What this means too me is an officer who had a good reason or he didn’t. If he thinks he did he’s pretty gung ho and for his own safety shouldn’t have. Why would he be patting him down, for a gun? did he know that he didn’t have a liscense for the handgun. Was it for drugs? is it his duty to arrest someone for drugs and have it thrown out of court because he didn’t contact the propper officers for doing this, maybe they can arrest someone for drugs im not sure of the laws there. If it was a game violation what would he be putting in his jacket, jeans, overhauls etc. that could constitute a patdown, maybe they have the right to patdown for a game violation, im not sure. I’d like the laws to be followed but I have a hard time with a search by anyone without reasonable cause that just on a hunch he thought so. To me this means that im saying ok go search anyone who visits this website. I think when the fathers of the bill of rights wrote these rights they knew that there would be certain troubles that followed these freedoms but they knew the free hands to do anything was worse when it came to respect for your neighbors and fellow man. I know theres times when a patdown is in order but without absolute proof in each situation it shouldn’t be done. Theres already enough dumbing of America and we don’t need a free reign of those who want to do other than what the bill of rights says for us to hold dear if we want to stay free. If theres a good reason with proof its ok for the propper officer but not to just be able to do it. How many people have won lawsuits when this has happened only to be warned by the judge to not do it again. If the judge knows its illegal so does the warden.
IDO » Forums » Fishing Forums » General Discussion Forum » Searchs by conservation officers
Searchs by conservation officers
-
December 17, 2004 at 2:03 am #332209
Quote:
I’m not excited about comments about drug pushers hooking my kid(s) on some horrible drug. That’s not the job of a CO. That’s my job. The authorities are supposed to make sure the bad guys get caught when they are guilty of a crime. Not to make sure that everyone is innocent.
Just my $.02.
Amen Brother!! I take full responsibility to teach my children what is right and wrong in the world we live in. If my daughter becomes a crack head, then I failed miserably as member of the human race.
Like I said earlier, I’ve never been in situation where I had to be patted down by a CO. Most of the CO’s I’ve ever talked to were good guys/gals.
The one that I had a beef with was his attitude of pre-sumed guilt. It’s sad he has to work a job where he treats everyone like they are criminals. I reported him to his supervisor. I like Slop’s comment, pre-sumed guilty until proven innocent, reminded me of that day.
So I’ve had one bad incident in lots of years of hunting and fishing. It doesn’t change how I act around CO’s. I think these guys are a great resource of info and we need them. I still refuse to give up my right to privacy. Hey, they might find my snickers I’m hiding in my front pocket.
December 17, 2004 at 3:43 am #332224Quote:
You know SB, I have to agree with you .
If a CO sees me stuffing a duck in my jacket…or something else that gives him reason to believe a law was broken…no problem, do your job..BUT a random pat down for no reason?
I don’t think so.
So some of you are saying that a CO can walk into your house and check your closets and (heaven forbid) your bedrooms…without any reason?
I do know that CO are one rung down from God, but law abiding citizens shouldn’t be touched…unless they are suspect of breaking a law.
If in fact that is the law…it’s wrong.
OK brian I think it’s time to tell you CO officer story, the one on the river when they came up to you late at night….
December 17, 2004 at 4:14 am #332225
Quote:
Hey, they might find my snickers I’m hiding in my front pocket
Only if it’s a female CO….
Not to change the topic…’cause it’s been changed already…
But I was about 8 years old, out on a lake with Dad and his friend. Checked by a CO for fishing license.
Dad was having trouble finding his, so the CO is checking the freinds. I of course didn’t need one at the time. Dad finds it and hands it to me because he’s too far away.I hand it to the CO…he looks a the license then at me and says “is this yours?” Dad said it was his…the CO’s word have been burned in my mind….”I thought you were holding your age rather well”.
Guess you had to have been there…
A couple summers ago the DNR was out on the Croix in force. Two Co’s snuck up on me…well I was fishing and day dreaming and didn’t hear them so they kinda startled me. They asked if they could see the fish I caught and I opened the live well…The younger Co asked why I had a cork with some line attached to it in the live well. I’m sure it looked odd..but when you want to let the water out…I don’t like to put my hand in the zebra mussle egg infested water (lol) so I just grab the line thats attached to the bobber.
After he left, I had to chuckle…the way he asked the question led me to believe he thought I had a third line going out the live well!
Maybe not…but maybe!But my all time favorite story about CO’s or Park Rangers in this case just happened this last fall. The reason that it’s my favorite is because I’m still alive to tell it. If I was in the Rangers shoes, I don’t know if I would have handled it this well….So if you’re out there freind…thank you!! I’ve learned my lession and made it to the 04 dumb persons list.
I was fishing for channel cats after dark on the North end of the Kinni Narrows. It was getting close to midnight…all the eye fisherman have left, couple campers on the sand towards the South end…I’m all alone out there.
Behind me I hear the slap of water hitting a very quiet boat. Turn around and it’s approaching me. All I can see is this boat (the lights) getting closer and closer. I’m thinking this clown has to see me..but I flip on my head lamp to ensure. (There’s more that one drunk been caught on the Croix at this time of night)….I’m thinking that this would be a good time to have a gun with me…because…I can’t see what these guys are doing or planing on doing…it made me VERY nervous. In fact..I had 911 pressed into my cell phone in my jacket and ready to dial.
Then the spotlights came on and blinded me. I could tell they were trying to keep the light out of my eyes somewhat…They stated who they were and wanted to know (politly) what I was up to.
I told them, then I told them that they made me so nervous that if I would have had a gun, it would have been out when they were approaching..IF YOU DIDN’T KNOW THIS–TALKING ABOUT HAVING A GUN IN THE DARKENESS ON THE ST CROIX IS NOT A GOOD IDEA!
As I realize what I just said…the spots came directly into my eyes..and I started getting all sorts of gun questions. Although I never heard the double click of a hammer being cocked…I’m sure there hands were warming the grips of their guns.
After I explained what I meant…they were ok with it…but the lights kept me blinded for the rest of the time…
Besides that “little” incident we had a good conversation…they even told me as far as they were concerned I could fish with three rods..(they only enforce the WI laws). As they boated away..they asked me one more time about having a gun on board…So…to wrap up to long winded post, I’ll end it here…..
Although last summer Commancharo, Catten Addict and I were stopped……
December 17, 2004 at 1:53 pm #332248Well I hope my post about the fishin shacks and constitution didnt start this whole thing, but it seems I fueled the fire.
I think what CO’s look for is mainly, probobly extra lines in the water when no one is around. If curtans are closed and door is locked, they have no clues what in there, whether it be extra lines or drug factories.
December 17, 2004 at 11:03 pm #332331Wow what a great conversation!!
I should ad that the individuals were Goose hunting in a field.
Krisko….Glad you added your opinion.
I am a Police reserve officer and have seen how and when officers search in various situations. I too occasionally search. But usually becouse they are going into the backof my car.
It could be that the officer (who is not new) saw something from a distance that may have givien him a suspicion that something else was going on.
Some very interesting comments from everyone.December 19, 2004 at 1:50 am #332452I spent 34 years in the United States Army. One thing I have learned and relearned consistently during all those years is to expect the unexpected and posture yourself to control the situation. I have total respect and admiration for the Conservation Officer or Law Enforcement Officer that puts himself into that high threat environment day after day. For all of you concerned about your rights – you haven’t been there in the dark, confronting someone you don’t know, who could be strong, strung out, and capable of killing you. Suck it up – do what the officer wants, do it now, and always show them the respect they deserve. The “pat down” isn’t about you or your rights. It could save that officers life. They can pat me down, hand cuff me, do what ever they want. When the 10 minutes is over, I will thank them for their service and tell them I appreciate the professional job they do. That’s my take on the entire issue of the Bill of Rights.
December 19, 2004 at 2:02 am #332455Very good Comanchero.
Kinda relates to the quote from Band Of Brothers,
“Inocent people dont run”, just before he shoots the Nazi commandant.Just let them do their job and its ok. I doubt they will go as far as handcuffing you, but if the situation is serious then I spose they will.
December 19, 2004 at 2:55 am #332458hey Comanchereo, you are a true poet. I know how you feel about sitting in the dark and knowing that “Charlie” is out there somewhere waiting to do worse than just pat you down.
shane
December 19, 2004 at 12:12 pm #332477I saw this thread and was kind of hoping it had died a natural death already without any participation on my part.
Too late now, I guess.
