It was a significant amendment. It prevents the Anti’s from ever making laws that would eliminate hunting/fishing/trapping in Minnesota.
There are movements in states like California to ban these activities! I do not believe Iowa has such rights.
Jon J.
Quote:
Actually, it has only been a “Right” to hunt and fish since 1998….. That’s when voters in Minnesota amended the Constitution to make it a right, rather than just a privilege.
Per my question above, I had thought it was Wisconsin that amended their constitution… Given that it was y’all instead, does the justification from this court not fly directly in the face of your constitution, as amended?
Most people won’t gel with the car search analogy, but it is better than many realize. Driving is undoubtedly a licensed privelege. This has been tested and upheld in court so many times that reversal would constitute a major alteration in the way that our very traffic enforcement is handled. By the justification given by this court, a person could also be stopped on his way to work every day of his life and have no cause for complaint.
Here’s how I suggest they fix the real problem:
1. Streamline the warrant issuance process.
2. Stop using judicial appointees as political playthings.
3. Create incentive for turning in poachers.
It is not throwing away any rights! i think your way off base if lifting the lid on a livewell is invading your privacy. the only ones being protected by this would be the poachers. Does not make sense to me.
This will help them to protect our fisheries once again. 
Thanks, Bill
All I am saying is it is pretty tough for the DNR officers to catch poachers if their only window of opportunity is the time between the catch of the illegal fish and the entry of the fish into the livewell. Jon, you said we should just get more DNR officers. Do realize how many officers it would take to patrol all areas of all waters 24 hours a day seven days a week. If that could possibly happen, where would all the extra money come from. It is not an acceptable alternative.
I do agree, however, that some DNR officer could work on their people skills. It does nothing but harm for them to treat law-abiding fishermen with disrespect and distain.
Gator Hunter
i would have to agree with gator, some of them officers need to work on thier people skills or leave their personal problems at home before coming to work. they don’t need to treat us with disrespect when we are being respectful to them or atleast trying to be. sharing a smile can go along way though!!
shane
I think some people need to treat the DNR agents a little better too. Sure its a hassle but they are just outdoorsmen just like we are and they are just doing their job.
Gator Hunter
Gator, I think of it this way: whether it is a DNR officer, a patrolman or anyone dealing with the public, They are likely the only ones that can help you at that moment! It seems to me it would be a good idea for me to be as pleasant as possible. I just feel strongly they should be civil too! Gator said most of it well.
Quote:
It is not throwing away any rights!
Somebody thinks so:
Quote:
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
So can they stop your truck going down the road if you have a boat on with a fishing rod visible? How about entering your house if it’s parked in the driveway?
People in general do not recognize the gross authority of the DNR. DNR employees are ‘regulatory officers’ and not an enforcement agency. My understanding is that they can do both of the above, no cause, no questions, no appeals. Notionally, when you purchase that little slip of paper that says you can fish, you open up your boat, car, house… everything.
More enforecement officers wouldn’t even be necessary were it not for the apathy of the fishing community.
Geez, we are not dealing with the SS here. If you think that CO’s are going to bust your door down and search your house your paranoid. Why do you want to protect game violators?
Gianni
To my understanding the DNR cannot enter your house without probable cause. They can, however, enter your iceshack at their whim, just like they have always been able to.
I can understand your concern for your rights and privacy but I honestly do not think this is going to be a case of give them an inch and they will take a mile. I believe they are just making themselves capable of protecting our environment and our sport that we all obviously love.
Remember, this is not something new. They have been able to check livewells for as long as boats have had livewells.
Gator Hunter
Don that is exactly the point. If we let all these little violations of our rights pass how far will it go? Your assuming that those to whom you are giving this power do have and always will have our best interests in mind.If the citizens of pre nazi Germany had been less complacent the SS never would have happened. 
I agree with gator. No one is giving any miles away. WE set the rules. There is no THEM. Live wells and ice houses should be accesible to conservation officers just like they always have. This paranoia about giving up freedoms is bordering on ridiculous.
