New Requirement to Re-take Hunter Ed for Safety Infractions - Discussion

[pianoman9701]

see the original topic here:
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,107610.msg1405461/topicseen.html#new

I want to discuss the idea of suggesting that people who are busted for safety infractions would need to re-take the Hunter Education class. These infractions would be something like using the scope to glass, especially at a person. Loaded rifle in the vehicle. Shooting the wrong animal. Shooting a person. Accidental, careless discharge of a firearm, either while hunting or not.

I know many of you distrust the DFW for a variety of reasons and are hesitant to "ask for" new regulations. However, at first glance, this seems to make sense to me and by us pursuing it, would be an indication to the general public that most hunters are safety-minded and ethical. I know I'm a boy scout. Let me know how you feel about this.
PMan

[Bob33]

One issue you will run into is the lack of available classroom slots. Most classes fill up well in advance. The argument will be that requiring someone to take a class for an infraction will rob a first time hunter from participating.

As you've probably read on here, there are several instructors across the state who are not pleased with some recent changes in the program, and as a result are stepping down. This could aggrevate the problem with lack of available classroom slots.

[lokidog]

One issue you will run into is the lack of available classroom slots. Most classes fill up well in advance. The argument will be that requiring someone to take a class for an infraction will rob a first time hunter from participating.

As you've probably read on here, there are several instructors across the state who are not pleased with some recent changes in the program, and as a result are stepping down. This could aggrevate the problem with lack of available classroom slots.

Make them go to Olympia and pay for a class put on by the administrators of the program.  Problem solved, funded and puts the big wigs back into the classroom.   

[Blacktail Sniper]

Shooting a person or livestock is already addressed in the regs, but as for the "lesser" violations, I think a regulation like that would great and would support it. 

How would you propose that it be handled?  As a result of a conviction, guility plea or finding of guilt based on an infraction/citation having been issued or as an adminstrative action not requiring an infraction/citation or court action?

I can see violations like the loaded firearm in a vehicle being easist to detect and probably rarely being let go without an infraction/citation being issued, but, like was mentioned in the other thread, scoping someone would rarely, if ever be witnessed by a Game officer.

[Blacktail Sniper]

One issue you will run into is the lack of available classroom slots. Most classes fill up well in advance. The argument will be that requiring someone to take a class for an infraction will rob a first time hunter from participating.

As you've probably read on here, there are several instructors across the state who are not pleased with some recent changes in the program, and as a result are stepping down. This could aggrevate the problem with lack of available classroom slots.

Limit it to a space avalible basis with priority given to new hunters.  If they can't get in and have to miss a season or two because of their stupidity....so what?  No "BOO HOOO" sympathy here for idiots like that.

[Bob33]

Honestly, I suspect that most violators already know what they are doing is not safe or ethical, and thus additional training doesn't address the real issue which is a lack of self discipline or concern for others.

Some form of stiff penalty might be more effective. Make them watch political ads for 8 hours a day for one week. That should cure just about anything.

[pianoman9701]

Shooting a person or livestock is already addressed in the regs, but as for the "lesser" violations, I think a regulation like that would great and would support it. 

How would you propose that it be handled?  As a result of a conviction, guility plea or finding of guilt based on an infraction/citation having been issued or as an adminstrative action not requiring an infraction/citation or court action?

I can see violations like the loaded firearm in a vehicle being easist to detect and probably rarely being let go without an infraction/citation being issued, but, like was mentioned in the other thread, scoping someone would rarely, if ever be witnessed by a Game officer.

Did you mean to say that you already have to re-take Hunter Education if you're cited for shooting another person or livestock? I didn't know that. If so, they should add more infractions to keep people sharp.

Gamies write tickets for rule violations. You can always contest in court when you feel you have a case against the ticket and get a hearing. Obviously, these infractions would usually have to be witnessed by a gamie unless the person reported themselves.

