Deer shooting at night?????

It wasn't me!

It's still illegal, and it's taking deer you have no right to take. They're on someone else's land. Hell, you're trespassing too most likely (wouldn't be a good move to poach your own permission, especially because the landowner ain't going to stand up for you). In fact, it's a fairly hefty charge sheet. You're trespassing, with a firearm; offending against the wildlife act by taking game out of season; offending against it again by lamping deer without a section 42 and wouldn't it nullify your firearms cert as well, so you're effectively carrying an unlicensed firearm, having gone beyond its remit? I wouldn't want that law cannon levelled against me anyway. Are there any moves to have deer declared a vermin species? (Albeit with the protection of limited calibres usable)

ivanthehunter

Firstly i wouldn't like to have the long arm of the law breathing down my neck for poaching. I have respect for the law which is born out of a healthy fear of prosecution and possible loss of liberty and rights.
So it is obvious that i don't poach because of the fear of possible prosecution and not because i am concerned as to the alleged ownership of wild animals or any other reason. If the species was threatened by excessive losses due to hunting it would also be morally wrong to hunt them then...
I am not alarmed in the slightest when i hear of illegal hunting when the species in question is out of control, however i am absolutely disgusted to hear of deer be shot with insufficient power either through excessive range and or with underpowered firearms for the range in question..
These problems could easily be solved be government resolve but i suppose they aren't high on the priority list. Possible solutions might be easier access to suitable calibers and an extension of hunt season or a possible allowance of night hunting with lamps while numbers are high.


I hate to think of any animal suffering and i think that the my personal experiences of having killed animals with my bare hands and subsequently having physically felt the life leave their fragile bodies has given me a worldly respect for all life. Ps I'm not just talking about foxes and rabbits!!


Secondly There is no such concept of vermin in Ireland. The wildlife act only refers to animals as unprotected and protected, oddly both of these categories are protected, one is obviously afforded a higher level of protection. I know this because i ask odd questions:D


There might be a move to remove certain species such as muntjic from the protected species list or to extend the scope of unprotected species.
The problems in removing deer from the protected species list is simply that new legislation would be required as when the any species is unprotected it is possibly open to any caliber:eek:

Other lower powered firearms might be sanctioned on smaller species of deer or the possible reintroduction of bow hunting here might open up super long extended hunting seasons which wouldn't have the same problematic physical interactions with other recreational users due to excessive ranges of modern powered firearms verses the lower safer range limitation of a bow hunting. Ireland might follow in the footsteps of Latvia, France or Sweden all of which have re-introduced bow hunting since 2000. Our Celtic cousins in Scotland our currently considering a re-introduction of bow hunting in a bid to introduce long term measures to control deer numbers. ps Bow hunting is hunting with bow and arrow.

Finally. A farmer can at any time of day and night shoot and kill a deer which is causing very serious damage to his property without a license however he must apply for a section 42 within a reasonable time frame.

final thoughts..
Shooting at night should be conducted by only the best marksmen, it is ironically a safer time of the 24 hour period as most people are locked up tightly in their beds but the possibilities of an injured animal running off into the darkness is high..
Skills on tracking of injured animals at night should be second nature to an experienced hunter these being augmented by the addition of a tracking dog.
Night vision aids should be the norm and they would put and end to the endless complaining about search lights pouring over the countryside and people falling into the alarmist trap...

Animals are easily spotted at night and as any farmer will tell you deer usually roam their properties during the hours of darkness so it a perfect time to dispatch problem animals..

There is nothing wrong with night time shooting but it does requires a higher level of skill, it might be case that the skill levels are so much higher as to warrant a competency test in hunting skill for the coveted section 42

In relation to lamping whether it be lamping of fox or deer, every post has failed to expose or highlight thy malpractice of shooting out the window of the car or from the side of the road. I don't want to hear any defence of this practice. It is obvious that these people are not willing to traverse the rough terrain in a bid to lessen the distance to their quarry and chances are that they are driving around in runners and tracksuits.. These ill prepared folk are nearly as bad as the illegal .22lr deer hunters.
These people are only shooters and i don't ever think that will earn the right to call themselves hunters..

Ultimately there exists poachers who are real hunters...

Regards Ivan the HUNTER>>>>>>> not Ivan the pot shot shooter or the impailer....

Grizzly 45

Amazing that any poachers out there that are pro,would be still waving searchlights around the country at night letting all and sundry know that they are about.:rolleyes:.

ivanthehunter

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Amazing that any poachers out there that are pro,would be still waving searchlights around the country at night letting all and sundry know that they are about.:rolleyes:.

fair point griz

But as you know hunting at night requires torches or night vision equipment. Most people in the Carlow side of the wicklow hill don't care about poaching as the generalization of the farming community is to brand deer as a nuisance pest species.. so most people turn a blind eye and tbh whats the harm in that(turning a blind eye). If these locals are not concerned then why should outsiders give a toss..

I suppose the same can be said of the popular misconception that lurchers are poachers dogs.. I tell you that the last thing the poacher needs is a dog;)
So ironically there is no such thing as a poachers dog.

Vegeta

ivanthehunter wrote: »

Most people in the Carlow side of the wicklow hill don't care about poaching as the generalization of the farming community is to brand deer as a nuisance pest species.. so most people turn a blind eye and tbh whats the harm in that(turning a blind eye). If these locals are not concerned then why should outsiders give a toss...

Ivan you are running a very fine line to condoning an illegal act

This is directly against the charter so next time its a paddling.

Sparks has already warned you over this.

I have no problem with the thread, there are some good points being raised here. Some of them yours

Look lamping/poaching deer is illegal, there is no point in saying "what's the harm in it". Sher there's no harm til antis catch someone on nightvision camera doing it, just dumping the bodies and then quoting a few posts from here to the Green party minister who is in power. No harm at all.

ivanthehunter

Come off it lads what do you want out of me. Do you want me to say "Poaching is illegal".

well it is illegal so don't do it........ JUST SAY NO....

I don't condone this illegal act and I'm not going to tell people thats is OK to poach but i have my opinion and i personal don't see this age old activity as the massive problem that some people are making it out to be....

I don't wish to be banned from the forum but i feel that the these two warnings are a preemptive strike against one of the forums more controversial posters..

Do you wish to have a clinical environment where the expression of opinion is construed as advocation of illegal activity. i am not oblivious to the new charter but i feel that no good will come of this hard hitting zero tolerance approach.

The forum was fine last week, the only problem was the lack of moderators to smooth things along... the only problems occurred when threads ran out of control because of the lack of moderation..

I will not condone illegal activity but i am sympathetic to certain activities under certain circumstances. I am sympathetic to people caught speeding but i wouldn't tell my son to speed... Did my sympathy encourage an illegal activity.

Seriously lads I'll give you real opportunities to flex your new found muscles at some stage but this premature demonstration of authority is OTT..

Take a look at the threads i have started, they may have been controversial but they were reasonable popular and some of them showed the glaringly obvious lack of knowledge which existed in the rank and file of the forum.
Some of the threads were slated for being illegal activities but in some cases it transpired that these despicable activities were indeed legal..
For example i truly believe that a hunting license can be obtained for a xbow and the statute books are unable to to provide a definitively straight forward answer.. Are the moderators going to act as judge and jury on Grey areas.
If i was to find a legal loophole as to the validity of the governments control on species control and hence their interpretation of Poaching and i posted such a loophole i feel i would be instantly banished.

I am a normal person and i will except normal criticism if given in a constructive manner but i don't like being given out to by some of the moderators here..Over the past few months people like nonameranger and johngriffin iwm and foxshooter243 but to mention a few, have had a profound effect on my out look. They achieved this through the intellectual persuasion(good people skills).



I received an infraction for sailing tight into the wind. But the New Charter does not state that being ambiguous or cutting it close are infractionable offences... Do the moderator think that a forum referendum on the charter change might have been a good thing.. I do and i say it might have been a good thread but i dare not post another controversial thread this day...............:rolleyes:

bunny shooter

Cop on and take the hint ! You're at this if i don't get caught it's OK crack for too long !:mad:

jwshooter

ivanthehunter wrote: »

Come off it lads what do you want out of me. Do you want me to say "Poaching is illegal".

well it is illegal so don't do it........ JUST SAY NO....

I don't condone this illegal act and I'm not going to tell people thats is OK to poach but i have my opinion and i personal don't see this age old activity as the massive problem that some people are making it out to be....

I don't wish to be banned from the forum but i feel that the these two warnings are a preemptive strike against one of the forums more controversial posters..

Do you wish to have a clinical environment where the expression of opinion is construed as advocation of illegal activity. i am not oblivious to the new charter but i feel that no good will come of this hard hitting zero tolerance approach.

The forum was fine last week, the only problem was the lack of moderators to smooth things along... the only problems occurred when threads ran out of control because of the lack of moderation..

I will not condone illegal activity but i am sympathetic to certain activities under certain circumstances. I am sympathetic to people caught speeding but i wouldn't tell my son to speed... Did my sympathy encourage an illegal activity.

Seriously lads I'll give you real opportunities to flex your new found muscles at some stage but this premature demonstration of authority is OTT..

Take a look at the threads i have started, they may have been controversial but they were reasonable popular and some of them showed the glaringly obvious lack of knowledge which existed in the rank and file of the forum.
Some of the threads were slated for being illegal activities but in some cases it transpired that these despicable activities were indeed legal..
For example i truly believe that a hunting license can be obtained for a xbow and the statute books are unable to to provide a definitively straight forward answer.. Are the moderators going to act as judge and jury on Grey areas.
If i was to find a legal loophole as to the validity of the governments control on species control and hence their interpretation of Poaching and i posted such a loophole i feel i would be instantly banished.

I am a normal person and i will except normal criticism if given in a constructive manner but i don't like being given out to by some of the moderators here..Over the past few months people like nonameranger and johngriffin iwm and foxshooter243 but to mention a few, have had a profound effect on my out look. They achieved this through the intellectual persuasion(good people skills).



I received an infraction for sailing tight into the wind. But the New Charter does not state that being ambiguous or cutting it close are infractionable offences... Do the moderator think that a forum referendum on the charter change might have been a good thing.. I do and i say it might have been a good thread but i dare not post another controversial thread this day...............:rolleyes:

i can not see what a private individual be he a ranger ,coillte or other employed to shooting deer at night under a section 42 has to do with any one and why poaching is tolerated ,i wound have no problem reporting any one for poaching.poaching for profit is a major problem nation wide .it is a second job to most of them some shooting and selling 100 plus deer a year there is no glammer involved ,just kill as many as they can .the tax man should have a look at the game dealers records . have a look at the shooting times page 13 of this weeks mag to see the results of poaching

ivanthehunter

bunny shooter wrote: »

Cop on and take the hint ! You're at this if i don't get caught it's OK crack for too long !:mad:

Bunny I've never shot a deer legally or illegally but i have killed several and i never broke any law, but i bet you'll join the dots or fill in the bits cause your obviously very skilled at that:D

People (some) here are quick to judge and are all brilliant at making assumptions.

But whats required is a response form the government/Garda to allow hunters easier access to deer and to deer suitable calibers..
I have never even applied for a deer caliber after being told by the crime prevention officer that I'd require a monitored alarm for such a weapon. It's too much trouble but i could have a swift or a hornet with only a gun safe.. realistically what the difference. When i told the crime prevention officer that i was buying a .22, he asked me was it capable of killing deer and if it was i need the alarm.. seems like a rule placed there just to keep the common man down..
These are the real causes of people circumnavigating the '76 wildlife act...

bunny shooter

ivanthehunter wrote: »

...........i have killed several and i never broke any law, but i bet you'll join the dots or fill in the bits cause your obviously very skilled at that:D.........................

Don't tell me :eek: you barbecued him with your flamethrower :pac:

Now the jokes aside. You have to justify that comment

Vegeta

ivanthehunter wrote: »

But whats required is a response form the government/Garda to allow hunters easier access to deer and to deer suitable calibers..

Now this is worth true debate

Are deer numbers at a place where they could be treated similarly to duck or pheasant?

irish setter

there is alot of talk of illagallity on this thread so here's a question... if all hunting was banned [which is a real possibility in our lifetime] would that mean we would all think it is wrong to hunt???

jwshooter

ivanthehunter wrote: »

Bunny I've never shot a deer legally or illegally but i have killed several and i never broke any law, but i bet you'll join the dots or fill in the bits cause your obviously very skilled at that:D

People (some) here are quick to judge and are all brilliant at making assumptions.

But whats required is a response form the government/Garda to allow hunters easier access to deer and to deer suitable calibers..
I have never even applied for a deer caliber after being told by the crime prevention officer that I'd require a monitored alarm for such a weapon. It's too much trouble but i could have a swift or a hornet with only a gun safe.. realistically what the difference. When i told the crime prevention officer that i was buying a .22, he asked me was it capable of killing deer and if it was i need the alarm.. seems like a rule placed there just to keep the common man down..
These are the real causes of people circumnavigating the '76 wildlife act...

may be your crime pervention officer was telling you something ..NO WAY SUN SHINE .you keep dogging away from the facts here . there is no deer problem in ireland the large amounts of deer live on the open hill doing no harm to man or beast eating scrub grass and young heather ,on our national parks there is large amounts of deer and do not forget its our national park .but the deer are doing little or no harm **** all else would live there .just because there is a lot of deer in parts of the country does not give the right away for muppets to go shoot at them at will and cry about not been let do so. god help our deer if the nargc ever get there on our parks ,

jwshooter

irish setter wrote: »

there is alot of talk of illagallity on this thread so here's a question... if all hunting was banned [which is a real possibility in our lifetime] would that mean we would all think it is wrong to hunt???

what type of hunting

foxshooter243

irish setter wrote: »

there is alot of talk of illagallity on this thread so here's a question... if all hunting was banned [which is a real possibility in our lifetime] would that mean we would all think it is wrong to hunt???

excellent point, Irish setter.;)

irish setter

jwshooter wrote: »

what type of hunting

jw all or any hunting that is legal today. laws change all the time and whats legal today may not be tomorrow. does that mean we have to change our believes to suit?

Grizzly 45

Got to question tho,Is there actually anyone poaching that many deer to be an almost commerical supplier/profit poacher???It is pretty difficult to shift that amount of meat these days with health regs and accountability of carcasses in butchers,resturants etc.Nor ASFICS is it a profitable situation what with commerically farmed deer from East Europe and Ireland having the market niche.Somthing that is smaller and more high market value like salmon or eels would be a more viable money making item IMO.
So does that leave us with " custom rack hunters" ala the USA?? [Basically be a lazy Bstrd and pay top dollar for somone to poach or shoot that trophy deer rack for your den]

Or just total wasters out shooting and dumping the carcass?THOSE would be IMO top target for anyone.As they are literally doing nothing with the animal.

Also,realistically it is a major PITA to actually convict anyone here,unless caught red handed of the crime of poaching and tresspass. I worked as part of my first job here in Ireland as a game keeper /forester on a very large estate in Clare.Which was plauged by poachers and had because of it's deer pouplation dept of forestry[as then known in the 1980s] rangers regulary on the estate,escorting foriegn deer hunters.We had regular pheasent and deer poaching in and out of season.We did catch a couple of them,but it was considerd almost a blow against the Empire still to be taking his Lordships deer and pheasents by our judicary.So much that the Gaurds lost intrest in trying to prosecute them as well.I mean £20 fine for shooting a deer,even by the 80s standard it was a joke...
Even then the Rangers were complaining of been more office bound than field bound,so has the situation changed much since then??No doubt it has for the worse.. The Rangers proably now have triple the paperwork...:rolleyes:
Are you willing to tackle solo and in the dead of night unarmed as well, a bunch of armed thugs who are breaking the law anyway and maybe making a profit of deer poaching???Braver man than I am .
Remember too folks,for somthing to stick,if you have knowledge of somone comitting a crime of poaching. YOU will have to make a statement to the Gardai,and may also end up in court as State witness as well to substantiate the claim....
And people wonder why the reckless driving hotline isnt that hectic???


XBows and lurchers
Ivan,remember that the lurcher was originally the poachers weapon to catch hares,rabbitts ,deer etc,when most folks were not allowed to have firearms,but could afford a mutt type dog to do the job.The lurch has the bad old reputation of the poachers dog,but again it is only doing it's masters bidding.

The Xbow situation.I sympathise with you on this .UP TO A POINT.
Look,if you belive that there is a legal precedent for this,get a good lawyer and challenge this in a court. I would like to see bow and X bow hunting here as well.As I have done both in the US and it is certainly more difficult and skilful than rifle hunting.As I have handgun hunting,another one that should/could be legal here considering some handgun cals are well within the accepted deer cal pre requsites.But if we have already a bunch of irresponsible "yahoos" causing this much trouble with legally held rifles.What will be it like when they allow Xbows and bows out there?

If hunting was to become illegal
I assume shooting is meant here?Personally,Iwould still "hunt" or in that case I would be a poacher.At that stage I think we would be pretty short of "hunting firearms " as well and it would be a pretty sad society we would be in.Obviously Bernie W and Aideen Y and Co have staged a coup de etat and turned Ireland into a totally animal equality,vegan happy clappy society,God help us all then as we will be in "re education camps" for our animal abuse crimes...:eek:.

What good reason could you give to own a gun for which it's purpose is now illegal??Why would I do this and how?Well,one is my own moral outlook on this and irrevelant to this debate and two,well there are more ways of harvesting game than a firearm.

Vegeta

irish setter wrote: »

jw all or any hunting that is legal today. laws change all the time and whats legal today may not be tomorrow. does that mean we have to change our believes to suit?

No but our actions would have to change

jwshooter

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Got to question tho,Is there actually anyone poaching that many deer to be an almost commerical supplier/profit poacher???It is pretty difficult to shift that amount of meat these days with health regs and accountability of carcasses in butchers,resturants etc.Nor ASFICS is it a profitable situation what with commerically farmed deer from East Europe and Ireland having the market niche.Somthing that is smaller and more high market value like salmon or eels would be a more viable money making item IMO.
So does that leave us with " custom rack hunters" ala the USA?? [Basically be a lazy Bstrd and pay top dollar for somone to poach or shoot that trophy deer rack for your den]

Or just total wasters out shooting and dumping the carcass?THOSE would be IMO top target for anyone.As they are literally doing nothing with the animal.

Also,realistically it is a major PITA to actually convict anyone here,unless caught red handed of the crime of poaching and tresspass. I worked as part of my first job here in Ireland as a game keeper /forester on a very large estate in Clare.Which was plauged by poachers and had because of it's deer pouplation dept of forestry[as then known in the 1980s] rangers regulary on the estate,escorting foriegn deer hunters.We had regular pheasent and deer poaching in and out of season.We did catch a couple of them,but it was considerd almost a blow against the Empire still to be taking his Lordships deer and pheasents by our judicary.So much that the Gaurds lost intrest in trying to prosecute them as well.I mean £20 fine for shooting a deer,even by the 80s standard it was a joke...
Even then the Rangers were complaining of been more office bound than field bound,so has the situation changed much since then??No doubt it has for the worse.. The Rangers proably now have triple the paperwork...:rolleyes:
Are you willing to tackle solo and in the dead of night unarmed as well, a bunch of armed thugs who are breaking the law anyway and maybe making a profit of deer poaching???Braver man than I am .
Remember too folks,for somthing to stick,if you have knowledge of somone comitting a crime of poaching. YOU will have to make a statement to the Gardai,and may also end up in court as State witness as well to substantiate the claim....
And people wonder why the reckless driving hotline isnt that hectic???


XBows and lurchers
Ivan,remember that the lurcher was originally the poachers weapon to catch hares,rabbitts ,deer etc,when most folks were not allowed to have firearms,but could afford a mutt type dog to do the job.The lurch has the bad old reputation of the poachers dog,but again it is only doing it's masters bidding.

The Xbow situation.I sympathise with you on this .UP TO A POINT.
Look,if you belive that there is a legal precedent for this,get a good lawyer and challenge this in a court. I would like to see bow and X bow hunting here as well.As I have done both in the US and it is certainly more difficult and skilful than rifle hunting.As I have handgun hunting,another one that should/could be legal here considering some handgun cals are well within the accepted deer cal pre requsites.But if we have already a bunch of irresponsible "yahoos" causing this much trouble with legally held rifles.What will be it like when they allow Xbows and bows out there?

