I INTEND to obey all fishing regulations.

[fishhungry]

I had to chuckle at W&B's assertion that an "intent clause" would be some new, irrational way for criminals to find a way out. Intent has always been a key feature of our criminal justice system. Intent is the only thing that separates "1st degree murder" from "involuntary manslaughter." If you intentionally run over a man with your car, it will be no different to the courts than shooting him with your gun, and you'll most likely be charged with 1st degree murder. If you accidentally run over a man with your car, you will most likely be charged with involuntary manslaughter. A large portion of the time spent in any trial is in attempting to establish just that: INTENT.

I think INTENT should be given more consideration in assigning DWR citations, as it is in more weighty criminal matters. The criteria for conviction, "beyond a reasonable doubt," is the same for any "Criminal" case (it does differ for "Civil" cases). However, in smaller cases, such as DWR violations, convictions are regularly handed down without meeting this criteria. For example, I could never be convicted of murder if the only evidence was the uncorroberated testimony of the arresting officer. Try to fight a DWR citation, or a speeding ticket, though, and you'll find that the word of the officer is often more than sufficient.

What do you all think?
[signature]

[jj74]

i think we should all INTEND to go fishing and INTEND to report the outcome of said fishing trips. i think we should INTEND to revive this as a place for useful fishing information and a little light fun.
i INTEND to do just that and i INTEND to rport how i do and the current conditions and anything else that i think may be of interest to the many friendly(and few not so friendly) folks who come here for just that reason.

that is what i INTEND to do. i hope we all do.

good fishin'

josh
[signature]

[DKSRenegade]

jj74, I agree with you. I intend to do a whole lot of ice fishing this winter. I intend to catch as many tasty perch as the law allows and I intend to obey my appetite eat as many as I can as fast as I can so I can go back and legally catch more tasty perch and start the whole process over again. DKS.
[signature]

[bassrods]

Do you think that if you could take ice and put it in the lake you could ice fish on it???[crazy][crazy][crazy]
[signature]

[Carp_Punisher]

[#505000]Thank you for saying that. I was itching to bring this up on the locked thread (before it was locked) but I decided I wouldn't comment on the matter further as I thought the thread was starting to get a little crazy and I didn't want to be the one throwing any more fuel on that fire.[/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]I think most people would be shocked if they actually bothered to crack a code book and see how many laws are based on intent. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]Like I mentioned in an ealier post I think the DWR Officers could really improve their public image and get a lot more public support if they looked at each situation and tailored their enforcement based on the facts of each situation and not a one size fits all approach. Frankly one size does not fit all every situation is different as are each person an officer deals with . That's why some people get speeding tickets and some get warnings. It's also why some guys get 1-5 years in prison while others get probation for commiting the same crime. Good officers and judges always look at the the situation and enforce/punish acoordingly.[/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]When I hear stories of DWR guys hiding in the bushes and hammering guys who help thier kids reel in a fish, or the story about IFG who got assistance loading his salted crawdads on ice by the officer then getting nailed a mile down the road by the same officer for transporting them live (although they were one Ice and salted down and clearly headed for the boiling pot) I have to shake my head and wonder how they can do that. Eventually the public will have a gut full and it's going to burn the DWR when they need public support in another arena. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]I'm not saying they shouldn't enforce the laws. Bucket biologists, those who keep fish over the limit, fish live bait, extra poles, slot fish, ect... should be taken care of although still on a case by case basis as the circumstances merit with tact and a a response appropriate to the situation. Sometimes a warning to the ignorant can go a lot further than screwing a guy over, but as an experienced law enforcement officer you need to feel the situation out and decide what is appropriate in the given situation. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]As a little bit of a disclaimer there are some fantastic DWR guys out there who do a phenominal job. Unfortunately there seem to be an even larger number who don't grasp the above concept and hurt the organization as a whole. The same can be said for any law enforcement agency though most of those are far more accountable to the public than the DWR is which is why I think we see the problems there we do. [/#505000]

[#505000]I've written a small novel on the matter so I'll leave it at that. If anyone wants a clarification on what I am talking about with law enforcement and public accountability I would be happy to go into it further.[/#505000]
[signature]

[michaelbolton]

So did our buddy WandB get banned? I must have missed that part. The thing with CO officers is that some actually do give a second chance to learn from your mistakes, that is why they have the warning citation on the back of every license. The common sense thing to do is just make sure that every fish, crawfish or other forms of underwater creatures are dead before transporting them, it's not hard but it may take a few extra minutes to ensure that.
[signature]

[fishluvr]

I don't think WormandBobber got banned. He is still around fuelling a stupid fire by posting DWR articles from three years ago.
[signature]