24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
-->
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 19 of 24 1 2 17 18 19 20 21 23 24
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6
Originally Posted by smokepole
Did I say otherwise?



Basically you did when emphatically declared that he "is so wrong".



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
GB1

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
Bullsh**. I said he was wrong on this particular point because he is.

If I was to write a response to your post, it would read exactly like my post above. The one you quoted, or actually mis-quoted. Why don't you read it.



A wise man is frequently humbled.

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6
Originally Posted by smokepole
Bullsh**. I said he was wrong on this particular point because he is.

If I was to write a response to your post, it would read exactly like my post above. The one you quoted, or actually mis-quoted. Why don't you read it.



This is your acctual quote,
Originally Posted by smokepole
That may be, I have no idea. Good for him.

Given his vast legal knowledge it's surprising he could be so wrong about whether this guy broke the law, and which laws he broke. Is H

The thing is, he threw off an insulting one liner indicating I'm not familiar with the legal process, and I responded.

At this point, I really don't care, I just want to hear the outcome with this particular Utah hunter.




That is your opinion, not a fact. You have no way to prove it therefore it is only your opinion. Bob's position is also an opinion. But since Bob is acctualy an atourney and makes a living in the legal field, his opinion carries more weight than yours.

Last edited by jwp475; 03/12/15.


I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
Well, you're wrong about that. We do have a way of knowing whether this guy will be charged with any violations. There are a few who post here who are following that.

How about you, do you want to wager on whether this guy will be charged for wanton waste of game or reckless endangerment by virtue of the fact that he took a very low percentage shot at a game animal?

You guys do understand that there are no laws against taking low percentage shots, right?



A wise man is frequently humbled.

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6

We will see if he gets charged or not as the State of Utah is looking into the incident.



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
IC B2

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
I didn't think so.



A wise man is frequently humbled.

Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 17,281
Likes: 3
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 17,281
Likes: 3
Don't think he broke the law but was an unethical bastard.


"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
Thomas Jefferson

GeoW, The "Unwoke" ...Let's go Brandon!

"A Well Regulated Militia" Life Member

Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571
D
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
D
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571
Pretty sure I'm endangering every animal I shoot at.... isn't that the point?

Also pretty sure I don't want courts, judges, DAs, or a jury of my "peers" deciding what's "reckless" and what ain't, particularly when it comes to the discharge of a firearm.

Proposal: They should write CBM a $500 ticket.... he can pay it as a 'stupid shot Tax'.... or they waive it if he can hit an 8" plate at same range with a single round.... double it to $1k if he misses. By the same token, they should do the same test for the ass-hat who grass-bags a running bull at 150 yards, then fails to recover it too...... agreed?


You better pray to the God of Skinny Punks that this wind doesn't pick up......
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6
Originally Posted by Dogshooter
Pretty sure I'm endangering every animal I shoot at.... isn't that the point?

Also pretty sure I don't want courts, judges, DAs, or a jury of my "peers" deciding what's "reckless" and what ain't, particularly when it comes to the discharge of a firearm.

Proposal: They should write CBM a $500 ticket.... he can pay it as a 'stupid shot Tax'.... or they waive it if he can hit an 8" plate at same range with a single round.... double it to $1k if he misses. By the same token, they should do the same test for the ass-hat who grass-bags a running bull at 150 yards, then fails to recover it too...... agreed?



They already have the laws in place 4ager posted the correct statue in this thread.




I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571
D
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
D
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571
They have a lot of laws... that doesn't make them correct, or effective.

The only thing nearly as effective as punching a dumb-ass in the mouth.... is giving them enough rope to hang themselves.... then punching them in the wallet.


You better pray to the God of Skinny Punks that this wind doesn't pick up......
IC B3

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6
Originally Posted by Dogshooter
They have a lot of laws... that doesn't make them correct, or effective.

The only thing nearly as effective as punching a dumb-ass in the mouth.... is giving them enough rope to hang themselves.... then punching them in the wallet.



Can't argue with that.



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
Reckless endangerment applies to people and property, not game animals that are legally being hunted.

jwp, let me see if I've got this straight though: Bob's opinion carries more weight than mine, and he knows way more about the law than I do, but you're not willing to risk, let's say $100 to that effect.

Does that about sum it up?



A wise man is frequently humbled.