[pianoman9701]

Honestly, I suspect that most violators already know what they are doing is not safe or ethical, and thus additional training doesn't address the real issue which is a lack of self discipline or concern for others.

Some form of stiff penalty might be more effective. Make them watch political ads for 8 hours a day for one week. That should cure just about anything.

It's not really a question of whether they know they're doing it or not. It's a question of making it hurt so that when they have the option in the future, they take the safer route. It would also act as a deterrent to others when considering an unsafe action, especially if it's been spelled out for them previously in the class.

Making someone watch political ads would qualify as cruel and unusual punishment.

[Blacktail Sniper]

Honestly, I suspect that most violators already know what they are doing is not safe or ethical, and thus additional training doesn't address the real issue which is a lack of self discipline or concern for others.

Some form of stiff penalty might be more effective. Make them watch political ads for 8 hours a day for one week. That should cure just about anything.

True enough, people who don't care, just don't care. 

Have the requirement that they pay a reinstatement fee after completing the class and before getting their license back.  Has been that way for years when someone losses their driver's license.

[bobcat]

I want game wardens out catching poachers, not being safety police.

[pianoman9701]

One issue you will run into is the lack of available classroom slots. Most classes fill up well in advance. The argument will be that requiring someone to take a class for an infraction will rob a first time hunter from participating.

As you've probably read on here, there are several instructors across the state who are not pleased with some recent changes in the program, and as a result are stepping down. This could aggrevate the problem with lack of available classroom slots.

I agree with the poster who wrote that preference goes to first time students. This would make the penalty even stiffer.

[KFhunter]

you got too much time on your hands piano 

 I vote no - this would be about as effective as DUI classes many states put on, sure it costs the driver a lot of pain and $ but in the end the class itself has little training value. 

If you're coming at this from a training standpoint, I think it is a fail as *they* won't learn a damn thing. 
If you are coming at this from a punishment standpoint, then yes taking hunters ED all over again will be painful 

A very stiff fine would make more money for WDFW than contracted out pay-per-class hunters safety, the only winner there is the 3rd party contractor.

[Bob33]

One issue you will run into is the lack of available classroom slots. Most classes fill up well in advance. The argument will be that requiring someone to take a class for an infraction will rob a first time hunter from participating.

As you've probably read on here, there are several instructors across the state who are not pleased with some recent changes in the program, and as a result are stepping down. This could aggrevate the problem with lack of available classroom slots.

I agree with the poster who wrote that preference goes to first time students. This would make the penalty even stiffer.

How does that work? Instructors post their class schedules online for the following year in December. Many classes fill up quickly. Are you suggesting that violators cannot register, but must wait until the day of class to see if a spot is available? If they register, and the class fills, then first time potential hunters cannot register.

I admire the intent but I think this will create some real headaches for scheduling students.

[pianoman9701]

I want game wardens out catching poachers, not being safety police.

This would be during the course of their regular job. This wouldn't require any additional effort. As it is now, if they observed this activity, they'd stop the person and correct them. The only change would be a citation.

[KFhunter]

One issue you will run into is the lack of available classroom slots. Most classes fill up well in advance. The argument will be that requiring someone to take a class for an infraction will rob a first time hunter from participating.

As you've probably read on here, there are several instructors across the state who are not pleased with some recent changes in the program, and as a result are stepping down. This could aggrevate the problem with lack of available classroom slots.

I agree with the poster who wrote that preference goes to first time students. This would make the penalty even stiffer.

How does that work? Instructors post their class schedules online for the following year in December. Many classes fill up quickly. Are you suggesting that violators cannot register, but must wait until the day of class to see if a spot is available? If they register, and the class fills, then first time potential hunters cannot register.

I admire the intent but I think this will create some real headaches for scheduling students.

A punitive hunters education class would be by necessity be a contract 3rd party pay-per-class, like the guilty DUI driver taking "safety" classes, costs them a helluva lot of money and time, but do they learn anything?