nile paper says muck's shot 140+/- deer last weekend?

[colockumelk]

I'll answer each of your questions.


Maybe they should change your fines so you could be in common with the Native Americans of the United States.
1. Well personally I think ALL poaching fines should be higher so it deters people more.  So tribal fines should match the state fines.  Not the other way around.  Also the minority should match the majority not the other way around.  Plus the WDFW does a much better job of managment and enforcement than the local tribes does. 

SO is it discrimination because Washington's fines are not the same as Oregon?
2. This is an apples to oranges comparison. I explained why in a PREVIOUS POST!!! If I go to Oregon and poach an animal.  And a guy from Oregon poaches an animal.  We BOTH get convicted and punished in an Oregon court and both receive the same sentance.  I don't get whisked away to WA and receive a much lower sentance.  Where if you and I go poach a Ram in WA state.  Legal Precedant says I get a Class C felony, 180 days in jail, a $3,000 fine and loss of hunting rights for life.  You get protected by the tribe and only get a $1,000 fine and loss of privelages for a year.  Sound fair? 


Are we not all Americans?
I used the example of you are a Yakama (which is how you describe yourself) as to why you get off easier than me soley due to your race.  I am an American, that's how I describe myself.  How would you describe me?  I refuse to use "Non-Native" since I am just as Native as you are.  I wont use "whitey" since that's racist.  Since we don't live under the same rules and are not subject to the same laws then I have to use a word to differentiate the two.  Yakama hence a person of the Yakama Nation.  And American since I am a citizen of the United States of America. 

I don't think its ok but that's the way it is.
Then help change it because its BS.  I still havn't received an answer yet ( Not directed at you YAK) but I don't see how it is legal and constitutional for different sentances to be doled out for the same crime SOLELY because of their race.  It's BS. 

The fact that we are debating whether or not tribal members should be held to the same legal standard as American's I think is absurd.  (Again not directed at you YAK)  We can all debate treaty rights until we are blue in the face, but I don't even see where or how it could be a matter of discussion on whether the racial discrimination is okay or acceptable. and it shows just how messed up the whole situation is when you have people who are not subject to the same laws as I am or if they do break the same law I do receive a much much much lower sentance.  How is this not unconstitutional.  Can someone please tell me how this is legal???

[PlateauNDN]

Colock, this again falls back to being a Sovereign Nation and exercising Self-Governance, like I mentioned previously we did not create, write or have a say on how or why the Laws were written the way they were.  This was done a long time ago and only the Current Tribal Council has the authority to make any type of amendments/changes to what is written. 

Should there be some change in the current laws?  Yes, I believe they should be reviewed and updated as needed. 

Am I or anybody else on this site in the position to do so?  Probably not.

It's not discrimination, the Tribe itself is exercising it's rights to create and enforce its own set of laws and regulations.  Again, as far as I know none of us are on any of our respected Councils so we don't have the authority to change the laws that have already been set.

I know we can debate this issue until we are all blue in the face and we've done it before.  I agree somethings need to change but until somebody is in a position to do it then I don't see it changing any time soon.

[whiteeyes]

I'll answer each of your questions.


Maybe they should change your fines so you could be in common with the Native Americans of the United States.
1. Well personally I think ALL poaching fines should be higher so it deters people more.  So tribal fines should match the state fines.  Not the other way around.  Also the minority should match the majority not the other way around.  Plus the WDFW does a much better job of managment and enforcement than the local tribes does. 

SO is it discrimination because Washington's fines are not the same as Oregon?
2. This is an apples to oranges comparison. I explained why in a PREVIOUS POST!!! If I go to Oregon and poach an animal.  And a guy from Oregon poaches an animal.  We BOTH get convicted and punished in an Oregon court and both receive the same sentance.  I don't get whisked away to WA and receive a much lower sentance.  Where if you and I go poach a Ram in WA state.  Legal Precedant says I get a Class C felony, 180 days in jail, a $3,000 fine and loss of hunting rights for life.  You get protected by the tribe and only get a $1,000 fine and loss of privelages for a year.  Sound fair? 


Are we not all Americans?
I used the example of you are a Yakama (which is how you describe yourself) as to why you get off easier than me soley due to your race.  I am an American, that's how I describe myself.  How would you describe me?  I refuse to use "Non-Native" since I am just as Native as you are.  I wont use "whitey" since that's racist.  Since we don't live under the same rules and are not subject to the same laws then I have to use a word to differentiate the two.  Yakama hence a person of the Yakama Nation.  And American since I am a citizen of the United States of America. 

I don't think its ok but that's the way it is.
Then help change it because its BS.  I still havn't received an answer yet ( Not directed at you YAK) but I don't see how it is legal and constitutional for different sentances to be doled out for the same crime SOLELY because of their race.  It's BS. 

The fact that we are debating whether or not tribal members should be held to the same legal standard as American's I think is absurd.  (Again not directed at you YAK)  We can all debate treaty rights until we are blue in the face, but I don't even see where or how it could be a matter of discussion on whether the racial discrimination is okay or acceptable. and it shows just how messed up the whole situation is when you have people who are not subject to the same laws as I am or if they do break the same law I do receive a much much much lower sentance.  How is this not unconstitutional.  Can someone please tell me how this is legal???

Trick or Treaty !! 

[colockumelk]

Hey Plateau I did not realize you guys could selves govern. Does this include felonies. Such as if you murder someone (extreme example) do you do time in a federal prison or a jail on the reservation.

As far as being a soveriegn nation goes if that is the case then it should be all or nothing. If tje tribes were truly soveriegn than the reservations should be treated just like every other foreign country. To only claim the sovereign nation status only when it suites you is BS. And I'm not made at the tribes I'm mad at our government for not doing the rigjt thing which is treat you as a soveriegn nation like Canada or Mexico or treat like full on Americans like myself. No in between.

