Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => Fishing-related Issues & News => Topic started by: baowu2 on March 27, 2011, 04:41:19 PM
-
Hi,
last year around late september i was fishing at Cap River, and realized i forgot to bring my fishing license. I did cast for maybe 5 mins before I noticed i didn't have my licnese on me. Put my rod on the side and stopped fishing and start chatting with friend. Shortly after, 2 young I believe either park ranger or conservation officer showed up checking everyone's hook, and license. One officer asked me, I told him I forgot to bring my license so i stopped fishing. He said they were far away and saw everyone was fishing. And at the end, gave me a ticket of $105-not able to present a valid license. Don't they have to catch you right at the moment when you are fishing in order for them to give you a ticket????
I asked around, a couple friends of mine were at the same situation. The officer told them just fax their license to a number, and the ticket given to them will just be removed automatically. They did it, and nothing after. I just don't understand why didn't I get the opportunity to fax them the license..
I went to dispute my ticket, and since then, haven't hear anything yet.
What are my chances? and has anybody got into this situation before? solution?
Thank you for your information!
-
--I see a couple of problems:
--you took away his option by telling him you were fishing and you were fishing without a license.... that's what the ticket is for.
--you have just again admitted to fishing without a license on a public forum
--others there although they may not have expressed it would have been writing into this or other forum about how a guy fishing without a license who didn't get a ticket.
--I say good on you for stopping on your own without being told, when you found you didn't have your license.. just pay the fine and chalk it up to a good beer story and don't buy any lotto tickets, given the number of complaints here about lack of enforcement.
-
i say fight it,when they see yu had paid for a licence they might drop it anyway.
-
Three words :
SUCK IT UP. ;D
You were fishing without a license. The law requires you carry it at all times while fishing.
Chalk it up to experience and pay your dues.
CO's will stand back out of view and observe, they obviously saw you fishing and when you cant produce a license it's ticky time.
I am sure many CO have heard "uhhh I forgot my license"
Bottom line is you broke the law. Even though it sounds like an innocent mistake ....you did it.
Why fight it when you were in the wrong ? ???
-
Phone the conservation office and explain the situation. Showing your licence and the time of purchase usually cancel the ticket like what has happened to your friend.
-
i had the same thing, had a licence for the year but didnt have it on me, dfo rolled up in there boat and didnt think anything of it because i had my licence, when they were gettin out of there boat i looked everywheer emptied my wallet like 5 times searched every pocket in my bag **** not with me. they gave me a week to proove it even though i still had a rod in the water while they were talking to me. not quite sure why u didnt get the same chance
-
fight it....you will win
-
Make an appeal with evidence to back up your position.
If accepted, you are not out of $105, if not, lesson well learned.
Also, good idea to keep a copy of your license in your car, so you could present a copy if you forgot the original.
I also keep my license in a small zip lock bag so it won't get damaged in heavy rain.
-
happened to me two years ago on the vedder in early april. I had just popped by Freds to renew it and accidentally left it at the shop. The CO gave me a ticket for failing to produce a license and gave me one week to prove that I had a license otherwise he would have also charged me for fishing with out a valid license. I guess the two are different infractions. Just pay up, you are required to have your license on your person. They did not charge you for sitting on the side of the river, they obviously saw you fishing.
-
yup fight it...big difference between forgetting a license at home and actually not having one.
the paper itself is just a document to prove you actually paid for the right to fish...it would be no different if it was the other way around where someone falsified a license by photocopying it and changing the owner's name...they could easily run the id number and match it with the person who it's made out to.
worst case scenario you should have been given a lesser fine or at best a written warning with a follow up of proper documentation.
-
fight it. all the purists on here who whine of lack of enforcement don't realize that this isn't the kind of enforcement we need. this is a cash grab and I effing hate it. if this guy's story is exactly how he said it is, he made a mistake. we all do. this guy was honest enough to do the right thing. give this guy a break. in the grand scheme of things, is it really a big deal that this guy didn't have a licence IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION. look at the bigger picture here ppl... there are many others we shouldn't be giving breaks to... anyone else see SBM's post on facebook? only ONE example of people KNOWINGLY breaking the law. where are the COs when you need them then...
-
fight it. all the purists on here who whine of lack of enforcement don't realize that this isn't the kind of enforcement we need. this is a cash grab and I effing hate it. if this guy's story is exactly how he said it is, he made a mistake. we all do. this guy was honest enough to do the right thing. give this guy a break. in the grand scheme of things, is it really a big deal that this guy didn't have a licence IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION. look at the bigger picture here ppl... there are many others we shouldn't be giving breaks to... anyone else see SBM's post on facebook? only ONE example of people KNOWINGLY breaking the law. where are the COs when you need them then...
ok you tweaked my curiosity...how about you post an attachment to show the rest of us what you're referring to?
-
Three words :
SUCK IT UP. ;D
You were fishing without a license. The law requires you carry it at all times while fishing.
Chalk it up to experience and pay your dues.
