Because of a recent topics here on AR, including the Desert Sheep "poaching" incident - I wanted to discuss the very recent interaction I had with 2 Colorado Game Wardens a couple of weeks ago....and get your thoughts / input? Now for various reasons, I will not disclose who I was with or the names of the officers - as neither are really important. But I wanted to bring to light, some of the concerns I have been re-iterating here as of late.

Two weeks ago myself and 4 friends were having lunch at a corner restaurant in the mountains after a morning of field photos / filming, etc. We were in the middle of eating, when I looked out the window and saw 2 game wardens parked next to my vehicle - inspecting my truck. In the bed of the truck, I had a huge elk rack (a 402" bull I shot last fall in AZ) and a nice set of desert sheep horns from a ram I took in NV several years ago. Both totally legal, the ram is plugged / and the elk rack still has the tag attached to the horns as they do it on the rez I was hunting on. Both completely legal to own, possess, and travel with at anytime I, you or anyone else feels like.

Obviously the elk rack was the attention grabber, thus why the wardens stopped. Now, let me be clear on the law here in CO - wardens are legally permitted to "inspect" wildlife in plain view, but of course they can't for example come into your house to do so - without a warrant. Obviously the rack was in plain view - so the wardens decided to investigate. But IMO they simply wanted to do so, because they KNEW it was me (more on that later)! One of the warden's knows me - as I have hunted in that area for at least 10 yrs or so.

So rather than waiting at their vehicle until we were done (which I think would have been the polite thing to do) they came into the restaurant, walked right up to our table - another indication they knew me, and started asking questions in the middle of our lunch. "Hi guys...how are you?" "That's a great bull, who's is it?" I responded it was mine. "Oh, great...where did you get it?" I told them, I don't answer questions (5th amendment to the constitution grants me that "RIGHT") "Oh, ok....so what's your name"? I gave them the same response. At which time they jumped at me with - "Where's your license for that elk?" Mind you this is roughly March 1st, elk season in Colorado has been closed since November - and NO law has ever existed in the state of Colorado requiring one to have a "license" to possess a set of antlers! The "tag" placed on your animal at the time of kill is a "carcass" tag, placed on the carcass - nothing else is ever required to be "tagged"....period! I informed them of said law, and they insisted I needed a "license" for the elk rack (total BS in CO). Nope....not required at all!!!! Anyone unfamiliar with CO game laws can look at title 33 of the CO statutes.

They abruptly walked out, and told me they'll run my plates for my ID (which they already knew) and would inspect my wildlife anyway! So of course I immediately followed them out the door - and arrived at my truck as one of them was already hanging over the side of my truck, helping himself. I immediately told him to step away from my truck (which he did) as I told him he does not have my permission to "search" my vehicle, nor does he have a warrant to do so....period!

And now, the 30 minute interaction with myself and the 2 wardens commences, and at times it got pretty heated to say the least - but unlike most people, I know the law and I know my rights. So without dragging this post on for an hour - let me highlight my points, and all the faults / issues I have with this entire interaction, and what I did allow them to do by law, etc.

1. Right / wrong, you can decide - I was not happy that they came into the restaurant to question me in front of my friends / co - workers, without even the slightest reason to believe anything was amiss....generally referred to as "probable cause". But yes, they DO have the legal authority to "inspect" wildlife in plain view - so decide for yourself?

2. No less than a dozen times they bold face "lied" to me, telling me I was required by law to have a license to possess the antlers, showing I hunted the animal legally - WRONG!

3. Several times I was told that I am required to ID myself....WRONG. Colorado is not a stop / ID state, and only if law enforcement suspects me of a crime, and can articulate what crime I am suspected of - can they legally ID me. Simply possessing a "legal" item to possess, is not probable cause or reasonable suspicion to assume a crime has been committed.

4. At least 10 times (and I have this on film) one of the officers told me I was required to "prove" to him, that I had taken the elk legally....are you kidding me? I don't have to prove anything to you sir....this is the USA, we are innocent until proven guilty, its call "due process" of law.

