I have, on numerous occasions, shot animals at the request of the game department.

I see nothing wrong with that.

So have I and so don't I. In this case, I guess you had to be there.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Agreed that the Dims would like to ban international hunting and then hunting in general. The problem is that they can't govern what a citizen does outside the US that is legal where it is done. That's why they have started to prosecute people for importing a trophy that was not taken perfectly legally wherever it was taken. Which raises some real Constitutional issues in my humble opinion because it involves a US Attorney deciding what is and is not legal under some foreign country's law. I think the US should mind it's own business and allow other countries to interpret their law as to what is legal and not legal.

Well stated!

I always keep some part of an interesting animal that I killed while hunting at home. But after only two experiences of importing and paying taxidermy and shipping and permits and dealing with delays and bureaucracy, importing trophies is now of little interest to me. I had my first and possibly only buffalo skull and horns on the way to me for more than a year, and finally gave up a couple months ago. Asked my PH/Outfitter to keep it. It was no fault of his, but the red tape, delays, transportation issues, etc. were just too much for me. I would certainly hunt another buffalo, and almost booked another hunt in Zimbabwe for June 2021 before this COVID pandemic got going. But however that works out I have no more plans to import trophies. A tuskless cow elephant or broken tusked old bull would be of interest but I don't need ivory or an elephant hair bracelet. All I want from now on is a good travel experience, to learn a lot about the game, the ecosystem, and the local people. Hunt fairly and with some honest effort. And eat a bit of everything I kill if possible. If the animal is used locally, and appreciated, That's reward enough for me.

Fulvio,

Understand that the order doesn't apply to hunters, but not sure the poachers won't shoot first under those circumstances and then it's "Katie bar the door." I didn't go there to get in a fire fight. Was a Tanzanian PH killed a few years ago by poachers. The shoot to kill order simply encourages them to shoot first.
Hunting under those circumstances was less than ideal. Armed guards in camp. Told to sleep with your rifle.

Had a game scout have an accidental discharge after my rifles had been collected and loaded on the car, while I was still sipping tea and tying my boots in my tent. Mad dash to the car to get a rifle as there is gunfire in camp. The troops pour out of their camp as well. Was pretty much chaos until we figured out it was an accident. The game scout was pretty sheepish after that.

I have no problem shooting a meat animal. Just know you can't import it if it's not on your license. In my case, the animal I shot was one I wanted to import and I had another buffalo on license, so I did.

quote:

Understand that the order doesn't apply to hunters, but not sure the poachers won't shoot first under those circumstances and then it's "Katie bar the door." I didn't go there to get in a fire fight. Was a Tanzanian PH killed a few years ago by poachers. The shoot to kill order simply encourages them to shoot first.

Lavaca,

If a hunting party gets attacked by armed poachers in the field and a fire fight ensues, retaliatory fire is viewed as self-defense and not prosecutable.
The mere fact that you had been advised to sleep with your rifle at close quarters by someone of authority is an indication that in the event of a skirmish, you would have the possibility to defend yourself.

Andre De Kok was unable to return fire because the poachers ambushed and took him out first and if the story is correct, died on the spot.
A manhunt was later conducted and suspects were both apprehended and some apparently shot in the process.

The trophy of the meat ration animal you shot and exported/imported against the legal quota permitted on license is OK as would substitution of the head of an inferior one already shot.

Bottom line: meat ration animals sanctioned by a Game Dept. official are legal - the trophy is not exportable unless it can be covered by the quota on license.

I don't care what order are, or who gave them.

If I am under fire, and I am armed, I will shoot to kill.

We were in the Deka safari area in Zimbabwe.

Driving along one morning, someone spotted people far away disappearing into the forest, where no one should have been.

The subject of poachers came up, and someone asked what would happen if they started shooting at us.

I said I will shoot back.

Someone said "and you don't miss" laughing.

I said anyone taking pot shots at me is not going to get another chance.

fulvio, will you pay lavaca's legal and court costs defending such actions in Tanzania, the USA, or both? You see my point.

Understand, I don't disagree with you on any substantive matter, but in the words of Justice Holmes, your (or my, or anyone else's) certitude is not the test of certainty.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:
fulvio, will you pay lavaca's legal and court costs defending such actions in Tanzania, the USA, or both? You see my point.

Understand, I don't disagree with you on any substantive matter, but in the words of Justice Holmes, your (or my, or anyone else's) certitude is not the test of certainty.

Please explain to me what the laws are when criminal poachers are trying to kill you.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:
fulvio, will you pay lavaca's legal and court costs defending such actions in Tanzania, the USA, or both? You see my point.

Understand, I don't disagree with you on any substantive matter, but in the words of Justice Holmes, your (or my, or anyone else's) certitude is not the test of certainty.

Mike,

Under such circumstances the TZ authorities would not take sides with the assailants, especially poachers who are criminals from all aspects: illegally killing wildlife, in possession of military firearms and attacking members of the public and tourists, with intent to kill.

