DNR Auction

[ForeverTwoWheels]

Are you saying that just because some unelected thug in a suit gives you a blessing in exchange for a bribe (ie license fees) that hunting is any different?

Whats the difference between hunting and poaching? Whether or not you have paid off the State.

Well, poachers also hunt on private land, where they don't even ask the landowners....but I am sure you have something to say about that as well. Not a big deal I suppose?

Can you answer the simple question if the poached animals are victims or not? it sounds like you are saying they are not victims. They are just animals? Right? Do whatever you want to them, as they are just animals? Is that how you think? I am just trying to get a baseline on you...

Quite to the contrary. I take it you are unfamiliar with libertarian principles one of which is ultimate private property ownership rights which include trespassing law. So, yes, I would have a problem with that scenario in which the crime would be trespassing and not poaching.

I would consider an animal that has been killed "legally" or "illegally" a victim of a crime and as long as you have paid your bribe to the DNR they'll leave you alone. However, this point seems to be distracting us from the original topic of discussion.

As I said before, I prefer not to hunt, but that's mostly because I can be rather impatient


---------------------------------------------------------------
Treat me good I'll treat you better.
Treat me bad I'll treat you worse.

Respect is a two way street gentlemen.

[ForeverTwoWheels]

deleted

[weck]

Quite to the contrary. I take it you are unfamiliar with libertarian principles one of which is ultimate private property ownership rights which include trespassing law. So, yes, I would have a problem with that scenario in which the crime would be trespassing and not poaching.

I would consider an animal that has been killed "legally" or "illegally" a victim of a crime and as long as you have paid your bribe to the DNR they'll leave you alone.

As I said before, I prefer not to hunt, but that's mostly because I can be rather impatient

So a trespassing law is OK then? So being a libertarian means you can pick and choose what laws you want to abide by? I am confused by your logic.

[ForeverTwoWheels]

Quite to the contrary. I take it you are unfamiliar with libertarian principles one of which is ultimate private property ownership rights which include trespassing law. So, yes, I would have a problem with that scenario in which the crime would be trespassing and not poaching.

I would consider an animal that has been killed "legally" or "illegally" a victim of a crime and as long as you have paid your bribe to the DNR they'll leave you alone.

As I said before, I prefer not to hunt, but that's mostly because I can be rather impatient

So a trespassing law is OK then? So being a libertarian means you can pick and choose what laws you want to abide by? I am confused by your logic.

Now who's the troll? Alright, I'll hope you're posing an honest question and that somehow you've never heard of this widely popular ideology.

Libertarians support maximum liberty in both personal and economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence. Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose government bureaucracy and taxes, promote private charity, tolerate diverse lifestyles, support the free market, and defend civil liberties. When it comes to crimes libertarians often use a "no victim, no crime" litmus test in deciding whether a law has a legitimate purpose and goal of protecting individuals from harm or aggression or if it mainly a revenue stream for the State.



---------------------------------------------------------------
Treat me good I'll treat you better.
Treat me bad I'll treat you worse.

Respect is a two way street gentlemen.

[weck]

Now who's the troll? Alright, I'll hope you're posing an honest question and that somehow you've never heard of this widely popular ideology.

Libertarians support maximum liberty in both personal and economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence. Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose government bureaucracy and taxes, promote private charity, tolerate diverse lifestyles, support the free market, and defend civil liberties. When it comes to crimes libertarians often use a "no victim, no crime" litmus test in deciding whether a law has a legitimate purpose and goal of protecting individuals from harm or aggression or if it mainly a revenue stream for the State.

Being called a troll on the internet...now I feel accomplished, even thought it was pretty uncalled for. I am sorry I am not familiar with your "Libertarian" philosophies. Didn't realize not doing my homework on some random guy on the internet was Troll-Worthy. Forgive me for asking dumb questions about something that to me sounds like a bat-**** crazy old man raving random thoughts.

[ForeverTwoWheels]

Now who's the troll? Alright, I'll hope you're posing an honest question and that somehow you've never heard of this widely popular ideology.

Libertarians support maximum liberty in both personal and economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence. Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose government bureaucracy and taxes, promote private charity, tolerate diverse lifestyles, support the free market, and defend civil liberties. When it comes to crimes libertarians often use a "no victim, no crime" litmus test in deciding whether a law has a legitimate purpose and goal of protecting individuals from harm or aggression or if it mainly a revenue stream for the State.

Being called a troll on the internet...now I feel accomplished, even thought it was pretty uncalled for. I am sorry I am not familiar with your "Libertarian" philosophies. Didn't realize not doing my homework on some random guy on the internet was Troll-Worthy. Forgive me for asking dumb questions about something that to me sounds like a bat-sh*t crazy old man raving random thoughts.

I apologize, the tragedy of the interwebs is that when I read "so you just pick and choose" my knee jerks towards the defensive. It was uncalled for.

