Forum Index » Chaff » Montana Mountain Man Arrested For Fishing Without A License (or was it taking the King's deer?) Because He Was Hungry.


Display Avatars Sort By:
Matthew Perry
(bigfoot2) - F

Locale: Oregon
Montana Mountain Man Arrested For Fishing Without A License Because He Was Hungry. on 02/10/2014 22:32:21 MST Print View

They can't figure out why anyone would choose to live this way, apart from society. You can't contain or regulate FREEDOM! Fishing license or not, if a man is hungry, he has a natural, God-given right to eat a fish (or the King's deer!). He's an odd duck, I grant you that, but c'mon....

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=703_1385224413

And his friends threaten to make a citizen's arrest of the judge:

http://benswann.com/friends-of-montana-mountain-man-threaten-to-arrest-local-judge/

kd

I'm sure they were after him for trespassing during the Government shutdown, too, even though his home is in the mountains. This makes me sick. Just let the man eat his fish and live in peace, whatever way he chooses. John Muir and Teddy Roosevelt would be right there with this guy (in the mountains and in jail).
t

Edited by bigfoot2 on 02/10/2014 23:05:54 MST.

Dean F.
(acrosome) - MLife

Locale: Back in the Front Range
Not a survival situation on 02/11/2014 13:34:05 MST Print View

You're sounding a little Unabom there, Matt.

Sort of hypocritical of me, actually, since I'm often accused of the same thing... :)

Some of my Soldiers even gave me a copy of the Unabomer's Manifesto as a PCS gift.

But... does an man in a life-or-death survival situation have a right to catch and eat a fish without a license? I'd argue yes. Does anyone who claims that they are "hungry" have the right to kill and eat any creature they come across?

Most definitely, no. And if you disagree then I'll be by your place shortly to shoot and stir-fry your dog...

As an outdoorsman I have no sympathy at all for poachers. None. Sorry. There are too damned many people to allow at-will hunting and fishing. We'd exterminate everything on this continent larger than a field mouse. Conservation, remember? That said, I like the idea of regulations like Alaska's, which makes allowances for subsistence fishing and hunting by some individuals.

From what I read about this guy he wasn't in any danger of anything, he's just an anti-government wingnut who didn't want to get a license. Did you WATCH the videos you linked? He talks about "oath and bond" and "British magistrates" and "titles of nobility" because the prosecutor has 'esquire' after his name. Am I not supposed to put MD and FACS after mine? (Because that's all 'esquire' means in the US- it's a professional designation.) He also calls himself The Living Man because the name on his driver's license is "owned by the government," not by him... WTF? That's wingnut unorganized militia Montana Freemen verbage if I ever heard it.

He did NOT get hauled away in handcuffs for the misdemeanor fishing without a license charge. He got hauled away for contempt of court. Of which, from what I can see, he is quite guilty. The link you gave makes some sort of harebrained diatribe about him not being allowed to call a witness- but he actually never tried to call a witness, he just wanted an opportunity to play games in court. And, frankly, he was allowed to speak his piece on the issue, but when he just started repeating himself over and over they decided that he was done and slapped him with contempt. I think that judge showed rather good self-restraint.

If he was engaging in civil disobedience, fine. Good on him. I agree that he seems harmless. But he should take his punishment and move on- a principle of civil disobedience. And I still don't want him poaching.

A Montana resident fishing license is $26. If he sells two muskrat pelts he can have a fishing license for a year. (Seriously- I googled the spot price of muskrat pelts.) And it's only $8 if he's over age 62, and in such a case one muskrat would net him two years of fishing licenses.

"The King's Deer?" You make me laugh. The US is actually almost unique in that it's wildlife is considered the property of The People, not the landowners- in Europe to this day hunting is still mostly an upper class perquisite. And I'll point out that The People instituted a government, and tasked it with managing their wildlife in a sustainable manner.

If someone forgets that their license expired, oops, y'know? But I've no sympathy for an unrepentant poacher. Not to mention that the American Taliban (aka the Christian Patriot and Militia movement) make me just as nervous as the Af-Pak ones.

Heck, I have to go. Hopefully this doesn't sound too confrontational without my usual re-re-re-re-editing.

Edited by acrosome on 02/11/2014 14:42:23 MST.

Jennifer Mitol
(Jenmitol) - M

Locale: In my dreams....
Re: Not a survival situation on 02/11/2014 20:29:04 MST Print View

Wow Dean, I actually agree with you AGAIN!!

Dean F.
(acrosome) - MLife

Locale: Back in the Front Range
Re: Re: Not a survival situation on 02/12/2014 08:29:45 MST Print View

Wow Dean, I actually agree with you AGAIN!!


WTF?!? Aren't you a pinko liberal bedwetter or something? How did THAT happen?

:)

Jennifer Mitol
(Jenmitol) - M

Locale: In my dreams....
Re: Re: Re: Not a survival situation on 02/12/2014 09:26:46 MST Print View

I AM!!!!

I also agreed with you 100% on your previous extended tirade on health insurance/payment reform. Right there I thought WTF? And now here again???

You need to go watch more Fox News or something.

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not a survival situation on 02/12/2014 09:38:44 MST Print View

Maybe there's a common sense majority somewhere in the middle

Don't listen to the extremes that want us polarized so they can pick our pockets

Katharina ....
(Kat_P) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Coast
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not a survival situation on 02/12/2014 10:44:51 MST Print View

What?? And I agree with Jerry here. This thread ought to be renamed the Kumbaya of Chaff.

Doug I.
(idester) - MLife

Locale: MidAtlantic
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not a survival situation on 02/12/2014 11:20:25 MST Print View

"What?? And I agree with Jerry here. This thread ought to be renamed the Kumbaya of Chaff."

Forget that crap. I disagree with all of you! I'm not really sure what y'all are talking about because I didn't actually read the thread, but I disagree with everyone anyway!

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not a survival situation on 02/12/2014 12:06:27 MST Print View

I only disagree with Matt because the defendant was poaching deer. Marmots, however, are pure evil so I would have felt differently if he had been hunting them.

Edited by IDBLOOM on 02/12/2014 12:25:19 MST.

spelt the enigmatic
(spelt) - F

Locale: SW/C PA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not a survival situation on 02/12/2014 13:05:51 MST Print View

I agree with Doug! Kumbaya restored.

Ken Thompson
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: Behind the Redwood Curtain
Re: Not a survival situation on 02/12/2014 21:43:33 MST Print View

I like fish you idiots. You'll ruin Chaff with all this agreeing.

Ryan Smith
(ViolentGreen) - M

Locale: Southeast
Re: Montana Mountain Man Arrested For Fishing Without A License Because He Was Hungry. on 02/13/2014 12:02:24 MST Print View

Matthew,

I hope you are posting this in jest. Obviously that guy is off the charts.

Ryan

Rick Adams
(rickadams100) - M
the truth on 02/13/2014 12:51:04 MST Print View

the truth is that any government employee with a badge and a gun can harrass a citizen at will. the argument should be about the ruling class vs private citizens not right vs left as there is actually lots we can agree on. i know lots of good people who work for the government, but they all have to justify an every bigger slice of the pie.

this guy is an idiot for making a huge deal out of a fishing license. law enforcement is making a mountain out of a mole hill.....because they can.

everyone involved needs to learn how to pick their battles.

wait....is that a drone outside????

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: the truth on 02/13/2014 14:05:29 MST Print View

I knew this could only last so long : )

You said "i know lots of good people who work for the government, but they all have to justify an every bigger slice of the pie."

U.S. spending vs time:

usspendingvstime

From 1930 to 1970 the U.S. spending level increased from about 5% of GDP to close to 25% (ignoring WWII).

Since 1970, the spending level has bounced around but stayed a bit below 25%.

No "ever bigger slice of the pie".

You are being effected by the extremists who want you to fight with "liberals" while "they" (the extremists) are picking your (and my) pocket.

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Re: the truth on 02/13/2014 14:09:25 MST Print View

And what's interesting (to me) about that plot, is that since about 1955, the amount spent on military has decreased (except during Bush it increased a little)

The amount spent on health has increased during that period to make up the difference

Medical expenses have been increasing which is totally screwing up the federal budget, and other government, corporate, and individual finances. We have to bring this expense back into line.

Rick Adams
(rickadams100) - M
Jerry on 02/13/2014 14:54:48 MST Print View

I can even find some common ground with you, somehow (if I try).

Not sure excatly what went into your numbers though I doubt it includes unfunded liabilities, but that wasn't really my point.

My point is: That the government at most if not all levels is ever more intrusive and the amount of regulation on the whole only increases. The problem with this is that while well intended, many regulations have unintended consequences that effect real people in tangible ways. I have personally been effect to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, it colors my views quite a bit. Our "leaders" aren't wise enough to know what they don't know, not necessarily bad people, just not all knowing.

In my world, I sell to many government agencies. At the end of every budget year they scramble to buy things they don't really need because if don't their budget will be cut for the next budget year. Hence, my comment about bigger slice of the pie as these folks will do whatever necessary to protect their turf.

And Jerry, you are making assumptions about which side I'm on that aren't accurate. I'm against both sides because they all take care of big donors first, not you or me. I'm on the side of personal responsiblity and freedom of thought. No party currently represents that.

Edited by rickadams100 on 02/13/2014 14:56:57 MST.

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Yup on 02/13/2014 15:15:56 MST Print View

"Not to mention that the American Taliban (aka the Christian Patriot and Militia movement) make me just as nervous as the Af-Pak ones."

Sad but true.

Edited by IDBLOOM on 02/13/2014 15:17:49 MST.

Franco Darioli
(Franco) - M

Locale: Melbourne
Montana Mountain Man Arrested For Fishing Without A License (or was it taking the King's deer?) Because He Was Hungry on 02/13/2014 15:44:57 MST Print View

"I sell to many government agencies. At the end of every budget year they scramble to buy things they don't really need because if don't their budget will be cut for the next budget year."

Same thing used to, and probably still does, happen here.
Amazing how at the end of June so many departments need new cameras....

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Jerry on 02/13/2014 15:48:03 MST Print View

You said "ever increasing slice of the pie"

I assumed you meant to say that the government is getting bigger and bigger, and thus we have to cut it.

Which is the idea that right wingers most talk about right now

And I say in response, that as a percent of GDP, the federal budget has stayed about the same since 1970. No crisis that requires major cuts (in every program that helps regular people)

I agree about unfunded liabilities. Like Medicare. and veterans expenses (exacerbated by the two unnecesary wars). and pensions. This is just the annual amount spent. From wikipedia which gets it's data from the federal government.

Rick Adams
(rickadams100) - M
budgets on 02/13/2014 16:43:01 MST Print View

I'm pretty certain that the R's would spend as much as the D's. They are going to protect there own, the other government employees, from pressures the private sector has felt for a long time. Basically, the ruling class gets a better program than the folks that pay for it. Used to be government employees made less money with better benefits, not so accurate any more.

Your argument re a fairly constant expenditure vs GDP has merit, and the R's will use that same argument when they fail to cut spending too. It seems to me that when we have real budget problems we should expect better than a constant rate of expense growth. Any private executive who offered that the best they could do was being done would likely be terminated within an hour. It's as if they all agree that failing is the best we can do. Of course, try getting elected (or getting anything done), with a policy of rationalizing every function of government and justifying every expense.

Agreed as far as the wars too. My Dad was in the service and one of my sons currently is. Those boys are not valued as they should be (by both parties) and they are sacrificing themselves for people who have no use for us. I know a few higher ranking folks and privately they all say we should have been out of assganistan years ago. Our military and it's men (and women) are used as props.