5. I was told by the same officer - he could confiscate my rack - if I could NOT prove to him I took the elk legally.....ya WRONG again bro! I am in possession of a "legal" item to possess, if you want to confiscate it, you better have a warrant from a judge, or probable cause to justify the crime I have committed? I am not required to "prove" my innocence to you or anyone else!!

So at this point, they have simply "assumed" the elk was taken in CO - ya how many 402" bulls have you seen come from CO lately? They demanded I prove that I had a license last fall to shoot the elk, that I prove the elk was taken "legally", that I must ID myself, and that I am required by CO law to have that license on the antlers! All of which are total / complete BS, no such laws in Colorado exist - again, check title 33.....cause I have long before this encounter!!!!

At this juncture I say to the officer, what makes you think I shot this elk in CO - this isn't the only state in the country with elk bro? And immediately he then accuses me of a potential "Lacey Act" violation....are you freaking kidding me??

So let's recap. The officers come into question me with no reason / probable cause to do so, their only "lawful" authority is to inspect, nothing more? They lie to me about the need to have the antlers tagged. They lie to me about my requirement to ID myself, they lie to me about my requirement to "prove" the elk was taken legally, and they lie to me about their lawful ability to confiscate my antlers without my cooperation of the afore-mentioned items, all with NO reasonable suspicion or probable cause that any crime has been committed what-so-ever!!!

I did allow them to inspect the elk and the sheep, as they are legally allowed to do. They found the sheep to be plugged, and the elk rack was in fact tagged - as per how they do it on the rez I was hunting in AZ. The tag on the elk is not a "state" tag, rather a "rez" tag obviously, so that of course induced more questions from the warden - which I refused to answer. Regardless, one is NOT required to have a license / or have antlers "tagged" in the state of Colorado to be in possession of them....period!!!!

In the end, I was not ticketed for anything, nor was any of my items taken - as I had done NOTHING wrong!!!!! But I was harassed!!!

BTW, did I tell you the one warden told not only myself, but my buddy, that he knew exactly who I was - he said it on film. He knows me, knows all about me, knows about my past medical issues, etc, etc. Of course he does, he like all of em - watches my FB page, etc. Which is fine....if I had something to hide - my page would not be "public". But don't BS me like you guys have no idea who I am, what I'm doing, etc. If you want me to be straight with you, be straight with me - don't come in the restaurant, interrupt my lunch - and act like you have NO IDEA who I am, or what's going on....total BS.

Some here might find my interpretation of this interaction as suspect / harsh, etc, and that's fine. But I know for a fact the game/fish is targeting guys like myself who are known hunters, tv hosts, guides/outfitters, in the industry, etc. One needs to look no further than New Mexico - Dec. 2017 and the monumental finding / action taken there by the NM Attorney General!

As an interesting follow-up, I texted one of the officers the following day - and asked for a meeting the following week with both of them....they kindly obliged. It was in fact a very cordial meeting, I said my peace and they said there's. Interestingly enough - I took one of my very best friends with me who is in fact a current law enforcement officer / SWAT team leader, as my witness to the meeting. Afterwards he told me point blank....."Aaron, they told you several things in that meeting that are NOT lawful / correct", period!

My whole point to this guys is simple......know your rights, know the law, and know when you are being targeted for something you have not done! Know you have the right to remain silent, know you have the right NOT to answer questions to law enforcement - and know that the wardens of today are not like those of yesterday, especially if you are a high-profile hunter. Do your best to be lawful....we all should. But also protect yourself - first and foremost!!!

i had a similar though much more serious happening years back in alaska - it just happened to get video taped and shown to the governor - it did not end well for the wardens or the entire department

Never wise too piss off LEOs IMO.

Sounds like an opportunity to have a good PR moment and they chose the opposite.

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:
Never wise too piss off LEOs IMO.

