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?

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.

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.

Ok deputy, you need to get the info right.

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. 

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?
 
 

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"

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?

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?

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.
 

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?

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

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.

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.

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.