You need to bear in mind that the client is not asked nor ordered to participate in any improbable exchange of gunfire with poachers but if push comes to shove, what will it be?

And, if the courts in the US take a dim view of such situations and will go to the extent of prosecuting their nationals for defending their lives in a foreign country, you guys are well and truly fucked.

If its that bad now just wait until Sleepy Joe and Camel-toe Harris get settled in.

quote:

And, if the courts in the US take a dim view of such situations and will go to the extent of prosecuting their nationals for defending their lives in a foreign country, you guys are well and truly fucked.

Actually, anytime a lawyer is is involved, both sides lose!

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by Duckear:
Not sure why y’all think ‘they’ would stop at an import ban?

If banning trophies doesn’t have the desired effect on hunting, expect international hunting to be made illegal for Americans.

Because several that support the democrats are just "whistling past the grave yard"!

They don't want to shoot an elephant PR a lion.....so it doesn't affect them!

They don't care for AR type rifles......so it doesn't affect them!

They don't want to shoot a giraffe or a zebra...so it doesn't affect them.

Once the left gets what " doesn't affect "them", do these people think the left is gonna just stop?


This " what if" conversation is the wrong conversation. The conversation should be how "we" hunters, shooters, conservationists ban together to stop "them" from ending our lifestyle and traditions!

.

This^^^in Spades!

And Duckear is correct as well.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Agreed that the Dims would like to ban international hunting and then hunting in general. The problem is that they can't govern what a citizen does outside the US that is legal where it is done. That's why they have started to prosecute people for importing a trophy that was not taken perfectly legally wherever it was taken. Which raises some real Constitutional issues in my humble opinion because it involves a US Attorney deciding what is and is not legal under some foreign country's law. I think the US should mind it's own business and allow other countries to interpret their law as to what is legal and not legal.

Lavaca,
What if they get all the iconic African species listed as endangered. Then hunting these animals, even if in another country, could be prosecuted under the Lacy Act. Never been done to my knowledge but...when I was running the Lion Conservation Task Force...I saw intel showing that is exactly what some NGOs conspiring with some in USFWS were planning to try.

quote:

Originally posted by Jason P:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by Duckear:
Not sure why y’all think ‘they’ would stop at an import ban?

If banning trophies doesn’t have the desired effect on hunting, expect international hunting to be made illegal for Americans.

Because several that support the democrats are just "whistling past the grave yard"!

They don't want to shoot an elephant PR a lion.....so it doesn't affect them!

They don't care for AR type rifles......so it doesn't affect them!

They don't want to shoot a giraffe or a zebra...so it doesn't affect them.

Once the left gets what " doesn't affect "them", do these people think the left is gonna just stop?


This " what if" conversation is the wrong conversation. The conversation should be how "we" hunters, shooters, conservationists ban together to stop "them" from ending our lifestyle and traditions!

.

JTEX:

You are currently in first place for post of the year!

And we don’t achieve that by denigrating the one political party that at least gives a small voice from time to time.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

And, if the courts in the US take a dim view of such situations and will go to the extent of prosecuting their nationals for defending their lives in a foreign country, you guys are well and truly fucked.

Actually, anytime a lawyer is is involved, both sides lose!

So, tell me, when it turns out that the guy you just shot is the nephew of the local police chief, who's doing a nice commercial poaching business with a Chinese diplomat, who's bribing several ministers in the national government, who you gonna call, your dentist?

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

And, if the courts in the US take a dim view of such situations and will go to the extent of prosecuting their nationals for defending their lives in a foreign country, you guys are well and truly fucked.

Actually, anytime a lawyer is is involved, both sides lose!

So, tell me, when it turns out that the guy you just shot is the nephew of the local police chief, who's doing a nice commercial poaching business with a Chinese diplomat, who's bribing several ministers in the national government, who you gonna call, your dentist?

Funny but true. If it was an absolutely life and death situation yes defend yourself but otherwise leave it to the team.

[/QUOTE] So, tell me, when it turns out that the guy you just shot is the nephew of the local police chief, who's doing a nice commercial poaching business with a Chinese diplomat, who's bribing several ministers in the national government, who you gonna call, your dentist?[/QUOTE]

Nope, in TZ you would be just fine and the so-called local Police Chief will suddenly have no recollection of having a nephew.

You need to worry more about your misguided legal system.

quote:

Originally posted by fulvio:

quote:

So, tell me, when it turns out that the guy you just shot is the nephew of the local police chief, who's doing a nice commercial poaching business with a Chinese diplomat, who's bribing several ministers in the national government, who you gonna call, your dentist?

Nope, in TZ you would be just fine and the so-called local Police Chief will suddenly have no recollection of having a nephew.

You need to worry more about your misguided legal system.

Fujo,
I believe your advice is sound.

Well, hell. Didn't mean to stir up a hornet's nest. Never meant to suggest that I wouldn't hunt where there were poachers or that if fired upon I wouldn't shoot back. Absolutely would. Also, I agree with Fulvio, that I have confidence in the Tanzanian legal system that there would be no consequences eventually. But I'm a lawyer and I know the meaning of "eventually" $$$$.

