i guess that makes you Robin Hood or something , guess what ! If i walk into the local Piggly Wiggly higher than a kite and steal $500 worth of groceries and donate them to the food bank , im still a dope head and a thief ! still trying to figure out how you did the right thing !Mapel Valley Kennels LLC. wrote:Well the story is fact, I have always or should i say use to hunt hard enuff to kill 300-400 rabbits a year.Every year.I got tons of neat stories about how it used to be so sorry if i offended anyone, just sheding some humor on joeys ass chewing.Btw dog after i made it home i drank a pint of blackberry brandy called a chick over to take off my boot smoked another fattie and delivered all my rabbits cleaned of course to all my old buddies that love em. So even though i was stoned and drunk with a shattered ankle that still hurts at times i managed to do the right thang .Feed people That were to old to fend for themselves. Call it what you my my friend .I dont regret much when it came to hunting. I also made it a point one crisp sunday morning to go to the state capital in frankfort thats right i pulled right up to the big house let a dog loose and put her in the floral garden and kill me a rabbit, Pretty ball-see move but i laughed the whole way home.dog wrote:Maple Valley , i hope that story is in fact just a story , there was so many things wrong with that story that i cant believe you would tell it ! if it is true then all i can say is you got exactly what you deserved , actually you got off easy , you deserved more ! thats about all i have to say !
What is wrong with people?
Moderators: Pike Ridge Beagles, Aaron Bartlett
Re: What is wrong with people?
Re: What is wrong with people?
gwyoung wrote:Mo. beagler 5000. I believe shooting at a rabbit that another man's dogs are pursuing is disrupting the hunt and if intentionally done would fall under the harrassment paragraph that you printed. If not this person could just follow you around all day and do this. I think this is exactly the sort of thing that the law is attempting to punish. however,I would think if it was a one time thing and the man didn't say it was his intention to disrupt he would probably suffer no ill consequences. if he continued to do this his plea of ignorance would fall on deaf ears and he would be prosecuted. The man in my opinion ( though probably ignorant) is in definite violation as outlined in the part of the law you posted. I still would have had a nice conversation with him and invited his party to hunt, but he was in violation of the law as I understand what you have printed.
Re: What is wrong with people?
thats exactly the point i am trying to make , the disrepect is only going to get worse , if thats possible , we as hunters need to make sure it doesnt , if we dont speek up who is going too , i only get a couple days a week to hunt and have limited spots to do it in , if i pack up and leave everytime something like this happens then i dont hunt and thats not going to happen , i have been reading these boards for a long time now and i hear all of the crying that goes on on these sites about some of the stupidest things and yet people think this is ok , let me ask this , would it be any different if this same individual walked along beside you all day and jumpshot at every rabbit you or your dogs jumped ? unless he actually shoots a dog or a person then he has done nothing illegal , how many would like that , there are alot of things that are not illeagal but that dont make them right or smart , IMO what that hunter done is hunter harrasment ! he impeaded joey from pursueing game , plain and simple . i just recently read on here a topic about someone going back and hunting a spot that someone took them too on public land and couldnt count how many people said that it was wrong and alot said a butt woopin was in order , go figure , i think the biggest reason this is getting so much attention is because who it was , jealousy will get you nowheregwyoung wrote:bunnyblaster, No you have it wrong, I don't believe the primary reason to not go off on someone is because of the fear of getting shot, I think the primary reason for it is to be civil, realize that others may be making an honest mistake , or simply ignorant. I think all I have said backs this up. Eventhough getting shot dead is a very good reason as Well, and I simply explained to bigdog what is very apparent in this world today, there are those out there that will shoot you over less than a rabbit, I think that is clear to all of us, and very hard to muddy for most of us.
Bigdog, I hope I don't have any to report, but you will have to admit the more confrontations we have in the field while rabbit hunting will increase the likely hood of it.
Re: What is wrong with people?
i just went back and read the locked topic of " not an anti shooter , But ! and was not suprised to see that alot of the ones that think Joey was wrong are the same ones that had a problem with shooting a tailgate full of rabbits , imagine that !
Re: What is wrong with people?
dog, it is your opinion that this is getting so much attention , because of who it was. I respect your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it. Speaking for myself only, so that you can take me out of the crowd ( if there is one) that thinks it is because of who joeyman is. I must be missing something, Did he poision the well at the orphanage or something , For as long as I have been on this board I have never saw anything out of or about joeyman that I thought he should be beat up about. seemed like an ordinary fellow to me. He asked for opinions he got them, I don't agree with what he done in the field on this particular occassion, and I don't think anyone wants to hang him over it. I think you are wrong on the reason of so much interest. I believe it is because it is the most interesting topic on the board right now, and I think there is a genuine concern by a lot of people who realize we, as hunters are coming under more scrutiny everday by those who would like to take our rights away and those among us who draw negative attention to the sport draw negative attention to all of us.
Re: What is wrong with people?
and if this type of disrespect continues in the outdoors and the true hunters get tired of it and walk away because they are tired of this type of crap happening and ruining their day afield the woods and fields will be overun with these people , how is that going to help , and if you think it aint going to happen you are a fool ! the numbers dont lie , i know a few personally that have walked away from it because of the dog eat dog attitude , Me ! Me ! Me ! , screw everybody else , disrepect that is going on right now ! when that happens the disrepectful are the only ones left and then what happens , oh and obviously you didnt read that topic because even though no names were mentioned it was quite clear who they were refering too
Re: What is wrong with people?
dog, I went back and read some of the posts on the topic, I mostly read the posts by the folks who I believe have dis-agreed maybe a little more than others about joeyman's actions in the field recently. I didn't see where they were the first to bring joeyman's name up , as a matter of fact once his name was brought up they said basically more power to him, kill all he wants, things along that line. They were addressing the original question and speaking of what they personally do. unless I missed something I didn't see anyone putting Joeyman down. Now this thread is there for everyone to see and you can go back and look at the responses yourselves. The thread is titled Not an anti-hunter but," One thing for sure is you won't find one of my posts there.Also, just because someone disagrees with joeyman or anyone else about a certain topic, how exactly does that dis-qualify them from ever disagreeing with him on another?
Re: What is wrong with people?
Speaking of respect, experience, wisdom, or whatever. I think it may be interesting if the folks who agree with what joeyman did would state their age and those who disagree would state their age. I think the results would be interesting. What do you think?
Re: What is wrong with people?
It looks like Mo. beagler 5000 has done some homework and is partially correct in his accessment. I would actually cite that as a violation of the Missouri Code, specifically 578.151.2. This specifically states that it is a CRIME for any person to intentionally interfere with another in in the taking of wildlife when they are lawfully hunting, fishing or trapping.
Still got many with questions or still on the idea that Joeyman's party was interferred with. I'm still waiting on Joeyman or someone else at the party to explain if they were on public or private property as that will also have an impact on whether any of the parties were lawfully hunting.
In order for someone to be legally wrong one must violate a written law, rule or regulation. As we have read in the case law of Pierson Vs. Post, wild game animals being in the state of fair chace are still fair game belonging to the citizens of the state. Possession is only evidenced when that wild game animal is killed. Once killed it becomes the possession of the one who killed it. In the case of Joeyman vs. the Shooter they were both within the confines of the law if they both had permission or were on public property. One can NOT be wrong or in violation if they are following the word of law. The rabbit that Joeyman's dogs were running was owned by the citizens of the state of missouri and BOTh parties were hunting for that very same game. The question at hand is how can you lose somnething you don't have possession of or own. At the time of the dogs pursuit the game is open for anyone to kill and take possession of NOT just Joeyman and his party because their dogs were chasing it. With both being in lawful pursuit of rabbits it just so happened that Joeyman's dogs chased one to where the other legal hunter could get a shot at it, which he took. Did his shot interfere with the lawful hunting of the parties? NO, both parties could have continued to hunt that rabbit or another rabbit BUT Joeyman made another decision to accost the other hunter and theyby running him off from his legal pursit of that very rabbit or any other rabbit. Being first at a spot does not give one sole legal right to that spot or the wild game animals within that spot UNLESS THEY OWN that property. There can be no harm suffered if acting within the word of law which the shooter did although many want to think the ethics or unwritten rules of hunting apply BUT they have no force or effect on waht is or isn't lawful to do. In this case the shooter and his kids were hunting rabbits and in the course of lawfully doing so a shot was fired at such game. There was no intention of the shooter to impede or stop joeyman or his party from taking wildlife but rather the shooter was trying to do exactly what he was there to do just as Joeyman and his party was. Now, the mere fact that Joeyman's party were using dogs also has no bearing on this instant case as fair game is fair game available to be possessed by the killer of it. That is the only time that wild game is possessed in most states. There was never any other intent of the other party other than to harvest some rabbits as that was their sole reason for being out in the filed. there was however an intent by joeyman to disrupt, impede and interfere with the shooters ability to shoot at the rabbit his dogs were running. if Joeyman was so concerned about the welfare of his hunting party and his dogs he had ample time to make the decision to protect them and he could have gathered up his dogs, hunting buddies and moved to a different spot. Facts are even after a shot was fired he didn't protect his dogs or his hunting party as he professed to be his only concern but rather he made the decision to intentionally and blatantly impede the shooter from shooting that rabbit his dogs and hunting party were after. The shooter party violated no rule of law although I will admit he did violate the unwritten rules of hunting BUt those rules hold NO force or effect of law. Neither does ethical conduct unless it is conduct that commits a crime which Joeyman's conduct did. I don't think there is any need to explain again as at this point if you still don't understand that the written word of law trumps anything and everything else you may think or feel. I was once told by an administrative law judge that if i didn't have it in writting then I didn't have it as all enforceable laws, rules and or regulations are put in writting.
Interference with lawful hunting, fishing or trapping in the first degree--penalty.
578.151. 1. It is the intent of the general assembly of the state of Missouri to recognize that all persons shall have the right to hunt, fish and trap in this state in accordance with law and the rules and regulations made by the commission as established in article IV of the Constitution of Missouri.
2. Any person who intentionally interferes with the lawful taking of wildlife by another is guilty of the crime of interference with lawful hunting, fishing or trapping in the first degree.
3. It shall be considered a violation of this section to intentionally harass, drive, or disturb any game animal or fish for the purpose of disrupting lawful hunting, fishing or trapping.
4. Interference with lawful hunting, fishing or trapping in the first degree is a class A misdemeanor.
Still got many with questions or still on the idea that Joeyman's party was interferred with. I'm still waiting on Joeyman or someone else at the party to explain if they were on public or private property as that will also have an impact on whether any of the parties were lawfully hunting.
In order for someone to be legally wrong one must violate a written law, rule or regulation. As we have read in the case law of Pierson Vs. Post, wild game animals being in the state of fair chace are still fair game belonging to the citizens of the state. Possession is only evidenced when that wild game animal is killed. Once killed it becomes the possession of the one who killed it. In the case of Joeyman vs. the Shooter they were both within the confines of the law if they both had permission or were on public property. One can NOT be wrong or in violation if they are following the word of law. The rabbit that Joeyman's dogs were running was owned by the citizens of the state of missouri and BOTh parties were hunting for that very same game. The question at hand is how can you lose somnething you don't have possession of or own. At the time of the dogs pursuit the game is open for anyone to kill and take possession of NOT just Joeyman and his party because their dogs were chasing it. With both being in lawful pursuit of rabbits it just so happened that Joeyman's dogs chased one to where the other legal hunter could get a shot at it, which he took. Did his shot interfere with the lawful hunting of the parties? NO, both parties could have continued to hunt that rabbit or another rabbit BUT Joeyman made another decision to accost the other hunter and theyby running him off from his legal pursit of that very rabbit or any other rabbit. Being first at a spot does not give one sole legal right to that spot or the wild game animals within that spot UNLESS THEY OWN that property. There can be no harm suffered if acting within the word of law which the shooter did although many want to think the ethics or unwritten rules of hunting apply BUT they have no force or effect on waht is or isn't lawful to do. In this case the shooter and his kids were hunting rabbits and in the course of lawfully doing so a shot was fired at such game. There was no intention of the shooter to impede or stop joeyman or his party from taking wildlife but rather the shooter was trying to do exactly what he was there to do just as Joeyman and his party was. Now, the mere fact that Joeyman's party were using dogs also has no bearing on this instant case as fair game is fair game available to be possessed by the killer of it. That is the only time that wild game is possessed in most states. There was never any other intent of the other party other than to harvest some rabbits as that was their sole reason for being out in the filed. there was however an intent by joeyman to disrupt, impede and interfere with the shooters ability to shoot at the rabbit his dogs were running. if Joeyman was so concerned about the welfare of his hunting party and his dogs he had ample time to make the decision to protect them and he could have gathered up his dogs, hunting buddies and moved to a different spot. Facts are even after a shot was fired he didn't protect his dogs or his hunting party as he professed to be his only concern but rather he made the decision to intentionally and blatantly impede the shooter from shooting that rabbit his dogs and hunting party were after. The shooter party violated no rule of law although I will admit he did violate the unwritten rules of hunting BUt those rules hold NO force or effect of law. Neither does ethical conduct unless it is conduct that commits a crime which Joeyman's conduct did. I don't think there is any need to explain again as at this point if you still don't understand that the written word of law trumps anything and everything else you may think or feel. I was once told by an administrative law judge that if i didn't have it in writting then I didn't have it as all enforceable laws, rules and or regulations are put in writting.
