|
Post by swilk on Oct 2, 2017 7:19:04 GMT -5
^^^^^ None that I have been on. Wait, did she say bone we're present on the property or that they had never used them on the property? So, with suck a high profile case getting bounced around, will there be a push to "clarify" the law? The law is clear now........ at least every CO I seen or asked says so! Maybe explain the part your saying needs clarity! We've gone over and over and over this ..... example after example. Theoretical after theoretical. That alone is enough that anyone with even a shred of common sense should see there is room for improvement.
|
|
|
Post by jjas on Oct 2, 2017 7:22:14 GMT -5
From the DNR release...
The way the above reads to me is that the DNR has been documenting offenses and what these two were charged with may be the first of a multitude of charges.
|
|
|
Post by coolbreeze on Oct 2, 2017 7:22:18 GMT -5
In a nutshell , I believe they absolutely had to know the law , but if not ignorance is not a valid excuse too many are going to buy..
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Oct 2, 2017 7:29:47 GMT -5
In a nutshell , I believe they absolutely had to know the law , but if not ignorance is not a valid excuse too many are going to buy.. Most crimes require what attorneys refer to as "mens rea," which is simply Latin for a "guilty mind." In other words, what a defendant was thinking and what the defendant intended when the crime was committed. Mens rea allows the criminal justice system to differentiate between someone who did not mean to commit a crime and someone who intentionally set out to commit a crime. Not sure if this would apply, but it seems that based on what is available she made a reasonable effort to remove the bait from the area and did not mean to commit the crime.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Oct 2, 2017 7:35:16 GMT -5
The law is clear now........ at least every CO I seen or asked says so! Maybe explain the part your saying needs clarity! We've gone over and over and over this ..... example after example. Theoretical after theoretical. That alone is enough that anyone with even a shred of common sense should see there is room for improvement. The law seems pretty clear if you ask a CO... but I am sure they don't have the common sense to match your standards!
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Oct 2, 2017 7:38:47 GMT -5
The law is clear now........ at least every CO I seen or asked says so! Maybe explain the part your saying needs clarity! We've gone over and over and over this ..... example after example. Theoretical after theoretical. That alone is enough that anyone with even a shred of common sense should see there is room for improvement. Yes,..... Lets please do not beat that dead horse anymore. Discuss THIS case all you want but leave the dead horse alone...
|
|
|
Post by whitetaildave24 on Oct 2, 2017 7:39:00 GMT -5
We've gone over and over and over this ..... example after example. Theoretical after theoretical. That alone is enough that anyone with even a shred of common sense should see there is room for improvement. The law seems pretty clear if you ask a CO... but I am sure they don't have the common sense to match your standards! Greg, do you have an example of how their common sense doesn't match his standards. Does it ever end?
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Oct 2, 2017 7:39:56 GMT -5
We've gone over and over and over this ..... example after example. Theoretical after theoretical. That alone is enough that anyone with even a shred of common sense should see there is room for improvement. The law seems pretty clear if you ask a CO... but I am sure they don't have the common sense to match your standards! I would assume our CO's are very well trained and have a common understanding of how to apply the baiting laws. I have a ton of faith in their ability to investigate a crime and file reports based on that investigation. I do not have faith in prosecutors or judges to press charges based on the CO's report or to get a conviction from a jury that does not have that same training.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Oct 2, 2017 7:41:30 GMT -5
Not for folks like you Dave..... SMH
So you think this person is not guilty and CO's have wasted there time? Do tell.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Oct 2, 2017 7:47:17 GMT -5
We've gone over and over and over this ..... example after example. Theoretical after theoretical. That alone is enough that anyone with even a shred of common sense should see there is room for improvement. The law seems pretty clear if you ask a CO... but I am sure they don't have the common sense to match your standards! lol .... Typing out more than that wont do any good so Ill just leave it at laughing AT you.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Oct 2, 2017 7:54:35 GMT -5
Just post the question in CO forum if baiting laws are not clear enough for them in enforce....... I seen that answered many time already! One would think if the law is so unclear there would plenty of over turned cases .....
