Wikipedia…really. You are killing me, Skinnee. Try using wikipedia in any professional environment or academic environment, and you will get BLOWN out of the water–epic fail. Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source for anything including discussions. It is not even good enough for wiping your butt. It is very funny though. Thanks for the laugh!
2012 Skeeter ZX22 Bay
Yamaha 250 hp SHO
Minnkota Riptide 101
Worst argument I have ever heard especially after you sent me a link from the internet yourself. Just so you know, just because something is from Wikipedia does not mean it's not true. I think you are a victim of the "If it's on Wikipedia, it must not be true" fallacy...
Skinnee, you can’t be serious. The internet is a great source for information and for authoritative sources. Wikipedia is NOT one of them. It is Not accepted in professional environments–ever. It is not accepted in academic environments–ever. It is a good place to point you to a valid source in order to evaluate another source for worthiness but not to support a position. Standard college 101 stuff, man. It does not matter if Wikipedia is right or not. Wikipedia is an open source
Why does it matter as long as I have rights in the land? And I’ve already weighed in that proposed bill in this thread, I think. It’s a waste of ink as written. Degenerate doggers will bust their mutts through the boundaries on 750 acres or 7 acres. It’s not the size of the property that matters, it’s the doggers themselves. As long as their refrain is “bo, my dog can’t read, bo,” there’s no dealing with them. Hell, even Skinneej, who seems like a reasonable fella, is advancing that argument in this very thread!!! To hell with that. I’ll tell you what, doggers, either teach your dogs to read or pay a fine of $5000 per dog that crosses the line (first offense) or go to jail for 30 days for each subsequent offense. I’ll bet your dogs would “learn to read” real f’ing quick like…
The first rule of fight club is…
I guess it doesn’t really matter, Im just trying to figure you out before I pass judgment. But from your other responses I can tell your probably super fun to be around.
Skinnee, you can’t be serious. The internet is a great source for information and for authoritative sources. Wikipedia is NOT one of them. It is Not accepted in professional environments–ever. It is not accepted in academic environments–ever. It is a good place to point you to a valid source in order to evaluate another source for worthiness but not to support a position. Standard college 101 stuff, man. It does not matter if Wikipedia is right or not. Wikipedia is an open source where anyone can add anything to it…and, presto, it is a nonvalid source. You are starting to look like you have no formal education. Anyone with even a little bit of college education knows wikipedia is unacceptable. But, if you want to use it to support your position…you go right ahead. I’m not buying. Your response is laughable at best.
2012 Skeeter ZX22 Bay
Yamaha 250 hp SHO
Minnkota Riptide 101
That's funny... Harvard says that Wikipedia is perfect for stuff like this:
“There’s nothing more convenient than Wikipedia if you’re looking for some quick information, and when the stakes are low (you need a piece of information to settle a bet with your roommate, or you want to get a basic sense of what something means before starting more in-depth research), you may get what you need from Wikipedia. In fact, some instructors may advise their students to read entries for scientific concepts on Wikipedia as a way to begin understanding those concepts.”
As to your first point, you are wrong. Under the brick scenario, it’s not murder but there are repercussions, perhaps criminal if reckless, but most definitely civil.
Look what you JUST SAID… “IF”… You gave a conditional… So, suddenly you care about intent… But with “doggers” you don’t care about intent (because it’s your land and you are the victim - i.e. “It’s all about ME!!!”). Surely you can see that you are pinned in a corner if you want to remain consistent…
quote:
What penalty does the dogger face for his hounds invading someone else's property? None that I'm aware of.
Have you tried civil action? Again, I SUPPORT fines and civil repercussion… I do not support the loss of hunting privileges or jail time UNLESS THEY ARE FOUND TO BE INTENTIONAL…
quote:
My proposed penalties are harsh, but the point I'm trying to prove is that the incentives need to change. The doggers need sufficient incentive to prevent their hounds from escaping property they have permission to be on. Right now, they do it with impunity.
Trust me, $425 per dog (I think that’s the max fine nowadays for most game violations) is PLENTY of incentive… 10 dogs on your land is $4k. That’s something “doggers”
And I basically just told you that except I’m not buying your source or your arguement on rights or sources. Here is a picture for you:
I particuarily like the first part that clearly states, “Name of active privilege” and the last part in bold RED that clearly states, “END OF PRIVILEGES LIST.”
