No deputies

Page: 12 > Showing page 1 of 2
Author
woodnickle
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 8349
  • Reward points: 0
  • Status: offline
2008/07/07 22:51:49 (permalink)

No deputies

Senater Armstrong wants to eliminate the deputties right to ware a gun and to search property.
Also to not flash lights and blow sirens!
I agree that they have too much right.
Whats your thought?

#1

48 Replies Related Threads

    Over the Hill
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 2382
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2007/03/28 20:54:23
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/07 23:30:19 (permalink)
    They are trained state officers. Every hunter they come in contact with has firearms (or a bow). They get into some dangerous situtations like any other officer.  Take away their guns? What's the reason for this? Are they running around pulling their guns out for no good reason? As with any police officer, if there is a problem with their actions, complaints can be made.
     
    This guy has a grudge because his kid was caught and fled from an investigation.
     
    Getting rid of the deputies would get rid of about 80% of PGC law enforcenment.
     
    mika, what is too much right?

    OVER THE HILL

    Some people are like slinky's; not really good for anything, but, they bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs...
    #2
    DanesDad
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 3087
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2005/03/21 15:35:43
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/07 23:59:12 (permalink)
    Without deputies, who work basically for nothing, the PGC would have almost no law enforcement capabilities.  There are some districts that dont even have a WCO.  Poaching would run rampant.  This is a horrible idea.  Unless you are a poacher.
    #3
    dpms
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 3447
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 07:27:15 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Mikastorm
    Whats your thought?

     
    My thought is you should educate yourself on LE within the PGC before making a post like that.
    #4
    woodnickle
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 8349
    • Reward points: 0
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 07:52:17 (permalink)
    Ya , he might have a grudge but also a good point. He was on his own property! Thats his land, he wasn,t hunting. Thats invasion of your own space. Thats my point.

    #5
    dpms
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 3447
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 09:20:48 (permalink)
    You have no point. The DWCO was doing his job during a demanding time of the year and the subjects were being evasive and left the scene.
     
    Case closed.
    #6
    woodnickle
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 8349
    • Reward points: 0
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 10:25:24 (permalink)
    Ok deputy, you need to get the info right.

    #7
    eyesandgillz
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 3757
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2003/06/18 11:30:03
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 10:35:47 (permalink)
    And what is the "right" info?  Assuming the story is somewhat correct as reported on the lancasteronline.com site, having a loaded rifle on the front seat of the car/truck and lieing to the DWCO about it is definitely getting off on the wrong foot when being questioned.  Then, taking off through a field to avoid further questioning and inspection.....hmm, I don't see anything wrong there. (please note extreme sarcasm in my post)
    #8
    griffon
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 1104
    • Reward points: 0
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 10:59:03 (permalink)
    It sounds like all sides could have handled this better.  As for Armstong, he seems like an arrogant POS who believes that he can do whatever he feels and doesn't have to answer to anyone because of his family name.  As for Daddy, he is just bailing out his snobby little son (probably that way his whole life).  I am quite certain he never gave a moments concern about this group until HIS son got stung.  As for the DWCO, it sounds like he should have gotten his facts straight before he started making accusations of trespassing (assuming his accusations are incorrect).  That has been the biggest complaint I have heard about deputies is that they are very impulsive and quick to pass judgement/overreact before they get facts.  I am guessing this situation could have been diffused by the DWCO (who should have had backup) had he handled this in a more professional manner and gathered facts up front.  I do believe that the idea of a loaded rifle in the vehicle should have been addressed right then and there and backup should have been called immediately.  A loaded weapon in a potentially hostile situation is always bad and it does not sound like this DWCO was trained to handle such a situation, to the point that he actually escalated the situation by not getting facts before he made his accusations. 
    #9
    woodnickle
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 8349
    • Reward points: 0
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 11:02:51 (permalink)
    "Cowboys with guns"!  Lack sufficient law training. They can arrest anyone, anytime, anywhere, and they are not professionals.
    The deputy fabricated the whole story. He was walking around the vehicle and thought he saw a gun. Never did he know if the gun was loaded.
    Kristian Armstrong was patroling his property looking for tresspassers. If you think allowing the game wardens to walk in your camp at anytime for no reason is ok, your nuts!

    #10
    dpms
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 3447
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 12:11:12 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Mikastorm

    "Cowboys with guns"!  Lack sufficient law training. They can arrest anyone, anytime, anywhere, and they are not professionals.
    The deputy fabricated the whole story. He was walking around the vehicle and thought he saw a gun. Never did he know if the gun was loaded.
    Kristian Armstrong was patroling his property looking for tresspassers. If you think allowing the game wardens to walk in your camp at anytime for no reason is ok, your nuts!

     
    Your distaste for DWCO's is blinding your judgement.  A law abiding citizen patrolling his property has every right to do so.  To do so with a loaded rifle on the seat is poor judgement to say the least.  A vehicle pulled off the side of the road in a wooded area on the first Saturday of rifle would attract the attention  of any DWCO or WCO for that matter.
     
    To be evasive in your answers and appear like there is something to hide is not a good move with any LEO.  To then dirve away during the questioning shows utter disrespect for LE and is punishable.
     
    Show me where this DWCO did anything wrong?
     
     
    #11
    bingsbaits
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 5026
    • Reward points: 0
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 12:14:18 (permalink)
    And yes they do get to waving their guns around.
    A deputy pulled his at a bar here in Sparty over a domestic dispute. He was fighting with his wife..He is still carrying a badge and a firearm. If you or I would have done that there would have been hell to pay..
    I think there should be deputies we need the enforcement..But I don't think they should have more power than the State Police..

    "There is a pleasure in Angling that no one knows but the Angler himself". WB
     
     


    #12
    woodnickle
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 8349
    • Reward points: 0
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 13:16:39 (permalink)
    Eugene, does the dp in your name mean,deputy? Where are you getting that the rifle was loaded? Armstrong told the deputy he was not hunting.
    Yes I have a distaste for dwco. Paid a fine for no shot size no. on a shell while turkey hunting. Offered to cut the shell open along with one with no.4 on it to prove they came from the same box. No, he just wanted his glorey! They throw their badge around like they are "King sh.. on turd island"

    #13
    dpms
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 3447
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 13:24:37 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Mikastorm

    Where are you getting that the rifle was loaded? Armstrong told the deputy he was not hunting.


     
    The passenger admitted that the rifle was loaded.  Again, I ask, what did the DWCO do wrong in this case?
    #14
    woodnickle
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 8349
    • Reward points: 0
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 13:37:55 (permalink)
    What was the reason for the dwco to decide to check this guy? Nobody else around to harass undoultedly?
     You apparently have more info on this than what the two papers I read had to say about this. You are evading the ? dp?

    #15
    S-10
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 5185
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 13:45:55 (permalink)
    Welllll-- Were the two men in hunting clothes or regular clothes? What was the DWCO's reasonable suspicion for inspecting them? Would he have done the same thing if he would have seen them in July? If i'am not mistaken you are allowed to have a loaded weapon in a vehicle in Pa. This may have been before that law. I think i'am with Griffon on this one. Sounds like two people looking for a confrontation. I've known many DWCO's and have ridden along with them when considering the job myself. They have many different reasons for taking the job not all having to do with protecting wildlife. Many are good guys but as in any profession there are alyaws bad apples. The problem is the PGC seldom admits it and spends a lot of time justifying their actions. 
    #16
    dpms
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 3447
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 13:49:22 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Mikastorm

    What was the reason for the dwco to decide to check this guy? Nobody else around to harass undoultedly?



    As I said previously, a car pulled off of the road in a wooded area will attract the attention of any DWCO or WCO that passes by on the first Saturday of rifle season.  They can and do all of the time.  I have been checked several times eating lunch in my truck.  They were not hunting but the LE would not know this unless he questioned them.

    What does it matter anyway? If the occupants did not engage in illegal activity none of this would have happened.

    And to answer your question, no I am not a DWCO.

    Since I have answered your question would you like to answer mine? What did the DWCO do wrong in this case?
     
    Or does your prior offense at the hands of a DWCO cloud your judgement?
    post edited by dpms - 2008/07/08 14:04:36
    #17
    woodnickle
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 8349
    • Reward points: 0
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 14:55:13 (permalink)
    Maybe nothing wrong with what he did but why he did. The first day of deer season you,ll see hundreds of cars parked on back roads, so does this give him the right to check every car he sees? My point! Gun toten Cowboys!

