I certainly don't want to commit one seeing how some of the idiots want to stick it to anyone they can, but I have a question.

I shot a couple Scimitar-horned Oryx before they went on the endangered species list. If I was to transport some of the flesh to relatives in another state, would I be violating any of the statutes of the Act like transporting across state lines of an endangered species?

When does the law actually take effect? After that date you could be in violation. They could certainly make life difficult even if you are in the right. Best case scenario you spend tens of thousands of dollars and walk, worst case you wind up with a subway up your a$$ in lock up. Some on this board would welcome it because you violated a game law.

Perry

Check and see when the law goes into effect. Even though everything you are wanting to do is/was perfectly legal pre-act it could be a real problem after the law goes into effect.

Under the original concept of the law things would have been different, but with our goverments power grab and broad interpretations of the laws, something as innocuous as giving away some meat from a legally taken animal might be or will be used as a major violation of a real stupid law.

Randall,
Your tone is changing, welcome to the darkside.

A smart person can change their mind. I had not been paying any attention to what had been going on in the area of how the Feds were dispensing justice.

I still feel that blatant poaching cases need to be dealt with strongly and if state laws are not strong enough then there needs to be another avenue for dispensing justice.

Going around looking for misdemeanors beings unknowingly commited by innocent or uninformed citizens and treating them as major felonies is wrong or should be in anyone's book.

Our whole justice system needs to be looked at closely, and laws and the folks enforcing them need to be scrutinized as to just exactly how important or trivial they are and whether they are neccessary or not.

Also, our country has absolutely no business what so ever trying to enforce or interpret the laws of another country in most if not all cases, murder/slavery/terrorism/drug trafficing all of those are on a different level than pissing around about where or when a piece of wood was cut down and shipped to be used as decoration on a guitar or rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Check and see when the law goes into effect. Even though everything you are wanting to do is/was perfectly legal pre-act it could be a real problem after the law goes into effect.

Under the original concept of the law things would have been different, but with our goverments power grab and broad interpretations of the laws, something as innocuous as giving away some meat from a legally taken animal might be or will be used as a major violation of a real stupid law.

This is the problem, I can't find a definitive date anywhere including the Federal Registers as to when this action goes into effect.

quote:

This is the problem, I can't find a definitive date anywhere including the Federal Registers as to when this action goes into effect.

Just hurry up and eat the evidence, the perfect crime.

quote:

I still feel that blatant poaching cases need to be dealt with strongly and if state laws are not strong enough then there needs to be another avenue for dispensing justice.

Perhaps if the States laws against poaching are not effective in enforcement and determent, they should be strengthened. I would rather a poaching case be handled too lightly, or heaven forbid, even go without prosecution. Than to give an over reaching Federal Government a law that it can subjugate it's citizens with, because it most surely will. The Federal Government should be contained to it's responsibilities as lined out in The Constitution of the United States, everything else is the responsibilities of the States.

quote:

Than to give an over reaching Federal Government a law that it can subjugate it's citizens with, because it most surely will. The Federal Government should be contained to it's responsibilities as lined out in The Constitution of the United States, everything else is the responsibilities of the States.

In my opinion, the problem is not the Federal Goverment, but the voters of the United States.

The reality is, the goverment employees that are making these judgement calls, need to be reminded of who they are working for, as do All politicians.

It is the voting public that has stopped using their ability to "Fire" people that are not doing the job they were elected to do.

If voters will start weeding out the elected officials and start rewriting and re-evaluating the existing laws and do away with wording that allows field personnel to make on the spot decisions, not based on the actual written word of the law but their own personal interpretation of the law, to the point of holding them accountable for their actions, this kind of stuff will stop.

It is however going to require citizens/the voting public to get more involved with the system and when goverment agencies start making their own rules, the ones that can be voted out and the ones that can't be voted out, fired.

quote:

Originally posted by 505 gibbs:

quote:

I still feel that blatant poaching cases need to be dealt with strongly and if state laws are not strong enough then there needs to be another avenue for dispensing justice.

Perhaps if the States laws against poaching are not effective in enforcement and determent, they should be strengthened. I would rather a poaching case be handled too lightly, or heaven forbid, even go without prosecution. Than to give an over reaching Federal Government a law that it can subjugate it's citizens with, because it most surely will. The Federal Government should be contained to it's responsibilities as lined out in The Constitution of the United States, everything else is the responsibilities of the States.

+1


Perry

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

Than to give an over reaching Federal Government a law that it can subjugate it's citizens with, because it most surely will. The Federal Government should be contained to it's responsibilities as lined out in The Constitution of the United States, everything else is the responsibilities of the States.

In my opinion, the problem is not the Federal Goverment, but the voters of the United States.

The reality is, the goverment employees that are making these judgement calls, need to be reminded of who they are working for, as do All politicians.