2012 Skeeter ZX22 Bay
Yamaha 250 hp SHO
Minnkota Riptide 101
Why does it matter as long as I have rights in the land? And I’ve already weighed in that proposed bill in this thread, I think. It’s a waste of ink as written. Degenerate doggers will bust their mutts through the boundaries on 750 acres or 7 acres. It’s not the size of the property that matters, it’s the doggers themselves. As long as their refrain is “bo, my dog can’t read, bo,” there’s no dealing with them. Hell, even Skinneej, who seems like a reasonable fella, is advancing that argument in this very thread!!! To hell with that. I’ll tell you what, doggers, either teach your dogs to read or pay a fine of $5000 per dog that crosses the line (first offense) or go to jail for 30 days for each subsequent offense. I’ll bet your dogs would “learn to read” real f’ing quick like…
The first rule of fight club is…
I guess it doesn’t really matter, Im just trying to figure you out before I pass judgment. But from your other responses I can tell your probably super fun to be around.
Well, since you posed the question, you tell me what you’re trying to figure out about me or anyone else based
I particuarily like the first part that clearly states, “Name of active privilege” and the last part in bold RED that clearly states, “END OF PRIVILEGES LIST.”
Maybe you should have checked out Wikipedia since your wallet didn't do you justice:
The traditions of hunting and fishing are valuable parts of the state’s heritage, important for conservation, and a protected means of managing nonthreatened wildlife. The citizens of this State have the right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife traditionally pursued, subject to laws and regulations promoting sound wildlife conservation and management as prescribed by the General Assembly. Nothing in this section shall be construed to abrogate any private property rights, existing state laws or regulations, or the state’s sovereignty over its natural resources."
I particularly like the part where it says “The citizens of this State have the right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife”
Unfortunately, it’s not in red, but I hope you still find credibility in this old black and white state constitution…
I particuarily like the first part that clearly states, “Name of active privilege” and the last part in bold RED that clearly states, “END OF PRIVILEGES LIST.”
Maybe you should have checked out Wikipedia since your wallet didn't do you justice:
The traditions of hunting and fishing are valuable parts of the state’s heritage, important for conservation, and a protected means of managing nonthreatened wildlife. The citizens of this State have the right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife traditionally pursued, subject to laws and regulations promoting sound wildlife conservation and management as prescribed by the General Assembly. Nothing in this section shall be construed to abrogate any private property rights, existing state laws or regulations, or the state’s sovereignty over its natural resources."
I particularly like the part where it says “The citizens of this State have the right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife”
Unfortunately, it’s not in red, but I hope you still find credibility in this old black and white state constitution…
We have already been through this one Skinnee. Not going to explain it to you again.
2012 Skeeter ZX22 Bay
Yamaha 250 hp SHO
Minnkota Riptide 101
I bet your fun to be around solely from the fact of your current tone to a few folks on this forum Belittling people for running rogue is one thing, but these boys on here don’t seem to do that. And to tell the truth, I’d rather deal with my current situation of a dog or 2 running on me every few weeks than have to deal with a 10 acre plantation owner from the city who has big ideas and wants to change the world.
Getting back on topic, I have thought long and hard about this 8 deer deal You let this get passed and it will lay the ground work for more regulations, which we don’t need. Don’t think for a second that once a tag system and bag limits are in place that they wont be reduced further in the future. And go ahead and push to ban dog hunting fellas, I haven’t hunted deer with dogs in 8 years, and Im well aware of the issues with rogues. But guess what happens next? They come after your corn piles, then your high powered rifles, next thing you know you better be able to shoot a bow or you wont be able to hunt. A bunch of hunters fighting amongst themselves will be the downfall of us all.
It’s not a matter of making regulations and/or limits based on what hunters need. Regualtions and limits are put in place to manage the resource and its needs. If managing the resource properly doesn’t make some hunters happy, tough. Without a properly managed resource, NO HUNTERS get to enjoy the pursuit of said resource. The US tried that before and nearly wiped the whitetail deer off of the planet in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s.
And as far as “coming after your corn piles,” I’m pretty sure that just recently (within the last two years) baiting was made legal throughout the state.
Sout Carolina is the most liberal state, with regards to hunting regulations (or lack thereof), in the country. But I guess when people are convenced the world is out to get them and their vision is obscured by the aluminum foil-lined armadillo shell they’re wearing on their heads, rational unselfish thought is a foreign language.
Earn it everyday
If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.
Getting back on topic, I have thought long and hard about this 8 deer deal You let this get passed and it will lay the ground work for more regulations, which we don’t need. Don’t think for a second that once a tag system and bag limits are in place that they wont be reduced further in the future. And go ahead and push to ban dog hunting fellas, I haven’t hunted deer with dogs in 8 years, and Im well aware of the issues with rogues. But guess what happens next? They come after your corn piles, then your high powered rifles, next thing you know you better be able to shoot a bow or you wont be able to hunt. A bunch of hunters fighting amongst themselves will be the downfall of us all.