The constitution is the supreme law. If your willing to trash that [4th amendment] over a poached fish how parinoid am I? Besides even parinoids have enemies.
I hesitated jumping into this one because it’s so hot. I should have stuck with my gut feeling. I’m out. I’ll keep my opinions to myself on this one. 
I am just curious, did you guys think that this was a gross violation of your civil rights before it was ruled that boats could not be searched. How is that different than now.
By the way, I think it is great that we have so many people that are passionate enough to speak up for what they thnk is right/wrong with what is going on in this country. That is the only way to keep this the greatest country on earth.
Gator hunter
The constitution is for law abiding citizens. I will ask again why are you wanting to protect law-breakers.
You are worried about CO’s bursting in your house and counting your perch fillets. Come on! With the budget cuts do you really believe the CO’s have time to do searches on a whim? They do not have the manpower or funds to even follow up on known violators.
I am not giving up any, or am I willing to give up my rights. That being said though, our enforcement officals have to be able to do their job. Thanks on the great debate on this issue. Don
Someone please tell me where it says livewell only?
I read this in the SPPPD:
“Justice James Gilbert wrote for the majority in the split opinion. “Those who choose to apply for this privilege accept the conditions imposed, unique to the sport of game fishing. Among those conditions is allowing conservation officers to inspect their catch and boat or other conveyance used to transport fish.””
It does not say livewell, it says boat or other conveyance. That could include lockers, tackle boxes, bilge, any part of car, truck or trailer, etc.
I understand what Jon J. and Gianni are saying, and agree with them.
However, I might be ok with popping open my livewells. But this ruling looks like it goes a lot farther than that.
Quote:
To my understanding the DNR cannot enter your house without probable cause.
My understanding is that Law enforcement officers are required to have a warrant, which means probable cause with judicial review, which is the distinction that I think is not made with regulatory officers such as the DNR, DHS, etc. There is an important distinction on what constitutes probable cause in the two cases, wherein one requires approval/judicial review and has checks in place to protect citizens from overzealous enforcement. I have been told stories by lawyers I trust (how often does that happen??) which lead me to believe that as regulatory officers, DNR field personell are essentially self-policing when it comes to probable cause.
As far as all the Nazi stuff, I wish we’d all knock that off right now. Both sides of the comparison are completely rediculous, with one saying that the DNR is on their way toward totalitarian slaughter and the other indicating that we shouldn’t lift a finger until we’re being marched into gas chambers. It’s the most base form of argument and it’s totally inappropriate.
Quote:
With the budget cuts do you really believe the CO’s have time to do searches on a whim?
Yes. In fact, I think that the budget cuts mean they will be doing more of this thing, because the manpower for proper surveilance and enforcement is so limited. Why focus on someone you suspect of breaking the law when you can just stop everyone and pray for it to rain cash (ticket money)?
Quote:
The constitution is for law abiding citizens.
Really? What about amendments protecting the right to face our accusers? Right to speedy trial? Rights against self-incrimination? Clearly the constitution is for everyone, especially the lawbreakers.
I see this as a full circle stand off…………
Suzuki…………don’t duck over thrown words buddy. Your opinion has just as much merit as anyone elses.
Two sides are clearly heard with little to no room for any gray areas. You’re either satisfied or dissatisfied. The cool part is that both sides are well spoken and represented. I don’t change a thing I’ve said…………..and I can see both sides. But the core still holds the undeniable…………….no matter the decision or outcome, somebody isn’t happy and/or has to disagree with it. The way it’s handled is again…………regulation. Nowhere in the world will you find regulation attached to any definition of freedom. Yes, it’s always been there to serve as enforcement against lawbreakers but how did that originate? Has anyone noticed over the decades that the rule books get thicker? This is a pecking transition and it happens very slowly.
I don’t believe for a second that the permission to inspect my livewell will turn into Nazi raids. But the accumulation of regulation after regulation is what spawns enforcement agencies. This is just “one more thing” on a list of standards and regulations that has become our duty to uphold and respect in an effort to support the overall objective. Deter non-conformants.