CO's will stand back out of view and observe, they obviously saw you fishing and when you cant produce a license it's ticky time.
I am sure many CO have heard "uhhh I forgot my license"
Bottom line is you broke the law. Even though it sounds like an innocent mistake ....you did it.
Why fight it when you were in the wrong ? ???
he never denied his mistake and as right as you are, sometimes there has to be some 'bend' to allow an honest person to make amends for an infraction that is nothing more than a minor misunderstanding...of course it would have been different if he had continued to fish.
-
I understand what you are saying BUT there is no bend here. The wildlife act clearly states that if you do not produce your license when requested you commit an offense.
So he clearly broke the law. His intent does not matter. I am not trying too be a hard my friend. It's like running a red light or driving down the HOV lane(by yourself)
You clearly broke the law. If the officer catches you and decides to give you a warning consider yourself lucky. If not you pay your ticket.
For anyone who is interested heres the link to the wildlife act. http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/00_96488_01#section97
-
SBMs facebook??
-
I understand what you are saying BUT there is no bend here. The wildlife act clearly states that if you do not produce your license when requested you commit an offense.
So he clearly broke the law. His intent does not matter. I am not trying too be a hard ***. It's like running a red light or driving down the HOV lane(by yourself)
You clearly broke the law. If the officer catches you and decides to give you a warning consider yourself lucky. If not you pay your ticket.
For anyone who is interested heres the link to the wildlife act. http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/00_96488_01#section97
i commend you on your values...BUT like debated before, have you never driven above the posted speed limit? how would you feel if out of ten cars going 110 at a 100 speed zone, you where singled out and ticketed? what would your argument be?
-
I hear what's being said.
Where I differ is I would not have an argument for the scenario you suggest. I was raised to take responsibility for my actions.
That's not a holier than thou attitude either. I get caught speeding. I pay the ticket. I get caught fishing without my license I pay the ticket.
Actually rereading the original post he asks "Don't they have to catch you right at the moment when you are fishing in order for them to give you a ticket?"
Don't they have to catch you....hmmmmm... actually seems suspect to me.
Everyone b!tches about not enough enforcement. Myself included. Now the CO's are out doing their job on a river and issue some tickets. What's the problem folks ?
They are doing their job.
Take your lumps ,boys, like a man and pay the ticket.
Not fish with your license. Kill an out of season fish. Retain Fish in closed waters. Use barbed hooks. The list goes on and on.
Which laws are OK to break then protest when you get caught ?
-
he has a licence...he made a mistake and forgot it....who cares? fight the stupid ticket and spend the money on more fishing gear
-
fight it you did the right thing stopping and admitted your fault probably just had a stuck up CO they shoulda just gave u a chance to present your license within a week
-
he has a licence...he made a mistake and forgot it....who cares? fight the stupid ticket and spend the money on more fishing gear
--local sports shop got in major trouble... after being caught backdating licenses for innocent caught clients...
--I have two vehicles... one trailer... I took the trailer to the dump the other day and remembered I left the insurance papers in the other truck... guess what would happen if I got stopped... fine for no insurance papers not for no insurance...extra fine only if I could not produce the documents later.
--fill your boots if you want to take the CO off the river to produce full report, evidence and time in court instread of letting him continue on the river to check the others there.
--So next thing is no ID at all .. again waste of time... especially if innocent.. escort back to vehicle for positive id etc. again time off the river that could be spent in a more productive mannor?
--I dislike onerous or ridiculous rules but having ID and proper tags, license etc is to allow CO to move on to next potential client who may actually be doing something more serious.
-
I don't think that the posters were saying that forgetting your license is OK or that they were critical of the COs doing their job, just that as the OP felt strongly about his treatment, he should appeal the ticket. Like any traffic or other violations, a ticketed person has a right to appeal. Whether it may be accepted or not is another matter.
-
Depending on how much BS one has to go through to get the ticket waived would be the deterring factor to me, maybe paying the fine is actually easier.
You were guilty as sin though :D, so maybe paying the thing and supporting the cause is justified here. ;D
-
it's never a waste of time to ensure fairness and justice...
just like the other accounts where the offenders were given a week to produce their licenses... to me, that is totally acceptable.
-
lets hope bluesteele and all his fans never have to kill anyone in self-defense and can't prove it to the ones accusing him of first-degree murder.
-
lets hope bluesteele and all his fans never have to kill anyone in self-defense and can't prove it to the ones accusing him of first-degree murder.
Bluesteele has fan club?! ;D
-
lets hope bluesteele and all his fans never have to kill anyone in self-defense and can't prove it to the ones accusing him of first-degree murder.
Oh come on, please. Killing someone in self defense? What has that got to do with anything discussed here? The guy was fishing without a license. It is not a case of mistaken identity, or being wrongfully accused. Whether he owns a license or not, the law requires you carry one while fishing. He was not carrying a license. He made the mistake, not the officer. Producing a license later would only change the offense from fishing without a license (WLA Section 12) to failing to produce a license (Section 97), both offenses are subject to the same penalties (Section 84-5).
