Po Monkey Lounger wrote:The original intent of the federal game laws was basically to stop market hunting. We are now so far afield from that basic end that the entire reason for the implementation of the laws has been forgotten. Our federal game laws, in many respects, have simply become a means of subjective harassment by the enforcers of those laws. As described by the shared experiences of many here in this thread, when stopped and checked by federal wardens the results usually include something along the lines of "..we could have cited you for x. y, and z, but chose not to do so" (because we didn't want to appear to be a bunch of cheesedicks). Much like our tax laws have become, the game laws have become so extensive and burdensome that even those who try to comply and be good sportsmen can often be found noncompliant. The practical use of these laws for most of the enforcement officers is to use them to really put the hammer down on those caught in more serious violations ---- just icing on the cake so to speak. But, in the hands of the inexperienced or those wanting to find violations for the sake of writing tickets, the laws usually can serve that purpose even against the most careful sportsmen.
When three guys cannot emerge from a duck hunt with 5 total birds (well within our daily bag limits) without being ticketed for a "tagging violation", we have reached the threshold of pointless absurdity.What real purpose did that serve? How did that ticket protect the resource or the sport? It didn't. Were the actions of the hunters "unethical"? No.
Laws can be changed folks. They weren't set by fiat from a King. Federal laws were enacted by Congress and can be modified by Congress. State laws were enacted by our legislature and signed by the Gov. Perhaps its time to make some concrete suggestions to the people who can make a difference --- our members of Congress --- US Representatives and Senators, or state legislators. . Surely we can prevent market gunning and enforce our daily bag limits without the necessity of the current federal and state laws as written (most likely by folks who don't even hunt and wouldn't know a duck from an ardvark), and without harassing our good sportsmen. When most finally get to the point of just saying F^*& it and just stop hunting, then I suppose we won't even need wardens. At that point, the anti-hunters will have won the battle through over-regulation, as opposed to popular support(this is exactly the tactics of the left in other areas --- what makes anyone think that this is not the desired end game here?).
Yet one more example and one more step toward the "pussification" of America.
...
Just for fun, I am willing to make the following challenge to ANY federal or state game warden. Film what you consider to be the "perfectly legal duck hunt", compliant with all federal and state (Mississippi) game regulatory laws, from beginning to end of hunt, transport, cleaning, and to the table to eat. And I will bet you $250, payable to the charity of the winner's choice, that I can find something illegal about your hunt. And whether I win or lose, some charity will get the $250, and our sportsmen get a video that they can learn from ---even from a warden's mistakes, if such should occur.
Conditions: You must have more than one hunter on the hunt and must collectively harvest at least ten ducks. And the hunt must be on a public WMA in MS. And you must transport them from the WMA to your home or to a club site, clean them, and transport at least some of the cleaned birds to another destination for cooking or storage. (added later: and you must demonstrate on the video compliance with all laws ---don't just tell us ---- show us ---eg licenses, permits, shell limits, tags, etc. etc. ).
Any takers?
which reminds me of why you should never talk to the police.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
