Camera law

[Obsessed]

Not talking the federal system, I wouldn't think. Just state level here. Not sure what scenarios concerning state game camera laws would ever become federal cases.

The seatbelt law scenario was a decent comparison, and for you to say not to blame the officers for pulling this unscrupulous tactic just proves my point about the OP. When a law is written in this manner, LEO will abuse it, and you will be treated like a criminal without the initial proof of any crime actually being committed.

Congratulations on harvesting that 200 class buck Jimmy!
Thanks, I've been after him for 3 years now
Nice! Do you run cameras?
Yep, I run a dozen on this 130 acres.
Really?! Do any of them allow remote pic viewing?
Yep, they're all cellular cams.
Well Jimmy, you're under suspicion of remotely viewing pics of that buck within the 24-hour window preceding its harvest. We're confiscating and holding your deer until you're able to prove you didn't illegally view pics remotely.

(Fine or no fine, the initial court date is set 18 months out, and it's going to cost you a minimum of $10k to plead your case for a chance to potentially get your deer back. In these types of scenarios, many people simply choose to cut their losses and not to fight it.)

This shit happens ALL of the time.

 

[Windlooker]

The feds can get involved with state game violations if poached animals are transported across state lines under the Lacey Act. NRs have gotten wrapped up in this law. I’m sure there are other ways the feds and state COs collaborate. I’m not that familiar.

You make a lot of good points. I’d hope the COs would view this cam thing as minuscule, there’s so many other worthy things to pursue. But, if it’s on the books it can be used.

 

[T_Max]

Let’s be honest. If I run cell cams, kill a nice deer and later check the pics and see I got a pic of him that day? All those cams getting pulled and tossed in the creek.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Oct-Lull]

Cell cams are nice but I have never had one put me in a stand based on pictures from that day. Not one time. If I was to choose one item to kill a big mature buck at any given time I would take an enclosed blind on a good foodplot. That kills far more deer than cell cams ever will.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

 

[HWC]

I hear you, however, if charged with a crime associated with a cam pic the burden is always on the government to prove guilt. In fact I’ve seen defense attorneys put on no defense case as the govt failed to prove theirs.

If the law reads one cant possess a cell cam and someone does that’s a no brainer. However if the violation is harvest via pic the govt would have to prove the use was tied to a harvest ie pic time, stand location, time between pic and harvest etc. That would be tough to put together. The burden of proof is never on the accused.

Unfortunately the government doesn't really have to prove anything. At least not in most courthouses. It's all a racket. They know most people aren't going to spend the money on an attorney or take 3 days off of work to go to all of the bogus hearings just to get a case. I fought a case when the group I was hunting with all got tickets for hunting with walkie talkies when they were being used to try finding a wounded deer. I never used one but got a ticket. I took it to court and the officer said he specifically heard my name on over the radio. Than I was able to prove that nobody in the group knew my legal name so he was lying about hearing my name. He doubled down on it. The corrupt judge found me guilty. Total BS money grab. Wasted 2 or 3 days of work to fight that ticket. Not to mention nobody in the group used them hunting even though I think they should be fine to use to organize pushers on when to start a drive. I think it's safer that way. Sorry for the long post but never underestimate the governments ability to get money out of you.