And in response to the question "Don't they have to catch you right at the moment when you are fishing in order for them to give you a ticket?"
No. They do not apparently need to "catch you right at the moment". I was given a ticket for fishing with a barbed hook when the CO noticed a fly on my hat and asked if I had "... tried it today". I replied yes, at which time he wrote me a ticket. I had apparently forgotten to pinch the barb on that fly, and even though the fly I had on my line at the time was barb-less (as was every other fly on my person), I was ticketed for fishing with a barbed fly. I made the error, not the officer, and I paid for the offense with a ticket. Was the officer over-zealous at ticketing a guy that obviously knows and obeys the rules (when he remembers to anyway)? Perhaps. Should I try to argue my way out of paying for an offense of which I was so obviously guilty? No. That would be a waste of time and money.
-
Oh come on, please. Killing someone in self defense? What has that got to do with anything discussed here? The guy was fishing without a license. It is not a case of mistaken identity, or being wrongfully accused. Whether he owns a license or not, the law requires you carry one while fishing. He was not carrying a license. He made the mistake, not the officer. Producing a license later would only change the offense from fishing without a license (WLA Section 12) to failing to produce a license (Section 97), both offenses are subject to the same penalties (Section 84-5).
And in response to the question "Don't they have to catch you right at the moment when you are fishing in order for them to give you a ticket?"
No. They do not apparently need to "catch you right at the moment". I was given a ticket for fishing with a barbed hook when the CO noticed a fly on my hat and asked if I had "... tried it today". I replied yes, at which time he wrote me a ticket. I had apparently forgotten to pinch the barb on that fly, and even though the fly I had on my line at the time was barb-less (as was every other fly on my person), I was ticketed for fishing with a barbed fly. I made the error, not the officer, and I paid for the offense with a ticket. Was the officer over-zealous at ticketing a guy that obviously knows and obeys the rules (when he remembers to anyway)? Perhaps. Should I try to argue my way out of paying for an offense of which I was so obviously guilty? No. That would be a waste of time and money.
you must be real dense to think that situations like these are so black and white. and you let the CO ticket you for having a fly with a barbed hook on your hat.. :D last i checked that wasn't against the law. sure, you said you "... tried it today" but you could easily have gotten out of the ticket just by using ur noggin and saying you just tried that PATTERN or something along those lines... you got weaseled out of your money buddy. if you want to graciously donate your money to the government, go right ahead. i'll spend my money on fishing gear.
-
Go ahead and try appeal your ticket.... if they accept it you won't need to pay the fine otherwise just suck it up and pay up.
The fact is you broke the law, you need to take responsibility for that. If the law meant for you to be able to produce your license at a later date, it would have been written that way.
I want to see the CO's out in the field doing their jobs, not sitting at the fax machine waiting for people to fax in their licenses. ???
-
I think it all depends on the CO and how much crap he/she has heard over his years. I saw a CO at Green Timbers the year the E-license first started (remember the site crashed and we all got that grace period until April 15 or 18th) anyways, the CO issued him a fine but also told the guy if he went a bought a license and came straight back he would rip up the ticket for him. Guy came and asked me where he could grab a license nearby (which was Walmart) and he returned in less than 30mins with a full 1 yr license, CO ripped up the ticket right then ;D
I have seen that same CO there many times since and he hands out loads of tickets to people without license, fishing 2 rods and keeping over their limits ALL THE TIME. I saw a new female CO last year who was very nice however very "by the book" and doesnt let stuff slide ;)
They way i see it here for this situation is that you should have LEFT and went home to get your license instead of sitting there, if they had grabbed you in the pakring lot then your excuse of going home to get it would have worked im sure however you continued to sit on the side of the river with a rod strung up and ready to fish. The way the CO sees it you will probably just fish after he leaves therefore you got off lucky that he didnt take your gear as well as giving you a ticket. Trust me i see them take gear more often then you think.
Just pay the fine, your in the wrong on this one, sorry
-
fight it ... you didn't do it by purpose....... I think at least you get a discount... be more careful in the future and carry your licence always.
-
Always carry an extra licence in your vest.
-
Always carry an extra licence in your vest.
If you are going to advise someone to break the law (having more than one license), you should at least advise them not to get caught..... ;D
-
if thats the case then why are you legally allowed to print 5 ( i think) copies before having to pay to print extras ??
I know i usually print 2 or 3. 1 in my vehicle, 1 my fishing vest/lumbar pack, 1 in my wallet. I will probably be doing one for the tent trailer this year also so that i am NEVER without my license.
the biggest problem i see with this is that lots of people abuse it when tagging off their 10 chinook and/or 10 steelhead per year because you can just have an empty you switch off to >:(
I personally will update all of them like you are supposed to, not that i ever keep my full license limit anyways
-
I didn't say it was illegal to print more than one copy. (It's a PDF file so you can print an unlimited number)
Just be aware if you get caught with more than one copy, you will get a ticket.
-
If they are all up to date with all the same fish tagged off i doubt you would and why would you have 2 on your actual person ??
-
If you are going to advise someone to break the law (having more than one license), you should at least advise them not to get caught..... ;D
Not advocating having more than one licence. Meant to say having an extra copy in your vest in the event you left your wallet at home
-
If the law meant for you to be able to produce your license at a later date, it would have been written that way.
really..? is that why there's so many grey areas when it comes to the regulations? not only in the wording, but the way they distribute and update changes to the act?
if it was infallible the process of appeal would not be included in it's legislation...i'm NOT saying the guy didn't commit an offense, i'm merely stating if in the past others had been given the opportunity and allotted time to make amends for their mistake, he too should be given the same right and privilege.
-
lets hope bluesteele and all his fans never have to kill anyone in self-defense and can't prove it to the ones accusing him of first-degree murder.
All I can say is I hope my fans are my witnesses and your not the judge. ;D
Bluesteele has fan club?! ;D
shhhh...it's a secret.
-
really..? is that why there's so many grey areas when it comes to the regulations? not only in the wording, but the way they distribute and update changes to the act?
if it was infallible the process of appeal would not be included in it's legislation...i'm NOT saying the guy didn't commit an offense, i'm merely stating if in the past others had been given the opportunity and allotted time to make amends for their mistake, he too should be given the same right and privilege.
He has the right to appeal. But an appeal is meant to address a wrong (ie: if he was wrongfully accused). It is clear he was not wrongfully accused. He was asked to produce a license and he could not do so (an offense under Article 97). Producing his license later is not an appeal, and he has no "right" to do so (and have his charges dropped) simply because someone else did. While you could make an argument for past precedence, you would need to cite (with documentation) an actual case where a charge was dropped after the accused produced a license. This is not going to be easy. The fact is he was cited for an offense that he was guilty of. It is tough luck, and it can happen to anyone, but the law is there for a reason.
you must be real dense to think that situations like these are so black and white. and you let the CO ticket you for having a fly with a barbed hook on your hat.. :D last i checked that wasn't against the law. sure, you said you "... tried it today" but you could easily have gotten out of the ticket just by using ur noggin and saying you just tried that PATTERN or something along those lines... you got weaseled out of your money buddy. if you want to graciously donate your money to the government, go right ahead. i'll spend my money on fishing gear.
You missed the point entirely. Of course I could have gotten out of the ticket. I could have lied. Perhaps lying to save your money is easy for you, it is not so for me. I have integrity. Both the CO and I agreed at the time that I was getting a ticket for being honest. The bottom line is I did fish with a barbed hook where I was prohibited from doing so. Sure I could have avoided the ticket by lying about it, but that does not make it "right" to do so. Nor do I have any "right" to appeal the ticket just because I could have "weaseled" my way out of it. I'll save the weaseling to you.
-
Speaking of integrity.....
I have a buddy who had his car stolen. Inside was his debit card with his PIN number on it. You guess the rest the crooks deposited blank envelopes in the ATM's
and made off with over 5 G's..... He has a thing about lying and told the bank straight up the truth. Result he owes the bank 5 G for being honest. Tuff lesson.
-
phoned up DO this afternoon. According to them, most likely I need to pay for the fine because the Provincial Conservation Officers don't always tell people about the 7-day grace period. And it's "up to the officers" wether they give you the opportunity to fax your license or not.
Ok, now i get it, it is double standard. If they like you, you get a chance; if they are not in the mood, suck it up.
And yes, i am still waiting for my disbute court date. And I will address this issue nicely with the judge, and also yes, i will honestly admit that i did fish for 5mins without my licnese, and got ticketed when the rod's already been putted away.
-
He has the right to appeal. But an appeal is meant to address a wrong (ie: if he was wrongfully accused). It is clear he was not wrongfully accused. He was asked to produce a license and he could not do so (an offense under Article 97). Producing his license later is not an appeal, and he has no "right" to do so (and have his charges dropped) simply because someone else did. While you could make an argument for past precedence, you would need to cite (with documentation) an actual case where a charge was dropped after the accused produced a license. This is not going to be easy. The fact is he was cited for an offense that he was guilty of. It is tough luck, and it can happen to anyone, but the law is there for a reason.
an appeal is exactly what it is...in this case, not to prove his innocence, but to put forth what precedence was set prior, to ensure fair play of *the principle that it is unfair to treat similar facts differently on different occasions[/i]...(known as the Common Law or Case Law Act).
everybody has the right of appeal, it's part of our constitution...by appealing, the courts can easily audit citations that were deemed 'void' and authorized by the Department.
-
phoned up DO this afternoon. According to them, most likely I need to pay for the fine because the Provincial Conservation Officers don't always tell people about the 7-day grace period. And it's "up to the officers" wether they give you the opportunity to fax your license or not.
Ok, now i get it, it is double standard. If they like you, you get a chance; if they are not in the mood, suck it up.
And yes, i am still waiting for my disbute court date. And I will address this issue nicely with the judge, and also yes, i will honestly admit that i did fish for 5mins without my licnese, and got ticketed when the rod's already been putted away.
that's the grey area i was referring to...
reminds me of my boss who got off twice with warnings after being pulled over for speeding by two different cops (who happened to be French Canadian)...as you guessed it, my boss is from Quebec.
You should have taken note of that conversation or even recorded it on your answering machine...or even asked for a name and referral of the phone call because that statement is admissible at your appeal.
-
phoned up DO this afternoon. According to them, most likely I need to pay for the fine because the Provincial Conservation Officers don't always tell people about the 7-day grace period. And it's "up to the officers" wether they give you the opportunity to fax your license or not.
Ok, now i get it, it is double standard. If they like you, you get a chance; if they are not in the mood, suck it up.
And yes, i am still waiting for my disbute court date. And I will address this issue nicely with the judge, and also yes, i will honestly admit that i did fish for 5mins without my licnese, and got ticketed when the rod's already been putted away.
Yes, it is the same double standard as the police officer that decides to let you off with a warning for failing to produce your license. You could say "...but I was only driving for 5 minutes...and I had already stopped when you gave me the ticket and I wasn't going to drive any more..." but it is the officer who decides if he is going to give you the ticket or not, and if he gives you the ticket, you are going to have a hard time selling it to the judge that you did not deserve it, since you were driving your car without having your license on your person. Sure you expect the CO to believe you that it was only for 5 minutes and you expect him to believe you that you were not going to fish any more, but you will have to forgive him for not trusting you as he has probably heard the same story numerous times in the past.
an appeal is exactly what it is...in this case, not to prove his innocence, but to put forth what precedence was set prior, to ensure fair play of *the principle that it is unfair to treat similar facts differently on different occasions[/i]...(known as the Common Law or Case Law Act).
everybody has the right of appeal, it's part of our constitution...by appealing, the courts can easily audit citations that were deemed 'void' and authorized by the Department.
Sure, but the "appeal" you refer to is used to prove the Judge in the case did something wrong, overlooked a key fact, did not allow viable evidence (or allowed invalid evidence) or, in this case, ruled contrary to prior precedence. To "put forth what precedence was set prior" you would need to cite an actual case that was heard in court (saying "my friend got off with a warning" or saying "A guy I know had the ticket ripped up when he faxed in his license" is not setting a "precedence"). What you are suggesting is that Officer's discretion (to write the citation or not) is a "precedence" and that is simply not the case. It is the judge who cannot "treat similar facts differently on different occasions" and it is there that you need to prove "past precedence". A judge, hearing similar facts, reduced the charges or dismissed the case. That is an appeal.
Now, you are not really arguing that the Officers should not have that "discretion", are you? That they should enforce the law to the letter every time? Something tells me that you would not want that. Or, that once one officer lets a guy off with a warning, he (and every other officer) must now let every offender off with a warning? You need to accept that the Officer has the discretion, and if you get them on a bad day, then you have the unfortunate problem of having to explain your actions in court. (Again, we are not arguing about his guilt at the offense.)
-
Sure, but the "appeal" you refer to is used to prove the Judge in the case did something wrong, overlooked a key fact, did not allow viable evidence (or allowed invalid evidence) or, in this case, ruled contrary to prior precedence. To "put forth what precedence was set prior" you would need to cite an actual case that was heard in court (saying "my friend got off with a warning" or saying "A guy I know had the ticket ripped up when he faxed in his license" is not setting a "precedence"). What you are suggesting is that Officer's discretion (to write the citation or not) is a "precedence" and that is simply not the case. It is the judge who cannot "treat similar facts differently on different occasions" and it is there that you need to prove "past precedence". A judge, hearing similar facts, reduced the charges or dismissed the case. That is an appeal.
Now, you are not really arguing that the Officers should not have that "discretion", are you? That they should enforce the law to the letter every time? Something tells me that you would not want that. Or, that once one officer lets a guy off with a warning, he (and every other officer) must now let every offender off with a warning? You need to accept that the Officer has the discretion, and if you get them on a bad day, then you have the unfortunate problem of having to explain your actions in court. (Again, we are not arguing about his guilt at the offense.)
it is because of personal discretion that the opportunity for appeal becomes more imperative...we're talking punitive circumstances here, the "appeal" and the outline of the "Case Law Act" was not intended as a reference to the case in point, but a guideline to the basis of the law...doesn't matter whether civil or federal.
-
it is because of personal discretion that the opportunity for appeal becomes more imperative...we're talking punitive circumstances here, the "appeal" and the outline of the "Case Law Act" was not intended as a reference to the case in point, but a guideline to the basis of the law...doesn't matter whether civil or federal.
Okay, but to be successful here, baowu2 would need to convince the judge that the CO was wrong to give him a ticket for fishing without his license. He would need to convince that judge that he was only fishing for 5 minutes, that he had stopped prior to the CO ticketing him, and that he was not going to fish again after the CO left (I am not sure if the judge would accept his own buddies as credible witnesses to this, so he would need to get a stranger who was there to vouch for him). Then he would need to convince the judge that the CO acted unjustly, or unfairly by not allowing him to produce a valid license (one dated prior to the date of the offense) at a later date to show that he did have a license even though he did not have one on him at the time. I just do not see this being successful. Since the two offenses, fishing without a license (article 12) and failing to provide a valid license to an officer when asked to produce one (article 97) both carry the same penalties, it is even questionable of getting the fine reduced.
-
Okay, but to be successful here, baowu2 would need to convince the judge that the CO was wrong to give him a ticket for fishing without his license. He would need to convince that judge that he was only fishing for 5 minutes, that he had stopped prior to the CO ticketing him, and that he was not going to fish again after the CO left (I am not sure if the judge would accept his own buddies as credible witnesses to this, so he would need to get a stranger who was there to vouch for him). Then he would need to convince the judge that the CO acted unjustly, or unfairly by not allowing him to produce a valid license (one dated prior to the date of the offense) at a later date to show that he did have a license even though he did not have one on him at the time. I just do not see this being successful. Since the two offenses, fishing without a license (article 12) and failing to provide a valid license to an officer when asked to produce one (article 97) both carry the same penalties, it is even questionable of getting the fine reduced.
[/b]
Fines can be reduced for a number of reason. Financial income, grey area of the offense, paying before a set date, and so on....
You might be better to strike a deal with the officer outside of court to save his time and ensure a settlement that works in your favor....
Explain to him that you are not a well of person and that this was a honest mistake that should be forgiven. Be very nice about it!!!
OR (if the above fails to provide)
Dealing with the officers supervisor and explaining that the failure to advise of the 7day grace was unfair and unjust and explain how you feel about it in a very nice and pleasant way.
I've gotten many people in trouble for acting poorly on the job, including cops, government agents and many private agents. I've also learned allot by going threw the appropriate channels of authority even if the offense still stands.
And attitude will get you no where... ;) Being nice and friendly will :)
-
the punishment always have to fit the crime...if baowu2 was given a ticket that was indicative to not owning a license...then the fine is excessive.
if the officer failed to inform him of his rights then he too is suspect for making a discretionary call that can be interpreted as bias.
-
Speaking of integrity.....
I have a buddy who had his car stolen. Inside was his debit card with his PIN number on it. You guess the rest the crooks deposited blank envelopes in the ATM's
and made off with over 5 G's..... He has a thing about lying and told the bank straight up the truth. Result he owes the bank 5 G for being honest. Tuff lesson.
That was a lesson in stupidity....... absolutely no lesson there about honesty!
-
the punishment always have to fit the crime...if baowu2 was given a ticket that was indicative to not owning a license...then the fine is excessive.
if the officer failed to inform him of his rights then he too is suspect for making a discretionary call that can be interpreted as bias.
Don't take this the wrong way Blaydrnr...... It's attitudes like yours that have made the law complicated to write and complicated to enforce. If everyone just took responsibility for breaking the law or didn't break the law at all imagine how efficiently our justice system would work. Instead we have 90% of the courts and enforcement officers time wasted answering arguments such as the ones you have been making.....
-
Stupid is as stupid does, you got caught. Man up and pay the fine, enough moaning and whining like a two year old in the Save On who could not have a candy. Put it down as lesson learned and keep it filed in the memory bank. ;D ;D
-
the punishment always have to fit the crime...if baowu2 was given a ticket that was indicative to not owning a license...then the fine is excessive.
if the officer failed to inform him of his rights then he too is suspect for making a discretionary call that can be interpreted as bias.
baowu2 was given a ticket "of $105-not able to present a valid license." As I mentioned before, the "fine" or penalty for both offenses, fishing without a license (Article 12) and failing to provide a valid license (article 97) is the same (Article 84 -5a), a fine of up to $50,000 and/or six months in jail. The fine is not excessive and he should feel lucky if he is guilty of the offense and only got a $105 ticket and did not have his gear seized (Article 94-1b). Since he got a ticket for "failing to provide", and not a ticket for "fishing without a license", it is obvious the Officer gave him the benefit of the doubt about actually having the license at home. There was no need to inform him of his "rights" to a 7 day grace period to produce a license, as that is for proving that you have a license and do not deserve a "fishing without a license" ticket. There is no appeal to failing to provide. You either provide the valid license upon request or you do not. An Officer who tears up a "failing to provide" ticket after the offender produces one at a later date, is the one making a "discretionary call that can be interpreted as bias" (in this case since the bias is in the offenders favour, no one objects).
-
the cost to take a day off work probably outweighs the price of the ticket..... so if your making more than $12.00 an hour then its not worth it..... plus you got caught fishing without a licence ... quite playing the victim and pay up!
-
I could be wrong but where in the Wildlife Act does it say there is a 7 day grace period?
