Your kids help spot and retrieve game? Man, that 100% falls into the category of tasks that require a hunting license. Pulling the trigger that kills the animal is not the sole task that is "hunting". "Spotting" and "Retrieving" are part of the pursuit and taking of the animal. Essentially, "participating" in any way in the taking of game requires a hunting license. It's kind of like claiming that the 3 people that are out in the woods, intentionally (intentionally being important here) "driving deer" in your direction aren't hunting because they aren't killing the game. I can guarantee you that if you tell any judge in the state of TX that your kid was helping you spot game to kill - that they'll tell you he was participating in a hunting activity that requires a license. Now you have judges that will still turn around and dismiss it because they think it's dumb (and it is) but they aren't going say it's not a hunting activity that require a license.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's non-sense and should be limited to the person pulling the trigger....and I'm also not saying a GW would cite you for it... but yeah, it's technically participation that require a license.

Probably not something you are likely to get in trouble for on private land but on public land you have a high likelihood of getting cited for it.

Alright man, good for you.

I have seen you literally argue with everyone that brings up anything legal around here, so I guess I should feel honored.

As far as police not protecting citizens, it isn't an opinion, it is a fact that was ruled upon by the supreme court.

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/...ve-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html

As far as police being trained to subvert your rights, police are allowed to lie and trick you in any investigation in order to get the answers they want/need.

Here is case law to support that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frazier_v._Cupp

Here is a shorter article explaining how police are allowed to lie to suspects to get information and often access to search.

https://www.policemag.com/339673/the-lawful-use-of-deception

Here is a really long Cornell Law Review Article about it for a more reputable source.

https://www.policemag.com/339673/the-lawful-use-of-deception

I want to reiterate, there are a lot of good and honest police out there that do the job because they want to be helpful and serve the people. I have had plenty of positive interactions with police and Game Wardens. I have enjoyed speaking to Game Wardens and have sought them out several times to ask for opinions and information.

From earlier in this thread
"I will say that generally they are all pleasant, knowledgeable, and often times forgiving if you have made an honest mistake. That doesn't mean that they all are."

The fact is that they are not required to protect the people and it is arguable what they are required to do under "serve."

I don't agree with people putting anyone, including police, on a pedestal thinking that they are going to always be on your side. There have been way too many instances where good people have been railroaded, tricked, and sometimes killed for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

My whole point to begin with is to just make sure that there can be no questions when hunting, especially public lands. Make sure that you have all of your bases covered.

I am just not sure how I am insulting a profession by stating what has already been decided by the highest court in the country and a lot of case law. It isn't my opinion, it is the opinion of the court that police don't have to protect you and are legally allowed to lie to you in order to convince you to give up your rights.

I personally have had a police officer try to tell me that I was DUI when I had been hit in the face by a come along that punched a hole through my lip and cut my toungue. I had hospital release paperwork that I offered to show him that I had been given no pain killers and explained why I couldn't speak clearly. When his partner arrived, his partner took him to the side and suddenly everything was okay. At the time, I was parked waiting for my girlfriend to come down from her apartment to move her car. I had done nothing wrong and he started questioning me about an unrelated call and if I had any information in that.

That is just my personal story of harassment, most other encounters I have had were positive.

I don't understand why so many people think that everything is so black and white. Life is full of gray areas in almost everything we do. There are plenty instances where what is right isn't always legal (ie in some states it is not okay to dispatch an animal after legal shooting time that was wounded before the end of legal shooting time, but the right thing is to end the suffering) and sometimes what is legal isnt always right (ie overharvesting a property because you have the tags).

You can disagree with how policing works but still respect officers as individuals. It can be both.

I hope that this brings some insight as to where I am coming from.

OP states that he made his decision to not get her a hunting license. I can respect that and don't take any issue with him doing that. People can do as they please.

I apologize for inferring that you are a fool. That was a poor choice of words.

As far as police not protecting citizens, it isn't an opinion, it is a fact that was ruled upon by the supreme court.

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/...ve-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html

As far as police being trained to subvert your rights, police are allowed to lie and trick you in any investigation in order to get the answers they want/need.

