RE: A question for R.S.B.
 

Perhaps read more carefully. I suggested only that as far as pr goes it is probably not a good idea for a wco to come on and defend the practice of checking and questioning hunters for "no reason other than to check" as, if you haven't noticed, it is not gaining you any points.
Again read more carefully. I said that eliminating this practice would "imensely" improve the PGC's public relations. I also recognized there would be an enforcement down side but that imo the pr benefit of eliminating the practice would far outweigh the down side.
I think you will find that the vast majority of hunters are more concerned with a jack booted state detaining, questioning and searching them without reasonable suspicion of wrong doing than they are with, by comparison, catching petty game violators.
Well, if your intent was to come on here and improve the publics perception of the PGC and its WCO's then you couldn't have failed more miserably. This last bit of speculative and insulting garbage pretty much ends your credibility. Do the PGC, the PA WCO's and yourself a favor and quit posting before you do even more damage to an already tarnished image.

RE: A question for R.S.B.
 

Here's something to think about. Even in the face of terrorism where hundreds maybe thousands of HUMAN lives are at stake, americans only reluctantly agree to sacrifice even the smallest amount of their rights. It seems that some think that the same or even greater sacrifice should be made to protect us from the neighbor down the road who just might place his wife's tag on a deer. I don't! For heavens sake, let's keep this debate in persepective. Police officers don't stop and check you to see if you are doing anything wrong unless they have reason to believe you have. Would they catch more criminals if they did? Sure they would. Do we as a society think that it would be worth it? Absolutely not! Is protecting the public from game violations more important?

RE: A question for R.S.B.
 

R.S.B., are you saying that I'm lying? I guess everyone on this thread that doesn't think like you is lying too. As we have all stated over and over again to search and harass for no reason makes us hate the PGC! I have no problem being stopped if I have game in possesion, that gives you every right to make sure I legally killed it and tagged it. But to search our cabin and check our guns for no reason without a warrant is ridiculous and a violation of our rights. And this did happen and I'm not lying. It may be legal but it's not right.Would you be angry if a police officer showed up at your door and demanded to search you house and present all of your firearms without a warrant and you had to let him? No reason, just a random check. Maybe if you stop being so arrogant and listen to what people are saying here you might see our side of this MAJOR problem. The original question that started this thread is why is the P.G.C. hated so much? Your typical "I have every right to search you whenever I feel like it" attitude is the reason why.

RE: A question for R.S.B.
 

It would benefit the honest hunters of our state to be able to pursue theyr sport without being subjected to unreasonable searches.

How would you feel if you walked out of WalMart and a policeman stopped you at your car and asked to see your ID and whats in your bag, pockets etc. He didnt see you do anything wrong but you might have shoplifted while you were in there. So is it OK for him to check you without probablecausebecause the police don't have the resources to watch every shopper?

Oh and just to keep it in perspective, mere shoplifting is a more serious offense,according to our laws, than poaching a deer. I personally thinkshoplifting isless serious but the lawallows for much stiffer penalties for shoplifting than it does for deer poaching.

You arguement is mostly self serving. The unconstutional powers that a WCO has make his job easier than the job of any other law enforcemnt officer in this state. As you just said, the way the law is written, you don't have to have ANY probable cause to detain and search a hunter.

So the end result is, since the PGC has limited resources, they depend heavily on volunteers with virtually no law enforcemwent training and then they give that ill prepared force more power than a full time policeman that has gone through much more thorough training and is in his job full time as a professional.

When too much power is bestowed on any part of government, abuse of that power is more likely. Bestowing that power on part time volunteers, many of whom are ill trained, just makes abuse that much more likely.

RE: A question for R.S.B.
 

