Unfortunately True..

[Blue_Runner]

SSI, the best way is to not get accused in the first place, hint, hint.

p.s. I refuse to go more than 9 MPH over the speed limit. Most of the time I go 5 to 7 over on the interstate, in good driving conditions.

Question - why is it that the law, for the most part, turns a blind eye to speeders that speed b/t 5 - 9 over the speed limit? We don't see our DNR letting people off for a fish that is 1 millimeter too short or 1 fish over the bag limit? This seems really really backwards to me. Speeding can cause loss of life, your own and/or other innocent lives. Poaching can cause unsustainable wildlife shortages. Obviously the one that involves loss of life should be more strict and more heavily enforced.

Solution: Let the state HWP trade places with DNR. Our roads become safer and SAFMC's dumb @ss laws won't be as strictly enforced.

[ssiredfish]

Thats a good point you have there. Guess it just comes down to discretion but why???

As for being accused, I'll be the first to say it, I'm keepin my Seabass and will continue to support and abide by the previous creel limits. You can call me a poacher or whatever you want but before you do know that I have assisted in more conservation projects(tagging/data collection/catch and release) in my few years then most would in a lifetime. Its complete BS. They know it, admittedly, and I know it....guess it will be to the officer's DISCRETION.

Prohibition didn't last........why?

[Destroyer]

Originally Posted by Blue_Runner

SSI, the best way is to not get accused in the first place, hint, hint.

p.s. I refuse to go more than 9 MPH over the speed limit. Most of the time I go 5 to 7 over on the interstate, in good driving conditions.

Question - why is it that the law, for the most part, turns a blind eye to speeders that speed b/t 5 - 9 over the speed limit? We don't see our DNR letting people off for a fish that is 1 millimeter too short or 1 fish over the bag limit? This seems really really backwards to me. Speeding can cause loss of life, your own and/or other innocent lives. Poaching can cause unsustainable wildlife shortages. Obviously the one that involves loss of life should be more strict and more heavily enforced.

Solution: Let the state HWP trade places with DNR. Our roads become safer and SAFMC's dumb @ss laws won't be as strictly enforced.

Blue, you're looking at it the wrong way.. What you really should be saying is "Why is there a speed limit in the first place"??? Think about it.. Where in the constitution does it say anything about speeders getting fines? Hell, where does it even mention speeders? Where does it say that driving is a privilage, not a guarantee? The fact is we've let the "lawmakers" of this land make law after law after law limiting what we can and cannot do, all in the name of "Safety"... Well, here's a news flash for everyone... SPEEDING DOES NOT CAUSE ACCIDENTS.. Yes, if you get into an accident at a higher speed the chances are that you'll recieve a more serious injury, but the act of speeding itself doesn't cause the accident. Survey after survey has found that you are just as likely to get into an accident at 30 mph as you are to get into one at 70.

I work for a very successful real estate development company. I take ckecks to various towns all the time to pay for building premits, electrical permits, plumbing premits, occupancy premits, elevator permits, permit permits, just about any kind of permit you can think of... We pay hundreds of thousands of dollars just for permits in order to build a warehouse. Permits are nothing but cash cows for towns... In 1934 my grandfather built his homd in Belleville, NJ. That home sold 5 years ago when my uncle died for over $600,000. My grandfather did not need a single permit in order to build the house. My point of this rant is that unless we, the people, start electing people that think like we do, we are doomed to forever being ruled by an elite class that think they know more than we do and make lots of laws to protect us from ourselves. Most times completely unnecessarly. The fishing bans are a great example.

[RidgeRunner]

Lots more traction on this topic than anticipated. Laws have importance in society. It all began with warning labels. LOL.

Prosecution: "Mr. Siredfish, Where were you at 10:43 am on Nov. 3, 2011? Is this or is this not a copy of your itterations on WellcraftV20.com? And do I have the best data available?"

I'm with you, just not sure about skating with that defense.
The FWC guy said that people will take no matter what the rules state.
No **** sherlock! There are fish species worth protecting but get real. There is no shortage of goliath grouper, black sea bass, redfish, trout, or amber jack. Don't have any first hand data on grouper or red snapper but the folks at Florida Sportsman caught plenty of large red snapper in a size group the Feds claimed there simply weren't any.

What techniques do they use to count all the fish in the ocean anyway?

[ssiredfish]

Originally Posted by RidgeRunner

Lots more traction on this topic than anticipated. Laws have importance in society. It all began with warning labels. LOL.

Prosecution: "Mr. Siredfish, Where were you at 10:43 am on Nov. 3, 2011? Is this or is this not a copy of your itterations on WellcraftV20.com? And do I have the best data available?"

I'm with you, just not sure about skating with that defense.
The FWC guy said that people will take no matter what the rules state.
No **** sherlock! There are fish species worth protecting but get real. There is no shortage of goliath grouper, black sea bass, redfish, trout, or amber jack. Don't have any first hand data on grouper or red snapper but the folks at Florida Sportsman caught plenty of large red snapper in a size group the Feds claimed there simply weren't any.

What techniques do they use to count all the fish in the ocean anyway?

Man if they found this thread to use against me that guy deserves a raise

Whats funny is that I think if you were to ask enough fisherman they would tend to say that the Grouper need more protection and not the aforementioned species. They could have a majority on their side as opposed but they want to hammer the stuff we know there is an abundance of. Anyway, better bite my tongue before they do find this......

I think they use hook and line, traps and diver counts to assess numbers but I heard the problem is that they grid an area out and fish it completely as opposed to going where the fish are and fishing multiple areas like the fisherman do. While they may be thorough, they isolate themselves geographically which is going to lead to a misrepresentation.......

[Blue_Runner]

I feel you on the permits and such but got to disagree on the speed limit. Laws are certainly necessary and I think a speed limit is one of those laws. If I didn't have kids I might feel differently.

I was just trying to make the point that why are some laws enforced to the nines and others have an unwritten but accepted threshold beyond what is actually legal. Isn't it kinda hypocritical for someone to rake a fisherman over the coals for breaking a fishing law when they just went over the speed limit on thier way to work? Or ate a slice of the wife's pizza at the pizza buffet when you only ordered the salad? Or used a different trailer tag on your boat trailer because the boat trailer tag was expired?

What really gets in my craw is when a law is bent around and made to fit a situation where it was not intended to be used. Had that happen to me one time. I shoulda went to court but it was out of state, so I just payed the fine and moved on.

[ssiredfish]

I got your data assessment right here.......

http://youtu.be/umMo4Spvw0s

[THEFERMANATOR]

FWC are the pushovers when it comes to fishery enforcement down here in Fl, try dealing with the NOAA people out on the water and see how you like that. They take your catch(ALL of it) to there boat, then count and measure them WITHOUT you present so you can't actually see what they are doing. They don't care what your papers say, they call it in and find out what the regs are if in doubt and go off of that. The NOAA people have said on numerous occasions that ignorance of teh law is no excuse and will be punsihed to the full extent of the law. Also keep in mind that NOAA doesn't answer to local or state courts, when you deal with them you deal with a federal court under basically there own jurisdiction. NOAA has truly become a monster and should be stopped, but with o in the house I don't see that happening.