I'm all for wardens or any law enforcement trespassing without my knowledge IF there's reasonable suspicion of an active crime. I am not ok allowing them to hang surveillance cameras without a warrant or my permission. Both things can be true.
TWRA ruled against - AGAIN!
- Thread starter BigJohnJTP
- Start date
kentuckylakebuck1
Well-Known Member
I totally agree with this! BUT, this is not the same as what the twra did to cause this lawsuit in the first trial. being able to check someone entering or leaving I have NO PROBLEM with, however I DO have a huge problem with a Warden sneaking around on private property putting up surveillance and trying to make someones life hell over some petty citation! but all in all we are one the same page!!
BSK
Well-Known Member
What the F**K are you talking about BigJohnJTP? That is the dumbest comment I've seen from someone on this site in a LONG time. You intentionally misconstrued and inflated my comment. Where did I say anything about kicking down doors? Where did I say anything about taking pictures? Where did I say anything about grabbing whatever evidence he wants? In fact, in my other comments on this topic, I said entering a property to place a hidden camera to monitor the landowners is Gestapo tactics.
If a Game Warden believes someone is hunting illegally on my property, I ABSOLUTELY want him to enter the property without a warrant and investigate. Don't like that? Bite me.
Always fun to recognize another green striper....
BSK
Well-Known Member
I do too kentuckylakebuck1. And I've said that on this site SEVERAL TIMES.
But that's not what was asked of me. I was asked by trkhunter about a Game Warden trapsing across my property. Yes, I absolutely want them trapsing across my property without a warrant if they think someone is hunting illegally. THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE PAID TO DO - CATCH GAME VIOLATORS.
so only if he thinks there is illegal activity its ok?? what if he sees the end of the rainbow and wants to go after the gold??? i see absolutely no reason for anyone to be on my land that i bought and pay damn property taxes to keep without asking first!!! all you gotta do is ask. or get a legal warrant!!! or help me pay my damn taxes!!
Under normal circumstances I would agree with you. But for abnormal circumstances such as emergency medical, fire, or law enforcement I think it's reasonable to accept that sometimes the situation doesn't allow time for them to get permission. If your house is on fire while you're away, would you want the fire dept to wait for permission before putting the fire out? If your neighbor sees flashlights in your barn when you're not home, would you want the sheriff to wait for permission before busting the thief? Of course not. Those taxes you pay are what fund the emergency services that exist to protect your property. That's a far cry different than a warden secretly hanging trail cams without a warrant. IMO there's a very clear line between reasonable and unreasonable.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2017
- Messages
- 20
This is what I am referring to: https://tennesseelookout.com/2022/0...ed-over-surveillance-cameras-on-private-land/
"Weeks after he discovered the secret camera, he heard a knock at the door to his home, located on a separate property.
It was early in the day and Hollingworth and his girlfriend weren't fully dressed. Outside were at least half a dozen men dressed in khaki pants and bullet-proof vests, including at least one armed with an assault rifle, Hollingsworth said. Frightened, Hollingsworth's girlfriend ran for the bedroom.
They were both detained and arrested."
It sounds like you disagree with their tactics. Which is good. But before you assume you know someone's intentions you should look in a mirror and ask yourself about yours. I'm glad we agree that they used "Gestapo tactics." And seemingly so do the majority of the commenters on this occurrence of LEO overreach. Enough said.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2017
- Messages
- 20
A classic quote from many historical sources: "Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." That quote often comes up in the context of new technology and concerns about government surveillance."
DoubleRidge
Well-Known Member
I absolutely agree in a landowners property rights...I dont want people on my land without me knowing it...but the original case is far from a "petty citation" with baiting deer, baiting ducks, baiting dove, $3,000 in fines and suspension of his hunting privileges for three years....all over a three year period. Sounds like a habitual poacher that has no regard for the law or the resource...so before everyone starts flaming away...Again, I agree that surveillance cameras crossed the line....but in the same breath Ill say if my neighbor was a habitual poacher TWRA would have no issue getting access from me.
That's the crux of it right there. They weren't singling out an innocent, random citizen. We can discuss hypothetical situations all day but in this very real situation they were trying hard to catch a habitual poacher and they crossed the line. Doesn't mean the guy was a victim. It only means the methods TWRA used were challenged in court and found unconstitutional. They had reasonable cause to surveil him. They just didn't take the proper channels in doing so.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2017
- Messages
- 20
I agree. More than one thing can be true at the same time. He should not be dong illegal stuff. They should not be swatting flies with a sledgehammer.
Well, the problem is if they are allowed to stomp on a poacher's constitutional rights it won't be long before every landowner will be dealing with the same tactics. Rarely, does government become less overreaching. They just take a little freedom here and a little freedom there for "the common good" and in a generation you're asking what country am I living in.
megalomaniac
Well-Known Member
Agreed. If they had enough evidence he was a habitual baiter, they had enough evidence to get a warrant before putting cameras out to catch him in the act.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
I don't remember all the details about the multiple cases regarding the same poacher(s), but . . . . . .
Wasn't the "surveillance" initiated by federal officers (not TWRA)?
If I remember correctly, part of the "legal" issue was that what the feds had initiated did not carry over to when they asked TWRA to assist? In other words, say the feds had a warrant (and it did sound like they indeed had "the goods" on the poachers?), TWRA's actions fell "outside" the bounds of the federal warrant because TWRA is technically "state"?
Seems like it's so often "technicalities" getting criminals off the hook?
All that said, yes, there will always be a bad apple in every barrel, including TWRA's. Just not so sure exactly what TWRA did in the specific case(s) sited was as nefarious as the defendants (and their cronies) have tried to make it sound.
One more thing:
If there was a case where the county judge was a close friend of the poacher, would that judge grant the warrant?
Last edited:
Corrupt politicians or judges is why the Founders gave us a government with limited powers. Protecting individual freedom was the cornerstone of the US Constitution.
Headhunter
Well-Known Member
You hit the nail on the head! Amazing how some can't see the corruption and the TWRA is just as guilty. The "higher ups" in the TWRA are some of the worst crooks and for sure do not care about the everyday hunter and fisherman.
TheLBLman
Well-Known Member
You know, there will always be a bad apple in every barrel.
But that bad apple does not make all the apples bad.
Compared to what you just said, it would be just as accurate to say that all TN hunters are the worst of poachers, including you. But I wouldn't say that because I know it's not true, nor is what you just said true.
What we have is disagreement about some tactics (and I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you about those), disagreement about the open doctrine rules, and more than that, disinformation that has been fueling much of those disagreements.
As with most "issues", things are just not as clearly good vs bad as we would want.
How about we work more together to make things better instead of worse?
Headhunter
Well-Known Member
I disagree, your thinking is so far off base it is not even funny. Sounds like the same arguments I hear from my friends who are staunch liberals. And it is way more than the issues you mention. The TWRA has screwed the "proverbial pooch" on most anything they have attempted to do.
When most every single hunter and fisherman (and they are law abiding people) I know has a complaint about the TWRA, something is wrong. Not only do they have a complaint, they are to the point of revolting. I know of so many who do all they can to follow the law have quit buying fishing license. Why buy one when the illegals and the immigrant population don't, they have no clue about the fishing laws (before long a huge number of them will be hunting and do you think they will pay attention to game laws?) and they don't care to know. Maybe I need backup, I know he is in heaven agreeing with me, but Ruger talked at length about the TWRA and he completely agreed with me, he was madder than me.