The whole meat animal issue never was an issue, at least not in my case. I hadn't even filled the open tag.

Lane,

I can't imagine a scenario that they could prosecute anyone for doing something totally legal in another country. The USA's use the Lacy Act is to prosecute if there is something harvested illegally in the country of origin. They don't limit it to trophies. Gibson Guitars got in trouble for some of the wood they used a few years back.

I don't think they could possibly prosecute a US citizen for something legal in a foreign country, but the times they are a changin' and the new Administration is not likely to be kind to us. That would raise serious Constitutional and conflicts of laws issues, however, in my opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Lane,

I can't imagine a scenario that they could prosecute anyone for doing something totally legal in another country. The USA's use the Lacy Act is to prosecute if there is something harvested illegally in the country of origin. They don't limit it to trophies. Gibson Guitars got in trouble for some of the wood they used a few years back.

I don't think they could possibly prosecute a US citizen for something legal in a foreign country, but the times they are a changin' and the new Administration is not likely to be kind to us. That would raise serious Constitutional and conflicts of laws issues, however, in my opinion.

I would not bet on it.

With the utter stupidity of the American legal system, anything is possible.

Bring back the old system.

Where you can sue anyone, but the loser pays all costs!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Lane,

I can't imagine a scenario that they could prosecute anyone for doing something totally legal in another country. The USA's use the Lacy Act is to prosecute if there is something harvested illegally in the country of origin. They don't limit it to trophies. Gibson Guitars got in trouble for some of the wood they used a few years back.

I don't think they could possibly prosecute a US citizen for something legal in a foreign country, but the times they are a changin' and the new Administration is not likely to be kind to us. That would raise serious Constitutional and conflicts of laws issues, however, in my opinion.

I would not bet on it.

With the utter stupidity of the American legal system, anything is possible.

Bring back the old system.

Where you can sue anyone, but the loser pays all costs!

Saeed, he is referring to criminal prosecution; not civil suits.

As for me, I have already decided not to bring home trophies. I would rather spend my money on hunting than shipping and taxidermy. If the prices go down I will hunt more.

I agree with Saeed on costs. The tort system in the US is so corrupt it's not funny. There needs to be a downside to the plaintiff's lawyers who encourage their clients to seek unnecessary treatment that they guarantee with letters of protection that we all know will be negotiated down after the fact, but allows them to get in inflated medical bills into evidence.

I had a case not long ago where a middle aged male claimed the usual back injuries. He didn't need surgery, but his TV lawyers got him to get surgery. He coded and died on the table. So how did his supposed lawyers and advocates and their hired and paid for doctors benefit him?

I had another plaintiff's lawyer after we reached a settlement say that his client would be so pleased because she could stop treating. It's a racket.

I “retired” from most family and civil law because of the attitude of opposing counsel in most cases.

For example, each side is paying $300 an hour to fight two hours for a $500 lawn mower. Emotions cost money. Could I play that game? Sure, but not in good conscience.

Civil lawyers from big firms typically love to bury sole practitioners in piles of BS discovery. They typically just have the paralegals do the work, while charging their clients for lawyer work. Although I did well for my clients, it just didn’t make sense.

I don’t mind being a lawyer, although I never planned to practice. I went to law school when the financial markets went to hell and a JD made more sense than an MBA to go back to business. However, I’ve been stuck in criminal defense for 11 years or so. At least the prosecutors are on salary and just want to move on to the next case.

quote:

I don't think they could possibly prosecute a US citizen for something legal in a foreign country, but the times they are a changin' and the new Administration is not likely to be kind to us. That would raise serious Constitutional and conflicts of laws issues, however, in my opinion.

As you and DCS well know, my friend, justice prevails in the courthouse 7 out of 10 times.
kh

I still have one trophy pending a permit that I don't expect to receive. I'm out of room anyway unless I toss all the offspring's stuff and move trophies in their rooms...hmmm.

I hunt for the experience.

Kevin, you are so right. Clients always ask for an evaluation before trial. Percentage chance of a win. First, a win has to be defined, but I remember the most tense jury deliberation I've ever been through. I really believed in my case.
I told the client we had an 85% chance of winning outright. Pretty aggressive. The judge pretty much agreed with me and told all counsel he was denying my directed verdict motion, but would fix it if the jury screwed it up.

This simple, so obvious case, 12 of our fellow citizens deliberated for a full day and a half.
Made me doubt the intelligence of the American people, long before the recent news that clearly does so.

Unfortunately, the skill and financial resources of the lawyers has a lot to do with who wins and who loses and the plaintiff's lawyers tend to ... Stopping there. Don't plan on getting sued. Plaintiffs lawyers stand to make millions on contingent fees and insurance companies don't want to pay very experienced lawyers a reasonable rate. So given the temptations to cheat and the financial limitations, why do you think we are where we are.