If all of what you mentioned in your post is exactly as it went down Aaron I would be taking it up all the way to the Governor's Office, as they were way out of line for even going into the restaurant and interrupting your lunch. They could, and should have, waited at your truck to ask if you would talk with them. If at that time you didn't want to say anything I would have offered up a sincere "Have a good day guys", got in my truck and gone on my way! It sounds like you handled everything even better than I would have as a retired Investigator if they had pulled that on me when both specimens were in sight and properly tagged. There was really not even a need for them to say a word to you if they could see what you stated without even asking. It does really sound like with your past record that they have it in for you, so all I can say is keep your cool like you said you did and record the interaction or any further ones that may come up as you did to protect yourself. It's a shame it has come to that for you, but that's what I would do to avoid getting railroaded at some further time. Ones like that really hurt the 98% of the ones who are doing the job properly and I had a couple in my Division when I was on the job that should have probably never even made it through their initial 6 month probation period.

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:
Never wise too piss off LEOs IMO.

As opposed to letting them trample upon your constitutional rights? I'll take the latter!

Aaron,

This is not a comment on your scenario above but a general comment about fish and game enforcement.

The threshold to conduct a warrantless search of a vehicle and to a lesser extent campsite in an area where hunting and fishing activities occur is much lower than other areas of the law.

Essentially, if a person is an area where hunting and fishing activities occur and there is any reason to believe that a person is/has been participating in such activities their vehicles, possessions, and camps (to a lesser extent) are subject to search.

There are several factors that may expand or mitigate the scope of that warrantless search.

The legal theories about the authority of warrantless searches by F&G officers include:

1) The State's/public interest in conservation outweighs the temporary intrusion of the search.

2) The enforcement action is more administrative than criminal and hunting and fishing activities are highly regulated making the laws administrative in nature. There is an exception to the 4th Amendment regarding administrative investigations and inspections. Regardless of whether the particular statute is in a criminal section of a code.


The above are only the bare bones of the concepts.

Not saying, I agree with the above but it is the current state of the legal system (as I understand it) and not many cases have gone to the higher courts. To date, the US Supreme court has refused to hear cases on this topic.

I would be interested to hear from current F&G enforcement officers as to what is taught in the academies regarding this 4th Amendment issue.

I don't understand why it wasn't a wait out side:

"hey aaron, nice elk rack in the bed, mind if we check the tag wrapped around the antlers"

ask some questions about the hunt

"have a nice day sir"

Jealousy is a powerful motivator.

Busting a celebrity would put a big feather in there hat.

When I was a working LEO

I have stopped a lot of vehicles with large bucks, bulls or bears in them.

The drivers are almost always on the offensive from the start.

But almost always when I tell them wow that really nice ??? I just want to have look at it because that's a really nice ???.

Invariably I get the whole story of the hunt where how what type of gun weather and the whole bit.

We then would swap hunting stories gun and shooting stuff.

Both parties going away happy.

As the old saying goes one catches more flies with honey then vinegar.

All of that mess just possibly could have been avoided with some simple cooperation. But then again.....that's hard for some and easy for others

Just my thought.

quote:

Originally posted by Topgun 30-06:

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:
Never wise too piss off LEOs IMO.

If all of what you mentioned in your post is exactly as it went down Aaron I would be taking it up all the way to the Governor's Office, as they were way out of line for even going into the restaurant and interrupting your lunch. They could, and should have, waited at your truck to ask if you would talk with them. If at that time you didn't want to say anything I would have offered up a sincere "Have a good day guys", got in my truck and gone on my way! It sounds like you handled everything even better than I would have as a retired Investigator if they had pulled that on me when both specimens were in sight and properly tagged. There was really not even a need for them to say a word to you if they could see what you stated without even asking. It does really sound like with your past record that they have it in for you, so all I can say is keep your cool like you said you did and record the interaction or any further ones that may come up as you did to protect yourself. It's a shame it has come to that for you, but that's what I would do to avoid getting railroaded at some further time. Ones like that really hurt the 98% of the ones who are doing the job properly and I had a couple in my Division when I was on the job that should have probably never even made it through their initial 6 month probation period.

In all fairness - I'm sure they have their side of the story too.

I think I was most upset because of their continual attempts to violate my civil rights, with a straight face. If I'm to be held to the legal standard, then so should they!

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Dettorre:
Aaron,

This is not a comment on your scenario above but a general comment about fish and game enforcement.

The threshold to conduct a warrantless search of a vehicle and to a lesser extent campsite in an area where hunting and fishing activities occur is much lower than other areas of the law.

Essentially, if a person is an area where hunting and fishing activities occur and there is any reason to believe that a person is/has been participating in such activities their vehicles, possessions, and camps (to a lesser extent) are subject to search.

There are several factors that may expand or mitigate the scope of that warrantless search.

The legal theories about the authority of warrantless searches by F&G officers include:

1) The State's/public interest in conservation outweighs the temporary intrusion of the search.

2) The enforcement action is more administrative than criminal and hunting and fishing activities are highly regulated making the laws administrative in nature. There is an exception to the 4th Amendment regarding administrative investigations and inspections. Regardless of whether the particular statute is in a criminal section of a code.


The above are only the bare bones of the concepts.

Not saying, I agree with the above but it is the current state of the legal system (as I understand it) and not many cases have gone to the higher courts. To date, the US Supreme court has refused to hear cases on this topic.

I would be interested to hear from current F&G enforcement officers as to what is taught in the academies regarding this 4th Amendment issue.

Mike, all of which is fairly true in Colorado - but note the following, and I have researched it too.

1. No hunting season was open in Colorado at the time, nor was I anywhere near a hunting / camping site - I was eating lunch in town at a public restaurant. Simply possessing an elk rack (which is totally legal to possess) is not legal grounds to assume I was "hunting", as I can go to the taxidermist down the street - or a local auction house should I so desire - and buy all the antlers / racks I so care to....period! None of which are required to be licensed / tagged!!!!

2. Colorado law is clear under title 33....if I have a hunting license / in the act of hunting / during a lawful season, the officer has legal authority to inspect my license, my ID to verify I am the licensed hunter, my weapon (to ensure it meets legal standards in the state of Colorado) and any "benefit" I have gained from said license (i.e. any animal taken). They are NOT allowed to search my vehicle without reasonable belief that I may have something they are in fact "searching for". Obviously I'm not stuffing an elk under the front seat of my truck!

3. The 4th amendment still extends to "we the people" even in the case of hunting / wildlife, despite a few minor differences, which is their legal authority to inspect wildlife they can see in plain view - without any reason to believe something about it is "illegal". Inspecting it, does not mean I am required to proclaim my innocence of possession.

Had a run in with State cop as I was coming from behind FS gate, which wasn’t locket but was supposed to ( in that I immediately said I’ll pay the fine , even I didn’t know about the road closure )
Anyway, first order was a bark from officer, bit of what I was doing, checking my licenses etc.
I watched him watching my hands when I handled paperwork and assumed he was looking for nervousness .
He argued with me about couple game laws and I simply offered “ let’s go and talk to GW “
After our initial sparring ( mostly on his part ), we started talking and before you know it, we were laughing and talking hunting
In the end we parted ways on good terms and all was good in the end.

Point is, , at times we can all get along but it takes two to tango

quote:

Originally posted by ted thorn:
All of that mess just possibly could have been avoided with some simple cooperation. But then again.....that's what LEO's want and or feed on.

Just my thought.

Sorry you had to deal with that shit.

Ted, I cooperated within the legal requirements of the law....period! I am not required to answer their questions or provide them proof of anything. I allowed inspection as required, and that was it. Why, where, when or how I got the elk is none of their business. I am in possession of a legal item, no different than you possessing your cell phone. If a LE officer asks you to prove you legally own / possess that cell phone in your hand, you can tell him....its none of his business. If he thinks otherwise, then the burden of proof falls upon him, not you! He can't confiscate it, simply because you won't prove to him you own it lawfully.

I'm really not trying to be a PIA to these guys....but I am not going to allow my rights to be violated either. I didn't approach them...they approached me.

Guys, think about it like this. You killed a big bull last fall....6 months later your taxidermist calls you and says "hey Ted", your mount is ready for pickup. Cool, Ted runs over there to pick it up - straps it into the back of the truck and drives home. On the way home, a game warden stops you - and says let me see your license for that animal, prove you took it legally, and unless you do - I am going to confiscate it right now. None of which in this state is even close to what the law deems legal / necessary.

