Three Michigan poachers went way beyond the legal harvest limits on waterfowl last December. What pisses me off to no end is the penalty for their actions. The monetary fines were probably within the maximum limits set by law, but only a one year suspension on hunting waterfowl. They should have forfeited not only their firearms but should have incurred a lifetime ban on all hunting and fishing in the state of Michigan.
I’m gonna be really honest here and say I don’t like the over limit thing, but the hunting over bait charge is stupid. Every time (many) I’ve ever hunted geese or cranes we hunted in Corn or Milo fields. The only “hunt” to it was knowing how to set the decoys and a bit of calling- the birds are VERY predictable in what fields they will feed on. Drive around in a truck with binos for two nights and they are patterned for the next morning. If you get just a little fog you’re going to stack them up. In the unlimited Snow Goose season with extensions on our guns and electronic calls legal, I’ve killed over 25 birds in a morning, more than once.
I can understand you being upset. These guys broke the rules and while it isn’t only these 3 guys, poachers and over limit hunters damage the hunting rights in many respects
However, this appears to be the first time they have been caught. They now have the misdemeanor convictions on record, so if they get caught again the consequences will be more severe. Second chances and all that. Still $7,500 each and the loss of the firearms involved is a damn big hit. I’d call it a win. Odds are they will not do this again.
Not necessarily supporting gun confiscation. This is a very narrow circumstance in which the tools used in the commission of a crime are forfeited. Say a some guy trys to rob you at knife point, but pleads out to misdemeanor assault. Should he get his knife back? How about a house breaker getting his burglary tools returned?
Call me crazy, but I see a difference between this and what I would consider “gun confiscation”.
The state of Utah can take your truck, boat, or anything else used in poaching but they rarely do. I think you can run into legal issues with leins/lenders and disproportionate punishment ($500 beater vs $70K premium ride) and the value could go over the threshold for fine involved in the charge.
But in theory I can see your correlation being valid. ESPECIALLY for frequent flyer DUI arrests. I could support something like that depending on the specifics of the law.
Self proclaimed conservationist here:
While these guys sound like real dummies. I think the “baited field” bull crap laws are stupid. Majority of the time when you hunt geese you hunt in a field that has been picked. For doves we plant crops (sunflowers or corn or millet) and then bush hog the field right before the season starts. As long as the field was picked or clipped its legal and only illegal if you actually dump the seed out there. And I can’t say that I haven’t thought (only thought) of feeding some yellow acorns to try to attract some ducks. They way over shot the bag limit and either didn’t care or didn’t know. Either way that’s their fault and should pay for it. Surrendering their firearms is part of the punishment same as any other hunting related crime. Headlight deer around where I live and they take your rifle and truck. And one could argue that this isn’t a victimless crime. The victims here being other sportsman, the State and the game.
Not picking a fight, but I’m curious as to how you feel about fines. Is a fine not effectively the same thing? Confiscation of your money? I personally fail to see a difference.
Confiscation of anything from a person is, in my mind, an infringement of their rights. Such a thing is only acceptable following the due process of the law. A process that SHOULD be fair, and reviewable by appeal.
Honestly I have a bigger concern in the confiscation of the rights themselves. Incarceration, and permanent loss of rights of persons convicted of felonies is certainly a far more aggravated offense of their rights than seizing property.
Violation of the law has consequences. It is our duty as citizens to weigh those consequences against the offense and correct our government as needed. Obviously you and I see this specific example differently.
Normalizing confiscating firearms shouldn’t be a thing.
To the poster above:
It’s a crime against the state? Really? Again, the “state” is an idea.
Crime against other sportsman? Then can every sportsman take you to civil court? Can the sportsman decide whether or not to press charges?
A crime to the animals? The animals are not human beings and have no right to life, liberty, or property. But perhaps the animals families can take you to civil court for wrongful death?
So then what? We have no game laws or agencies to enforce those laws?
Without game laws and state and fed agencies to enforce those laws we will return to the days of deer and turkey being wiped out of the SE. Hunting and the taking of game is not a constitutional right (may could argue pursuit of happiness or life in dire times). That’s one reason I don’t believe the 2nd ever had anything to do with hunting. Game wardens are basically supervisors of wild game and the lawful taking of the game.
The thing about rights is they don’t have to be listed in the constitution to be valid rights. In fact, the constitution says things not specified are reserved to the people.