This is an interesting thread. Spent a while just to read thru it. So here is one more thought.
People seem to have very polarized feelings fashioned from experiences as well as influence from others. A lot speak of individual rights which we should all strive to protect but forget to have these rights, laws and protections are in place and they hold all of us responsible. There are different divisions of law enforcement there to protect these responsibilities which in the end answer to the people. There are checks in place that make it possible if one feels wronged that they can pursue in order to affect change or have their grievance heard. If more people used them maybe the alleged abuses could be addressed. A lot of these stories I am sure there is more to them than what we are being told.
I for one have been checked many times in PA VT NY. Anywhere from sitting on my tail gate having lunch to walking to my tree stand. At all times I was very courteous and it was returned. Did it effect my hunt? Sure. Am I going to let it bother me? No as I know they are only doing the job they are hired to do and that is to protect our “privilege” to hunt. These guys have a very dangerous job. Are there very many times that a weapon of some sort isn’t present or involved?
Put yourself in this situation. You get a call telling you that there have been shots fired after dark in this area. You are driving thru the area and you hear a shot. You proceed forward and see tail lights go out of site in a bend of the road next to a big field. Lying next to the road is a deer dead from an apparent gun shot, looks like a large caliber from the hole. You leave the area and head in the direction the tail lights headed. Now you have lost sight of the vehicle but drive by a vehicle in a driveway where some one is walking thru their doorway with what appears to be a firearm, do you pursue or drive on?
How about you are hunting on a friends land and have been patterning this buck to the back 40. Area is posted but you have been having issue all season with trespassers. You have called the game warden and spoke with him as well as the owner doing the same, giving him a list of those with written permission. Now your rig is parked at an access point and the warden drives by and checks the plates. Yep you are ok to be there but he sees this person duck in about 100 yards up the road. Normally he could slip up and ask to see the persons license and ID but for some on here that is a violation of your personal freedoms, so the guy or gal sneaks in and arrows that buck you have worked so hard for, never to be seen again. As it stands now he could have stopped this person right there, checked the list and accessed if this person was allowed to be on this land or not and saved that buck so it could walk down the trail to you and prosecuted this violator.
Now I guess we can subscribe to the big brother principle and say this is a violation of personal freedoms and be able to with hold our names and ID. But isn’t that an obstruction of justice or hindering an investigation.
Saying they should lay out the very reason they stopped to check you could be hindering their investigation so after he leaves someone pops on the cell phone to alert John Smith that they are hot on his heels and he better get rid of the deer or the gun used as you bet someone tipped him off to your gangs possible involvement.
People who are doing the right thing and following the rules usually don’t have anything to worry about. He laid out very carefully some of the cues they look for in behavior. People who get their hackles up when they are around are going to get reflected back on them what they are putting out.

RE: A question for R.S.B.
 

I love reading this. R.B.S. is winning this debate by a mile. How is checking for a hunting an unreasonable search? If no onechecked forthem, nobody would have one. The WCOs didn't make up the laws, they just do their job and enforce them. No big deal! Some of you guys are funny, keep posting.

RE: A question for R.S.B.
 

In both of your examples, probable cause could be argued and therefore there isno problem. It's the searches "cause I'm the warden/deputy and Ican" coupled with a guilty till proven innocent mentality that ruffles our feathers. (Again, this mentalityI will acknowledge has only come from deputies in my experience)

RE: A question for R.S.B.
 

Good post Grnmtn.

RE: A question for R.S.B.
 

Just checking for a hunting license is not the problem. I beleive the law states that hunting, like driving, is a privilege and not a right. Whats not OK is warrantless searches without probable cause. THAT"S A RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE!!!

RE: A question for R.S.B.
 

"Grnmnt" I could live with your anology if...IF the Game Warden were to say to me "There has been a report of an illegal act in the immediate area and I need to check your license."

But, for the Game Warden to say "It's my duty to check you or It's my job to check you." (as is so very often the case)when there is no apparent violation and he does not make any valid reason or have provocation for a search, then I take issue with him as I believe it to be interfering with may hunt and an unreasonable stop and search.

Just because I have a current hunting license prominantly displayed on my back does not give him the right to stop and search me.