Here is case law to support that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frazier_v._Cupp

Here is a shorter article explaining how police are allowed to lie to suspects to get information and often access to search.

https://www.policemag.com/339673/the-lawful-use-of-deception

Here is a really long Cornell Law Review Article about it for a more reputable source.

https://www.policemag.com/339673/the-lawful-use-of-deception

I want to reiterate, there are a lot of good and honest police out there that do the job because they want to be helpful and serve the people. I have had plenty of positive interactions with police and Game Wardens. I have enjoyed speaking to Game Wardens and have sought them out several times to ask for opinions and information.

From earlier in this thread
"I will say that generally they are all pleasant, knowledgeable, and often times forgiving if you have made an honest mistake. That doesn't mean that they all are."

The fact is that they are not required to protect the people and it is arguable what they are required to do under "serve."

I don't agree with people putting anyone, including police, on a pedestal thinking that they are going to always be on your side. There have been way too many instances where good people have been railroaded, tricked, and sometimes killed for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

My whole point to begin with is to just make sure that there can be no questions when hunting, especially public lands. Make sure that you have all of your bases covered.

I am just not sure how I am insulting a profession by stating what has already been decided by the highest court in the country and a lot of case law. It isn't my opinion, it is the opinion of the court that police don't have to protect you and are legally allowed to lie to you in order to convince you to give up your rights.

I personally have had a police officer try to tell me that I was DUI when I had been hit in the face by a come along that punched a hole through my lip and cut my toungue. I had hospital release paperwork that I offered to show him that I had been given no pain killers and explained why I couldn't speak clearly. When his partner arrived, his partner took him to the side and suddenly everything was okay. At the time, I was parked waiting for my girlfriend to come down from her apartment to move her car. I had done nothing wrong and he started questioning me about an unrelated call and if I had any information in that.

That is just my personal story of harassment, most other encounters I have had were positive.

I don't understand why so many people think that everything is so black and white. Life is full of gray areas in almost everything we do. There are plenty instances where what is right isn't always legal (ie in some states it is not okay to dispatch an animal after legal shooting time that was wounded before the end of legal shooting time, but the right thing is to end the suffering) and sometimes what is legal isnt always right (ie overharvesting a property because you have the tags).

You can disagree with how policing works but still respect officers as individuals. It can be both.

I hope that this brings some insight as to where I am coming from.

OP states that he made his decision to not get her a hunting license. I can respect that and don't take any issue with him doing that. People can do as they please.

I apologize for inferring that you are a fool. That was a poor choice of words.

I agree with your opinion. I fully support law enforcement but they are not going to protect you from bad guys, you need to be prepared to do that yourself IMO. Most of their work is trying to catch bad guys after the crime has been committed....... and IMO you need to know your rights and NEVER relinquish them to law enforcement for any reason as one of our highest ranking military Generals found out when the FBI told him he didn’t need legal counsel to answer their questions.....



We have a first! Two logical posts in one thread. Good job.

This thread has gone off the rails, but it has been entertaining.

It is my general observation that I am better off not coming into contact with law enforcement of any kind. That includes, cops, GW's, judges, politicians and "public servants" of all kinds.

I guess it depends on the circumstances. There's alot of THF members I'd like to meet but most of ya-all are up North of Centerville. They include cops, firefighters, GWs. Not sure about any Judges on here. Only the politicians get that broad brush from me. There's only a few I'd let on my lawn.

Read the newspapers, in a weeks time you will see a few of the leading role models indicted. Whether it be a teacher, a preacher, or a LEO, every week one or more goes to post bail and await trial.

I do read, each and every day. You are right about seeing the leading role models. But the percentage of the bad apples (caught and uncaught) versus the good is extremely small. I don't have anything scientific backing me up, but i would bet the percentage is roughly the same across most to all of civilized humanity. To ostracize one is to ostracize all, or not as in my case.

DC, please don't take my words as trying to split any fence here or mince words to the molecular level. I'm just not willing to allow a tiny percentage to sway my view. You were a professional soldier, I'd love to shake your hand too. Lt. Calley's actions will not sway that one bit. I don't think i can explain it any better.