125py

i think its a great idea...i wish they did it more!

jrbsr

I voted against it, because its entrapment.
And could, and does cause hunters that normally follow the laws to break the laws.
Especially if they are having a really bad deer hunting season that year.
It would be like holding a bottle of liqueur in front of a reformed alcoholic, or a bag of weed, or bottle of pills in front of someone just walking out of a substance abuse center.

It causes people that normally obey the laws, to break the laws.

JMHO

Blackelk

It's all about self control. Is shooting one deer worth losing your hunting license for a number of years or a big fine. I'll walk the 50ft off of centerline to shoot at a coyote. And if the coyote is gone before I get that done so be it. It's not worth it. If you'll shoot that deer off the road on property you don't know the land owner I'll guarantee you'll poach him after season just the same.

Bocajnala

It's not technically entrapment, but I agree with you still. I just don't like the idea.
-Jake

timbercruiser

As to the entrapment, what is the difference in someone illegally shooting a decoy on land they probably don't have permission to hunt on and shooting a live buck on property they don't have permission to hunt on? Just makes it easier for the understaffed wildlife officers to catch someone.

SteveBNy

Anyone who should shoot at a decoy believing it too be a deer would be shooting at a deer as well illegally. No entrapment in any way - just making it easy for them to show their true collors - that of a poacher. I'd be willing to bet that virtually everyone caught by the decoys has had experiance in road shooting and poaching.

bigcountry

Truthfully, I would bet more are against it than let on.

I used to hunt GW forest in WV, and at the shack we slept in, I would see folks all night spot lighting and poaching. With 2 game wardens, it was about impossible to get them.

All I could think of is, who are these people??? Why are they doing this.

Schobs

Straight from the "Lectric Law Library"

ENTRAPMENT

A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.

However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a Government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informer or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person. So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that Government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity.

On the other hand, if the evidence leaves a reasonable doubt whether the person had any intent to commit the crime except for inducement or persuasion on the part of some Government officer or agent, then the person is not guilty.
In slightly different words: Even though someone may have [sold drugs], as charged by the government, if it was the result of entrapment then he is not guilty.

Government agents entrapped him if three things occurred:
- First, the idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.
- Second, the government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving him the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as persuading him to commit the crime.
- And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.

On the issue of entrapment the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped by government agents.




So the way I see it, if you've got no intent to shoot a deer from the road, you wouldn't be shining spotlights in the woods looking for one while you've got a gun. That's you will and intent to poach. If it were done during the day, I can see how you would get around that stipulation, but I highly doubt the GWs are sitting in the woods with a loudspeaker shouting "Shoot it! Shoot it! It's a real deer we swear!"

If you have even an ounce of self-control, there's nothing that can cause you to break the law. I haven't seen a deer in the last 2 seasons, never once did I even begin to think of going poaching, and I've seen plenty of deer on the side of the road.

WVCritter

It's not entrapment. It's totally lack of self control on the poachers part and lack of respect for game laws that were put in place to benefit landowners and the wildlife we're supposed to be managing. No one forces poachers to pull off the road, illegally discharge a weapon from their vehicle, trespass on private property and in general give real sportsman a bad name. They do it by their own choosing and I hope they all get caught. The game laws were put there for everyone to follow, not just for the sportsman and real hunters. Poachers Beware!!! There's a Robo Deer out there waiting for you!!!.........lol

WV Hunter

I've seen some pretty nice bucks standing along the road over the years....sometimes during hunting season when I had a gun with me. Not once did I ever consider shooting at them. Entrapment my @ss. All it does is bring out whats really in them.