As a downside it pretty much screws your game up and much of your bear won't be edible. But it is still better than be eaten yourself.
Posted on 04/10/2015 3:59:47 AM PDT by marktwain
When’s judge and bureaucrat season?
Anyone know the bag limit?
Did he plead guilty?
One is not denied a trial by jury.
Germany had the ‘problem-bear’ episode around 2006. This was the first bear reported within Germany in around 150 years. For six weeks, he was an acceptable bear, then farmers started to complain over him killing some sheep and chickens. Then he got problem-bear status where a bunch of Finn bear hunters were hired to tranquilize and recover him. The brief four weeks of Finn hunting was worthy of a 300-page book. In the end, the Finns gave up and the Bavarian government approved full-scale hunting of the bear, and about eight hours into the hunt...he was found and killed.
“What is clear to anyone that studies bear problems, is that these were problem bears, and would have to be dealt with sooner or later.”
What is clear to any bureaucrat who studies armed patriot problems, is that these were problem patriots, and would have to be dealt with sooner or later.
Heck I wold have to think twice about going after one with the Ruger Redhawk .44.
Sounds like a problem judge, to me.
As a downside it pretty much screws your game up and much of your bear won't be edible. But it is still better than be eaten yourself.
Was his house bear proof?
Sixth Amendment violation?
I really wish someone would explain this case. Like you, I thought that a trial by jury was always citizen's right.
Could it be that he broke a "regulation" and not a "law"? It shouldn't make any difference, but in today's America...
Shoot, shovel and shut up.
It is not surprising to kill a 150 pound cub with a .22
Bingo.
First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Sixth Amendment: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed . . .
Several florists and bakers would have said one is not denied the right to the free exercise of religion. This is not the United States of our youth. The "Living Constitution" means what liberals want it to mean, and some animals are more equal than others in this brave new world.
One would think so, given the plain language of the sixth amendment. But SCOTUS has construed the word "all" to mean "all with a possible penalty greater than 6 months."
Doesn’t sound credible to me either. Sounds like he just decided to kill himself some bears.
12 months and $65k...
Thank you for the education. I thought the six month rule only applied to the states, and not all used it.
Now that you mention it, they can also pile as many “six month charges” into the trial as they want, correct?
So in this case, the fellow could go to jail for as much as a year and a half, and be fined $75,000. Is that correct?
All for doing something that his neighbors likely applauded him for.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.