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,395
Likes: 2
F
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
F
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,395
Likes: 2
I don't do head shots. Have seen a bunch taken during culls, have seen hunters take them while hunting and have seen some messed up (hunters that is). A 900 yard headshot is simply out of the question in any normal scenario while hunting for me.

With that....



You "please let there be a law for everything" and "let there be a law against anything I don't like" people are going to get exactly what you want. But it won't be rational, critically thinking people that make the laws. It will be the average, ignorant, emotionally driven people with agendas that make them. We already are a nation ruled by laws yet as a nation have no virtue. I guarantee you that every single person who has stated that he should be charged with some crime due to his shot selection, has a hunting habit that he views as ethical, that hundreds or thousands of people view as reckless, irresponsible or wrong. All of them will believe that it should be illegal. If what you don't like should be illegal, than what they don't like should be illegal. With that, nothing will be "legal". Bad choices are bad choices and should be condemned within the community. Bad ethical choices is not, and should not be up to the government at any level. People always think that they are so different to those that came before them and refuse to acknowledge that humans are humans and their nature remains the same. It is in vogue now to speak about all manner of how the government is out of control and oversteps their bounds, yet fail to see that they themselves caused it by screaming for the "someone" to do something.

Unfortunately because of ego, ignorance and outright shortsightedness The vast majority cannot or will not see it.

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6
Originally Posted by 4ager
Actually, 23-20-4 might well apply.

"Reckless" is defined by statute in UT under 76-2-103:

Originally Posted by Utah State Legislature
76-2-103. Definitions.

A person engages in conduct:

(1) Intentionally, or with intent or willfully with respect to the nature of his conduct or to a result of his conduct, when it is his conscious objective or desire to engage in the conduct or cause the result.

(2) Knowingly, or with knowledge, with respect to his conduct or to circumstances surrounding his conduct when he is aware of the nature of his conduct or the existing circumstances. A person acts knowingly, or with knowledge, with respect to a result of his conduct when he is aware that his conduct is reasonably certain to cause the result.

(3) Recklessly with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he is aware of but consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor's standpoint.

(4) With criminal negligence or is criminally negligent with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he ought to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of a nature and degree that the failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise in all the circumstances as viewed from the actor's standpoint.


His actions were clearly intentionally and knowingly done. It'd be very hard to argue that his actions were not "reckless" under that statute, and quite possibly "criminally negligent".

If so, then 23-20-4 might well stick.

http://le.utah.gov/code/TITLE23/htm/23_20_000400.htm


Utah State Legislature


Title 23 Chapter 20 Section 4

Title 23

Wildlife Resources Code of Utah
Chapter 20

Enforcement - Violations and Penalties
Section 4

Wanton destruction of protected wildlife -- Penalties.


23-20-4. Wanton destruction of protected wildlife -- Penalties.

(1) A person is guilty of wanton destruction of protected wildlife if that person:

(a) commits an act in violation of Section 23-13-4, 23-13-5, 23-13-13, 23-15-6 through 23-15-9, 23-16-5, or Subsection 23-20-3(1);

(b) captures, injures, or destroys protected wildlife; and

(c) (i) does so with intentional, knowing, or reckless conduct as defined in Section 76-2-103;

(ii) intentionally abandons protected wildlife or a carcass;

(iii) commits the offense at night with the use of a weapon;

(iv) is under a court or division revocation of a license, tag, permit, or certificate of registration; or

(v) acts for pecuniary gain.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to actions taken in accordance with:

(a) Title 4, Chapter 14, Utah Pesticide Control Act;

(b) Title 4, Chapter 23, Agricultural and Wildlife Damage Prevention Act; or

(c) Section 23-16-3.1.

(3) Wanton destruction of wildlife is punishable:

(a) as a third degree felony if:

(i) the aggregate value of the protected wildlife determined by the values in Subsection (4) is more than $500; or

(ii) a trophy animal was captured, injured, or destroyed;


(b) as a class A misdemeanor if the aggregate value of the protected wildlife, determined by the values established in Subsection (4) is more than $250, but does not exceed $500; and

(c) as a class B misdemeanor if the aggregate value of the protected wildlife determined by the values established in Subsection (4) is $250 or less.