It is the voting public that has stopped using their ability to "Fire" people that are not doing the job they were elected to do.

If voters will start weeding out the elected officials and start rewriting and re-evaluating the existing laws and do away with wording that allows field personnel to make on the spot decisions, not based on the actual written word of the law but their own personal interpretation of the law, to the point of holding them accountable for their actions, this kind of stuff will stop.

It is however going to require citizens/the voting public to get more involved with the system and when goverment agencies start making their own rules, the ones that can be voted out and the ones that can't be voted out, fired.

For some reason you are giving gov't officials/employees way too much credit for being intelligent. Very few of the upper level "management" types are there because of merit...real merit. My conclusion from the way the gov't has abused laws and their enforcement over the last 30 years is the voter needs to strike down EVERY new law. I can not think of anything that the gov't could not arrest you for given the broad stroke of laws, and the agencies ways of enforcing them, we have on the books. We are already too far gone to compare our society today with anything that resembled freedom 50 years ago.

Perry

Not giving anyone credit, pointing out that it is the responsibility of the voting public to monitor the jobs these people are doing while in office.

I have pointed out before on AR and other sites, the almost total lack of interest by the electorate of our country towatrd the mid-term elections where many of these oddball/useless laws are voted into existance simply thru lack of interest of the voting public.

People run afoul of a new law and then raise hell about it, yet had they paid attetion during the last mid term election they might have been able to keep that particular law from taking effect.

Didn't we have something like 700 new laws go into effect on Sept.1 here in Texas alone? How many folks bothered to even go to the polls when those issues or proposals were on the ballot?

As long as the public refuses to get actively involved in the political system of the state they live in or Americas political system, we are going to keep having such legislation passed.

The Lacey Act is an example of legislation that needs to be pared back to its original wording and then if changes or additions need to be made do it, but remove such wording that gives the agency in charge of enforcing the rules the "power" to try and enforce the rules of a foriegn country.

That is beyond trhe scope of what they should be enforcing.

quote:

The Lacey Act is an example of legislation that needs to be pared back to its original wording

The Lacey Act needs to be pared back to non-existence.

I disagree, it served a real purpose in its original scope. It is the later/latest revisions that took place that have caused the problems.

Do you actually believe that the Federal Governments abuse of this law is limited to your recent discovery of that abuse?

In some ways yes. In the past i have read or heard of very few instances where the Lacey Act was involved, I am speaking of 10 or 20 years plus in the past.

With the latest revisions, to much freedom was given to the folks assigned to enforce the regulations and too much freedom of interpretation as to what the regulations covered on the part of the folks supposed to be enforcing those rules.

You view things how ever you want to, I don't agree with you on this subject and never will.

The Lacey Act under its original guidelines was a good piece of legislation, subsequent revisions granted the agencies in charge of enforcing the law too much freedom to act independently and no oversight authority was implemented to make sure those people were not overstepping their actually authority.

New Plan:

Invite relatives to Texas and grill Scimitar while they are here! Problems solved!

Sasquatch

Might want to make some laxative available before they leave the state. Some gung ho agent looking fo vicious law breakers might want stool samples.

I read the below article today. Game laws have long been the testing ground for what is possible to move rights from individuals to Government.
We are living in a time of unprecedented intrusion of Federal Government into everything. Game laws are no exception. It is a very troubling trend to me.
Banned anywhere in the World??


A Salisbury resident has been banned from hunting anywhere in the world for two years as part of an agreement with federal authorities in Kentucky on charges that he illegally hunted in and took wildlife from that state.

Rodney L. Poteat agreed to the ban in U.S. District Court in Kentucky last week, according to a Department of Justice press release. Reached at his Perryman Drive home Wednesday evening, Poteat declined to comment.

He also agreed to pay the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources $5,300 in restitution, and $50 in special penalty assessments. The restitution is to compensate the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources for the fees Poteat would have paid for hunting in Kentucky between 2002 and 2011, the press release said.

Poteat was charged July 27 and sentenced Sept. 7. He received unsupervised probation. The hunting ban was a condition of that sentence, Justice Department statement said.

According to federal authorities, on Nov. 27, 2010, Poteat transported a 14-point white-tailed deer from Hart County, Ky. to his home in Salisbury. Poteat was required to purchase a non-resident hunting license and deer permit prior to hunting in Kentucky. He also was required to report the harvest of any deer taken in Kentucky, and to make a report before transporting the deer outside of Kentucky.

Poteat also pleaded guilty to knowingly transporting a bobcat from Hart County, Ky. to Salisbury in November 2010 without purchasing a non-resident hunting license. Poteat also failed to report the harvest of a bobcat taken within Kentucky, authorities said.

According to the press release, Poteat used to live in Hart County, Ky.