-
Don't take this the wrong way Blaydrnr...... It's attitudes like yours that have made the law complicated to write and complicated to enforce. If everyone just took responsibility for breaking the law or didn't break the law at all imagine how efficiently our justice system would work. Instead we have 90% of the courts and enforcement officers time wasted answering arguments such as the ones you have been making.....
no offense taken...however, it's because we live in a democratic society that we are allowed to question the law/government/judicial system...that's our right. if not for that, peaceful demonstrations and other key issues would not be tolerated or resolved...and as painful as the process is, change will only occur through debate and revamping of the act.
perhaps you would be happier to live in a totalitarian country where circumstances have no bearing on a case...where everything is black and white.
i agree our judicial system is in disarray...and yes, people do take advantage of the loop holes...but honestly though, if something doesn't feel right or fair why on God's Earth would you not question it? Why does one have the luxury of pardon while another does not?... especially for the same offense, the same scenario....does the law only apply to one but not the other?
-
An Officer who tears up a "failing to provide" ticket after the offender produces one at a later date, is the one making a "discretionary call that can be interpreted as bias" (in this case since the bias is in the offenders favour, no one objects).
...and it's because of that discretionary call that changes the logistics of the act...it's not about whining, but the relevance of consistency.
-
Stupid is as stupid does, you got caught. Man up and pay the fine, enough moaning and whining like a two year old in the Save On who could not have a candy. Put it down as lesson learned and keep it filed in the memory bank. ;D ;D
one time i almost got a ticket for passing an officer doing 40kms/hr in a 50 zone (he was in the fast lane and i was in the slow)...his view was that i over took an emergency vehicle and that i showed audacity in the process. i refused to sign the ticket and i asked him to call his supervisor...after 10 minutes of threats and a final call to dispatch...he reluctantly gave me a verbal warning and let me go.
i suppose if that was you...you would have signed the ticket and assumed that it was illegal to pass an emergency vehicle in a non emergency situation.
-
The OP had a brain fart and left his license, he did not check before starting to fish. He was guilty of fishing without a license PERIOD. Does not matter that it was at home or half a kilometer away in the vehicle. he was fishing WITHOUT a license. GUILTY,GUILTY. Pay the fine and get on with life, if I had been the CO he would have lost his rod and reel too. ;D
-
Oh, I would have given you a ticket for passing on the right, I would have cared less if you signed it or not. All your signing is acknowledging receiving the ticket nothing more. So wether you sign or not makes no difference to the outcome ;D.
-
That was a lesson in stupidity....... absolutely no lesson there about honesty!
I guess it is for guys like you ?
I have another friend. He had a serious heart attack requiring major surgery while he was vacationing in Southern California. He is from the lower mainland and had no current travellers health insurance.
The hospital bill was approx 125k.... The hopspital informed him after finding out he had no insurance that they had a charity that was perhaps willing to cover all or part of the bill.
My friend informed the administrators that they should use it for someone who really needs it. He cut a cheque for the full amount.
I guess he is stupid as well ?
You sound like a real standup guy AF... ::) Eagle food...
-
Oh, I would have given you a ticket for passing on the right, I would have cared less if you signed it or not. All your signing is acknowledging receiving the ticket nothing more. So wether you sign or not makes no difference to the outcome ;D.
hahaha...then why didn't he just pass me the ticket?....because all i had to do was deny ever receiving it! ;D
-
I guess it is for guys like you ?
I have another friend. He had a serious heart attack requiring major surgery while he was vacationing in Southern California. He is from the lower mainland and had no current travellers health insurance.
The hospital bill was approx 125k.... The hopspital informed him after finding out he had no insurance that they had a charity that was perhaps willing to cover all or part of the bill.
My friend informed the administrators that they should use it for someone who really needs it. He cut a cheque for the full amount.
I guess he is stupid as well ?
You sound like a real standup guy AF... ::) Eagle food...
Come on Blue, you have got to admit, leaving your bank card anywhere with the PIN attached is a pretty foolish move. You are never supposed to have the PIN and the Card in the same place. That is a real no brainer.
-
Sorry blaydRnr but you dont have to sign the ticket. The officer signs the ticket and you are considered served.
-
Come on Blue, you have got to admit, leaving your bank card anywhere with the PIN attached is a pretty foolish move. You are never supposed to have the PIN and the Card in the same place. That is a real no brainer.
Damn rights Sandman it was stupid and he admits it. But it was not about the money to him. The problem is one lie leads to another. The police report states the time the truck was stolen. The thieves immediately began using the card.(obviously) all times of these transactions are recorded. He took the high road as he did not want anything to come back on him as he is in a position of authority ;)
-
Sorry blaydRnr but you dont have to sign the ticket. The officer signs the ticket and you are considered served.
for what? hurting his ego?...like i said, he had no call to ticket me in the first place.
-
for what? hurting his ego?...like i said, he had no call to ticket me in the first place.