(4) Regardless of the restitution amounts imposed under Subsection 23-20-4.5(2), the following values are assigned to protected wildlife for the purpose of determining the offense for wanton destruction of wildlife:

(a) $1,000 per animal for:


(i) bison;

(ii) bighorn sheep;

(iii) rocky mountain goat;

(iv) moose;

(v) bear;

(vi) peregrine falcon;

(vii) bald eagle; or

(viii) endangered species;

(b) $750 per animal for:

(i) elk; or


(ii) threatened species;

(c) $500 per animal for:

(i) cougar;

(ii) golden eagle;

(iii) river otter; or

(iv) gila monster;

(d) $400 per animal for:

(i) pronghorn antelope; or

(ii) deer;

(e) $350 per animal for bobcat;

(f) $100 per animal for:

(i) swan;

(ii) sandhill crane;

(iii) turkey;

(iv) pelican;

(v) loon;

(vi) egrets;

(vii) herons;

(viii) raptors, except those that are threatened or endangered;

(ix) Utah milk snake; or

(x) Utah mountain king snake;

(g) $35 per animal for furbearers, except:

(i) bobcat;

(ii) river otter; and

(iii) threatened or endangered species;

(h) $25 per animal for trout, char, salmon, grayling, tiger muskellunge, walleye, largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, and wiper;

(i) $15 per animal for game birds, except:

(i) turkey;

(ii) swan; and

(iii) sandhill crane;

(j) $10 per animal for game fish not listed in Subsection (4)(h);

(k) $8 per pound dry weight of processed brine shrimp including eggs; and

(l) $5 per animal for protected wildlife not listed.

(5) For purposes of sentencing for a wildlife violation, a person who has been convicted of a third degree felony under Subsection (3)(a) is not subject to the mandatory sentencing requirements prescribed in Subsection 76-3-203.8(4).

(6) As part of a sentence imposed, the court shall impose a sentence of incarceration of not less than 20 consecutive days for a person convicted of a third degree felony under Subsection (3)(a)(ii) who captured, injured, or destroyed a trophy animal for pecuniary gain.


(7) If a person has already been convicted of a third degree felony under Subsection (3)(a)(ii) once, each separate additional offense under Subsection (3)(a)(ii) is punishable by, as part of a sentence imposed, a sentence of incarceration of not less than 20 consecutive days.

(8) The court may not sentence a person subject to Subsection (6) or (7) to less than 20 consecutive days of incarceration or suspend the imposition of the sentence unless the court finds mitigating circumstances justifying lesser punishment and makes that finding a part of the court record.

Amended by Chapter 250, 2009 General Session



There you go smoke pole




I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
Yes, I read those the first time he posted them.

So what. Wanna take that bet?



A wise man is frequently humbled.

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,974
Likes: 6

Still don't get it I take it.



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
Actually, I do. Money talks, and bullsh** walks.



A wise man is frequently humbled.

Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 17,281
Likes: 3
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 17,281
Likes: 3
No difference in what the 900yd shooter did and what our own John Burns does. Both slobs.

Anyone remember when Dober pointed out the empty shell casings around the shooter on Burns' video? Appeared to be a lot of shooting before the videoed kill. Trial and error? Shoot till it falls and if it don't crawl off, show your big shateating grin on the video?



"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
Thomas Jefferson

GeoW, The "Unwoke" ...Let's go Brandon!

"A Well Regulated Militia" Life Member

Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,122
S
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
S
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,122
Originally Posted by smokepole
Actually, I do. Money talks, and bullsh** walks.


So far you've done a lot of walking!!!

Just sayin

Shod


The 6.5 Swede, Before Gay Was Ok
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,194
Likes: 8
Another one of the "there ought to be a law" bunch, it figures.

How about you, you wanna take that bet for $100? So far no one else does.

"Just sayin" is just talk, and talk is cheap. Money talks but I'm thinking you'll walk.



A wise man is frequently humbled.

Page 19 of 24 1 2 17 18 19 20 21 23 24

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
AX24

683 members (10gaugemag, 007FJ, 01Foreman400, 117LBS, 10Glocks, 70 invisible), 2,964 guests, and 1,295 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,193,642
Posts18,512,297
Members74,010
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 


Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.



Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.136s Queries: 55 (0.026s) Memory: 0.9325 MB (Peak: 1.0583 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-05-15 02:03:48 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS