Naaay. Let's look at something else.

See how the DCNR wants to be a little legislature within itself and then enforce it's own laws making them mean whatever they want to? Compare their analysis with what the law really says:



That's not what the law says. Landowners and their immediate family members on their own land can hunt right up to the road with all legal firearms for hunting. All others can hunt with all legal firearms (handguns, bows, small game firearms etc. that are not listed), right up to the right of way of the road.



Not if you own the land or an immediate member of your family owns the land. Nothing is illegal unless a law makes it illegal. 9-11-257 does not make it illegal.



That is not what the DCNR told the Attorney General. Attorney General opinions carry more weight in court than a DCNR publication that contradicts what the DCNR has told the Attorney General.

Does it make sense to say that it is only unsafe for somebody to hunt near a road if they don't own the land or their immediate family doesn't own the land? Is it only unsafe to deer hunt near the road while hunting small game is perfectly OK?


Since the commissioner will not tell you what the law says, I reckon I will:





Now... grab you another bite of popcorn, I've got something else I need you to look at:

Here's the defintion of hunting that appears in the front of the Regulation Book that is published without the game and fish laws instead of together with them.



Notice that there is no rule number in front of that defintion like the other rules I cut and paste for you since most of you have never seen a Regulation Book.

Now...
What part of the DCNR's own little defintion that somebody made up was Bucky doing while he walked back to his truck with an unloaded rifle?

- Was he pursuing anything?
- Was he shooting, killing, capturing or trapping anything?
- Was he disturbing, harrying or worrying anything (besides the game wardens, which is not illegal)?
- Was he placing, setting, drawing, or using any device used to take anything?
- Was he assisting anybody that was doing any of that crap?

Note to Danny: nothing about possession of firearms, nothing about color of clothes, nothing about trespassing .... just read what's there.
Maybe a jury will see thru all this. They might need to bring some popcorn with them though. It could take a while.


Has anybody learned anything from all this yet?

Here's some more stuff while you eat your popcorn:

Arkansas:
HUNT or HUNTING – To search for, pursue, chase, track, lure, attract, or
lie in wait of game animals or other wildlife for the purpose of taking or
attempting to take such game animals or wildlife by any method.

######################################################################
ARKANSAS GAME AND FISH COMMISSION v. MURDERS
ARKANSAS GAME AND FISH COMMISSION, Appellant, v. Nelson Murders, Jr., Roland Bates, Judy Pickering, Roy Pickering, Dean Meredith, Verdell Meredith, and Darrell Bratton, Appellees.
No. 96-338.
-- March 03, 1997

... However, while we have said that t he Commission has broad discretion in carrying out its powers, see Chaffin v. Ark. Game & Fish Comm'n, 296 Ark. 431, 757 S.W.2d 950 (1988), its discretion is not unfettered.   The Commission's power to regulate the manner of taking game certainly does not translate into a general power to regulate the general possession of all firearms on city, county, state, or federally maintained roads or rights-of-way.
 An overbroad statute is one that is designed to punish conduct which the state may rightfully punish, but which includes within its sweep constitutionally protected conduct.  McDougal v. State, 324 Ark. 354, 359-360, 922 S.W.2d 323 (1996), citing 4 R. Rotunda & J. Novak, Treatise on Constitutional Law, § 20.8 (2d ed. 1992).   The Commission's rule, as amended, essentially shifts the burden to non-hunters who possess loaded or uncased firearms on city, county, state, or federally maintained roads or rights-of-way, to prove that he or she is not engaged in the prohibited act of road hunting.   When examining amended rule 18.04, we conclude that it may include within its sweep innocent and legitimate conduct.   For example, it is an affirmative defense to the charge of carrying a weapon that the person charged was carrying the weapon upon a journey.   See Ark.Code Ann. § 5-73-120(c)(4) (Supp.1995).   The amended rule is thus overbroad, and exceeds the Commission's authority granted under Amendment 35 to regulate the manner of taking game.
Because we agree with the trial court that amended rule 18.04 is unconstitutionally overbroad, it is unnecessary for us to reach the Commission's remaining arguments on appeal.   Based upon the foregoing, the decision of the trial court is affirmed.


Mississippi
"Hunt" or "hunting" means to hunt or chase or to shoot at or kill or to pursue with the intent to take, kill or wound any wild animal or wild bird with a firearm as defined in this subsection.

[no court challenge found]

Georgia
"Hunting" means pursuing, shooting, killing, taking, or capturing wildlife or feral hogs. This term also includes acts such as placing, setting, drawing, or using any device used to take wildlife or feral hogs, whether any such act results in taking or not, and includes every act of assistance to any person in taking or attempting to take such wildlife or feral hogs.

#######################################################################

SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA
September 5, 1985
TRAMMELL GRADY SHIRLEY v. THE STATE

... Defendant urges that the word "pursue" would make criminal the act of a photographer in following wildlife for the purpose of photographing it. The word "pursue" may mean "chase" or "follow," Funk & Wagnalls Standard Dictionary (1980). On the other hand, the word "pursue," in the context in which it is used here, may mean: to seek or search for wildlife, for the purpose of shooting or capturing such wildlife. See Funk & Wagnalls, supra, "hunt." We find that this latter meaning was the one intended by the General Assembly. OCGA § 1-3-1 (a).

Defendant also urges that the words "disturbing, harrying, or worrying" render the definition of hunting overbroad, and thereby inclusive of innocent conduct, because many people who are not hunting wildlife nevertheless may disturb, harry or worry them. However, as we did above, we find that the General Assembly intended those words to be limited to situations in which the accused was "disturbing, harrying, or worrying" wildlife for the purpose of shooting or capturing them.

Defendant's objection that the trial court's instruction to the jury defining "hunting" was vague and overbroad and therefore erroneous is valid and he is entitled to a new trial.

Judgment reversed.



Tennessee
“Hunting” means chasing, driving, flushing, attracting, pursuing, worrying, following after or on the trail of, searching for, trapping, shooting at, stalking, or lying in wait for, any wildlife, whether or not such wildlife is then or subsequently captured, killed, taken, or wounded and every act of assistance to any other person, but “hunting” does not include stalking, attracting, searching for, or lying in wait for, wildlife by an unarmed person solely for the purpose of watching wildlife or taking pictures of wildlife;