lee G. Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 I think the best thing to remember is that people do carry, I did for years, and it made me a more polite person, but thats just me.
ness Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 JD -- you've got some good points, but I don't think it's been established that the victim was a drunk. Regardless, the best thing to do in a confrontation is to schmooze the aggressor and forget proving your freakin' point. I said the same in the Shoal Creek/Prater thread a while back. There's a couple loud mouths, that no longer grace us with their presence, that were pushing buttons on gun-toting folk and probably were closer to a BIG problem that they ever thought. Screw the bravado -- you're out there to fish. Put Big Ed back in the barn and bring him out at the next gravel bar. John
hank franklin Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 Tragic story, all the way around. I have my doubts the shooter really owned the ground where it happened. I haven't heard his ownership reported as fact. This is not to excuse the shooter, who needs to be locked up. But the sad fact is the popular float stretches are not family friendly and haven't been for years. I was at Onondaga a couple years ago and "The Bull" float trip was passing by on the river. All manner of drunkenness, vulgarity, lewdness, complete unabashed profanity, etc. All on the river right by a state park. While the polite floater may have a rite of passage, it's entirely different to say the drunk masses do. I think Al is correct in that there is a theoretical right to be on a Meramec gravel bar. However I think "passage" and "partyin" are two different concepts. And I think the landowner (whoever that is) has a definite right to ask them to leave.
Greasy B Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 Please correct me if I’m wrong, my understanding is Elder vs Delcour does not address gravel bar camping. We camp on countless gravel beaches through generosity, because of inaccessibility, and a general tolerance by land owners who are simply too busy to concern themselves with fishermen, floaters who are mostly harmless. I believe this is the case on the majority of our float streams that are not destination rivers. Much to my delight and experience this goes on year after year with few encounters or conflicts. His father touches the Claw in spite of Kevin's warnings and breaks two legs just as a thunderstorm tears the house apart. Kevin runs away with the Claw. He becomes captain of the Greasy Bastard, a small ship carrying rubber goods between England and Burma. Michael Palin, Terry Jones, 1974
lee G. Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 That's a new thought on the subject, Hank, and one that should be thought thru by all.
jdmidwest Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 JD -- you've got some good points, but I don't think it's been established that the victim was a drunk. Regardless, the best thing to do in a confrontation is to schmooze the aggressor and forget proving your freakin' point. I said the same in the Shoal Creek/Prater thread a while back. There's a couple loud mouths, that no longer grace us with their presence, that were pushing buttons on gun-toting folk and probably were closer to a BIG problem that they ever thought. Screw the bravado -- you're out there to fish. Put Big Ed back in the barn and bring him out at the next gravel bar. The account in Stltoday mentioned beverage, they pulled over to get one and whip big Ed out to release one. One can only assume what would make someone go up against someone with a pistol with a handful of rocks. But the victim was actually acting as a cooler from the account I read. But then the mention of Army Ranger and merely pushing the gun out of his face then getting shot would lead one to believe. "Life has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously." — Hunter S. Thompson
LarrySTL Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 If I look at the moment the shooter pulled the trigger, I can see the self-defense argument. What I don't know is what the law says if you withdraw from a situation, as he did at first, and then return as an aggressor or otherwise provoke things to a point where deadly force might otherwise be legal. I dont know but it could be an interesting trial. http://intervenehere.com
Al Agnew Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 Please correct me if I’m wrong, my understanding is Elder vs Delcour does not address gravel bar camping. We camp on countless gravel beaches through generosity, because of inaccessibility, and a general tolerance by land owners who are simply too busy to concern themselves with fishermen, floaters who are mostly harmless. I believe this is the case on the majority of our float streams that are not destination rivers. Much to my delight and experience this goes on year after year with few encounters or conflicts. Greasy, the original case was tried in a trial court, which found for the plaintiff (the floater). Here is what the trial court said, as documented in the final Elder v Delcour decision, exact wording and punctuation: "That the Meramec River at the place in question and as described in the petition is public water and subject to travel by plaintiff and those who desire to wade it or to float down it in boats***that plaintiff has a legal right to fish in said stream subject to the regulations of the Missouri Conservation Commission and the Laws of Missouri***" The court declared that plaintiff had "the legal right to carry his boat around obstacles in the river where obstructions preclude the passage of his boat, subject to liability for damages he might inflict on defendant's property***(and) the legal right to tie up his boat or to camp on said stream as long as he uses the stream bed, gravel bars and clearly recognizable area over which the stream flows during its normal stages." The issue was then taken to an appeals court, which reversed that decision, and then to the state Supreme Court. After reviewing lots of case law in the document, in the end, the Supreme Court simply said: "The judgment of the trial court is affirmed." Note that camping was specifically okayed in the trial court decision, and the trial court decision was affirmed with no modifications by the Supreme Court.
Smalliebigs Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 WOW!!!!! you aren't kidding, neither one of these fellows is afraid of court cost......holy smokes!!!! they have been in court a ton.......Crocker seems to like to speed in his past as well as get married and divorced alot.....and the guy who was shot in the head is not a clean guy by any means....he likes to get assault charges and never pay anybody he owes money to.....just a couple of dudes you will run into on the Meramec....lol....river fishing is getting sketchy Look it up, pretty interesting.....
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now