Always have the Debbie doubters I guess.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on Oct 2, 2017 8:15:11 GMT -5
I 100% have learned how long and ongoing some baiting/illegal activity investigations can go...first hand assistance being one measure of how complicated and time consuming these kind of things can be for CO's. Sadly, they are everywhere and outside of trespassing I guarantee you at least with the CO's I've spoken too is one of the top things hunters call in about other hunters.
Just another example of how I believe making the IC code even more stringent would be a good thing...I like Greg though don't see the current code as being unclear persay...albeit I don't like how they don't define an area...but agree an ICO officers knows hunting involving bait when he sees it.
Just ban baiting of any kind on any property someone is hunting on, from Sept 1st through January 15th. Simply removes any "argued gray area" which may or may not have grounds (dead horse not worth discussing).
Either way this chick and her friend knew precisely what they were doing was wrong...if they were truly naive, they've have just left the bait out there...If you read the IC code enough to gain the knowledge you have to remove it, you are just plain stupid if you didn't see the 10 days part...
|
|
|
Post by jjas on Oct 2, 2017 8:24:54 GMT -5
Again...this was posted by the IDNR
Based on the above...this isn't a one time "mistake" by these people. It appears to be a pattern of offenses over several years and by all appearances, the DNR has been building a case against those involved.
Bottom line...if these ladies have been breaking the game laws over the last few years, they should throw the book @ them. Confiscate the mounts, fine the crap out of them and take away their hunting privileges for life through out the country.
|
|
|
Post by jjas on Oct 2, 2017 8:29:41 GMT -5
tynimiller
The problem is, how many people do you think put out mineral sites on their property, hang a camera over it, shut it down by Sept 15th and then go to the trouble of removing the contaminated soil?
I would imagine many stop putting out minerals or other baits by that time, but we all know that the deer keep checking those sites during the hunting seasons.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Oct 2, 2017 8:32:56 GMT -5
Actually when she is found guilty her entry's from past game will be removed from the record books ... B&C,P&Y and HRB.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2017 8:54:53 GMT -5
Hey there folks I just thought I'd offer my $0.02. I recently moved here from North Carolina, and I have also hunted extensively in another state where hunting over bait is a legal practice. In both states I have placed cameras over corn piles just to see what sort of bucks were around. I can tell you without any hesitation that at least 95% of the pictures my camera took of bucks were taken after dark. If it was a big buck, it was more like 99.9% of the time.
I knew people who regularly placed corn piles under their stands. They always told me the same thing. The corn pile kept getting smaller, but they never had deer coming in to the pile while they were hunting. The state of Ohio says right there in the deer regulations (or at least they used to when I hunted there) that hunting over bait is legal, but studies have shown it does not help hunter success.
So why bother with bait in the first place? Because people mistakenly believe if it is illegal, then it must work really really well. It doesn't work. Anyone who baits deer is risking a ticket and forfeiture of their hunting equipment, all for a tactic that doesn't work anyway.
End of soapbox. Thank you for reading.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on Oct 2, 2017 8:54:58 GMT -5
tynimiller The problem is, how many people do you think put out mineral sites on their property, hang a camera over it, shut it down by Sept 15th and then go to the trouble of removing the contaminated soil? I would imagine many stop putting out minerals or other baits by that time, but we all know that the deer keep checking those sites during the hunting seasons. Oh for sure. Very very few. When we ran sites, and I'd tell buddies late august time to go dig em up, cover and fence them off...the crazy looks I'd get told me everything I needed to know about this. I do like the idea of using a kiddie pool for delivery of mineral, which I am a believer in, but just stopped due to the removal process flat being ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on Oct 2, 2017 9:19:54 GMT -5
Anyone else notice the fact it seems every single district DNR page is declaring they caught baiting suspects yesterday? I mean this is just an awesome testimony to the hardwork the ICOs do. It is a never ending battle sadly, but one they wage on no matter.
|
|
|
Post by johnc911 on Oct 2, 2017 9:41:42 GMT -5
Yep i remember that post last year it was all over the place people were freaking out about it
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Oct 2, 2017 9:49:14 GMT -5
The clarity or enforcement of the law isn't the issue. It's having a prosecutor that will actually file the charges.
Around here it is almost becoming the Old West with laws not being enforced because of lack of action by prosecutors. To be honest, things are getting so bad with not prosecuting trespassers, game violators, and property destroyers that they are just getting bolder and I fear it's going to end up getting someone killed.
|
|