Quote:
The sad thing this world is full of psycho’s that love to blow people up, poison you, shoot you, rob you and sexually violate you. [emphasis Gianni’s]
The world is actually full of decent, hard-working people who pose no threat to anyone, with a few bad eggs thrown in the mix. Still, I understand the paranoia. After all, the BLS statistics for 2003 indicate that police work is almost as dangerous as being a professional gardener. The pizza delivery guy is more likely to be injured or killed on the job than the policeman, so next time you order a pie, shake his hand, thank him for his service, and remember to tip big. Timbercutters deserve much more – maybe a hug.
Police and CO’s are deserving of our thanks. They have to deal with the stress of knowing that they could, no matter how unlikely, be forced to respond to danger. It’s an aspect of life that most of us would rather not deal with, and kudos to them for taking on that burden. I can still hope that most don’t view every man, woman, and child as someone who’s first and foremost trying to kill them.
If you don’t want to be searched, Jon J has it right: Say no. Denial of search, even though some officers think that means you have something to hide, is not suspicious or wrong… it’s your right (and cannot be used as evidence to obtain a warrant). The reason many submit is because they fear reprisal by the authority in question.
December 20, 2004 at 2:18 am #332541So I have a question……..
How exactly is a warden supposed to catch poachers if all he can do is check your license and ask politely to check the rest of your stuff??
So you say no because you have 100 walleyes in a cooler and you drive away.
People that do play by the rules and support limiting what a CO can do are just opening the door for poachers…and probably creating more poachers since now all they have to do is say no and drive away. People that wouldn’t have before for fear of getting caught don’t have to worry any more.
Those guys are out there protecting the resources a good chunk of us donate $ to on an annual(or more frequently) basis…Ducks Unlimited, MN Deer Hunters, MN Waterfowl Assoc, Trout clubs etc etc.
Doesn’t it turn your stomach everytime you do hear about a big game bust???
Hunting and fishing are priviledges just like driving…they might be passing laws that will keep those things legal but the fact remains it is a priviledge….if it was your “right” they couldn’t take your license for X number of years if you violate the law…just like losing your drivers license for a DWI.
I just don’t see what the big deal is if you aren’t breaking the law. I have nothing to worry about, I like seeing them out there. I have been walked in on Mille Lacs when it was still legal for them to do so….no biggie…I wasn’t breakin the law so I had no worries.
Honestly….makes me sick to know that now they have to do their job with their hands tied.
December 20, 2004 at 3:03 am #332549Quote:
How exactly is a warden supposed to catch poachers if all he can do is check your license and ask politely to check the rest of your stuff??
If a warden is checking MY license, he wouldn’t find a poacher anyway.December 20, 2004 at 3:28 am #332553
Quote:
How exactly is a warden supposed to catch poachers if all he can do is check your license and ask politely to check the rest of your stuff??
Nobody is questioning a Warden’s ability to check for bag limits and look for poachers…We’re just saying there is no reason to pat us down w/o probably cause.
December 20, 2004 at 3:44 am #332557Quote:
So you say no because you have 100 walleyes in a cooler and you drive away.
People that do play by the rules and support limiting what a CO can do are just opening the door for poachers…and probably creating more poachers since now all they have to do is say no and drive away. People that wouldn’t have before for fear of getting caught don’t have to worry any more.
I have never had 100 walleyes in a cooler. If you have evidence otherwise, throw it up and send the cops to my house. I’ll be waiting.
I have never opened the door for poachers, unless they happened to file through with a bunch of old ladies entering the church.
I have only aided in the creation of two people. The oldest one is 12, and she is not a poacher.
Since I won’t have a computer for a couple of days, I’ll propose a compromise: I’ll submit to a random pat-down by anyone who, upon finding nothing, licks my boots a la A Clockwork Orange.
Quote:
Hunting and fishing are priviledges just like driving…they might be passing laws that will keep those things legal but the fact remains it is a priviledge….if it was your “right” they couldn’t take your license for X number of years if you violate the law…just like losing your drivers license for a DWI.
Do American’s have a right to vote?
December 20, 2004 at 6:18 am #332571Gianni..I apologize if you think I was referring to anyone specific with the 100 walleyes in a cooler….it was merely an example.
