I actually looked up Federal Constitutional Laws, such as Amendment Rights. Federal Laws, which hold power over all state statutes first, actually tackle the act of trespass...laying out the laws for which each state (that includesIN and ILL, just to point that out) Individual statestrespass laws based off of the federallaw, thendecide who enforces it (many states won't even allow DNR to do so) and the punishment (usually a civil forfeiture suit in most states).

Again, for probably the 4th time...

When I differentiated my state lawsfrom Federal laws, I stated that. Everything else (everything includes every Court document {Supreme Court that is...you know...the Justices who interrept the American citizens Constitutional rights}, every Amendment right that I went over, inluding clauses and and every sub-category I layed out).

I still do not believe you understand what the term "enforce" actually means. That is taken from the great state of Ill's reg's manual, is it not? Tell me legally what it means to "enforce" something. I know I've covered the legal term several pages ago, straight from our Justice's law manual.

I can not believe you still don't legally understand...I'm actually laughing out loud. No person/official in the country has the legal power to trespass WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE or a WARRANT! Call a lawyer. Heck, give me your phone #. I'll call you, then a lawyer of your choice on 3-way...then ask away. How's that sound? Somehow though, you wouldn't believe that even...

All I've done is layed out 100% legally based facts. No other individual has 1 bit of legal argument in this thread. Still want to pull out the old Ill reg's manual story on me? Well, sorry...proved my point on that one too. Next.......?



BTW, how did I talk to someone as if they were "stupid?" By asking a question one said could answer? Explain to me how is that stupid? Care to discuss?

"Some of these guys do make me sick."


It's a joke that some of these guys have no grounds for an argument (or even a kind discussion for that matter). Even when faced with (seemingly) endless amounts of legalized facts, in plain english, they still hold their ground.

Oh boy, good times....good times...

Not to offend any lawyers but they are over rated. They make a heck of alot more money than I ever will. They go to school for 8 + years to get people out of trouble. I went to school for 2 years and 10 months to learn how to make a perfect case so lawyers who go to school for that long cant beat it. I face defense lawyers atleast 4 times a month and sometimes alot more. In 6 yearsin law enforcement I have neverbeen beatenby a lawyer.Matter of fact I have never had to go to a jury trial because things are done by the book. Satify yourselfPat and call a lawyer. I really don't care.In fact if you want I have a call into the warden in the pic. If you want,pm me yourphone # and I'll have him give you a call soyou can tell him how he is violating peoples rights.

Sent.

Oh, tell him to provide legal backing on this. Tell him to email me everything to:

[email protected]


Thanks.

This is a really intersting post to say the least.

In the end, regardless of who is right, law enforcment officers of any kind will win. They write the report. It is your word against the word of government official. Does it matter that he did or did not see someone walking with a gun through your property the other day. No because that was just the probable cause that he needed.

You don't need law books to settle this argument.

Tom

A good lawyer would rip them apart in one of the many states that requires evidence of PC. In your hypo'sit, there would be footprints in the mud/dirt of the person walking around with a gun (just 1 example of PoPC. plus, who's to say the DNR officer knew whether or not that was the land owner, or some random person that has permission?). Here's a quiz: If a police officer saw someone running out of a bank with a ski mask on and a black bag of unknown contents (but no report of a robery/no alarms), could he legally stop him and frisk him? Nope. Not unless he gave the officer a reason to be frisked (by giving any combination of set circumstances of justifiable reasons to a "SaF").

Your theory is flawed. My statements are facts. To say officers will win any kind of case, boy that's laughable...especially when rights have been violated (read up on a few of last year's Supreme Court cases, or even your own state's SC..happens all year in session).

50 years ago, heck..even 25 years ago..the power of the court was on the law enforcment's side. Today, defense lawyers make killings off of rights violation cases. Some find that horrible, others who believe in Rights see otherwise. I'm right in the middle as long as everything's legit. How often do you see someone getting let off b/c the police didn't do their job correctly? Happens all the time. Ever wonder why it takes so many years to set up a mob boss or a drug runner? It's b/c they will fund the top lawyers in the nation to get them off b/c of the smallest rights infringement.

Don't get me wrong, I love the police/DNR/FBI/etcofficers who do their job legit. I wouldn't mind seeing a DNR officer patrol my partof the state (doubtful though) and even my land...as long as they don't walk thru it and abuse their power.

Good Lawyers cost money. Most people will take it and move on. Only the wealthy can hire a good lawyer to show that their "rights" have been violated.

In general they will do as they please and get away with it.

I will keep you in mind if I have have a situation arise. If you get this riled up for a thread I can only imagine how you would get in a court of law.

Tom

I looked all over for Missouri's rule concerning this, and I couldn't find it. Can someone answer this for me. We all know, without question, that a search warrant is needed to search a residence. An officer of the law can't just show up at my house and search without either permission or a warrant. Why, then, would they be able to do that in the woods I own behind the house??

"I will keep you in mind if I have have a situation arise. If you get this riled up for a thread I can only imagine how you would get in a court of law."

I'm not riled up, just providing common information available to all those who chose to learn it.

Besides, I haven't been riled up since my psycho ex g/f accused me of seeing another girl a few years backb/c I wore cologne to work. lol That girl was/is nuts..although she is now working for the Chicago Tribune making 6-fig's. Damnit. If I didn't axe her, I'd have a Ranger sitting in my garage right now. [>:]


*Edit...Aw hell, I might as well tell the story.

My ex g/f went to "THE" Ohio State Univ. I was taking her back down there one Sunday evening, along HW 33 in Ohio somewhere. We stop at a rest area close to that big Honda plant somewhere...talking...chit chatting..etc. We get to the subject of my coworkers liked the cologne she bought me for my bday...she then went into freak mode saying I must be wearing it for some girl at work. It came totally out of nowhere...and she even knew I worked around guys all day. She picked up a chair in the lobby of the rest area and flung it at me! I walked to my truck, tossed her bags out in the parking lot, went back home. Saw her on/off for a while, then called it quits. Now I'm totally happy with my RN fiance (even though I have a Bass Tracker instead of a Ranger).

[8D]