DNR came by this morning

And you thought I was done. Quote from Lawdog. "People not even from Wyoming running their lips saying "you can't do that" "well guess what we do". If that don't confirm everything me and JohnC have been saying I don't know what else could. The only concern implied in this statement is what they CAN do. Not wether they should, or wether its morel, or Constitutional. Bogels the mind of the freedom loving Americans!!

 

John C your a punk also, hope that makes you feel better. All that time studing the Constitution and no attorney, what that makes you is a wanna be or just a doubt idiot, I will go with Idiot. I can care less how old you are and how many post you have, your still an idiot, or should I say a punk idiot. I can care less what you and Ron B think about me. Constitutional law is the first law class Officers go through Mr. numb nuts. I will never back down from you or Ron B, because you both have no clue about what you are talking about, you know how to look up stuff on the internet, give you an award for that but probably don't understand a damn word of the Costituition. Now I am going to listen to the other member I'ming me telling me not to listen to you 2 idiots, because I should just bang my head against a wall because I would get farther with that and they are rite.

 

Well, what started out as a helpful exchange of information has degraded into name calling. I'm sure this post is about to be deleted and that is a shame because there is a lot of helpful information in here for those that take the time to read all of it.
Thanks WYlawdog for the insight into how some law enforcement officers think. I say "some" because I'm sure not all law enforcement officers feel about the law and the citizens of this country the way you do. I really believe your screen name says it all. Has anyone else noticed that MItrooper is now staying out of this exchange?
Perhaps WY lawdog would like to post those PM's from people "telling him not to listen to you 2 idiots." In fact, I would really like to see him produce ANYTHING that supports his assertions. Its a shame that Spangler-wannabes still exist in this country. By the way lawdog, Steven Spangler lost his ass to Mike Showers. He lost his job, he lost everything he had worked for and the agency he thought he was working for turned on him like a ticked off pit bull. Hiding behind the notion of "Qualified Immunity" is really nothing more than QUALIFIED STUPIDITY! With your attitude I hope you don't have to suffer the same fate.

 

Thank you Paul. I've just watched this one and when WYlawdog showed up, I though, MY GOD, ANOTHER SPANGLER. It's no wonder that ALL law enforcement officers have to endure the mistrust and doubt from a large segment of the public simply because of the Barney Fife's like this character. Here's a guy who swears his life to enforcing the laws of this country telling us he'll make them up as he goes along if necessary. He's probably ended up in Wyoming after confiscating lawfully owned guns from private citizens in New Orleans during Katrina. I'd like to think he's one that fell through the cracks, but law enforcement agencies seem to have more and more of these characters coming out every day. Anyone who even entertains the idea that a local law can invalidate a ruling by the U.S. Constitution and the Supreme Court is a danger and menace to society who needs to be introduced to Bubba in a jail cell.

 

Its really sad for the few Good officers that the poor ones have dropped thru the cracks. Maybe its way more than sad.

Guess the meaning of the Constitution means nothing to them, its pretty plain and simple you don't need a lawyer to explain it, remember most of the people who signed had nothing more than an 8th grade education, yet some young punks think with their associates degree in law enforcement they know more about it!!!

They have never sworn to defend the document which is why they don't understand it, they may have had a short class in it but failed to read it, failed to know it, failed to understand exactly what it says and would not read the amendments.

Lawdog you really need to take some college classes on this before you end up like the officer in the Spangler VS Showers case.

These poor quality cops don't have the guts to refuse their bosses, they worry more about their job security than doing the right thing.

I took alot of arse chewing in the Army because I questioned the authority of my bosses when they issued orders that violated the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The big thing IS I WAS RIGHT EACH TIME in doing so!! yes several times it took a JAG attorney to fix things and tell my bosses they were wrong. Most of these bosses had Master's degrees or higher, yet they issued illegal orders weekly.

Never blindly follow what the boss is telling you, why? Because You and You ALONE are responsible for your actions, your boss is not responsible he/she may have the wrong idea and you should know better, thats why you need to know what the CONSTITUION SAYS AND UNDERSTAND IT

You can bet I have printed out the Spangler VS Showers case and its in the front of my log book, just in case. But then I have a good bunch of wardens probably the best in the state. My Wardens are not thrilled with the power of their badge they know who the poachers are. They do enforce the laws without being bully's. When I lived in Kansas my warden was a pretty good fellow too.

You can do your job without being the punks from the TV shows. I see many times those guys are nothing more than SS troops a good lawyer could slam them and slam them hard. Thats right you should do your job where the public likes you not hates you.

It takes knowing and understanding the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to be that person. Along with Compassion.

But then Lawdog you are probably the cop who would write w ticker for someone not wearing a seatbelt driving a 63 Chevy or Ford. hey seatbelts were options back then!

I just hope with time Lawdog you will learn what it is to Guard the Constitution with your life, thats one thing you have missed is knowing what the right thing is and doing it.

Never blindly follow orders just because your job is one the line, there are things far more important than a job, one of these is the Constitution of the United States, without it we become a totalitarian Governed Nation!!!!!

It takes Guts and Courage to do the right thing, dig deep and be a man and do what is right.

 

Wyominglawdog, you have shown yourself to be a true example of what I DO NOT respect about a lot of law enforcement officers. You are supposed to be serving the people, and upholding the law, not making up your own. Pricks like you let the badge go to their head, and you forget exactly why you are there.

I especially dislike your ignorant comments about all the time John C spent studying the Constitution, but no attorney. What the hell does that mean? Since when do you have to be an attorney or consult one to understand your rights? The man retired from the US Army, I'm pretty damn sure he earned his right to have an opinion about what the Constitution entitles him.

John C, I admit I thought you were a little wound up when this started. But as I have watched it progress, I just couldn't keep my mouth shut any more.

 

I found this picture and thought it may go with this thread?

 

Fascinating thread....

What I found interesting in the Showers v. Spangler case is:

"The Inspection Regulation -- upon which Spangler was also entitled to rely at the time of the search, despite its constitutional infirmities -- is worded more broadly but is also ultimately tied to the records kept under the permit. The Inspection Regulation also requires permittees to "keep a record" of transactions, but states that "[t]he record, together with the premises, shall be open to inspection upon demand . . . ." Thus, the Inspection Regulation seems to include an additional aspect relating to premises not provided by statute. But even broadly construed, such language is insufficient to grant officers of the Commission the type of sweeping search power Spangler claims. At best the Inspection Regulation conferred a limited power to search the transaction records of permittees-- albeit under all too generous terms of time (on demand) and place (the premises).

In other words, even when we consider the administrative regime in this case and construe it liberally, we conclude that there remained for all objectively reasonable officers a discernable difference between an inspection of records, for which no warrant was required, and a search for which a warrant was always required absent consent from the person being searched. This interpretation is far from unique and the record as a whole strongly corroborates it as the prevailing view."

Ignorance is bliss and you can't fix stupid....... In the face of super-ceding FEDERAL case law (which DIRECTLY counters his assertions), he's still not backing down.

He'd probably need a dictionary to determine if it's ignorance or stupidity.

 

Well, once again a nonsense response with no case study or actual laws provided. No admiration of the constitution, or love of freedom mentioned. And once again as mentioned above totally disregarding federal law.
Honestly after reading that last respose I think we have been had. Sounds immature and childish. Perhaps we are not dealing with an actual officer here. Still just seams fishy to me.

Hey John C we have now both been upgraded to idiot status, and you to "punk idiot" which means you still out rank me. Hey a few hundred more post and I will get my stripes!

 

its too bad we dont have a choice like John C for president.I was just thinking,it seems that every bully i knew as a kid is now a cop,I'm just sayin...

 

WOW! Isn't it easy to "bash" law enforcement collectively.

It was very clear in the Showers v. Spangler case that the law was broken by an officer coordinating a warrantless search. Even the Appelate Court said the responsibility was on Spangler and not the other officers. Do we consider every hunter as a poacher? Of course not. Poachers are criminals. Do we consider bank robbers as customers making unauthorized withdrawals? Of course not. They are criminals. The officer in this case clearly broke the law in regard to a warrantless search, because he did not follow proper guidelines and laws by establishing probable cause."


Following is a quote from the IL DNR:

"Taxidermy records shall be open for inspection by any peace officer at any reasonable hour. The Department may require the taxidermist to submit any information it deems necessary.

Authorized employees of the Department are further empowered to examine any packages or other receptacle which they have reason to believe contains aquatic life, or any part; wild birds, or any part; or wild mammals, or any part, contrary to the provisions of the Fish and Aquatic Life Code or the Wildlife Code.

All authorized employees of the Department shall be given free access to and shall not be hindered or interfered with in making such examination, and any license issued by the Department held by the person preventing such free access or interfering with or hindering such authorized employee shall be subject to confiscation by the Department;and no license or permit of any kind whatsoever shall be issued to such person for the period of one year thereafter."

These are the same rules that have been tested and upheld by the courts throughout the country in regard to vehicle and home searches.

In IL, this means that IF a peace officer can establish probable cause that a crime is being committed, he has the right to search "any packages or other receptacle which they have reason to believe contains aquatic life, or any part; wild birds, or any part; or wild mammals, or any part, contrary to the provisions of the Fish and Aquatic Life Code or the Wildlife Code." Any search conducted without establishing probable cause would be deemed illegal.

WLD - Keep in mind that you will typically only hear from people with complaints or accusations. I'm sure that most of the thousands of people whose life and property you protect, are very happy with the job you are doing, and wouldn't want the responsibility themselves. It's rare that they would seek you out to thank you for a job well done.

It's amazing to me, how many people are willing to bash others that are performing jobs that they themselves, could not or would not perform. That bashing climbs to new levels of absurdity, when it can be done anonymously and without accountability for what is said.

 

Hey Ron remember its LAWDOGS opionon all that and five bucks will by his daily Happy Meal.

I was never one to back down from the bullys in school. I did my best to avoid fights and just walked away, but when cornered I made sure I walked away the winner.

I do have to agree many of the bullys from school have become cops and even one a County Sheriff. But thats still all they are is bullys and they try to abuse laws to their advantage.

Like the Probable Cause.

Lawdog has avoided answering several questions, man with his temper he carrys a gun!! Thats scarey, but then how do we know he is actually a cop, much like the police dispatcher who will pipe in here I am sure.

Lawdog in a sense I retired from law enforcement and anytime you dont think the Millitary is law enforcement you are sadley wrong, very wrong. We had to know what the US COntituion was about , the Bill of Rights, none of which we could break and the laws of the United Nations and religous and local national laws along with NATO Laws rules and regs. YOu have to know these to supervise troops that are deployed. then toss in the Geneva Convention!!

You super trooper dont have a real clue about Freedom and what Freedom is or what Freedom is about.

 

Tacker... you're not following this....

The point is most definitely NOT about Probable Cause. It is about routine inspection of the records and regardless of the state's rules/regulations, Showers v. Spangler has established case law that determines the scope that "inspection" covers. Go re-read the quote I posted from the case. States can try to enforce the same rules/regs that PA had when Spangler conducted his "inspection", but my guess is that under the same circumstances if anyone pushed it hard enough from either side, it'll go against the LE, BEFORE going to court.

This isn't "bash LE", it's "bash LE that is too ignorant or stupid to stop & learn what the law decided was right". Law ENFORCEMENT is not law "interpretation", and unfortunately for some people, they have to deal with law enforcement people that are more concerned with being "right" than doing what's right.

 

PWS - I have read the entire court summary of Showers v. Spangler, and understand it just fine. A routine inspection of records would not include ANY type of "search" beyond records.

In IL (I don't know about other states, but would expect them to be similar), if probable cause is established, a lawful search may be conducted without a warrant or consent. As a defense attorney, I would immediately ask for proof that probable cause truly existed prior to the search. If the officer cannot establish that, the search would be deemed illegal, and anything found during that search would be inadmissable in a court of law.

Any officer that goes beyond what is allowable by law is committing a crime himself.

 

No, I don't think you get it.

You quote:

The section in bold is *exactly* what Showers v. Spangler is all about. The "rules" (as you provided) are giving LE the right to a SEARCH a shop, the freezers, etc. in order to FIND illegalities. Showers v. Spangler explicitly states that that is NOT legal. Let's post it up again:

If the LE sees an untagged deer on the floor, or finds discrepancies in the records, that very well may qualify as probable cause.... But lacking that, there's nothing that entitles LE to a warrantless search.

 

I do get it!

You even bolded the portion that says "which they have reason to believe ... the Wildlife Code."

Reason to believe IS the probable cause portion of the law. The officer would have to explain why he had "reason to believe" that something was being done contrary to the Wildlife Code.

I absolutely agree with your last statement. Maybe we are just saying the same thing in two different ways.

 

Oops... bolded the wrong part....

But, yeah, we are following along the same path here...

The way it's worded and the behavior of the average LEO make the average guy scared to deny consent of a search. (and no, I do not have ANY problem saying that, EVERY LEO I've ever come across acts in a way as to assert dominance over a situation and attempt to gather as much intel as possible with as little effort as possible).

 

When they check the records if nothing is wrong then there is nor reason for them to search anything else.

A record search is simple they look thru and have you pull out a couple items from your freezer and if all is tagged and matches up fine.

At the start of this post Matt and Laci said they had to go thru the freezers and were tickets for two untagged coyotes, the search of the freezers was illegal plain and simple.

Do yourself a favor WAL MART is selling a digital Observation system with two cameras for $150.00 If I had worries of being checked I would get two systems and when you get inspected record them.

If the officer is doing what he is suppose to he/she will not have any problem with it.

Many years ago the Feds busted a bunch of Oklahoma Taxidermist and were nothing but rude, crude bullys one taxidermist as he ws being inspected was held at gun point another requested he be allowed to call his lawyer and yet the FED refused.

So if I were afraid and did not know my Contituional Rights I would certainly record the event.

 

Dam, Poor lawdog got the equivalent of a verbal tasering. I guess he couldn't take anymore. Either that or his parents took away his computer!!! I kinda feel bad for him!

 

Ten pages of posts on this thread alone and another 7 or 8 on the other "Warrantless thread" and I just read another thread (can't remember what category) about a taxidermist from VA that was elated with the fact that he survived a warrantless search of his business and freezers without a ticket. The worst part was that there was several people congratulating him for "passing" his inspection.
I really don't know what it will take to get people to stand up for themselves and their rights.