Got ticketed for fishing w/o a license.... except I wasn't fishing...

[ATOMonkey]

Yes, but what do you do with that license? After you kill a deer, you attach your tag to it, and you're done, unless you want to buy another one. Logically, the license applies to the animal, not the activity. Therefore, the law should be enforced based on the animal, not the activity.

Same way with fish limits. You're allowed XX number of fish over XX size. Once you hit that limit, you're done. So, the law has more to do with the fish than the pole, and that is how it should be enforced.

IMO, convicting a guy because of what you think he might do is just lazy and corrupt. The only way a CO should be able to cite someone is if he catches you with too many fish, deer, squirrels, whatever, or he catches you killing them in an illegal manner.

I know there aren't a ton of COs out there, so catching people in the act is hard, which is why they've changed the regulations to allow them to cite people for intent in order to "head it off at the pass."

That's just not right, it's too much. I know my opinion doesn't matter much, but I believe I'm right. I'd rather be on the side of Liberty than tyranny.

 

[Knife Lady]

Sorry OP but this is how I see it.
Judge- did you ahve a pole in your hand or hands?
answer- yes sir
Judge- was the pole in the water?
answer- yes sir
Judge- was there any kind of lure or bait on the line?
answer- yes sir
Judge- did you have a license in your possesion at this time?
answer- no sir


Judge- Guilty as charged pay the fine.

 

[USMC_0311]

Yes, but what do you do with that license? After you kill a deer, you attach your tag to it, and you're done, unless you want to buy another one. Logically, the license applies to the animal, not the activity. Therefore, the law should be enforced based on the animal, not the activity.

Same way with fish limits. You're allowed XX number of fish over XX size. Once you hit that limit, you're done. So, the law has more to do with the fish than the pole, and that is how it should be enforced.

IMO, convicting a guy because of what you think he might do is just lazy and corrupt. The only way a CO should be able to cite someone is if he catches you with too many fish, deer, squirrels, whatever, or he catches you killing them in an illegal manner.

I know there aren't a ton of COs out there, so catching people in the act is hard, which is why they've changed the regulations to allow them to cite people for intent in order to "head it off at the pass."

That's just not right, it's too much. I know my opinion doesn't matter much, but I believe I'm right, and it's hard to be wrong when you side with Liberty.

I don't think the CO ever questioned intent, pretty obvious, pole in hand and at the site of the CO the pole gets dropped. Bad judgement on the OP's part but anyone would take that as intent. I don't think he was fishing but I get to read his side of the story. I didn't witness his actions before his explantion either. Just bad luck.

I remember when you couldn't even take a deer in Indiana and then for many years only a buck. The rules and regulations are confusing sometimes but overall I am happy that the DNR has made the sport of hunting and fishing in Indiana a hell of a lot better then it was.

I would rather the CO catch them before they poach. I don't think any liberties are being violated when they ask for a license if observed holding a pole, standing on the shore, and then dropping the pole at the site of the CO. He is doing what we asked him to do.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I don't think the CO ever questioned intent, pretty obvious, pole in hand and at the site of the CO the pole gets dropped. Bad judgement on the OP's part but anyone would take that as intent. I don't think he was fishing but I get to read his side of the story. I didn't witness his actions before his explantion either. Just bad luck.

I remember when you couldn't even take a deer in Indiana and then for many years only a buck. The rules and regulations are confusing sometimes but overall I am happy that the DNR has made the sport of hunting and fishing in Indiana a hell of a lot better then it was.

I would rather the CO catch them before they poach. I don't think any liberties are being violated when they ask for a license if observed holding a pole, standing on the shore, and then dropping the pole at the site of the CO. He is doing what we asked him to do.

Except in this case an innocent man is convicted. (I also still believe the license is to CATCH fish, not just try to catch fish but we've established that I'm a loon).

Whatever happened to letting 100 guilty men go free being better than convicting one innocent man?

Is it better for the greater good that we convict the innocent?

 

[USMC_0311]

Except in this case an innocent man is convicted. (I also still believe the license is to CATCH fish, not just try to catch fish but we've established that I'm a loon).

Whatever happened to letting 100 guilty men go free being better than convicting one innocent man?

Is it better for the greater good that we convict the innocent?

Thats not the point of the OP. I don't want to innocent people convicted of anything either. This is hardly a criminal offense, just a fine. He has the option to fight it then the burden of proof is on the state.

You can believe whatever you want far as the license but in Indiana it is a license to fish, catching them is not a requiiement.

 

[yotewacker]

Sorry OP but this is how I see it.
Judge- did you ahve a pole in your hand or hands?
answer- yes sir
Judge- was the pole in the water?
answer- yes sir
Judge- was there any kind of lure or bait on the line?
answer- yes sir
Judge- did you have a license in your possesion at this time?
answer- no sir


Judge- Guilty as charged pay the fine.

I'm with you on this one.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I capitulate.

You guys have much more faith in the government than I do.

 

[wildhare]

Tell me where I need a license to carry a gun in my woods. They can kiss my county a$$ lol. The co obviously didn't care what you were doing. He wrote you a ticket cause he could. A good friend and me were fishing last spring. He opened up the motor 2 minutes before time. The co said he didn't care what our watch said lol. Oh well they do what they want when they want.

