Physical force to terminate suspected trespass

JLS said:
No but it may empower the idiots.
Click to expand...
Exactly and now it would codify it. The first time someone physically removes someone wrongly they’re going to be putting themselves out to potential prosecution themselves and probably a massive lawsuit. This law might just be the best way ever for someone to acquire a ranch
 
mulecreek said:
I find it almost impossible to believe that that only thing holding people back from beating the shit out of trespassers on sight was the existence of this law. Good chance we will have the opportunity to see if my faith in people is misplaced.
Click to expand...
As the previously posted story shows, if one party is dead, there is only one side of the story.
 
SAJ-99 said:
As the previously posted story shows, if one party is dead, there is only one side of the story.
Click to expand...
As I previously posted, that level of stupidity was present before this legislation. Don't feel this legislation would measurably change the amount of stupid.
 
mulecreek said:
As I previously posted, that level of stupidity was present before this legislation. Don't feel this legislation would measurably change the amount of stupid.
Click to expand...
Agree completely. There is no reason to have this legislation to allow the stupid to think they have new legislative rights to escalate situation based on their idea of "reasonableness".
 
mulecreek said:
That level of stupidity exists regardless of this legislation. I don't think this legislation will make anyone more or less stupid.
Click to expand...

i see where you're coming from on all this.

but i can't help but think a law that specifically states "is justified in using reasonable and appropriate physical force" and "to the extent that it is reasonably necessary to terminate what the owner .... reasonably believes to be the commission of a criminal trespass" we have a problem.

the bolded words are what already cranky landowners want to see and will see. you can put the words "reasonable" and "reasonably" in the bill a thousand times over but that's what people will see. we have quite a few examples of landowners getting very boldly in peoples faces in wyoming believing they have exclusive rights to land that they don't.

if this bill only results in one landowner feeling empowered to vigilantism simply because he believes he's right, than that's still too many. from watching afar it seems there are lots of landowners that truly "believe" people are trespassing on land that they're actually allowed on. if just a few falsely interpret and believe just a little bit that the law is more on their side, that may be more empowerment than we want.

tldr: i suspect there are plenty of landowners who will not reasonably interpret this bill. 99% of em won't even read it. they'll just hear about it. what i'm really worried about is the landowners that already harass people who aren't trespassing. they're already clearly confused or willfully ignorant on the current law; if they feel even a inch more empowered that's really bad.
 
Last edited:
TOGIE said:
if this bill only results in one landowner feeling empowered to vigilantism simply because he believes he's right, than that's still too many. from watching afar it seems there are lots of landowners that truly "believe" people are trespassing on land that they're actually allowed on. if just a few falsely interpret and believe just a little bit that the law is more on their side, that may be more empowerment than we want.

tldr: i suspect there are plenty of landowners who will not reasonably interpret this bill. 99% of em won't even read it. they'll just hear about it. what i'm really worried about is the landowners that already harass people who aren't trespassing. they're already clearly confused or willfully ignorant on the current law; if they feel even a inch more empowered that's really bad.
Click to expand...
It is possible that all these cranky Wyoming landowners will gather vigilantly posses and start kicking the crap out of law abiding hunters. Just don't think that is likely.

I don't agree with the standard that if even one person acts like a fool we should not have legislation, regulation, rules, etc. If we applied the one stupid person standard to everything else, not much would get done or happen in this world.

I also understand peoples concern with this legislation. Just happen to disagree.

I think the Bill is foolish and unnecessary and is wasting valuable time. This is what I have communicated to my Reps. So far it has not convinced then to kill it.
 
mulecreek said:
It is possible that all these cranky Wyoming landowners will gather vigilantly posses and start kicking the crap out of law abiding hunters. Just don't think that is likely.
Click to expand...

i don't really think that would be what happens.

more thinking if Grende had a slightly different mindset during the elk mountain ranch debacle. what if he kinda felt that the law gave him the power to essentially view his airspace as though it fell under some sort of castle doctrine. "that guy just hopped our corner, he trespassed, let's go drag him out by the collar boys" oof that would be a bad situation with armed folks all around.

sounds like it's all moot anyway!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

HuntingJudge
Montana Antelope Hunt 24
Replies
2
Views
345
HuntingJudge
HuntingJudge
Elkoholic
Elkoholic Retired!
2 3
Replies
49
Views
2K
3855WIN
3855WIN
Stifler
Il show you mine. Even if you dont show me yours.
Replies
7
Views
1K
Stifler
Stifler
beagle001
Old Hand-me-downs: What to do with them?
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
beagle001
beagle001
ImBillT
Aging mule deer bucks!
5 6 7
Replies
123
Views
11K
rogerthat
rogerthat

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,668
Messages
2,028,993
Members
36,275
Latest member
johnw3474

Share this page

Back
Top