And we havnt debated this topic on this site yet. We've debated treaty hunting but nothing about actual crimes being commited.

[PlateauNDN]

I was referring to Sovereignty Issues and through all your research you're telling me you never came upon any paperwork that showed you this?  We are allowed to prosecute up to Gross Misdemeanors and everything above that statute is turned over to the Feds and prosecuted through Federal Court.  If you are guilty in Federal Court you do Federal Prison, Misd's and below you do Tribal Jail.

We are treated as a Sovereign Nation, why do you think we have to report to the Federal Government and not the State.  There is no in between, when States or the Govt. want to deal with the Tribe they deal with the Tribal Council on a Government-to-Government basis.  Why do you think the Govt. has the final say in what we do.

[colockumelk]

Hey Plateau thanks for the info. And no I swear I didn't know any of that stuff. I never really researched that stuff. I guess my last question is if your sovereign then why do you answer to tje feds?  I currently cant do a whole lot of research because my only internet is my phone.

[ICEMAN]

I was referring to Sovereignty Issues and through all your research you're telling me you never came upon any paperwork that showed you this?  We are allowed to prosecute up to Gross Misdemeanors and everything above that statute is turned over to the Feds and prosecuted through Federal Court.  If you are guilty in Federal Court you do Federal Prison, Misd's and below you do Tribal Jail.

We are treated as a Sovereign Nation, why do you think we have to report to the Federal Government and not the State.  There is no in between, when States or the Govt. want to deal with the Tribe they deal with the Tribal Council on a Government-to-Government basis.  Why do you think the Govt. has the final say in what we do.

Please quit....The tribes are not treated as a sovereign nation....  I don't have a nation status to compare the relationship, but it does not seem like a sovereign nation to me.
 
Here is a definition from the web;
The supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power by which an independent state is governed and from which all specific political powers are derived; the intentional independence of a state, combined with the right and power of regulating its internal affairs without foreign interference.
Sovereignty is the power of a state to do everything necessary to govern itself, such as making, executing, and applying laws; imposing and collecting taxes; making war and peace; and forming treaties or engaging in commerce with foreign nations. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Sovereign+nation
 
 
You are using US made american cash in your daily transactions, you have no border control, you have no trade tarrifs of trade arrangements with the US and rather ignore our tax laws, we come in and put out your fires on tribal lands, the sheriff will make and arrest and prosecute felonies...etc...etc...etc... 
 
My point is, you are not a Sovereign nation so lets not call it that...
 
 
EDIT, just found it:   Domestic Dependent Nation
 
Tribal sovereignty in the United States refers to the inherent authority of indigenous tribes to govern themselves within the borders of the United States of America. The federal government recognizes tribal nations as "domestic dependent nations" and has established a number of laws attempting to clarify the relationship between the federal, state, and tribal governments. The Constitution and later federal laws grant local sovereignty to tribal nations, yet do not grant full sovereignty equivalent to foreign nations, hence the term "domestic dependent nations".

[FC]

Ouch, body blow right on the belt line!

[whiteeyes]

Ya its really important that we keep it politically correct.... 

[Alan K]

I'll start off saying that I haven't yet read this entire thread yet, but figured this would be a good starting point. . .

i dont condone poaching at all and never will. poaching is hunting illegaly. right?

I'd think it's safe to say that everyone on here can agree to that. That right there however is why those of us who hunt by the states laws are always so enraged over these topics.  If any of 'us' were to do what the tribal hunters do, it would be poaching!!! Sure what you guys do might be technically legal, but to us those practices are considered hunting illegally, which is why it makes most of us want to puke when we hear about it. 

Now I understand it is all legal, but I know that to me poaching is just about as heinous as murder. (Again, what you guys do is considered legal, but in my mind it is poaching nonetheless because if I were to do it it would be considered such.) If it were legal for a select few to run wild committing murder via a treaty, it still wouldn't be right! That's the issue to me.

And as far as the number of animals go, it probably doesn't have as dramatic an effect on the populations as we might think, but where I get fired up is when I keep hearing the 'in common with' language in the treaties.  I understand (I think) that it was written in there, or at least interpreted as such, to pertain to gear and technology.  I would think though, that the 'in common with' language was included so that there would always be equality between the races with respect to these issues.  To me 'in common with' should mean everyone abiding by the same rules with the same bag limits, weapon restrictions, dates, etc. on U.S. land anyways.  As far as the reservation land goes, it wouldn't bother me one bit if tribal regulations were set however they chose.

Sort of jumping all over there, and there is probably a bunch more in the next 9 pages I could comment on, but I'm not sure that I'll get to all of it tonight.

[whiteeyes]

 

[FC]

If it hurts your feelings to see the truth laid out then don't read it, go get yourself a tissue while you are at it

[igotbigbulls]

you can analyze all these comments all you want. it will be a waste of your time. and of course im sure your smart enough to understand that it doesnt matter how you want to break it down. its not going to change my hunting practices or others because your upset that i can harvest multiple animals ie. deer and elk and bear and so forth if i desire. oh and we do have as good border patrol as any other nation.joke. and FC its only the truth to you. and just when we thought this thread was put to bed. bam!

[seth30]

 

[whiteeyes]

If it hurts your feelings to see the truth laid out then don't read it, go get yourself a tissue while you are at it

HaHaHa! now thats funny right there. Its obvious who is doing all the crying on here. Tissue is for cry babys and obviously you know what tissue is for. And yes the truth does hurt doesn't it.