I feel forced to conform……………though it’s not an issue. All I know is I can be following the law to the best of my recollective knowledge and I still get nervous when stopped by the warden or a patrol officer. I’ve had my share of “what was that all about” incidents and while I know they are there for my protection and service, my own experience has taught me to be wary of them.
Ever have someone constantly looking over your shoulder? You know you’re aren’t doing anything wrong. Nothing is being said. But the longer you’re stared at, the more nervous it makes you and you’re more prone to make a mistake. The effect is no different when the authorities pop up out of nowhere. What did they see that makes them want to come check your boat or car?
When someone in authority acts in a manner that clearly shows they’re looking for something to call you on or mark against you, you never forget it, and these things can happen over something as simple as checking a livewell.
Paranoia? A simple check and the “new guy” starts smashing the nose of my legal catch to “make sure he’s reading it right”? This is the crud the opposition to the complacent are trying to avoid. Maybe no one’s breaking into my house but trying to make an offender out of me? It’s been attempted and does have a way of taking the pleasure out of your day.
I’m more than willing to show my livewell but having the authority to do so needs to be kept in check. If I have to put up with the inquisition everytime there’s a random check, I’d vote for legislation to ban the check unless there is reasonable evidence beyond the act of fishing to warrant a search.
Stop poachers – Yes. Oppress the innocent – No.
You are reading something and taking it out of context. Here is the deal this whole privacy issue when it came to fishing boats was in existence for a couple of months. Before that it was business as usual. Seems some are getting bent out of shape over rights they never had.
All the amendments are for law abiding citizens. Remember innocent until proven guilty?
I wonder how far we can take this privacy thing. If I don’t want to show a DNR officer my fishing license I don’t have to. It’s my license. It’s hidden in my wallet which is in my pocket. Is that my constitutional right. He cannot search for my license. What if I don’t want to tell him my name? It is my name. I have a right to my privacy.
Sounds kind of ridiculous doesn’t it? My point is invasion of privacy can mean a lot of things to different people. The important thing is what it meant when they wrote the constitution. It was put in there to keep governing armies from entering people’s houses and taking their food, supplies, weapons etc. not to keep DNR officers from protecting our waterways.
Gator Hunter
Quote:
I wonder how far we can take this privacy thing. If I don’t want to show a DNR officer my fishing license I don’t have to. It’s my license. It’s hidden in my wallet which is in my pocket. Is that my constitutional right. He cannot search for my license. What if I don’t want to tell him my name? It is my name. I have a right to my privacy.
Actually, unless he has some reason to suspect that you’re in violation of the law, then all of that is true. The fact is we all do our best to be nice, polite, and help out where we can becuase we understand that they are doing a tough job, and at least in my case, I know he will have up to date info on where the fish are & what’s working.
A cop just can’t pull people over at random and breathalyze them and search the trunk for guns or drugs (ok, they’re not supposed to be doing it). What’s the difference?
It’s come to my attention that some people are taking what I’ve been writing on this thread personally. I dug through and didn’t find anything, but just the same I’d like to make it clear that this is just a place to vent an opinion, and there’s no hard feelings or personal animosity.
Quote:
I’d like to make it clear that this is just a place to vent an opinion, and there’s no hard feelings or personal animosity.
Same goes for me……
For me, Freedom and the Right to Privacy outweigh the protection of Fish and Game. I am not personally willing to budge one inch on those rights….no matter what. To many soldiers have died protecting those rights.
Not sure who first said this…. “Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.” There is a reason the forefathers of this country left England for this land. The biggest being and oppressive King. Think about it!
Anyway, we could debate this till we are blue in the face. Personally, I think the ruling was wrong and will eventually go to the US Supreme Court. We will see.
Jon J.
Jon, your last post says it all! A respectfull thank you.
herb
You still can vote. I THINK.
