ORIGINAL: NEW61375
While I agree anyone trespassing with a firearm should face similiar penalties to clarify a little this law is already on the books and applies specifically to dog hunters, actually it helps dog huntersbecause it givesthem theright toretrieve dogs on foot andunarmed on private property. You and I can not do the same without hunting dogs,the only thing changing appears to be the penalties fornot following the "unarmed" stipulation of the law. For the right to"legally" trespass they should be able to follow that onestipulation.
ORIGINAL: Hokieman
The law already states to leave your weapon in the truck and you may not drive on someone elses property, the change in the law is the severity of the penalties. Which would be fine if it applied to all hunters hunting illegally, but they are singling out hound hunters only. Thats what makes this a bad bill.
My quote above yours I was trying to say that the retrieve law is not a law that hinders dog hunters it helps themby giving themthe right to legally go on private property, no other group of huntershas that right.
So with the right/privalege comes rules. If the rules that govern the privalegearebroken or are violated there will and should be penalties. And if those rules aredisregarded on a large scale over a long period of timethen the penalties should be stiffened and enforcedto ensure compliance. It is a privalege thatno other hunter or group of huntershave, follow the rules and the penalties never even come into play. I can befined and ticketed for a number of offenses if I even step footon postedor unpostedprivate property armed or unarmed.