"Harvest thingy" proof at roadblocks

[Edwardo]

Feel free to print and keep this with you. I understand game wardens are conducting road blocks and asking motorists driving on public roads for proof of "harvest thingies" these days.

Don't ask me how they can prove in a court of law that you have been hunting deer or turkey just by looking at you and your possessions on a public road. Driving down a public road does not fit the definition of hunting, btw. Hunting from a public road is a crime.

[bobwhite]

Are you serious? ??

[Edwardo]

Yes.

Gunter Guy confirmed to me that these checkpoints on public roads had his blessings at the March CAB meeting when I talked to him. One was conducted in Macon County this past Saturday.

Be careful what you ask for or remain silent for. You may get it no matter how ridiculous it is.

Four people officially commented on the proposed rule when it was being implemented. There are about a half million hunters in Alabama.

[bobwhite]

Thanks for the heads up....I had no idea.

[Tru-Talker]

So according to them..... anyone traveling down the road is considered a hunter? BS... Guess they'll be a showdown in court if they try and ticket me over that.... Cuz I ain't gonna show them chit except a driver license and an insurance card........ What a crock.....

[bobwhite]

So according to them..... anyone traveling down the road is considered a hunter? BS... Guess they'll be a showdown in court if they try and ticket me over that.... Cuz I ain't gonna show them chit except a driver license and an insurance card........ What a crock.....

I agree....drivers license and proof of insurance is all I'm showing him.

[Morris]

So according to them..... anyone traveling down the road is considered a hunter? BS... Guess they'll be a showdown in court if they try and ticket me over that.... Cuz I ain't gonna show them chit except a driver license and an insurance card........ What a crock.....

Be sure to hand them your BC/BS card

[PEA_RIDGE]

So according to them..... anyone traveling down the road is considered a hunter? BS... Guess they'll be a showdown in court if they try and ticket me over that.... Cuz I ain't gonna show them chit except a driver license and an insurance card........ What a crock.....

Be sure to hand them your BC/BS card

[Tru-Talker]

So according to them..... anyone traveling down the road is considered a hunter? BS... Guess they'll be a showdown in court if they try and ticket me over that.... Cuz I ain't gonna show them chit except a driver license and an insurance card........ What a crock.....

Be sure to hand them your BC/BS card

You sure that won't help? It helped the first time!!!

[Edwardo]

Here's the general checkpoint plan for the DCNR. They haven't honored my request for the specific plan for the Macon County checkpoint on December 10, but I'm still working on getting that public document.

Here's the link to the four page collection on Scribd:

https://www.scribd.com/collections/1788 ... point-plan

[Reaper]

So according to them..... anyone traveling down the road is considered a hunter? BS... Guess they'll be a showdown in court if they try and ticket me over that.... Cuz I ain't gonna show them chit except a driver license and an insurance card........ What a crock.....

I agree....drivers license and proof of insurance is all I'm showing him.

Same here.

[PEA_RIDGE]

220-2-.12 Game Bag, Hunting Coat, Etc. Shall Be Open To
Inspection. Pursuant to the Code of Ala. 1975, Sections 9-11-85
and 9-11-259, which provided in effect that all game birds,
animals or fish taken or killed in this State must at all times
be carried or transported openly and that all game birds,
animals or fish carried or transported in an illegal manner
shall be confiscated and disposed of under regulations by the
Commissioner; any live box, holding box, game bag, hunting coat,
camping equipment, or like receptacles, or any automobile or
boat used for the carrying or holding of any fish, game birds,
or game animals or any gun or fishing tackle used in hunting or
fishing shall be subject to inspection by officers of the
Department of Conservation and Natural Resources at all times

upon proper identification of said officer. Any person who
refuses to allow inspection of the above named articles shall be
in violation of this regulation and shall be punished as
provided by law.
Author: John W. Hodnett
Statutory Authority: Code of Ala. 1975, §§9-2-7, 9-2-12,
9-11-85, 9-11-259.
History: Filed September 30, 1982. Amended:
September 30, 1985. November 5, 1985.

[Edwardo]

That rule is unconstitutional under the opinions of the US Supreme Court (see Terry v Ohio and cases that follow). I filed a request for a declaratory ruling from the DCNR this past summer and their answer was that I had not been substantially affected by the rule so I had no grounds to contest it.

The DCNR is forbidden from expanding laws by their rules into something that is not in the law. Here's what the law says that was passed by our legislature thru a bill that went through the legislative process outlined in our state constitution and in compliance of the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution:

Section 9-11-259

Game, birds or animals to be transported openly; confiscation, etc., of game, birds or animals transported or taken illegally.

All game, birds or animals taken or killed in this state must at all times be carried or transported openly, and failure to do so shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than $10.00 nor more than $25.00. All game, birds or animals carried or transported in an illegal manner or taken or killed illegally shall be confiscated and disposed of under regulations promulgated by the Commissioner of Conservation and Natural Resources.

(Acts 1935, No. 383, p. 813, § 24; Code 1940, T. 8, §107.)

The DCNR rule essentially defines a new crime of refusing to surrender your right to be free from unreasonable and unwarranted search and seizure when you go hunting. That is an unconstitutional exercise of legislative powers and a violation of the commissioner's oath of office.

[Tru-Talker]

That rule is unconstitutional under the opinions of the US Supreme Court. I filed a request for a declaratory ruling from the DCNR this past summer and their answer was that I had not been substantially affected by the rule so I had no grounds to contest it.

The DCNR is forbidden from expanding laws by their rules into something that is not in the law. Here's what the law says that was passed by our legislature thru a bill that went through the legislative process outlined in our state constitution and in compliance of the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution:

Section 9-11-259

Game, birds or animals to be transported openly; confiscation, etc., of game, birds or animals transported or taken illegally.

All game, birds or animals taken or killed in this state must at all times be carried or transported openly, and failure to do so shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than $10.00 nor more than $25.00. All game, birds or animals carried or transported in an illegal manner or taken or killed illegally shall be confiscated and disposed of under regulations promulgated by the Commissioner of Conservation and Natural Resources.

(Acts 1935, No. 383, p. 813, § 24; Code 1940, T. 8, §107.)

The DCNR rule essentially defines a new crime of refusing to surrender your right to be free from unreasonable and unwarranted search and seizure when you go hunting. That is an unconstitutional exercise of legislative powers and a violation of the commissioner's oath of office.

So what happens if you take them to court over this if you're treated this way? The judge is gonna side with them most likely.... Is it not a losing battle? Or is it gonna depend on how good your attorney is?

[Edwardo]

This is what has happened already:

Code: Select all

Because the primary purpose of the Indianapolis checkpoint program is ultimately indistinguishable from the general interest in crime control, the checkpoints violate the Fourth Amendment. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is, accordingly, affirmed.

It is so ordered.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case ... as_sdt=203


Here's some Alabama Supreme Court case law on the matter of the legality of checkpoints:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case ... s_sdt=4,64

[Tru-Talker]

In other words.... It's gonna cost you alot more money to fight it.... rather than just go ahead and allow it... That's what they're banking on.....They're gonna keep rolling em out there until someone challenges it....

[Edwardo]

I hope somebody rich enough does challenge it, and when they win they prove that the commissioner violated his oath of office. That's first degree perjury with a class C felony penalty.

[Tru-Talker]

Why are there no checks and balances? They're allowed to break the law at will with no consequence unless a citizen challenges it? Seems like the lawmakers need to get their head outta their ass.....