ORIGINAL: BTBowhunter
As far as going into the woods being the same as entering a house...you have to be kidding me, right? Here is an example for you. If you catch a guy tresspassing in one of your farm fields, does the fact that he is there give you the right to shoot and kill him? Now, put that same person in your house, it's no longer trespassing, it a burglary, home invasion, robbery, etc., and you can kill him, just because he is there.
"Kill him just because he is there?" Who's kidding who here? I understand that a few states afford a great deal of latitude to someone protecting his home but It's my understanding that the law is far more restrictive in most states than you just implied. In my home state you have to have reason to believe that your life or the life of another is in imminent danger. And guess what? That's the standard for deadly force if I happen to be out of my house as well!If you are a law enforcement officer,as you seem to imply,that seems like a pretty irresponsible statement to make in a public forum like this.
Actually, I am a police officer, have been for over 10 years, and have risen high enough to turn down the LT's position 3 times now. My statement is not irresponsible, it's factual...you canshoot someone who breaks into your home in the middle of the night. You cannotshoot him for walking across yourback forty, or your lawn, unless he is firing at you from your driveway. The totality of the circumstancesis crucial in determining if deadly force can be used, and trust me, someone breaking into your house in the middle of the night is much different than someone walking across some part of your 200 acres in that same night.
Furthermore, you do not have to wait to see if the intruder in your homeis going to fire at you to shoot him, however, if that same subject was to walk across your driveway, you cannot shoot him unless he is firing at you, and even then, if you can safely retreat, you are directed to do so by law. Most States are pretty clear on this, and I gave the example as such to illustrate that going into someones home is much different than walking acros some part of their 20, or 200 acres.
Someone coming into your house, whether it's the police, game warden, or criminal, is much different than someone going through your 500 acres 1/2 mile from your home. If you can't see that difference, and still think woods and fields should be treated as homes, I'm done here, nothing I can say will help you understand the reasons wardens don't, and shouldn't need warrants to go into woods and fields and on lakes.
I didnt claim that there was no difference. You need to read before you react. That doesnt change the fact I believe there should be a higher standard applied than"in the course of his duties"or "he had a tip" when it comes to tresspassing on private property.
Right here, the post before the one of mine you quoted, it looks like you did...in bold
Lets say you and your neighbor dont get along. He decides to drop an anonymous "tip" that you are baiting deer. So there you are in your treestand on your own property minding your own business and here comes the GW snooping around looking for your bait and disrupting your hunt in the process. I really dont see that as being much different than helping himself into your house. IMHO, for anyone to enter, your own private property, they should be required to have a valid reason. It appears that the current law allows a GW to tresspass without any specific reason other than "carrying out his duties".Invading our private property should require a better reason than that.