If hunting was to become illegal
I assume shooting is meant here?Personally,Iwould still "hunt" or in that case I would be a poacher.At that stage I think we would be pretty sort of "hunting firearms " as well and it would be a pretty sad society we would be in.Obviously Bernie W and Aideen Y and Co have staged a coup de etat and turned Ireland into a totally animal equality,vegan happy clappy society,God help us all then as we will be in "re education camps" for our animal abuse crimes...:eek:.

What good reason could you give to own a gun for which it's purpose is now illegal??Why would I do this and how?Well,one is my own moral outlook on this and irrevelant to this debate and two,well there are more ways of harvesting game than a firearm.

poaching is out of control .there is big money been made each year ,the price of venison went up this season so it should even worse next year .i am not into ranger bashing .as enda and john have been most helpfull over the years ,we have to pull together to stop it . i think the rangers should have a full time wildlife officer some one we report to and let them free lance and hit the problem head on .the gardai very good in wicklow .and i am sure they would come on board ,after all its a firearm offence been committed,the game dealers records should be compaired against the returns on the deer licence.the nargc have there head well burried on this one .after all they are the main insurance provider for shooters ,as for the deer groups they just talk about it .when you have seen poaching first hand you will see how harm full it is.its a free for all at the moment some thing will have to be done or there will be blood some night

ivanthehunter

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Ivan,remember that the lurcher was originally the poachers weapon to catch hares,rabbitts ,deer etc,when most folks were not allowed to have firearms,but could afford a mutt type dog to do the job.The lurch has the bad old reputation of the poachers dog,but again it is only doing it's masters bidding.

At the dawn of time man used dogs to hunt..
But poaching thousands years ago was not considered to be a crime against the natural heritage that Ireland is fortunate to posses, it was probable a unwelcome invasion of the neighboring tribe's territories.:D

A few hundred years ago it was seen in the same light. It is only in the last century that we as a race have reconsider the value of our natural environment and the necessity of well maintained bio-diversification thats needed to support life as a whole.

Poachers today are unlikely to be hunt to stave off starvation but in any event they will not employ the use of dogs unless their sport of choice is that of hunting with dogs. They might be badger baiting, digging out foxes, running down deer, running down hare or rabbits but you can be sure that they are aggressive and dangerous as these activities are extremely difficult to carry out in a covert manner and as such for this very reason one could physiologically profile them as having very little fear of authorities or confrontation from land owners or sporting clubs/members with relevant rights etc etc.

How ever professional poachers are using methods of stealth and cunning. They might utilise modern technologies such as flash suppressors and moderators. Being more realistic they probably use old hunting methods such as traps,lines, nets and snares. With this array of implements it would be possible to catch any animal from mink to deer with a degree of skill. but be assured of this simple fact, the last thing a seriously active poacher needs is a bloody dog to blow his cover.

IMO poachers using dogs are doing it for the sake of sport with the dogs and they are not primarily concerned with the detention or capture of the animals they hunt but are primarily concerned with the business of engaging their dogs in a pursuit. The successful capture of any quarry is only viewed as a bonus.
On the other hand the covert poacher armed with his arsenal of devices is only concerned with the numbers of animals captured in any set period of activity
Is there a differance?? Who knows!

bunny shooter

Ivan,

You are worrying me now :eek:

Well said.

The only thing you missed is it's illegal and therefore, should not be condoned or tolerated.

irish setter

i dont agree in legal and illegal being black and white. take two men, one who lamps 1 or 2 deer a year in season with an approiate firearm for his own freezer. he is carring out an illegal act. the second man shoots pheasant but doesn't want to become part of a gun club instead he just gets landowners permission. he shoots any chance he gets taking large numbers but does nothing to put anything back. he is perfectly legal but is he better than the first man????

It wasn't me!

Morals are irrelevant to the law here. Absolutely no point comparing the two instances in a moral sense, as one is illegal, the other is not. Black and white, it most certainly is.

irish setter

i'm not saying we should all carry on hunting illegaly quiet the oppisite infact but its morrals that will save our sport not the law. at least not untill hunters have a say in making the laws. its attitudes that need to change

bunny shooter

1st man is commiting an illegal act against law.

2nd man if he has chosen not to join the club is a sponger !

If the club won't allow him join, unless there is a good reason, eg kicked out for poaching etc, then fair play to him !

bunny shooter

irish setter wrote: »

i'm not saying we should all carry on hunting illegaly quiet the oppisite infact but its morrals that will save our sport not the law. at least not untill hunters have a say in making the laws. its attitudes that need to change

They do. They have, should have a vote in the General Election ? Lobby politicans, the antis are doing it

Sparks

Not to mention that the first man in that straw man argument could comply with the law with relative ease; even if he wanted to lamp the deer, there's still a legal route to take.

Frankly, if you wind up in a courtroom over any of this, you have no excuse and no defence, and the idea of fellow shooters saying "oh, he has a gun, we have to be uncritical of his behaviour and back him to the hilt", well, it's too damn much like the mentality that led to the really disturbing results in both the Milgram and the Stanford Prison experiments.

There's also the point of view we're not considering here; which is that the shooter is in the wrong morally. We're dismissing it out of hand, with no knowlege of the shooter in question. For example, we're all assuming the shooter is a legitimate one, with a licenced firearm. We're assuming the firearm being used is of sufficient power to be a humane tool for the purpose. And those are assumptions without any foundation in fact - how many of us have heard of deer shot in Ireland found to have birdshot and .22 bullets lodged in them from old injuries?

Honestly? I'm all for the idea of regulating hunting so that hunters are a known quantity, with appropriate tools and training for the task. And then prosecuting poachers to the limit of the law. We cannot lament Gardai not applying the law as written to us on one hand and then argue to turn a blind eye to those breaking it on the other. The law is not a dim sum platter - you either follow it (even if only until you can change it), or you sod off and live in another jurisdiction.

ivanthehunter

Sparks wrote: »

Not to mention that the first man in that straw man argument could comply with the law with relative ease; even if he wanted to lamp the deer, there's still a legal route to take.

Frankly, if you wind up in a courtroom over any of this, you have no excuse and no defence, and the idea of fellow shooters saying "oh, he has a gun, we have to be uncritical of his behaviour and back him to the hilt", well, it's too damn much like the mentality that led to the really disturbing results in both the Milgram and the Stanford Prison experiments.

There's also the point of view we're not considering here; which is that the shooter is in the wrong morally. We're dismissing it out of hand, with no knowlege of the shooter in question. For example, we're all assuming the shooter is a legitimate one, with a licenced firearm. We're assuming the firearm being used is of sufficient power to be a humane tool for the purpose. And those are assumptions without any foundation in fact - how many of us have heard of deer shot in Ireland found to have birdshot and .22 bullets lodged in them from old injuries?

Honestly? I'm all for the idea of regulating hunting so that hunters are a known quantity, with appropriate tools and training for the task. And then prosecuting poachers to the limit of the law. We cannot lament Gardai not applying the law as written to us on one hand and then argue to turn a blind eye to those breaking it on the other. The law is not a dim sum platter - you either follow it (even if only until you can change it), or you sod off and live in another jurisdiction.

Laws and rules are there for control of people and lets face it they don't allow for thinking outside the box but its not always black and white.
If you followed the rules of the road to the end of time, well, your time would come sooner that you'd bet on you'd cause an accident.

rules are sometimes broken and its allowed as the law cannot make allowance for all occurrences that one might encounter. That why we have judges, they make a decision on whether or not your supposed breach of the law was warrented.... There will always be shades of gray and i for one like a world with a bit of colour;) as its a more interesting place:cool:

IRLConor

ivanthehunter wrote: »

That why we have judges, they make a decision on whether or not your supposed breach of the law was warrented...

Typically this only happens when by breaking the law you prevented a greater wrong from happening (like injury or death to a human). You'd be hard put to make such an argument with regard to hunting. The "It's coming right for us!" excuse might cut it in South Park but I don't think it works in real life.

IMHO, there's no excuse for poaching. "It's hard to do it legally" is never an excuse in my book and I really doubt any judge would disagree.

It wasn't me!

Exactly, and it really shouldn't be that hard if you're determined. If you want to do it, you can, and if you're not committed enough to do it the legal way, regardless of obstacles you might encounter, then there's no excuse to do it illegally then.