AR-15 STOLEN FROM NC WILDLIFE OFFICER’S TRUCK

Lafayette Gregory said:
OK.... The solution is to revamp the entire DNR structure, And that ain't gonna happen. Its kinda like when the police dept start to militarize. No more beat cops , everyone is in an armored personnel carrier with turret guns. :eek:
First these sting operations have gotta stop. DNR spends millions on sting ops that sometimes last for years. Note- the bear poaching sting that went ever so wrong. http://www.smokymountainnews.com/ne...ng-sting-uses-dubious-tactics-to-trap-hunters. If they cannot do their investagations with good cop work then they need to get another job. No warrant entry !!!!!!!!!!!!! This has gotta stop. DNR officers are trespassing on private land setting up cameras and other traps to catch a man on his own property minding his own business. Again millions are being spent on rabbit hole adventures based on speculation and sometimes it seems like the DNR just has nothing better to do. So they gotta spend the money in order to get more next year. Sneaking around rifle ranges to ticket guys who make minor violations. "Shooting from a prone position outside the cover stalls" This crap has to stop. A regular patrol is needed but cameras, high tec equipment to film someone shooting trash at a range, Geeez..... Millions of dollars spent to repopulate elk just to allow their hunting buddies with lots of cash and political donations to hunt them. My tax dollars and lic fees should not go to subsidise exotic animal blood sports! And yes!! They do need to be patroling ramps when they are in use. Why do they even need an AR on a rack anyway? Cool factor maybe!!! DNR needs to get back to basic DNR duties. Checking for hunting and fishing lic. and patrolling during hunting season. Responding rapidly to the reports of poaching in the off season. Responding to trespassing reports in a rapid manner. Developing a tag system and monitoring this system at processing centers/investigating clandestine processing and hunt camps. ............ That is enough for a start. And its just the tip of the rifle as to what goes on at the DNR.
Click to expand...

Why do they need an AR? How would you like to confront 4 or 5 drunk bubba's poaching deer with high powered rifles and you only get to have a handgun?
 
Last edited:
SPST said:
Why do they need an AR? How would you like to confront 4 or 5 drunk bubba's poaching deer with high powered rifles and you only get to have a handgun?
Click to expand...
first of all, unlikely scenario. Most poaching is caught after the fact.
secondly, you used the term high-powered correctly. Good on you.
third - how in the world did they do it before the AR15 was the LEO gun du jour?

They're more than likely gonna run into the beat up Toyota Tercel that I witnessed riding the 1 way in and out road at a National Wildlife refuge on Sunday while I was scouting.

2 Hispanic unarmed males up front and 1 underage looking kid in the back with a rifle. Sunday. Pre-season. Almost guaranteed none of them speak english. But I bet they know what a Border Patrol agent looks like. Exactly like the Rabbit Sheriff they're likely to meet should they continue to pursue their sunday hobby.
 
Last edited:
Ikarus1 said:
first of all, unlikely scenario. Most poaching is caught after the fact.
secondly, you used the term high-powered correctly. Good on you.
third - how in the world did they do it before the AR15 was the LEO gun du jour?

They're more than likely gonna run into the beat up Toyota Tercel that I witnessed riding the 1 way in and out road at a National Wildlife refuge on Sunday while I was scouting.

2 Hispanic unarmed males up front and 1 underage looking kid in the back with a rifle. Sunday. Pre-season. Almost guaranteed none of them speak english. But I bet they know what a Border Patrol agent looks like. Exactly like the Rabbit Sheriff they're likely to meet should they continue to pursue their sunday hobby.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't want to be walking up to Jose in his Tercel with his bolt action 30.06 in the middle of BFE armed with only a pistol either. Who knows, Jose could be MS13? If Jose was doing this on your private property with his rifle, would you grab your AR or your pistol to go tell him to leave?
 
SPST said:
I wouldn't want to be walking up to Jose in his Tercel with his bolt action 30.06 in the middle of BFE armed with only a pistol either. Who knows, Jose could be MS13? If Jose was doing this on your private property with his rifle, would you grab your AR or your pistol to go tell him to leave?
Click to expand...
Oh you know, dial 911 and retreat to my safe room. Isn't that what we're instructed to do?
 
Ikarus1 said:
Clearly this is better left to professionals instead of homeowners/landowners. How else are they gonna justify playing faux .mil
Click to expand...

So, I'm guessing the answer is you're just going to grab your .38 and tell them to GTFO your property because no one needs a scary black rifle to do that?
 
J R Green said:
No ones houses are on game reserves. Can you not comprehend that??
Click to expand...