Aaron,

Two comments:

1) That is why I prefaced my post with "This is not a comment on your scenario above".

2) Your premise of a requirement that the taken wildlife must be in "plain view" to be inspected may not necessarily be accurate. This very issue of no plain view wildlife and no other evidence of a potential crime and a warrant-less search occurred and was brought to SCOTUS and SC0TUS refused to hear the case.

Not saying, I like it or agree with but this application of the 4th amendment remains untested. Just like after 40+ years of gun laws, SCOTUS has yet to apply the "privileges and immunities clause" of the 14th Amendment to gun laws.

Aaron,

I understand your point.....trust me I do.

I also know how cops expect to be treated and how cops are some of the most arrogant people on the face of the Earth. If you would have covered your load they would have asked you "whats under the tarp"?

I've been fortunate enough to have not been ticketed in nearly 20 years but I have been pulled over several times. Almost always out of state.

One thing I see from LEO's............ arrogance X10

quote:

Originally posted by ted thorn:
Aaron,

I understand your point.....trust me I do.

I also know how cops expect to be treated and how cops are some of the most arrogant people on the face of the Earth. If you would have covered your load they would have asked you "whats under the tarp"?

I've been forrunate to have not been ticketed in nearly 20 years but I have been pulled over several times. Almost always out of state.

One thing I see from all LEO's............ arrogance X10

Here we go again, as that is absolutely not true X 10!

The problem with this discussion is that one cannot detect tone and attitude from these posts. The tone and attitude of the game wardens would have a lot to do with how I responded no matter what the law required.

I have seen LEOs who were nice guys. For example , I just got stopped for speeding in a remote area. I had guns, a lot of guns. I told the officer immediately and produced my CCP. I ended up with no ticket and we ended up talking about hunting. On the other hand, I have seen some total asses with bad attitudes. The local police were using my building to do surveillance on a company next door that was some sort of time share scam. This jack ass wanted to arrest me as I was trying to enter my office as I returned from lunch the day they were arresting the people next door. Had I not let them use my building,’the arrests next door would never have happened.

quote:

Originally posted by Topgun 30-06:

quote:

Originally posted by ted thorn:
Aaron,

I understand your point.....trust me I do.

I also know how cops expect to be treated and how cops are some of the most arrogant people on the face of the Earth. If you would have covered your load they would have asked you "whats under the tarp"?

I've been forrunate to have not been ticketed in nearly 20 years but I have been pulled over several times. Almost always out of state.

One thing I see from all LEO's............ arrogance X10

Here we go again, as that is absolutely not true X 10!

I suppose you know cops who aren't arrogant? Most of them that I've met are brash at least.

Story....

I had my front door knocked on about a month ago at 6am on a work day.

A county deputy was looking for a suspect in a investigation that I later found out to be a tripple homicide......murder is rare in our area of the world. I allowed him and his partner into my home. They were both hopped up on adrenalin and treated my wife and myself like loudmouth drill instructors.

Long story short.........they had the wrong house......and they were in the wrong county.

I agree with one point, they have power and power is easily abused
And we all have seen it in our time
Bad apple sours the whole batch so any bad officer in rank should be immediately fired, that way examples like that would go long way for all departments
I think Trump is on right track at the top with FBI and I hope it trickles down to state and local departments of all LE Agencies

So what did their supervisor and/or other higher ups have to say about this?

I don't know you from Adam. I believe there are three sides to every story. If things are as bad as you state, shouldn't you have a lawsuit or at least an official complaint with the district attorney in progress by now?

My point is that no segment in our society is composed of all that are entirely good or entirely bad. It's just absolutely disgusting to read where any of you are declaring that one or two bad apples in ANY barrel that you may have run into makes EVERY apple in the barrel bad. It's just not so!

If this happened in the area that I suspect it did then I know one game warden from there and have had no problems with him whatsoever. As a matter of fact he has been quite helpful on several occasions.

quote:

Originally posted by Topgun 30-06:
My point is that no segment in our society is composed of all that are entirely good or entirely bad. It's just absolutely disgusting to read where any of you are declaring that one or two bad apples in ANY barrel that you may have run into makes EVERY apple in the barrel bad. It's just not so!

It’s the fact, these guys hold your life in their hand if they desire so, so to speak and that is the difference here

At the same time, we will all defend LE when they do the right thing

Unfortunately, these situations can be escalated very easily by either side

Anyway, trust and verify goes both ways

Hi Aaron,
Good on you for standing up for your rights.

I am also in the camp that a large portion (not a few bad apples) of LEO have an attitude problem, are willing to bend the law in their favor, and often times do not know the law or are at least willing to lie about it.

this sounds just like that TV show wardens.
same attitude and MO on the wardens part as those on the show.
I recall the last time I watched that show. they had a robo deer out the night before the season started and a truck come down the road and seen it, the truck slowed down to check it out, and then drove off.

the wardens reaction was one of disbelief, and their comments were.
they must not be hunters, they must have left their guns at camp, they'll be back later, I think they seen us.

everything except the fact that they were obviously hunters.
the rifles in the truck window their dress and the stuff in the truck made it pretty clear they were going hunting/camping.

proven guilty until proven innocent seems to be the prevailing attitude on that show.

Why is it the same guys are always the ones in trouble with the law? And why do those same guys always blame the officer? These guys never do anything wrong. They claim their right to be uncooperative is some form of constitutionally protected anarchy.

So you asked for an opinion? My opinion is that your attitude is what is wrong with our society. You won't give the officer your name? Ok, you proved your point. You treated them with disrespect and then you expected to be respected? You plead the 5th so you don't incriminate yourself, which INCRIMINATES yourself because it implies you have done something wrong.

In the end you allow them to inspect everything. But weren't you just ranting about how it was illegal for them to look at the items? So which is it? Sounds like the chip on your shoulder is turning into a log.

You might want to read the posts above by Mike_D. He gets it. Put down your ego and take what he says. I'd recommend the next time the Conservation Officers check you try the respect route and I bet they will show it back to you.

Lot of good points in this from several angles.

'Might' have never counts after the fact.
But, what if: You'd told them, "excuse me/us until we finish eating then we can talk business outside away from the crowd".

I had one I wish I could do over again sometime.
Hunting til dark and driving out from LaJara Res. On the North road over the steep hill. Expect you've been there Aaron.

Dark as it can get in the mtns. Real steep hill, going real slow because of the rocks and rough track. Halfway up something in front of me didn't look right so I stopped. Turned out to be the back end of the GW's truck so muddy it blended in with the hillside. I was within 3-4 feet before I saw something just didn't look right. He had to move it to let me by.

Soon as I stopped almost instantly a GW knocked on my window scaring the shit out of me. Rolled the glass down to see what was going on. "open the bolt of your rifle I want to see if the chambers loaded." "ok, you can go". I believe several others were around and did the same to the other trucks following behind me. Three from our camp, might have been others tagging along.

The next time IF it ever happens I fully intend to ram it and keep pushing.

Aaron: I feel you should turn this into Hickenpooper and the AG. names, dates, times, witness'es the whole works.

Thanks for posting everyone.

George

quote:

proven guilty until proven innocent seems to be the prevailing attitude on that show of law enforcement in general these days.

This is how I view law enforcement beginning about 2 decades ago.

I am a licensed professional (board-certified equine orthopedic surgeon), owner of one of the largest businesses in my tax paying district, a large land-owner, a significant donor and contributor to my local community, a law-abiding ethical-advocating citizen on multiple levels, and I see law-enforcement as my amended quote above...there is likely a general problem in law-enforcement.

My feelings like Aaron’s...come through actual experiences...where law-enforcement was blatantly in the wrong and abusive of power.

I commend knowledgeable law-abiding citizens like Aaron for holding their feet to the fire...I do as well...even when it would be easier to just comply with something that I know in my heart (and brain) is WRONG.

Aaron: I too have had my own tv show aired and suffered because of it.I have stated my experience with GWs in Pa. here on AR before, thus I have a jaded view of their ethics. I have learned a lot from that money gouge an on the advice of my attorney (after the fact) now reply to them," no comment,if you have something to charge me with do so now or contact my attorney" then go about my business. You can bet the house before they put you in cuffs they will rethink their actions an all their bluff tactics will be forgotten.

It comes from top as someone did not teach them in academy how to deal with public properly
The Gun Ho system shows then

Those wardens were completely out of line and I agree with the comment about reporting this up the line of command. It was uncalled for.

My experiences with GW's here in Texas have all been good ones even with one that was a known "
Hard Ass".

Those two thought they had themselves a "Big Time" bust, and that is what it turned put to be a "Bust" and they got embarrassed and then realized they had no easy way to back out.

There are people that have absolutely NO BUSINESS being an LEO of any kind. I think you handled the situation appropriately, Sorry that it happened and the manner and location only compounded the problem.

quote:

Originally posted by MC:
Why is it the same guys are always the ones in trouble with the law? And why do those same guys always blame the officer? These guys never do anything wrong. They claim their right to be uncooperative is some form of constitutionally protected anarchy.

So you asked for an opinion? My opinion is that your attitude is what is wrong with our society. You won't give the officer your name? Ok, you proved your point. You treated them with disrespect and then you expected to be respected? You plead the 5th so you don't incriminate yourself, which INCRIMINATES yourself because it implies you have done something wrong.

In the end you allow them to inspect everything. But weren't you just ranting about how it was illegal for them to look at the items? So which is it? Sounds like the chip on your shoulder is turning into a log.

You might want to read the posts above by Mike_D. He gets it. Put down your ego and take what he says. I'd recommend the next time the Conservation Officers check you try the respect route and I bet they will show it back to you.

MC - Fact is, I had done nothing wrong...period! I do have "rights", we all do. Constitutionally protected anarchy? No MC - its called civil rights / due process of law. If you or law enforcement don't like one knowing the law and standing up for their rights when contacted by LE - you / they can petition the legislature to remove said rights / laws, and then they can do whatever they want? I'm always shocked when I see Americans accusing other Americans of "anarchy" for simply standing up for yourself, knowing the law, and expecting law enforcement to respect the law, and my rights....they took an oath to do so.

I cooperated within the legal requirement of the law.....that's not being uncooperative! Disrespect started when the officers came into the restaurant, interrupted me / my friends so they could ask questions about something that was completely legal in the first place. When I didn't give them the answers they wanted / expected, they immediately jumped to lying to me about the legal requirements to possess the rack....accusing me of a crime that DOES NOT EXIST IN CO. Maybe you see that as a respectful interaction on their behalf - I do not.

No, I never said it was illegal for them to look at the items - it is legal. Its not legal for them to be hanging over my truck bed, digging through my stuff without a warrant or my approval. I won't deny the chip you are referring to....but funny you have nothing to say about the numerous ways they lied to me / tried to intimidate me into doing what they wanted by accusing me of a crime that does not exist, by telling me they could confiscate my rack, and telling me I was required to "prove" to them I took the elk legally. All of which were just intimidation tactics / bogus laws that do not exist. I guess all that was ok to you?

In short...they had the legal authority to inspect the items, and they did. I have the constitutional right to NOT answer questions...period. That's not disrespectful - that's the law! Instead of inspecting and leaving as they were entitled to do, they continued to pressure me with bogus threats, because I wouldn't do as they said. All of this for something that was totally legal, and at no time did they have any reason at all to think otherwise? If you consider my actions wrong, then so be it - I saw it as protecting my rights.

I'm aware of what Mike_D is saying, I have looked into it quite extensively - and have sought legal advice on it too. I've called the head LE office here in CO a couple of years ago to get them to describe to me their assessment of the laws under title 33 as well. Fact is, I want to be 100% lawful - I didn't do so in hopes of skirting the law. But I also want to be informed and protect my rights. I can't imagine what's wrong with that?

As mentioned by others....my choices could have been different also. I think we can all look back and play "arm-chair" quarterback in any situation. In the future I will work on my interaction with them as well. We met a week later, and had a very cordial encounter. I expect future encounters with them will be the same.

