DanimalW
WKR
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2020
- Messages
- 395
They’ll probably never see a penny of that restitution. How do they expect a convicted felon to come up with over $300k? Rob a bank?
Nobody said anything about "big huge" dead bucks........but an animal is an animal. Does Kansas price them like high fence hunts......different price points based on their antler size? That would get interesting........low tag prices but state imposed trophy fees figured "after the fact". Don't give them any ideas.Feel free to logic you way into [having a tag = having a big huge dead buck].
Nobody said anything about "big huge" dead bucks........but an animal is an animal. Does Kansas price them like high fence hunts......different price points based on their antler size? That would get interesting........low tag prices but state imposed trophy fees figured "after the fact". Don't give them any ideas.
One tag entitles you to one dead animal.Well you equated a tag to a dead animal. I’m still trying to figure that one out.
Nobody said anything about "big huge" dead bucks........but an animal is an animal. Does Kansas price them like high fence hunts......different price points based on their antler size? That would get interesting........low tag prices but state imposed trophy fees figured "after the fact". Don't give them any ideas.
He was likely convicted under state law. It appears to qualify under Federal statute, it must include all three elements, so the felon must cross state lines. See Element CSo why is he not doing ten years as felon in possession of a firearm...from my limited understanding that is a federal offense.
(b) (1) In addition to any other penalty prescribed by law, the unlawful intentional taking of a trophy big game animal shall be punishable by a fine of not less than $5,000.Here's the quote......"Blick was assessed three hundred ten thousand two hundred thirty-four dollars and sixty-eight cents ($310,234.68) in restitution that is owed to the Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism for the value of the deer killed".
Says that's just for the "value" of the deer killed. So a KS deer tag (even NR tag) is an absolute bargain for such expensive deer. They can probably raise their tag prices if they're that valuable.
Nobody said anything about "big huge" dead bucks........but an animal is an animal. Does Kansas price them like high fence hunts......different price points based on their antler size? That would get interesting........low tag prices but state imposed trophy fees figured "after the fact". Don't give them any ideas.
The felon doesn't have to cross state lines, just the firearm or ammo. So, unless the firearm and ammo were both manufactuered in the same state where the felon possessed them, "C" is automatically met. Chances are the case just wasn't presented to the feds.He was likely convicted under state law. It appears to qualify under Federal statute, it must include all three elements, so the felon must cross state lines. See Element C
QUICK REFERENCE TO FEDERAL FIREARMS LAWS
I. POSSESSION OF A FIREARM OR AMMUNITION BY A PROHIBITED PERSON:
18 USC § 922{g} & {n} . Punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment. May receive minimum sentence of 15 years without parole if offender has three or more prior convictions for a felony crime of violence (e.g. burglary, robbery, assault, possession of offensive weapons) and/or drug trafficking felony.
Elements:
A. Possession or receipt of a firearm or ammunition;
B. By a subject who falls within one of the following categories:
Felon - (Additionally, persons awaiting trial on felony charges are prohibited from receiving firearms.);
Drug user or addict - (Often shown where paraphernalia seized, subject tests positive for drugs and/or subject claims drugs were possessed for personal use.);
Alien - (Includes illegal aliens and aliens lawfully admitted under non-immigrant visas, i.e., those aliens not admitted for permanent residence. This provision does not prohibit aliens who lawfully possess a so-called “green card” from possessing guns or ammunition.);
Is subject to a domestic restraining order - (The order must prohibit contact with an intimate partner, or child of the subject, and must have been issued only after a hearing of which the subject was notified and at which the subject had an opportunity to participate. The order must also find the subject poses a threat to the physical safety of the intimate partner or child or must prohibit the use, threatened use or attempted use of physical force.);
Has a prior conviction for domestic assault - (Includes a prior conviction for any assault or threatened use of a deadly weapon against a present or former spouse or partner or child or guardian of any such person. The subject must have been entitled to a jury trial and been represented by counsel in the prior proceeding or be shown to have waived those rights.);
Fugitive from justice - (Fled any state to avoid being prosecuted or to avoid testifying in any criminal proceeding.); or Dishonorably discharged from the military; AND
C. The firearm or ammunition was transported across a state line at any time.
You're talking about the fines imposed after the fact for poaching. We had already passed that up and were on to discussing tag prices and the "value" of said animals. Yes, I know and understand the Sampson Law.Living in Colorado where Samson's law originated way back in 1998 and has been copied by many other states, including Kansas, you should know better.
I didn't interpret it that way, but you're likely correct.The felon doesn't have to cross state lines, just the firearm or ammo. So, unless the firearm and ammo were both manufactuered in the same state where the felon possessed them, "C" is automatically met. Chances are the case just wasn't presented to the feds.
Yup. I wasn't the one who convoluted the thread by comparing the cost of tags to fines imposed on lawbreakers. Two separate & distinct issues. Using your convoluted logic, the cost of a each share of stock that was manipulated by an inside trader nailed by the Feds should equal the fine he was assessed.You're talking about the fines imposed after the fact for poaching. We had already passed that up and were on to discussing tag prices and the "value" of said animals. Yes, I know and understand the Sampson Law.
Good point.So I read this and it peeked my interest on perceived value on these animals for the state. Wyomings yearly revenue for hunting and fishing is 88.5 million on average. Now down to hunting, specifically license revenue was 43.5 million for non residents. 9.5 million for residents. 77 percent of revenue comes from non res.
I think this might help understand how the state came to the tally they did for the fine. They view the wildlife as the money maker it is.
Im aware this didnt happen in WY. Just had these metrics handy.
Apparently under Kansas law, 5 yrs. is the max for hunting privilege suspensions. The 5 yr. will apply to all states within the compact.That much violating should have gotten a lifetime ban on hunting. But with the new felony expungement thing in our near future he could be hunting from the comfort of his pickup in a few years
I like how the game wardens dog has its own badge on its collar.