Interesting case to come before Arkansas Supreme Court involving AGFC enforcement

[Feathers and Fins]

That is what may well be in balance here. Read Article 35 and 89 of the Arkansas Constitution.

[Chief Grey Bear]

That is what it says. But I don't know how you call it a right when you have to purchase the privilege to do so.

[Feathers and Fins]

You got me, this case could be very interesting for its ramifications.

It would take another Ammendment to correct this I fear.

[Chief Grey Bear]

It's really odd.

They gave the right to AR citizens only.

The case with the felon duck hunter will be very interesting.

[Chief Grey Bear]

I think it's in the Wildlife Code that MDC agents can check you. And they have the same powers as any law enforcement officer.

My code book is in the other room and I ain't getting out of bed to go get it, so I'll look later.

[dtrs5kprs]

This is kind of like one of those weird little intersections where no one thought to build a stoplight, but did build a house in the middle of it. Screech and crash impending.

At a guess it will come out badly for sportsmen, game and fish, and the resources. Just seems to be the way things are trending.

[fishinwrench]

Nothing negative to the sports of hunting/fishing is going to come of this.

The agents screwed their own pooch by testifying that they witnessed them for 2 hours without noticing them do anything wrong, THEN followed them back to their camp and proceeded to put them through a checkpoint (license, check magazine capacity, and overall search of their belongings). This IS unconstitutional THANK DOG!

At most all this will change is the reason for suspicion claims by the officers in the future. If they had just testified that they "thought one of them shot 4 times" or something like that then there would not be a case against them.

Cops have learned. They pull people over randomly all the time, but they just claim they "smelled something" or "they crossed the line" or "they thought they saw someone throw something out the window". Works every time.

As for the felon with a firearm....If we can't trust him with a gun out hunting then WHY IS HE NOT STILL IN PRISON?

Armed robbery is one thing but his felony may have been writing a 750.00 bad check, or maybe he sold some weed once when between jobs. Do we really assume that a guy convicted of THAT is likely to shoot someone if allowed to go hunting for food? Kinda ironic that he was the one complaint with his permit, plugged magazine and non-lead shot.

[mhowerton]

I am for this change. Maybe it will get the wildlife officers out of the parking lots and boat ramps and out patrolling the waters and woods and actually observing and catching violators in the act. It doesn't feel right when you pull up to the boat ramp and a wildlife officer detains you and asks to see your license and proceeds to remove all the contents of your boat looking for something illegal ( lead shells, too many shells, plugged guns, etc.) without an ounce of probable cause.

[Old plug]

I do not see how they can rule for the defense without setting a preceedance over all law inforcement in the state. I do not want to see anything like that at all. Just makes it easier for someone to move weapons and explosives around.

[Old plug]

Qiuillback ------ being arrested for failure to identify has almost happened to me a time or two. If you talked ro me you would not know I was deaf. I have been stoped and when I told the cop I was deaf he gave me avery strange look. and would start asking me things and I would tell him again. I speak as clear as any of you do. Thats why I have a deaf sign in 3 in high letters on each side of my boat.