JR, work with me here. I didn't say anyone's home was on a piece of game lands but if a violation is committed on the game lands and they come to your home (anywhere in NC) pursuant to that violation they have the power to search your home. If you're truly an LEO, as you purport, ask your supervisor to explain it to you in terms you can understand.
 
Bailey Boat said:
JR, work with me here. I didn't say anyone's home was on a piece of game lands but if a violation is committed on the game lands and they come to your home (anywhere in NC) pursuant to that violation they have the power to search your home. If you're truly an LEO, as you purport, ask your supervisor to explain it to you in terms you can understand.
Click to expand...
First off, I don't know why you chose to address my post as it had nothing to do with anything you posted.
Show me the statute that gives them authority to search my home without a warrant because being pursuant to an investigation doesn't give them that authority.
I have made no claim of being a LEO so, so much for your legendary comprehension.
 
Excuse me, is there any word on them getting info on who took the AR?
Have them got the AR back?
Thanks
 
Ikarus1 said:
Click to expand...


So the wife will discharge all rounds in to the air and not know where they land okay. Just security forces will be on you with AR style weapons and will kill you.


The weapon does not matter just they are over reaching and if a cop sees a fishing poll or anything to that affect they will call a game warden out to search your vehicle. I have know plenty that have been called out for that. They got tired of it and got out of that line of work.
 
SPST said:
I just can't imagine that Duke Energy or big coal companies wouldn't be dumping their coal ash into our lakes and streams without gov rules and regulations. Oh wait, they do it anyway! I'm sure in your no gov Utopia they would change and be good stewards of the environment.
Click to expand...

Is it just me or did you crush your own point in your argument?

What good does it do us to pay for a government to create rules and regulations that will be ignored? Either way, we get ashy water.

Just a thought...
If the government that created those rules and regulations didn't create a monopoly for those companies, we could have multiple companies offering us energy at competitive prices. Then when we learn one of them dumped ash into our water, we could all change to another company and let that one die the death it deserves. (Not to mention sue their asses and provide them long term prison sentences.) Think that might hinder future malfeasance?
Instead, the goverment slaps them on the wrist and keeps the same people running the same business. Oh yeah, we get the added benefit of our rates going up so they can recover the cost of repairing their "mistake". I don't see the value-add.

One last thought about this (your) example, do you really think that they would think twice about doing it again based on the "punishment" they received?

ETA: (your) in last question for clarity.
 
Last edited:
TheWallrus said:
Is it just me or did you crush your own point in your argument?

What good does it do us to pay for a government to create rules and regulations that will be ignored? Either way, we get ashy water.

Just a thought...
If the government that created those rules and regulations didn't create a monopoly for those companies, we could have multiple companies offering us energy at competitive prices. Then when we learn one of them dumped ash into our water, we could all change to another company and let that one die the death it deserves. (Not to mention sue their asses and provide them long term prison sentences.) Think that might hinder future malfeasance?
Instead, the goverment slaps them on the wrist and keeps the same people running the same business. Oh yeah, we get the added benefit of our rates going up so they can recover the cost of repairing their "mistake". I don't see the value-add.

One last thought about this example, do you really think that they would think twice about doing it again based on the "punishment" they received?
Click to expand...

What is this punishment you speak of? If there are no regulations what is the punishment for not breaking the law?
 
J R Green said:
What is this punishment you speak of? If there are no regulations what is the punishment for not breaking the law?
Click to expand...

Read my post again. The punishment Duke received.

ETA: Added (your) to my post to help clarify.
 
Last edited:
Rarely do I give up on something in progress but I'm going to make an exception in this case and just stop feeding the fish... no pun intended, really.....
 
TheWallrus said:
Is it just me or did you crush your own point in your argument?

What good does it do us to pay for a government to create rules and regulations that will be ignored? Either way, we get ashy water.

Just a thought...
If the government that created those rules and regulations didn't create a monopoly for those companies, we could have multiple companies offering us energy at competitive prices. Then when we learn one of them dumped ash into our water, we could all change to another company and let that one die the death it deserves. (Not to mention sue their asses and provide them long term prison sentences.) Think that might hinder future malfeasance?
Instead, the goverment slaps them on the wrist and keeps the same people running the same business. Oh yeah, we get the added benefit of our rates going up so they can recover the cost of repairing their "mistake". I don't see the value-add.

One last thought about this (your) example, do you really think that they would think twice about doing it again based on the "punishment" they received?

ETA: (your) in last question for clarity.
Click to expand...

No, they won't think twice about doing it again because fines are not much punishment for companies with lots of money. But I still wouldn't want environmental responsibility left up to the companies alone. If we did that, we'd be breathing air like China and India have.
 
