gammie in wrong

[pianoman9701]

Like I said, if you don't like it, either make hunting a right or don't hunt. DFW LE has the right to search your vehicle while you're out hunting just because you're hunting. You might be able to beat a rap in court due to no PC, but that's the rules if you hunt. I'm not saying I like it, because I don't. It just is.

Hunting being a "right" has nothing to do with it, we participate in many activities everyday that aren't considered constitutionally protected "rights".  Like someone stated earlier, driving for instance. DFW LE is given more latitude to determine what is "probable cause", but they still have to have probable cause or it is an illegal search.

As I stated, I don't like it either and I believe in the power of my Bill or Rights.

[RifleRidge]

I don't think that you are overreacting at all.

 

[RifleRidge]

Fish and wildlife officers do have a right to search a vehicle without a warrant when there is probable cause of a fish or wildlife violation.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.15.094

Maybe he could have been nicer about it, but it sounds to me like you're overreacting. He searched your vehicle, found nothing, and left you to go on your way. What harm was done?

What harm was done?
WHAT ARE YOU KIDDING ME? WHen there is probable cause. DOesn't sound like there was probable cause to just go through the vehicle without even talking to the guy. YOU GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!

 

[pianoman9701]

Like I said, if you don't like it, either make hunting a right or don't hunt. DFW LE has the right to search your vehicle while you're out hunting just because you're hunting. You might be able to beat a rap in court due to no PC, but that's the rules if you hunt. I'm not saying I like it, because I don't. It just is.

Hunting being a "right" has nothing to do with it, we participate in many activities everyday that aren't considered constitutionally protected "rights".  Like someone stated earlier, driving for instance. DFW LE is given more latitude to determine what is "probable cause", but they still have to have probable cause or it is an illegal search.

Hunting as a right might not have anything to do with this instance, but it would help to make these incidents go away. Once it becomes a right instead of a privilege, that takes the increased power of DFW LE away and would force them to abide by our rights of privacy in any circumstance. That is not the case presntly, obviously.

[Magnum40]

Like the RCW said, they can only search your vehicle to gather evidence.  Just because you are hunting in not legal authority to search.  I would politely say, "Sir, I do not consent to a search" or something similar.  Fighting back would be a bad idea and puts you in the wrong.  Politely stand up for your rights and a true LEO Oath Keeper will respect that or they should get another job.  I know cops who can bust plenty of bad guys following the rules.

[Jingles]

I'm a firm believer in the 4th amendment and all of it..........
----- and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized"
 

[csaaphill]

Understanding the document did mention if the before mentioned officer had reason to believe a crime was commited, but again is my dissent to the whole thing. Is that law enforecement can make that up at their own whim. Seen it been harrassed  by the law before so I know they do.
I think he could of reasonably asked for a warrant or some probable cause.
Hunting itself does not give law enforcement probabel cause I will argue against that forever. Condoning that kind of behavior is opening the door to despotism, and should be stopped in it's tracks.

[Bean Counter]

My only problem with filling a complaint is that i don't know the game wardens name.
And as far as saying I am over reacting like one had said on hear I don't understand that because all I did was tell other fellow hunters how we as hunters are being treated. That's all I have done.

If you really want to file a complaint, you aren't limited by the fact that you didn't get his name. There are only so many game officers, and if you give date and time, along with location, their boss WILL figure out who it was.

[Blacktail Sniper]

http://wdfw.wa.gov/enforcement/surveys/feedback.html

[motg9_6]

Fish and wildlife officers do have a right to search a vehicle without a warrant when there is probable cause of a fish or wildlife violation.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.15.094

Maybe he could have been nicer about it, but it sounds to me like you're overreacting. He searched your vehicle, found nothing, and left you to go on your way. What harm was done?

look up probable cause. they can not just walk up to your vehicle and start searching.

[NoBark]

It's obvious to me that if it hasn't been tested in court yet (don't know)  then someone is going to have to do it.  I would love to know if it has.  I understand the reasoning for more latitude for the gammies, but I do see the conflict with the 4th.   

As far as the whole 'probable cause' issue being a weak reason, IF he does find anything he will have to persuade a judge over someone's lawyer objection, so it will need to have merit.

[popeshawnpaul]

I've done more than a few cases exactly like this.  I've won every one and it's an easy motion to suppress anything he would have found.  I don't care if he found 50 lbs of cocaine, you would be walking on this one.  I don't care if you are armed or the fact that his job is "tough".  We have rights.  You have the right to not feel the way you do right now.  Someone invading your privacy.  That being said, he really won't get in trouble because you have no damages really.  Plus, most attorneys will just cut some deal and not call him on this BS.  He gets away with it and keeps doing it... 

[Bean Counter]

More reason to file a complaint. Those do go in the personel file.

[csaaphill]

Ya I would file a complaint up to you though. As others have said even without a name or badge number dept head can figure out who was where, when, and at what time. If not then this will continue on to someone else.

[bigtex]

....Maybe, they just got a report of a truck matching your description and the occupants threatened someone else with a handgun....

Absent any other evidence, this would merely create "reasonable suspicion" but not "probable cause." Reasonable suspicion  would give a LEO right to temporarily detain an individual to conduct an investigation with due diligence, but absent developing probable cause or obtaining your consent to search, I don't think  a search of the trunk is legal. 

DO NOT CONSENT TO SMPD SEARCHES

Like I said, BC, DFW LE has way more latitude with searches than any other LE in the state.

Thats actually false. WDFW and "ex offico fish and wildlife officers" have the same search authority regarding fish and wildlife enforcement. Ex officio officers are city cops, county deputies, WSP troopers, and LE personnel from DNR, State Parks, NPS, USFS, USFWS, and NOAA/NMFS. When it comes to search authority WDFW and these personnel are on par.

Where the "big" difference was came to stop authority NOT search authority. Up until this year only WDFW Officers could stop you to check for licenses, tags, game, etc, a non-WDFW officer could roll up on you and do a check, but only WDFW could actually order you to stop.

HOWEVER this all changed this year. This year the WDFW asked the legislature to give ex officio officers the same stop authority as WDFW Officers. The legislature (almost unanimously) approved this. So as of Summer 2012 any law enforcement officer can stop you to do a check (just like WDFW) and any officer still can do the search.