 

[USMC_0311]

Tell me where I need a license to carry a gun in my woods. They can kiss my county a$$ lol. The co obviously didn't care what you were doing. He wrote you a ticket cause he could. A good friend and me were fishing last spring. He opened up the motor 2 minutes before time. The co said he didn't care what our watch said lol. Oh well they do what they want when they want.

You don't need a license to carry a gun in your woods. Where are you getting that from? Hell you don't need a license to carry a gun in my woods, just permission.

You do need a license to hunt.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Fight it. If you ain't guilty, you ain't guility.

Protip: Offer to let the Judge/CO smell your hands. If the smell doesn't fit, then you must acquit!

I'm just going to guess that telling either the CO or the judge to "smell my fingers" is not going to go well. Just call that a hunch.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Destro]

If you were not fishing then you were not fishing....fight it

 

[DThurston]

In practice, the OP has no chance of winning. I've heard other complaints, admitedly, not first hand. In one case, a mother was baiting the hook for her kid and got busted.

Personally, I'm convinced that some COs purposely look for such simple tickets for the chance to jack someone up or even just fill the department fund. Either way, in practice, like "winning" against a speeding ticket, you'll lose monetarily at the least. In some areas, we have no freedom anymore.

That said, talking to the court and explaining that you have remedied the situation can't hurt.

Good luck.

 

[MRLUCKYIRISH]

I say pay the fine and be done. If you go to court and lose(and you will lose) then you have to pay court costs and the overtime for the ICO to show up. The ICO saw you with the rod in your hand which means you were fishing by definition.

 

[jsharmon7]

CountryBoy, we have the benefit of hearing your side of the story first and knowing you as a productive member of the site. Obviously we are going to side with you. Unfortunately, it's not what you know but what you can prove. Given what the CO most likely saw, and what you will have to testify to in court (that you were holding a pole, on the bank, with bait, etc.) it's going to be hard for you to prove anything. I would advise that you just chalk this one up to bad luck and move on. Ultimately it's up to you to decide what to do, but I don't see this ending in your favor. The best advice so far (if you decide to fight it) was from Fargo. Either eat the ticket or do what Fargo suggested, but that's only my opinion.

 

[Destro]

is this an infraction of Misd?

 

[CountryBoy19]

Sorry OP but this is how I see it.
Judge- did you ahve a pole in your hand or hands?
answer- yes sir
Judge- was the pole in the water?
answer- yes sir
Judge- was there any kind of lure or bait on the line?
answer- yes sir
Judge- did you have a license in your possesion at this time?
answer- no sir


Judge- Guilty as charged pay the fine.

I clarified once already, your "help" based upon a misconception that the pole was in the water doesn't help me any. The pole was not in the water, I already clarified that once. I was tapping the lure on a log on the shore in front of me.

I'm with you on this one.

Same for you, thanks, but your help and advice sucks... I already clarified once.

I say pay the fine and be done. If you go to court and lose(and you will lose) then you have to pay court costs and the overtime for the ICO to show up. The ICO saw you with the rod in your hand which means you were fishing by definition.

And what is the definition exactly? I'd like to see the IC on this but nobody can present it. I've searched with no luck. What is the definition of fishing in Indiana? There is no IC cited on my citation so it's not just simply a matter of looking it up.

 

[Zoub]

You would think a Country Boy would know better?

Pay it because the only way to possibly beat it involves your BIL as your trusted witness. Dragging him to court is not helping him which is what you were there to do in the first place. Stick to the plan and your original intent.

You are on a downward spiral with this one. Plus, you were fishing. When I fish, before I can cast the lure again, I reel it in, take it out of the water and cast it again. I am almost always on or near water when I do this.

It all fits and your honor is not damaged here, it is just a ticket. People believe you but you lost the second the ticket was written. Don't let it go to collections for being unpaid.

PS I am told the fine here for walking a dog off the leash outside of a specific area on the beach is also $135. My dog is never on the leash but I always have one clipped to my day pack in easy reach. I also always have her under my verbal control. If we drift outside that area of the beach and I am not feeling lucky I clip the leash on her. If I get nailed I will try to negotiate but off the leash is off the leash.

 

[Bert]

plead not guilty and then ask for a trial by jury . really pisses off the judge , but he has to allow it . costs the county a fortune , so they usually just throw it out .

 

[Knife Lady]

Countryboy19 my apology for the misunderstanding that the log you were tapping on was not in the water. Good luck with your fight if you decide to go in that direction.

 

[sbcman]

Tell me where I need a license to carry a gun in my woods. They can kiss my county a$$ lol. The co obviously didn't care what you were doing. He wrote you a ticket cause he could. A good friend and me were fishing last spring. He opened up the motor 2 minutes before time. The co said he didn't care what our watch said lol. Oh well they do what they want when they want.

What are you referring to when you say "opened up the motor 2 minutes before time"? I'm unaware what regulation this breaks. I'd like to know so that I don't break it.

I'm surprised to hear of so many bad encounters with game wardens on this thread. My experience with game wardens in Indiana and Kentucky have been nothing but professional and pleasant.

As to the OP- fight it for principle or pay it for convenience, don't know much else to offer.