Posted on 08/25/2011 1:37:53 PM PDT by xp38
In the latest example of the gap between Canadian and American views about polar-bear hunting, a Michigan man could face jail after pleading guilty to bringing home a mounted trophy of a bear he had legally shot in Nunavut a decade ago.
Rodger Dale DeVries, 73, entered a guilty plea this week to one count of illegally importing polar-bear parts.
(Excerpt) Read more at theglobeandmail.com ...
“Increasingly statutes of limitation are being altered to read “x number of years AFTER police become aware of a crime”.”
Every time I hear about a change to a law like that, it’s always for the worse.
Almost everything is being run by people who should never be in charge of anything.
Can writs of attainder, ex post facto laws, and debtor’s prison be far behind?
“In the summer of 2007, he went back to Calgary and moved the bear mount and its skull to a storage unit in Sault Ste. Marie, Ont. From there, Mr. DeVries and his two grandchildren, both minors, took the trophy by boat to a tiny harbour in northern Michigan, then drove it home.”
He knew exactly what he was doing and chose to break the law.
If I thought I had a shot at it I would’ve notified authorities of the assh*le who deliberately ran over a medium-sized turtle with his Jeep but I was too far behind him to get his license plate number. This turtle was crossing the road between an adjacent wetland pond and a section of wooded land approx. 100 feet away. I wanted to jump that SOB at a red light and kick him in the balls. There is NO excuse for that...NONE EVER! Not to discriminate by age but the driver of the Jeep appeared to be male, between 17 and 23 years old. It happened back in 2004 or 2005 on what was supposed to be a beautiful spring day in SE Michigan.
Functionally, we already have the latter two. Consider changes to handgun permits so that what once weren't felonies/restrictions against getting a concealed permit are now grounds for refusal.
Or the ever-growing restrictions on those convicted of violence against children; yes, it's a terrible thing, but if they've served their sentence they should be allowed to continue on with their lives. Yet we see locality after locality increase the exemption around parks, churches, schools and the like.
And good luck if you owe any back taxes; even bankruptcy won't get you out of that and you'll end up paying for the rest of your life.
“Since May of 2008, the U.S. government has listed polar bears as a threatened species and banned the importation of pelts and heads from any parts of Canada, a move that has hurt Nunavut outfitters and others benefiting from the tourism money of big-game hunters.”
Sounds like an ex post facto conviction to me.
I would vote not guilty if I were a juror.
Everything leading to his breaking the law was crap. Polar bears have been declared “endangered” despite a growing population, he legally hunted the bear and was fine transporting it within Canada.
If he were trafficking parts for sale it would be one thing but this was a trophy he shot years ago that the government has since decided that he can’t have.
“but if they’ve served their sentence they should be allowed to continue on with their lives.”
The problem with that, at least as regards sexual abuse, is that the person continues to suffer from pedophilia, which does not seem amenable to treatment. One can never say with confidence that a child is safe with them.
This is why I think sexual abuse of children should be a capital crime.
A polar bear was just killed (accidentally)on Endicott Island, Alaska ~1 week ago. I was up there working at the time the Feds were doing there investigation. I can tell you first hand, the security at Endicott really did feel bad that the bear suffered for about a week before it died. They were not allowed to put it down because of the strict laws...Also, the comments following the article linked below will make your blood boil.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2011/08/polar-bear-killed-bp-arctic.html
“but if they’ve served their sentence they should be allowed to continue on with their lives.”
The problem with that, at least as regards sexual abuse, is that the person continues to suffer from pedophilia, which does not seem amenable to treatment. One can never say with confidence that a child is safe with them.
This is why I think sexual abuse of children should be a capital crime.
That’s a good point. I went back the article to see why he pled guilty. It says this, “Mr. DeVries’s case predates the May 2008 American classification.”
“However, he was charged because he shot the bear in the Foxe Basin area, north of Hudson Bay, a place where the U.S. Department of the Interior hadn’t confirmed that the hunt was conducted at sustainable levels.”
But that’s not very clear at all. He may have been charged with the crime for any reason. Perhaps he smart mouthed the prosecutor. Who knows.
Here is a clue, “After killing a bear, he had it mounted by a taxidermist in Calgary. Mr. DeVries then left it in storage with a friend there because he knew he couldn’t legally take it to the U.S.”
So what the heck is going on here? The listing of polar bears as a threatened species was set after he transported the bear. Why did he “know it was against the law” to do something before the bears were listed as a threatened species?The article reads like it was written by a B student English major who doesn’t really understand what he’s writing about and hopes that the vagueness makes the article more intriguing.
Thinking more about it, here is what really irks me (apart from the poor writing). Congress never said that polar bears were threatened. Congress never said that it was illegal to import polar bears. These were laws made up by executive branch technocrats under a vague law passed by congress. This is how we’ve lost our freedom and stifled the economy. Congress gets to say “We are against killing threatened species” but never has to take responsibility for specifically voting on the words to which DeVries plead guilty.
Cummings v. Missouri (1867):
3. A bill of attainder is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without a judicial trial. If the punishment be less than death, the act is termed a bill of pains and penalties. Within the meaning of the Constitution, bills of attainder include bills of pains and penalties.
So, if your car (widget) is allegedly used in a crime, and confiscated without a trial...
Ex post facto:
if you kill a bear and import it into the US before it becomes against the law to do so...
If you get your 16 year old girlfriend pregnant, while 20 yourself, and marry her, and you can no longer give out halloween candy when someone decides decades later to change the punishment for the crime...
debtor’s prisons:
if you are charged child support at a rate beyond your ability to pay, or for times they lived with you, or for that matter, if you simply are a deadbeat...
Further language in the Cummings case would argue against the practice of at least some red light camera tickets of saying that if you don’t pay or appeal by x date, you lose all right to do so, and may only plead that you or your vehicle are guilty.
“”A British act of Parliament,” to cite the language of the Supreme Court of Kentucky,
“might declare, that if certain individuals, or a class of individuals, failed to do a given act by a named day, they should be deemed to be, and treated as convicted felons or traitors. Such an act comes precisely within the definition of a bill of attainder, and the English courts would enforce it without indictment or trial by jury.”
When did it become illegal?
I know a guy that shot one in Canada about 40 years ago, had it mounted and the 10’ high standing Polar bear graces his den in California.
“......Insanity they name is regulation...”
In our Health & Safety class the instructor asked “how much of a fine can a company get if an employee dies from unsafe work practices?” It was $70,000 maximum (OSHA).
He then related instances of two crew members slopping out a ships hold of oily water and spilling it into the bay. The next morning, the Coast Guard followed the sheen and arrested the two. Hundreds of thousands in fines and ten years in jail Waited for the Captain. 25 years in jail.
I forget what it was for eagle’s feathers - but huge fines and long prison term.
All of the cases and numbers were way goofy.
Cummings v. Missouri (1867):
...bill of attainder...Ex post facto...debtor’s prisons:
Jeez, you’re just a bundle of cheer.
Did you have to show me that things are even worse than I thought they were?
I want to extend childhood out to 60, start believing in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.