It’s not a matter of making regulations and/or limits based on what hunters need. Regualtions and limits are put in place to manage the resource and its needs. If managing the resource properly doesn’t make some hunters happy, tough. Without a properly managed resource, NO HUNTERS get to enjoy the pursuit of said resource. The US tried that before and nearly wiped the whitetail deer off of the planet in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s.
And as far as “coming after your corn piles,” I’m pretty sure that just recently (within the last two years) baiting was made legal throughout the state.
Sout Carolina is the most liberal state, with regards to hunting regulations (or lack thereof), in the country. But I guess when people are convenced the world is out to get them and their vision is obscured by the aluminum foil-lined armadillo shell they’re wearing on their heads, rational unselfish thought is a foreign language.
Getting back on topic, I have thought long and hard about this 8 deer deal You let this get passed and it will lay the ground work for more regulations, which we don’t need. Don’t think for a second that once a tag system and bag limits are in place that they wont be reduced further in the future. And go ahead and push to ban dog hunting fellas, I haven’t hunted deer with dogs in 8 years, and Im well aware of the issues with rogues. But guess what happens next? They come after your corn piles, then your high powered rifles, next thing you know you better be able to shoot a bow or you wont be able to hunt. A bunch of hunters fighting amongst themselves will be the downfall of us all.
It’s not a matter of making regulations and/or limits based on what hunters need. Regualtions and limits are put in place to manage the resource and its needs. If managing the resource properly doesn’t make some hunters happy, tough. Without a properly managed resource, NO HUNTERS get to enjoy the pursuit of said resource. The US tried that before and nearly wiped the whitetail deer off of the planet in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s.
And as far as “coming after your corn piles,” I’m pretty sure that just recently (within the last two years) baiting was made legal throughout the state.
Sout Carolina is the most liberal state, with regards to hunting regulations (or lack thereof), in the country. But I guess when people are convenced the world is out to get them and their vision is obscured by the aluminum foil-lined armadillo shell they’re wearing on their heads, rational unselfish thought is a foreign language.
Goldfinches bill needs to mirror Georgias law where dogs have numbers or chips that mark them. First offense trespassing dog is caught a fine is payed, third offense dog hunting rights are taken away from club.
Don't need to lose hunting rights... A fine per violation, per dog, would bring in a lot of cash to the state :smiley:. Most dog hunters I know would give up dog hunting after a few fines if they were significant.
What’s more significant than losing your hunting priviledges for hunting violations? The DNR could always use more funding but a fine will not be more of an attention getter than suspending one’s hunting priviledges. Just like with breaking any law…a fine stings but losing your freedoms and being tossed in jail is a bit more sobering. Play by the rules and you don’t have to worry about either. Personally I believe if you make an example out of a few, the masses will pay attention. In my opinion, a fine just isn’t significant enough.
Earn it everyday
If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.
Contrary to what you may believe, it is very difficult to teach a dog not
I particuarily like the first part that clearly states, “Name of active privilege” and the last part in bold RED that clearly states, “END OF PRIVILEGES LIST.”
Maybe you should have checked out Wikipedia since your wallet didn't do you justice:
The traditions of hunting and fishing are valuable parts of the state’s heritage, important for conservation, and a protected means of managing nonthreatened wildlife. The citizens of this State have the right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife traditionally pursued, subject to laws and regulations promoting sound wildlife conservation and management as prescribed by the General Assembly. Nothing in this section shall be construed to abrogate any private property rights, existing state laws or regulations, or the state’s sovereignty over its natural resources."
I particularly like the part where it says “The citizens of this State have the right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife”
Unfortunately, it’s not in red, but I hope you still find credibility in this old black and white state constitution…
We have already been through this one Skinnee. Not going to explain it to you again.
2012 Skeeter ZX22 Bay
Yamaha 250 hp SHO
Minnkota Riptide 101
I already asked you to clarify your question. If you don't clarify it, I still don't understand. I would like to answer your question, but you haven't asked one that I understand yet. All I know is you have an "injun question"...
This whole right/privilege sideshow is such red herring. Your “right” to drive deer with dogs ends at my property line.
The first rule of fight club is…
It's not a red herring... It is a digression... A digression is an unintentional consequence of getting off topic for a brief period of time. A red herring is a mechanism used to lead readers to a false conclusion.