I would like to apoligize if my previous post offended any one, that was not my intent.Sometimes my verbal skills are not what I would like.In this case I wasn’t able to convay the proper tone. That being said I still think we need to be very careful about trusting our polititions with too much leeway.
The first ammendment does not differenciate between good intentions and the law. You could go back to the arguement that if you’re law abiding, you have nothing to fear. The Constitution doesn’t make that destinction either. Left unchallenged, law enforcement will catch some bad guys, I think. Look around at what is happening in this country. I think the slippery slope arguement is valid here.
I like big cars, big boats,
big motorcycles, big houses and big campfires.
I believe the money I make belongs to me and my family,
not some governmental stooge with a bad comb-over who
wants to give it away to crack addicts for squirting out babies.
Guns do not make you a killer. I think killing makes you a killer.
You can kill someone with a baseball bat or a car, but no one
is trying to ban you from driving to the ball game.
I believe they are called the Boy Scouts for a reason, that is
why there are no girls allowed. Girls belong in the Girl Scouts!
ARE YOU LISTENING MARTHA BURKE?
I think that if you feel homosexuality is wrong, it is not a phobia,
it is an opinion.
I don’t think being a minority makes you a victim of anything
except numbers. The only things I can think of that are truly
discriminatory are things like the United Negro College Fund,
Jet Magazine, Black Entertainment Television, and Miss Black America. Try
to have things like the United Caucasian College
Fund, Cloud Magazine, White Entertainment Television, or
Miss White America; and see what happens. Jesse Jackson
will be knocking down your door.
I have the right “NOT” to be tolerant of others because they
are different, weird, or tick me off.
When 70% of the people who get arrested are black, in cities
where 70% of the population is black, that is not racial profiling,
it is the Law of Probability.
I know what sex is, and there are not varying degrees of it.
If I received sex from one of my subordinates in my office,
it wouldn’t be a private matter or my personal business.
I would be “FIRED” immediately!
I believe that if you are selling me a milk shake, a pack of
cigarettes, a newspaper or a hotel room, you must do it in
English! As a matter of fact, if you want to be an American
citizen, you should have to speak English!
My father and grandfather didn’t die in vain so you can leave
the countries you were born in to come over and disrespect ours.
I think the police should have every right to shoot your sorry self
if you threaten them after they tell you to stop. If you can’t
understand the word “freeze” or “stop” in English, see the
above lines.
I feel much safer letting a machine with no political affiliation
recount votes when needed. I know what the definition of lying is.
I don’t think just because you were not born in this country,
you are qualified for any special loan programs, government
sponsored bank loans or tax breaks, etc., so you can open
a hotel, coffee shop, trinket store, or any other business.
We did not go to the aid of certain foreign countries and risk
our lives in wars to defend their freedoms, so that decades
later they could come over here and tell us our constitution is
a living document; and open to their interpretations.
I don’t hate the rich. I don’t pity the poor. I know pro wrestling is
fake, but so are movies and television. That doesn’t stop you
from watching them.
I think Bill Gates has every right to keep every penny he made and continue
to make more. If it ticks you off, go and invent the next operating system
that’s better, and put your name on the building.
Ask your buddy that invented the Internet to help you.
It doesn’t take a whole village to raise a child right, but it does
take a parent to stand up to the kid; and smack their little behinds
when necessary, and say “NO!”
“I think tattoos and piercing are fine if you want them, but please
don’t pretend they are a political statement. And, please, stay
home until that new lip ring heals. I don’t want to look at your ugly
infected mouth as you serve me French fries!
I am sick of “Political Correctness.” I know a lot of black people,
and not a single one of them was born in Africa; so how can they
be “African-Americans”? Besides, Africa is a continent. I don’t go around
saying I am a European-American because my great,
great, great, great, great, great grandfather was from Europe.
I am proud to be from America and nowhere else.
And if you don’t like my point of view, tough.
( Andy Rooney )
And your squacking about a warden inspecting your live well ? Geesh !!! Lighten up and enjoy everything our great country has to offer. There has been a serious mountain made out of this small mole hill..
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