These ideas are not exactly "mainstream" but are by no stretch a "fringe" ideology and upon further research and reading the principles become less "crazy" and more logical when their consistency, morality and practicality is realized and accepted. If you have time for a good read I would suggest "1984" or "Atlas Shrugged".



---------------------------------------------------------------
Treat me good I'll treat you better.
Treat me bad I'll treat you worse.

Respect is a two way street gentlemen.

[weck]

I apologize, the tragedy of the interwebs is that when I read "so you just pick and choose" my knee jerks towards the defensive. It was uncalled for.

These ideas are not exactly "mainstream" but are by no stretch a "fringe" ideology and upon further research and reading the principles become less "crazy" and more logical when their consistency, morality and practicality is realized and accepted. If you have time for a good read I would suggest "1984" or "Atlas Shrugged".

Not sure it is "uncalled for". In my eyes, there are 2 laws, you are trying to pick and choose which one to follow are you not? You want the property laws, but not the hunting laws? either way, have a great night. I am going to go put my daughter to bed since she is throwing a fit...

[yuppiejr]

If the DNR charges a fee to hunt on "public" land shared by a community and that I don't own I don't really see paying a license fee being different than paying a landowner for private hunting rights on their property. If someone chooses to poach on another person's private property or public land without adhering to the rule of law that is clearly documented I don't understand the basis for objection to people having the instruments of their crime confiscated.

In the pure libertarian view, to what extent should private property rights allow the rule of law to be entirely the choice of the landowner? Murder, rape, incest, cruelty to animals - to what degree of legal autonomy does a pure libretarian feel property ownership entitles them on their own land, is it completely outside the rule of state and federal law? What if an adjoining private landowner elects to absorb a neighboring private property that functions outside the rule of state and federal law through use of force - fair game? Do we simply become a nation of small states and warlords ruled by the richest and most aggressive landowners? Or do we agree that certain oversight is appropriate including a set of common laws that apply to both private and public lands to allow for a reasonable amount of structure and security for all people even if it means the occasional tresspassing dumbass poacher gets their 4-wheeler and shotgun confiscated?

[BemidjiDweller]

You guys have a talent to turn something you disagree with into the devil himself.

[Scott Notaeh]

What does trespassing have to do with poaching?

[Scott Notaeh]

If the DNR charges a fee to hunt on "public" land shared by a community and that I don't own I don't really see paying a license fee being different than paying a landowner for private hunting rights on their property.

Pretty sure a libertarian would agree with this.

In the pure libertarian view, to what extent should private property rights allow the rule of law to be entirely the choice of the landowner? Murder, rape, incest, cruelty to animals - to what degree of legal autonomy does a pure libretarian feel property ownership entitles them on their own land, is it completely outside the rule of state and federal law? What if an adjoining private landowner elects to absorb a neighboring private property that functions outside the rule of state and federal law through use of force - fair game? Do we simply become a nation of small states and warlords ruled by the richest and most aggressive landowners? Or do we agree that certain oversight is appropriate including a set of common laws that apply to both private and public lands to allow for a reasonable amount of structure and security for all people even if it means the occasional tresspassing dumbass poacher gets their 4-wheeler and shotgun confiscated?

Huh? a libertarian would clearly identify a victim in murder, rape, and incest. When I think of victim-less crimes, I think of helmet laws, seatbelt laws, drug laws, prostitution, and perhaps "poaching" a fish or critter on my own land.

The confiscations set-up perverse incentives.

[yuppiejr]

If I'm interpreting the arguments correctly this is not an objection to seizure by the DNR per se, it's primarily around restricting unlimited hunting rights on private property by the landowner. Do we know to what extend the confiscations resulting in the auction in question were made on private land versus public? It seems like the law has a logical mechanism for placing the burden of cost for enforcement on people who violate the law, there is no more incentive taking a poacher's gun to cover the cost of enforcement than there is collecting a fine from someone who gets nailed going 72 in a 55 mph zone...

[Pezhead]

Wow. A simple question is turning into a big debate. I wasn't planning on attending this auction just an idea if the guns would be overpriced(i.e. Gander Mtn.)
I see this thread getting locked soon.

[tt3]

I hope not, Pez. I enjoy these threads.

"This orange is JUICY!"
"NO, This apple is RED!"
"No, TROLL, this orange is JUICY!"
(C'mon where's Godwin's Law?)
"Only a natzi like you would call this apple green!"

[ForeverTwoWheels]

Wow. A simple question is turning into a big debate. I wasn't planning on attending this auction just an idea if the guns would be overpriced(i.e. Gander Mtn.)
I see this thread getting locked soon.

That would be a shame since there's good conversations going on. If it doesn't interest you and your question was answered then feel free to explore elsewhere.


---------------------------------------------------------------
Treat me good I'll treat you better.
Treat me bad I'll treat you worse.

Respect is a two way street gentlemen.