TheWallrus said:
Read my post again. The punishment Duke received.

ETA: Added (your) to my post to help clarify.
Click to expand...
You say take away regulations and rely on lawsuits and prison sentences to gain compliance. Where do prison sentences come from if there is no law to violate? You don't get prison time for tort cases.

Also they can be sued already by any injured party and that isn't having much effect; so how is that going to solve the problem when you are in charge?
 
SPST said:
No, they won't think twice about doing it again because fines are not much punishment for companies with lots of money. But I still wouldn't want environmental responsibility left up to the companies alone. If we did that, we'd be breathing air like China and India have.
Click to expand...
So we live in an open market with social issues that pressure companies to fix the issues. Also it is a saleing point to have a clean production system here in the USA. In China and India they do not have the same social pressures to force companies to clean up their acts.
 
J R Green said:
You say take away regulations and rely on lawsuits and prison sentences to gain compliance. Where do prison sentences come from if there is no law to violate? You don't get prison time for tort cases.

Also they can be sued already by any injured party and that isn't having much effect; so how is that going to solve the problem when you are in charge?
Click to expand...

Please read again without adding your own agenda. I did not say I was in charge. I did not say do away with regulations.

1. I pointed out in the prior example that rules and regs are being ignored, so what is the benefit?
2. I gave examples where .gov is doing their job the wrong way (market control) or not at all (enforcement).

I did not say anarchy was best. I did imply that a bad .gov is no better and maybe worse than no .gov.

Until we hold our leaders personally responsible for their actions, or lack thereof, we will continue to receive the crap they roll down towards us.


If I was in charge, I would require that everyone care about everyone else more than themselves. I would make personal responsibility and common sense mandatory for anyone wanting to leave their house. I would remove anyone that intentionally infringed on the rights of others. And no matter what kind of short term success I had, in the long run it would fail. They all do. Government is institutional control and it always fails in the end.

The problem is we have accepted bad government under the ruse it is better than no government. I say it is not. Doesn't mean I want no government. It means I want government held accountable. Tar, feathers, law suits, prison sentences, executions. Sadly, even that dream is false hope. It would require a citizenry that cared.
 
TheWallrus said:
If I was in charge, I would require that everyone care about everyone else more than themselves. I would make personal responsibility and common sense mandatory for anyone wanting to leave their house. I would remove anyone that intentionally infringed on the rights of others.
Click to expand...
I was going to let this thread go but You're saying that you would legislate morality? and that anyone who doesn't comply with your version of what that should be is to be removed from society? Are they to be imprisoned or killed outright? And your "Inquisition" will be better than what we have now?

You go Torquemada!
 
J R Green said:
I was going to let this thread go but You're saying that you would legislate morality? and that anyone who doesn't comply with your version of what that should be is to be removed from society? Are they to be imprisoned or killed outright? And your "Inquisition" will be better than what we have now?

You go Torquemada!
Click to expand...

Let me give you and your likers some advice. Read my entire post(s), thoroughly. Read it objectively. Read it honestly. And when you quote it, don't quote half the story.

Anyone with a little reason and sincerity can understand what I was saying. That was not a campaign speech for my dictatorship. (I never even implied I should be "in charge".) It was making a point about the fallacy of government. No "model" is perfect. Any attempt to govern will falter and corruptly fail if it is not constantly monitored, constrained and challenged.

As usual, you want to try to argue some obscurity, even if you have to create it, because you are unwilling to argue the whole premise. You want to lump me into some preconceived "agenda" instead of reading what I write for what it says. If you want to leave the thread, do so, but if you want to stay, please try reading my posts in their entirety with objectivity.

Only then should you suggest a new name for me.
 
TheWallrus said:
Anyone with a little reason and sincerity can understand what I was saying. That was not a campaign speech for my dictatorship. (I never even implied I should be "in charge".) It was making a point about the fallacy of government. No "model" is perfect. Any attempt to govern will falter and corruptly fail if it is not constantly monitored, constrained and challenged.
Click to expand...
He would tell us that we should shut up and be thankful for what we have today because it could be worse. Somehow I remember Darth Vader making the same kind of claim in The Empire Strikes Back in that scene when he captured Han Solo.
 
"I just can't imagine that Duke Energy or big coal companies wouldn't be dumping their coal ash into our lakes and streams without gov rules and regulations. "

Oh those evil big companies. I bet they like Capitalism too!

I know the solution! Lets create another armed State Goverment Agency to save us.
 
Last edited:
J R Green said:
I was going to let this thread go but You're saying that you would legislate morality?
!
Click to expand...

We do already and have for many years. The only change we've made is to adjust the dial.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom