoot while you are in the truck.

[Jabba]

You are not allowed to use a motor vehicle to aid in taking game in Indiana.

They shot from a roadway. Those were the 2 charges.

Yes, I believe it was baiting. It it was a doe... no they would not have shot her. If it was a REAL buck... no I don;t think they would have shot it. It was a INCREDIBLE buck that you just don;t see in real life. Not regular Joe's hunting public land. It's like leaving $100,000 in cash on the street and arresting people for picking it up.

Like I said... I would not have done it, but I THINK I would have kept my head and realized that it was not real. It sure LOOKS real though. I just know that you don;t see bucks like that on public land. Especially where they just stand in a place to be shot. Bucks get big because they RUN from stuff like that. Poachers get them before they get that big if they are stupid.

Jabba

[fabsroman]

Jabba,

We would all like to say that we will step in front of the bullet screaming toward one of our family members, but until the time comes there is no telling what we will do. So, whether or not I would take a shot at a monster buck would probably depend on the circumstances. I am not going to say that I NEVER would do it, because I just do not know.

I understand that if it was a doe they would not have shot her, but they wuold obviously shoot a buck. Kind of like saying to an undercover officer selling crack cocaine that if it was sugar you would not have paid for it.

By the way, taking $100,000 you find on the street without any is not stealing if it does not have any indication of ownership. We had this discussion a couple of weeks ago at a family dinner and I pretty much broke out the property law book to settle the issue. If a construction worker finds something in somebody's wall and the property owner did not know about it, it actually belongs to the construction worker. Personally, I thought it would have belonged to the homeowner, but not so. I am sure that case law varies among all the states, but I can bet that if you took $100,000 to the police department's lost and found and nobody claimed it after a certain period, you would be entitled to keep the money. Where most people go wrong is that they keep the money without informing the police that they found it. Now, if there is some type of ID in the suitcase, it isn't your property because you know who it belongs to, unless the only ID is Samsonite. The US pretty much believes in a finders keepers attitude if the finder does not know who the property belongs to.

[Jabba]

I guess you don;t KNOW what you'll do till you go theu it... but I can say with relative certainty that I would not take a buck like that no matter how tempting. It would not be worth it to me to remember the cheating way in which it was taken. I could not have a reminder of my submission to doing wrong hanging on the wall.

BTW if you remember the pic I posted of the BIG buck taken close to my house... it was the same guys. They got a REAL trophy honestly.

Jabba

[Rocky Raab]

I think that if I saw a monster buck standing still and looking at me from 100 yards off a public road...



...I'd KNOW it was robo-deer.


I saw video a while back (the DWR always videotapes their robo-deer setups for evidence) where a truck slams to a stop, a guy bails out with a rifle and - instead of shooting from the truck hood - carefully crawls through the brush to the mechanical deer. About ten yards out, he can't stand it, leaps up, shoots...and MISSES it!

The DWR still laughs about that guy. They escorted him back to his truck, laughing all the way, and congratulated him for at least trying to be legal.

[gspsonny03]

Fabs:

You were assuming again. As in Jabba case they were not shooting from the vehicle, but they were shooting from a public road, which is almost as bad. Law reads that you have to be on the outside edge of the barrow pit or if there is no barrow pit 30 feet from center of the road either direction. And I can truthfully say that I have let some monster bucks go because they were on property where I had no permission. I will also say that I have bent a few laws when I was younger, but since I've gotten older and hopefully a little wiser, I just don't care to go through the grief anymore.

I think it was wolvie that was having the problem with having a loaded gun in the back of his truck, now that would be tough. Never heard of such a thing. Here you can have it loaded in your truck as long as you're not moving. You can have the magazine loaded to the hilt and the breech open and hunt all day long here if you want to. Me personally I keep it closed until I get where I'm going and then put a round in. But every state is different to some degree.