Interference with lawful hunting, fishing or trapping in the first degree--penalty.
578.151. 1. It is the intent of the general assembly of the state of Missouri to recognize that all persons shall have the right to hunt, fish and trap in this state in accordance with law and the rules and regulations made by the commission as established in article IV of the Constitution of Missouri.
2. Any person who intentionally interferes with the lawful taking of wildlife by another is guilty of the crime of interference with lawful hunting, fishing or trapping in the first degree.
3. It shall be considered a violation of this section to intentionally harass, drive, or disturb any game animal or fish for the purpose of disrupting lawful hunting, fishing or trapping.
4. Interference with lawful hunting, fishing or trapping in the first degree is a class A misdemeanor.
Re: What is wrong with people?
...
Last edited by Joeyman on Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:10 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Missouri rabbits running for their lives!!!!
Give us a like on FACEBOOK search for Track Em Down Kennels
Give us a like on FACEBOOK search for Track Em Down Kennels
Re: What is wrong with people?
The first bar you come to....find a Harley parked outside (preferably a 1%er bike)....sit on it till the owner arrives....let me know how that works out for ya. 
After your able to talk again you can let everyone know you wasn't breaking any laws.....
It is about respect for personal property and space, people are idiots anymore....who would horn in on another mans chase, that my friend deserves an azz whooping.
Now, had they come over and struck up conversation before setting up for a shot....well, I would say Joey would agree things would have gone differently.
After your able to talk again you can let everyone know you wasn't breaking any laws.....
It is about respect for personal property and space, people are idiots anymore....who would horn in on another mans chase, that my friend deserves an azz whooping.
Now, had they come over and struck up conversation before setting up for a shot....well, I would say Joey would agree things would have gone differently.
Last edited by Ohiohntr on Wed Jan 04, 2012 10:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
FC Green Bay Nemasket Singer
FWR Blue Boy's Lightfoot
FWR Blue Boy's Lightfoot
Re: What is wrong with people?
joeyman, started this thread let's allow him to end it on what I think is a very good note. My last post.
Re: What is wrong with people?
i have not read page 3 thru 12 but i argree with this one.gwyoung wrote:joeyman, started this thread let's allow him to end it on what I think is a very good note. My last post.
-
Mapel Valley Kennels LLC.
- Posts: 3877
- Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:40 pm
- Location: Great State Of Kentucky
Re: What is wrong with people?
Dearest Dog. I did not state that i condone anything even though i merley tried to prove a point. Public land is for all and private is not. I dont think i have ever stole much pecially from a Piggly Wiggly seeing how my best friends Parents owned the joint we did how ever turn the air conditioning quite high in the summer to see the bra less women come in out of the hot sun for a somewhat perverted sense of humor. That however was merly a picture of the man i once was, in which to be honest i am not ashamed or afraid to admit my past life.
I am now grey and older and content rasing kids and hanging out at the house and occasionally going to church, once again it is not how we start its how we finish ......... My only outlet at times is reliving a few glory days with a bunch of chaps i have never met or friends i never get to see and for that i apoligize to no one. Joey guess you handled it a little different than i would have and thats alright, never the less it great to see both sides of the coin .
Robin Da Cradle.
I am now grey and older and content rasing kids and hanging out at the house and occasionally going to church, once again it is not how we start its how we finish
......... My only outlet at times is reliving a few glory days with a bunch of chaps i have never met or friends i never get to see and for that i apoligize to no one. Joey guess you handled it a little different than i would have and thats alright, never the less it great to see both sides of the coin .Robin Da Cradle.
When the moment of truth arrives, the point of preparation has passed.
Old School, Full Throttle ,No Bottle.
Old School, Full Throttle ,No Bottle.
Re: What is wrong with people?
"I am now grey and older and content rasing kids and hanging out at the house and occasionally going to church, once again it is not how we start its how we finish ......... My only outlet at times is reliving a few glory days with a bunch of chaps i have never met or friends i never get to see and for that i apoligize to no one. Joey guess you handled it a little different than i would have and thats alright, never the less it great to see both sides of the coin ."
Right on Maple Valley, right on.
Right on Maple Valley, right on.