    #18
    dpms
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 3447
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 15:10:17 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Mikastorm

    Maybe nothing wrong with what he did but why he did. The first day of deer season you,ll see hundreds of cars parked on back roads, so does this give him the right to check every car he sees?

     
    He may, he may not.  He did and the occupants deserved what they got. 
    Those are the facts.
     
    You can try to discredit the officer if you want but it serves no purpose other than to prove your bias.
     
    #19
    DanesDad
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 3087
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2005/03/21 15:35:43
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 17:24:33 (permalink)
    If this occurred during the rifle deer season, and these guys had a loaded gun in their vehicle, I'm pretty sure they were in violation.  I dont think you can carry a loaded rifle around in a vehicle during deer season (if at all).
    #20
    woodnickle
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 8349
    • Reward points: 0
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 18:15:31 (permalink)
    OK. I read both papers over again and I do not see where the gun was loaded or that there was a passenger. Where did you get your info?

    #21
    Over the Hill
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 2382
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2007/03/28 20:54:23
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 20:26:30 (permalink)
    Passenger said it was loaded, here's another news article:http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/224018
     
    Carrying a loaded firearm (shotgun or rifle) in a vehicle is illegal in PA. A ccw is only for handguns to be loaded. Private property or public roads, doesn't matter. No loaded long arms in vehicle. I went through this a few years ago with a friend who got a ticket for having his rifle loaded in his truck. Look it up on the web.
     
    As far as being arrested, "anyone, anytime, anywhere", Uhhh, is the person getting arrested breaking the law? If not, I would be in contact with my lawyer for false arrest. Unlawful detention.
     
    Last year the PGC won a Supreme Court case to be able to go on private property, in the performance of their duties, and check hunters. I'll see if I can dig up the article.
     
    From the articles I read, the deputy did act proffessional. He didn't take off in "hot" pursuit chasing the guy across the field. He went to the guy's house later with another SENIOR officer (backup).
     
    Mika, why didn't you go to the DJ and open up the shotgun shell in front of the judge to fight it? Did the DWCO take the shell from you? If he did, he would have to show it in court as evidence. I guess that's a lesson to make sure your shells are properly marked.

    OVER THE HILL

    Some people are like slinky's; not really good for anything, but, they bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs...
    #22
    S-10
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 5185
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 21:21:48 (permalink)
    Hill--do you happen to know the statute that says you can't have a loaded long gun in a vehicle with a ccw permit. For some reason I thought that had changed and can't find anything specifically forbidding that activity. I know there is/was a game law forbidding it but I thought that was superceeded. thanks
    #23
    bluntman
    Expert Angler
    • Total Posts : 684
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2006/08/12 18:39:12
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/08 22:54:29 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Mikastorm

    "Cowboys with guns"!  Lack sufficient law training. They can arrest anyone, anytime, anywhere, and they are not professionals.



    I think "Jack Booted Thugs" is the proper terminology when they work for any branch of the state or federal government
    post edited by bluntman - 2008/07/08 22:55:36
    #24
    MuskyMastr
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 3032
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2005/06/30 17:39:29
    • Location: Valley of the Crazy Woman
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/09 02:10:14 (permalink)
    I think that because DWCO's do not have as extensive training as a WCO there are often mistakes made, moreso than with WCO's.  We have good and bad here, however it seems that most reflect the type of WCO assigned to that area.
     
    Bad example from here is a DWCO who reported to a landowner where I had secured permission, that I was conducting "All kinds of illegal activities, Screw in treesteps, stands that damage trees, and trimming shooting lanes"     None of the above occured and I was asked to leave the property for a year until the misunderstandings were cleared up.  Now the dwco has been asked to leave....ha.
     
    Same DWCO called me to let me know to pass the word that my buddie and his son should not hunt a certain area on the pheasant opener because the PGC was "On to them" and had stocked all hens to try and catch them shooting illegal.  Driving by the first day I saw the same DWCO and his son hunting the area.  Nice image pgc. 
     
    I am sure there are just as many stories about good things that are accomplished by dwco's every day, but since every story in the game news became laced with saftey propaganda, i don't get to read them any more.

    Better too far back, than too far forward.
    #25
    woodnickle
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 8349
    • Reward points: 0
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/09 07:20:04 (permalink)
    It appears both the papers I read( Sharon Herald and the Greenville Record Argus ) copied the same story and did not print the whole story. If indeed the rifle was loaded, yes he broke the law. I stand corrected and appoligize for that. It still does not change my view on allowing them to come on your property at will.
    No, I just paid the fine, figured it to cost me more to go in front of a judge and lose money from work.
    I beleive that as sportsmen we can patrol our ranks and turn in any poaching or unlawful activites ourselves. Its our hunting rights to do so.
    If you have, or know of a buddy shooting deer illegally inform him that you will turn him in or at least let him know that you will not tallorate this.
    I have.
    There was alot more to my story with the shell that p**** me off. The guy was hiding behind a tree to see if my son and I would pack it up at noon. No doupt that is why we heard and saw no birds, even though I put them to bed the night before. This on private property that my friend owned.
    I am a law abiding citizen. I hunt, fish, drive and pay taxes , all within the law. This guy wanted to bust someone and that day it was me. Bad taste in moulth , YES!

    #26
    dpms
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 3447
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2006/08/28 12:47:54
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/09 07:41:03 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: Mikastorm

    I am a law abiding citizen. I hunt, fish, drive and pay taxes , all within the law. This guy wanted to bust someone and that day it was me. Bad taste in moulth , YES!

     
    I can empathize with you.  Sounds like you got a bad deal and maybe just a warning was more than appropriate.
     
    I just hate to see anyone paint DWCO's negatively with a broad brush.  Most are fine officers who donate personal time.  They are to be commended for doing so.  There will be bad apples but they exist in any LE agency.  Luckily, they are in the minority.
    #27
    griffon
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 1104
    • Reward points: 0
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/09 08:07:00 (permalink)
    I have a buddy that got tagged for the same exact thing a couple years back by a DWCO, Mika.  He was pi$$ed but didn't fight it and just paid the fine.  I actually got checked by a WCO this fall while hunting waterfowl.  Several of my shells were not marked.  He ran a magnet over them and then cut one open of his choosing.  He informed me that indeed the shells have to be marked.  That said, all he asked was that I use the unmarked shells first so that I could remove them from my inventory.  he also told me that he would never ticket someone for this infraction unless the shells were actually illegal when he inspected the contents.  It seems that the ink being used on shells has been stamped lightly or is a different mixture than days of old and it wears off quickly.  Fortunately, there was a DWCO with him (forgot that I had actually met one) and hopefully he received a good lesson in working with the public. 
    #28
    Over the Hill
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 2382
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2007/03/28 20:54:23
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/09 18:39:31 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: S-10

    Hill--do you happen to know the statute that says you can't have a loaded long gun in a vehicle with a ccw permit. For some reason I thought that had changed and can't find anything specifically forbidding that activity. I know there is/was a game law forbidding it but I thought that was superceeded. thanks

     
    S-10, it is the game code that bans loaded firearms (long arms) in vehicles. The law has not changed reguarding CCW for long arms. According to the game co. many citations were handed out this past buck season... CCW or not.
     
    S-10, I think you may be thinking of the law changes with reguard to bowhunters and spotlighters being able to have a loaded handgun on their person with the CCW permit. That just changed last year.
     
    Here's the law in Title 34 section 25 from the PGC website: http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/cwp/view.asp?a=478&q=151112#2503
     
     
    Sec. 2503. Amended March 29, 1996, Act No. 1996-13, and December 19, 1996, Act No. 184.
    Sec. 2503. Loaded firearms in vehicles.
    (a) General rule. - Except as otherwise provided in this title, it is unlawful for any person to have a firearm of any kind in or on or against any conveyance propelled by mechanical power or its attachments at any time whether or not the vehicle or its attachment is in motion unless the firearm is unloaded.
     
    Mika, I can understand your point with losing a days pay with the court appearance. Wonder what the DWCO would do if he checked me and my reloads? I have AA trap hulls loaded with 1-1/4 oz #4 shot. I never saw in the law it had to be marked on the hull, just stated the possession of larger than #4 is unlawful.
     
     
     
     

    OVER THE HILL

    Some people are like slinky's; not really good for anything, but, they bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs...
    #29
    S-10
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 5185
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2005/01/21 21:22:55
    • Status: offline
    RE: No deputies 2008/07/09 21:50:44 (permalink)
    Thanks--your right, I was thinking about the spotlighting revision.
    #30
    Page: 12 > Showing page 1 of 2
    Jump to: