Originally Posted by
statjunk
Flip,
Don't take this the wrong way but I don't care if a guy with 26 posts thinks I'm laying out some BS. I'm not giving any additional details.
Secondly none of the info you have provided addresses meat in a freezer. Only the transportation of the animal/meat.
Anyone on here that has known me for a while knows I don't BS. The officers were looking for tags in the freezers and that should be enough. If you don't believe what I have written go about your business.
Tom
I believe his point is that he was unable to find any statute that substantiates the requirement of the tag having to accompany the meat in the freezer and asked you to post the statute.
On a side note I find it very hard to believe that a judge would sign the court order to wire tap an entire neighborhoods phone lines just because they own a truck. That would be quite of number of peoples' civil rights being violated. Especially if they had the IP address of the person who made the post. Common sense would lend to identify the make of the truck and then check registrations. Then you have circumstantial evidence that a judge may authorize the surveillance on. Like you said " it's in the details".