So really…what is so wrong about getting patted down. For crying out loud, they do it when you walk into a Mn Wild hockey game if you have a bulky jacket on to make sure you aren’t smuggling booze in. They do it at Gopher hockey games as well, they also make women open their purses….big deal….I have never once seen a person complain about that. The only difference I see is they are checking you for booze at sporting events and a CO is checking for a weapon that may be used to kill him/her.
Don’t break the rules and getting patted down shouldn’t mean a thing and if it gives a CO or a police officer the piece of mind that you don’t have a deadly weapon on you so be it..they put their lives on the line every day…if they want to do that for their safety what harm is there????
They are out there protecting the resources we all enjoy….why make their job harder or more dangerous than it already is??
December 20, 2004 at 2:35 pm #332603I pick up a few things here in my perspective about the ice house, can’t they just wait outside where they can’t be seen and check the coolers, stringers etc when they come out instead of coming in. When the poachers are coming out of the ice house to me thats intent to carry away over limits of fish. I can also see that this is just one CO or just a very few others frisking some sportsman and not the vast majority of sportsman. Seems that this isn’t everyone of them, only a very few and he will probably learn that after he continually finds that a very few sportsman are violating anything he will see the need to quit doing it as its not neccssary like Tom Gursky said. I understand what krisco’s point of mind is and i realize i can’t expect him or any law officer to try to read body language, probably the very first thing that they look for so its impossible too tell who the individual is. I see that this is an area thats a shade of grey and until we can read minds it will stay that way. For thier own protection i can see a patdown on some individuals because im sure they don’t look like thier on thier way to church with grandmother and granddad in the back seat. Im sure that those guys are failry decent at recognizing a marginal person who is in question on needing a patdown. Completely enebreated, pissed off about something or just a wiliey attitude. I see the need for some individuals to be patted down. The guy who pats down everybody are the ones who’ve got alot to learn and after a few years experience probably will stop because they now realize theres no need for it, just for certain individuals in question because of thier demenior and i guess i would too. To pat down ol mom and dad i think (very few officers) do that as they’ve fund out that theres no need right along with alot of other persons. Its a shad of grey until they learn who’s who. Ater all because its a shade of grey its the learning process.
December 20, 2004 at 3:09 pm #332607Another guy and I were fishing on Bald Eagle in my 6′ x 8′ portable when suddenly the zipper on my fish house door went half way down and in popped this beautiful face about 12″ from mine. “You boys catching anything?”, she asked. It must have been 30 seconds before I could spit out any words. Thought I had died and went to fishing heaven. She was a CO for that area at the time but I didn’t know that until she opened the door completely. She looked in our pail and at our licenses and left. I couldn’t get her to pat me down no matter how hard I tried. As she walked away I saw that she was packing major heat, so it’s a good thing I behaved.
December 20, 2004 at 3:51 pm #332613I’m glad Clarence stepped back in here…… I was starting to think he set us all up! lol!
So……… if Gianni can’t stay off this thread, neither can I!
I like coming in on the backside of these sensitive topics because I don’t feel a need to address any particular, single issue.
What we have here, is two sides……… and both are right. So what do we do? Harbor everything inward and agree to disagree? Maybe…….. I don’t know. I can’t possibly know any better than any of the rest of us could possibly know.
The sane person today could very well be tomorrow’s whacko! Today’s whacko might actually develop the conscience to become a productive and useful member of society. Can we label anyone as completely sane? Given the right circumstances, we’re all NUTS! We can be pushed into realms of instability, fear, and poor discernment. But from the spacious view of our self promoting comfort zones…….. “I’m alright and will never pose a threat to anyone.”
Find your wife with another man and say that to me again. If you love her, I won’t believe for a minute that you’re not just one itchy finger away from blowing someone’s head off. Truth is, we have to talk ourselves OUT of a lot of irrational impulses and I’m sure there’s at least couple of people in this world that are very pleased with my decision to decide the law was my best option, right or wrong.
Oh……… don’t freak…….. all us humans are built with the same circuitry. If you think you’re not capable of feeling this way, you’re lucky your life has been this soft.
Now……… what to do with the original question?
Police officers aren’t usually pulling over law abiding citizens……. are they? Wasn’t the law abiding citizen driving with one headlight? Speeding? Something out of compliance? These things are laws because they DO threaten other people and their safety. At this point, you’re already out of line and if a pat down is requested, so be it. Get off the high horse and realize, you’ve stepped into “their world”.