Bottom line, I do greatly respect game/fish LE, and in particular LE in general. As I said earlier, one of my closest friends is active LE / SWAT here in Denver. But even he says the same thing....for some reason game/fish LE seem to have a particular chip on their shoulder for some reason? He had an encounter with one of these same officers a couple of years ago - according to him the officer was extremely rude / aggressive simply because my buddy refused to tell him exactly where he was hunting. He doesn't tell anyone where he hunts...nor do I. Perfectly legal!

Thanks for the input, and I will seriously take your opinion under advisement too!

Guys - I have no plan to file a report / complaint. Especially considering they both agreed to meet me the following week, where we had a productive / cordial meeting and discussed some of the issues from the previous interaction. I do believe they want what's best for the wildlife, and you gotta respect that. I believe they made some mistakes (perhaps I did too) lord knows I have done the same in my life...so my judgment against someone only goes so far.

Why were you riding round with elk horns and sheep heads in your truck? Especially big trophy heads in an open pickup and then go in to a restaurant to eat with that stuff inn plain view. I would never do that for fear of getting stolen. It is like Bragging or saying see what big trophies I got. At the very least, I would have thrown a tarp over the heads to be inconspicuous. I think you were almost baiting a confrontation with game wardens or anti hunters. About like going to the bar after shooting a big deer or big elk to brag.

I say screw all this macho LEO crap (regardless of dept.) in short they themselves watch too much tv.
I know the law an if I willingly broke it I know I broke it and expect to be punished.... if I made a mistake unknowingly then I expect to be treated with respect while it is explained to me be it a traffic or game violation.
To have some ass try an bluff me is about as low as snake shit...they are purposely breaking the very laws they are sworn to uphold... Like I said either charge me or pull your nut sack up of the ground and drive away!

There is such a great phrase in the English language, Aaron that was created for this sort of stuff.

Go to Hell!

quote:

Originally posted by DIs:
Why were you riding round with elk horns and sheep heads in your truck? Especially big trophy heads in an open pickup and then go in to a restaurant to eat with that stuff inn plain view. I would never do that for fear of getting stolen. It is like Bragging or saying see what big trophies I got. At the very least, I would have thrown a tarp over the heads to be inconspicuous. I think you were almost baiting a confrontation with game wardens or anti hunters. About like going to the bar after shooting a big deer or big elk to brag.

As I explained we were working on a project with the horns / antlers as props, that's all. Good point, and I'll do so in the future - but I certainly wasn't doing anything illegal / wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by 2th doc:
I say screw all this macho LEO crap (regardless of dept.) in short they themselves watch too much tv.
I know the law an if I willingly broke it I know I broke it and expect to be punished.... if I made a mistake unknowingly then I expect to be treated with respect while it is explained to me be it a traffic or game violation.
To have some ass try an bluff me is about as low as snake shit...they are purposely breaking the very laws they are sworn to uphold... Like I said either charge me or pull your nut sack up of the ground and drive away!

I did in fact tell the officer 4 different times, then charge me with a crime - if you believe I've committed one....which he obviously did not! I understand he has a job to do, and that's fair enough - but that job should not include violating my rights...IMO.

Do remember, the SCOTUS has upheld LE's legal authority to "lie" to people in the course of their investigations. I think its wrong, but it is lawful for them to do so.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Dettorre:
Aaron,

Two comments:

1) That is why I prefaced my post with "This is not a comment on your scenario above".

2) Your premise of a requirement that the taken wildlife must be in "plain view" to be inspected may not necessarily be accurate. This very issue of no plain view wildlife and no other evidence of a potential crime and a warrant-less search occurred and was brought to SCOTUS and SC0TUS refused to hear the case.

Not saying, I like it or agree with but this application of the 4th amendment remains untested. Just like after 40+ years of gun laws, SCOTUS has yet to apply the "privileges and immunities clause" of the 14th Amendment to gun laws.

Mike is well informed folks, no doubt.

And yes Mike, game/fish LE has le-way regular LE does not. BUT.....even to conduct a warrant-less confiscation or search - they still MUST have probable cause that a crime has been committed against wildlife. They cannot search / seize simply because they want to. That is a fact.