Random checks can also come for reasons unannounced. If this reason is undisclosed, the law has been broken. If this reason IS disclosed, you’re just whining.
I’ve been on the other side of shotguns and pistols because I fit the APB of a cop killer. I’ve never been so shaken in all my life! I couldn’t even watch TV violence for 3-6 months without almost freaking out! If you’ve ever had a gun held to you, you know what I’m talking about. If you haven’t, how can you possibly know?
I don’t EVER want to feel way again. I had people telling me I should sue the police for my trauma. It was mistaken identity and I was endangered by irrational actions. Even after being identified by surrounding citizens, I was still “raided” and put through the experience.
I simply asked myself why I’d want to make life more difficult? Even I did nothing wrong and I was completely innocent. Acting unsuspiciously and only having a late night dinner in a local Perkins restaurant. Am I supposed to come unglued over the actions of the officers? After all, wouldn’t a few people match the description of the killer? There was a killer on the loose but in MY world, they had no right to come for me….. only observe me. In their world, they had to find out if I was the offender of the law and by physical description only, turned my psyche upside down for a few months! The intent was to catch a criminal, not shake up my life or play with my head. Everyone went home, shaken but unharmed, and life has long since been back to normal.
If permitting yourself to live untraumatized appeals to you, comply at every opportunity and take it upon yourself to try not to sweat the small stuff. Do we really need to know everything? Let them do the best they know how and treat them as you would like to be treated. If you want to take issue, it’s your choice, but I’d rather be randomly and compliantly patted down any day of the week than have to be selectively patted down under suspicion.
Law enforcement professionals……… are environmentally subject to deal with annoyed and uptight people. Most of them think the world is full of psychos because………. it is! Even Gianni is a psychological creation and subject to go nuts without prior notice, whether it be a psychosis, a medical condition, or some level of duress.
As for game wardens……… they’re in the same situation and I choose to cut ’em some slack. Random house checks and all that other rights stuff…….. yeah, let’s be sensible……. but “in the field”, you’re in their world, even though you think you’re just in yours.
Right or wrong, compliance is your best option, even though there will still be horror stories. We’ll never escape every possible scenario.
Krisko, be safe out there buddy! The survey comparison includes all positions of the job description and lumps in field officers with pencil pushers.
December 20, 2004 at 5:32 pm #332631Quote:
I couldn’t get her to pat me down no matter how hard I tried
Haha good one Putz.
December 20, 2004 at 5:44 pm #332638
Quote:
Can we label anyone as completely sane?
I don’t know about you Still…but I can. I’m living proof
But on the other hand…look at all the golfers out there!
(At this moment of my sanity) I would help out a CO/Officer as much as I could…but, for some wild and maybe crazy reason…keep your hands off me unless…1) you plan on making love to me…or 2) you are arresting me…
I like the veiw from my horse!
December 20, 2004 at 9:40 pm #332683I have to agree with Slop on this one. Unless they have probable cause as defined by the law, they should not be searching people. How would you feel if the CO only wanted to pat down your wife who was fishing with you? Law Enforcment officers are great people who serve and protect. They also get rewarded for stopping crime. We have these laws to protect us from being a police state. J Edgar Hoover had files on almost everyone. Eventually the enforcers become the law. I have been checked many times by wardens and have never ever had one pat me down or even act the slightest bit unprofessional. I would say this is an isolated incident. I would have asked the CO why he felt the search was warranted.
December 21, 2004 at 10:27 pm #332881I didn’t read all the replies to this post so I’m not sure if it was already stated, so if I am just repeating what someone else has already posted, I’ll apologize now.
I am a SGT. with a Wisconsin Sheriff’s Dept and I want people to understand what we do and why.
First a pat down search can be done if an officer has reasonalbe suspiscion that a person is armed. Reasonable suspiscion in a nut shell means that a reasonable person under the circumstances the officer is in, knowing what the officer knows would also believe the person to be armed. It’s sometimes called articuitable suspiscion, meaning the circumstances can be articulated or written down. Things like nervous behavior, a visible bulge or lump in clothing, time of day, location of the pat search (such as high crime areas)number of people, past experience with the searched subject(knowledge of subject being armed), etc can all be used to justify a pat search. The totality of the circumstances are looked at as well. Just one of them would probably not justify a pat search. A mere hunch would also not meet the critera. But a pat down search does not need probable cause. An arrest requires probable cause, and then the search is a full search of the person and his belongings immediately under his control.
Also if an officer has reasonable suspiscion that a person is armed he may use the force necessary to implement the pat down search. Even if a court later determines that a pat down search by an officer was not justified, you are not justified in resisting the officer and if you committ a crime by resisting, you will be prosecuted. Remember, if a person is unlawfully searched there are two ways to remedy it. First the evidence obtained in an illegal search would be tossed out. Second, an officer can be civilly sued for violating someones fourth amendment right against unlawfull seaches and seizures.Lastly, if an officer doesn’t have reasonable suspiscion or probable cause, he can still ask for consent. You can refuse a request for consent.
Sorry it’s so long winded, just want people to know the facts.
December 21, 2004 at 11:07 pm #332885STG113;
I’m really confused on this now.With what you are saying, any person at any time can be “patted down”, because you are suspicious??? And if we resist the pat down, we are subject to reasonable force? I would assume this is physical force???
Or does this come into play when you stop an individual for breaking the law?
I can’t beleive that you can pat down anyone at your own leisure, because you are “suspicious” of that person, even though the person didn’t commit a crime. Does this mean that you can pat someone down, who is walking down the street?
Maybe laws are different in Wisconsin, but in Minnesota, we have the right to conceal and carry. With that said, where does it apply that on routine traffic stops (road blocks) or by COs for routine game/license checks, can you pat someone down??? Who cares if they look suspicious? If I have a right to carry a firearm and I haven’t broken the law, what laws are in place that gives you the right to search me “just because”???
I don’t think anyone is arguing a crime breaker getting searched, even by a CO. What the concern is that innocent people are getting searched at random.
December 21, 2004 at 11:52 pm #332888Quote:
I don’t think anyone is arguing a crime breaker getting searched, even by a CO. What the concern is that innocent people are getting searched at random.
Gary……. per my experience mentioned but not really described in detail, sometimes in the line of duty, “random” pats have their benefit and their place. I think we’re trying to address misconduct vs. line of duty, based on the recipient’s perception rather than the knowledge of the officers purpose.
I don’t think anyone attends a debriefing and then says, “Well, I think I need to pat down 100 people today.”
I was a case of exact fittings, but mistaken identity. Given all the events of that experience, I’d rather have a “random” pat down ANY day of the week. It DOESN’T make me live any less free or infringe upon my freedom of activities. It allows the officer to do his job more safely, and I’m in favor of that because I was once a millimeter’s distance from being shot to death…….. and it would’ve been a mistake.
We shouldn’t confuse misconduct with safety measures. All the provisions are there for misconduct, pursue them. But otherwise we’re getting into an apples and oranges comparison. Suspicion is suspicion and I’d rather stay alive next time it looks my way.
December 22, 2004 at 1:08 am #332892Gary,
To answer your question simply, no, officers can’t go around frisking anyone they want. What I was describing was the legal justification for a pat down search. A pat down search is nothing more than “frisk” of the outer garments for weapons. Also I didn’t say a suspicion. I said a reasonable suspicion, meaning if you(a reasonable person, not reasonable officer) were presented with the same facts known to the officer at the time, you would also suspect that person to be armed. Even in states where concealed carry is permitted, the officers may require you to surrender your weapon for the duration of the contact for the safety of all involved. It’s a safety issue, not a necessarily criminal one.
An officer cannot arbitrarily walk up to someone and pat them down. A simple social contact would not warrant progressing to a pat down search, unless further circumstances justify an officer to “detain” a person.
In a land mark Supreme Court case Terry V. Ohio, the courts said that an officer can temporarily detain a person if they have a reasonable/articutable suspiscion(there’s that term again) that a person has committed, is committing or is about to committ a crime. The courts have said that the person can only detain that person long enough to confirm or dispell those suspicions. The courts also said that if during that time the officer has reasonable/articuitable suspicions that the person is armed he may pat search(frisk) that person for weapons. Basically if an officer has the authority to temporarlily detain a person and then has a reasonable suspicion that the person is armed, he can then pat search that person. That’s not Wisconsin Law, thats a US Supreme Court Decision, making it the law of the land.Part of the problem hear is that hunting and fishing is a privledge not a right, we have to have a license or permit to participate in those activities. If we are taking part in those activities we may be stopped and asked to provide those permits. Conserv. officers actually have no broader limits than any other officers in how they can conduct their stops and searches. The amendments to the constitution apply to us all. I want the same protections from an intrusive government as anyone else. Remember though, Conserv. Officers are enforcing laws that deal with hunting and fishing. Hunters and Fisherman are more likely than anyone else to have a weapon on them. That pocket knife or fillet knife is a weapon as well as a tool. Don’t take that as meaning that anyone hunting or fishing is subject to a pat search either, but it does add to the totallity of the circumstances that may lead to a pat search. In my opinion any LE officer whether he/she is a Cons. Warden or police officer who is pat searching everyone they contact is violating these legal principles. Personally, in this day and age of civil lawsuits and political correctness, I don’t think it would be possible.
Hopefully I didn’t confuse you.
ShaneDecember 22, 2004 at 1:29 am #332897What’s the difference between “Probable cause” and “reasonable suspicion”??? Your definition of the two really aren’t clear to me?
From what you’ve written, this “reasonable suspicion” justify’s a CO or whoever to do a search to whoever, for whatever reason….as long as they cite “reasonable suspicion”
I carry a small pocket knife on my almost all the time…That’s not illegal the last time I checked, but what you’re saying now is i’m subject to a pat down because i may have a fishing hat on and that makes whoever think i could be carrying a knife? IMO, that still doesn’t give them the right to pat me down..
BUT, it sounds like the laws are written to CYOA. And i’m not trying to come down on those of you who are officers of the law in anyway….but I’ve seen first hand how they are abused, and while not all are that way, there’s enough out there to leave bad a taste .
December 22, 2004 at 2:05 am #332900Jerimiah,
Probable cause and reasonable suspicion are close, but not the same.
Think of it this way. You see two people on a corner known for drug dealing in a high crime area. You see them reach out to each other as if exchanging something, but can’t see what it is. One of the people is a known drug dealer. The circumstances surrounding this would make a person suspect that a drug deal had just gone down, but because you don’t know what if anything was passed you can’t say for sure. This circumstance could prompt a temporary “stop” of the people for a brief period of time to talk to them about their activities. For examples sake, they are just old friends exchanging handshakes the contact must end, the suspicions were dispelled. On the other hand one of them produces drugs, a reasonable person would say they that it was “more than probalbe” that a crime of drug distribution just took place.Hunch- simple suspicion, 6th sense so to speak. Not enough to justify anything more than further observation.
Reasonable suspicion is more than a mere suspicion, there are articuitable facts that can be stated that would lead a person to believe a crime may have been committed. It may warrant stopping someone to speak to them. If the officer then can articulate other circumstances that would make a reasonable person to believe the person to be armed, he may pat down the outer garments for purposes only to see if the person is armed.
Probalbe cause means the facts presented would lead a person to believe that it is more than probable that a crime was committed. If that is the case an arrest may occur and a full custodial search could be conducted including the area immediately under control of the arrested person.
The highest level of course is beyond a reasonable doubt, which is needed to convict anyone of a crime.
Last point I’ll make, I didn’t mean to get into a Legal debate. Yes, I carry pocket knives too. They have many uses, but they are still a weapon. When all is said and done, I always try to explain to people why I am searching them. I’m not asking you to agree with it, but the main purpose for all searches of a person is for the safety of all. In the case of a probable cause arrest, evidence would be a secondary consideration. And again, just because someone is hunting doesn’t mean there is legal justification to pat someone down. You are more likely to have a weapon though, that’s the only point I was making with that comment.
ShaneDecember 22, 2004 at 2:26 am #332906It definately won’t be me.
It’s really not easy to explain. It took me a number of years to get a real good grasp of it and most people won’t ever have to experience it.December 22, 2004 at 4:26 am #332929I want to thank you and Krisko for both sharing the view from the other side of the ticket. I’m one of the anal minorities on this particular subject, but it doesn’t mean I don’t respect what you guys do on a daily basis. As a matter of fact, I doubt there is a person here on IDA that doesn’t feel the same as me. Hey, your here talkin’ fishin, you can’t be all bad right!!!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.