Hence your analogy is a Red Herring. The officer (in the scenario you described) had no call to ticket you (not that I can see), as you are permitted to pass a vehicle on the right if you have a clear lane of traffic. The regulations regarding approaching emergency vehicles state that the vehicle must have lights and audible signal (siren) at which time you are compelled to pull over to the right and stop until the vehicle passes, or slow and pass with care (if the emergency vehicle is stopped), yet you say his lights were not on. Furthermore, the officer would have been compelled himself to travel in the right hand lane since he was traveling slower than the normal speed of the traffic at the time (as you described), so he himself was in violation of the MVA since he is only permitted to exercise his exemptions under the MVA when considering the use of his vehicle at the time (ie: he may exceed the speed limit to respond to an emergency but may not exceed the speed limit to get to the bank before it closes). Therefore, he should have moved over the to right lane, and allowed you (and all the vehicles behind you) to pass him on the left. Am am not sure than what regulation under the MVA he was even citing in the ticket. In any case, you are of course in the right to dispute the ticket (signed or not) if you were not committing an offense under the MVA.
That is the Red Herring.
baowu2 is not in the same position as his is guilty of committing the offense for which he was ticketed.
-
baowu2 is not in the same position as his is guilty of committing the offense for which he was ticketed.
yes his offense had already been established and not contradicted...what was originally in question was the inconsistency of the department's manner of restitution...to have given others the opportunity to make amends where baowu2 was denied shows disregard for the judicial system itself.
-
yes his offense had already been established and not contradicted...what was originally in question was the inconsistency of the department's manner of restitution...to have given others the opportunity to make amends where baowu2 was denied shows disregard for the judicial system itself.
I guess I just do not see it the same way. I guess what you are arguing is for Article 97 to be removed altogether, as a few CO's have chosen not to enforce it, as was the case with Mr. 420247, and baowu2's "couple of friends . . .[that] were in the same situation" and had their tickets for failing "to present a valid license" removed after faxing their licenses (although I suspect that his friends had been issued "fishing without a license" tickets, not "failing to produce a license"). Since these officers have "shown a disregard for the judicial system itself" by failing to enforce the law which they are charged with enforcing, we should now remove the law to be fair to everyone else (what is the point in having Article 97 ("failing to provide a valid license") in the first place, if all you have to do is produce the license later at your convenience). If the CO had issued you a "fishing without a license" citation, did the paperwork for that citation (in case you do NOT fax it in), and then you DID fax the license, so he then has to shred that paperwork once you faxed it, his time (and wages) for that work done on that citation is now wasted (all because you forgot to bring your license with you). The $105 fine for failing to produce a valid license is to encourage license holders to carry their licenses so CO's are not wasting time (and taxpayers' dollars) doing that wasted paperwork on your citation. In point of fact, the CO should have issued citations for both offenses, but as I said, he showed some discretion by taking baowu2's word for it that he had the license at home. He saved the taxpayers some money by not citing him for fishing without a license, but he was clearly sending him a message that he needs to remember to bring that license so as not to waste the CO's time (and taxpayers' money).
Even still, getting rid of the law because someone gets cut a break is not really an option. Can I say I should not be given a speeding ticket because I know many officers have let people off with just a warning? While I agree that the law needs to be fair to everyone, and "should" be enforced without bias. I would not want to rule out my opportunity to plead with the officer to not ticket me for that barbed hook, as I was clearly interested in following the law (the fly I was presently using was barbless after all). That officer took the hard line and said the law is the law and you broke it so I have to ticket you. While I accepted the fact that I broke the law, I was still hopeful he would use his discretion and not ticket me (unfortunately for me, he chose to enforce the law and ticket me). However, I would not want to rule out the hope he would cut me some slack and let me off. I would definitely not want the fact that if he DID let me off with a warning that time, he must now no longer issue a ticket for using barbed hooks, just because the future offender says "oh, I just forgot this one time, I usually use barbless hooks, and I know a guy that. . ." The CO's job is hard enough. If you break the law, even by "accident", by all means plead for leniency, plead for understanding, but do not blame the CO for enforcing the law.
-
I guess I just do not see it the same way. I guess what you are arguing is for Article 97 to be removed altogether, as a few CO's have chosen not to enforce it, as was the case with Mr. 420247, and baowu2's "couple of friends . . .[that] were in the same situation" and had their tickets for failing "to present a valid license" removed after faxing their licenses (although I suspect that his friends had been issued "fishing without a license" tickets, not "failing to produce a license").
no where did i say to remove the article from the regulations...i merely stated that every person has the right to be heard and accountability should be held at an even playing field...baowu2 might not get his ticket over turned, but he should at least have the opportunity to present a defense.
it would be like you buying something from the mall, then deciding to return it the next day not realizing you had forgotten your receipt at home...next thing you know a security guard mistaken you for a shoplifter...you can't blame the guy for doing his job, but at the same time you know you're innocent, so you would naturally plead your case.
not quite the same scenario, but the same underlying principle...so when you choose to deal with semantics rather than the issue of intent, then that's when justice becomes obscure.
-
no where did i say to remove the article from the regulations...i merely stated that every person has the right to be heard and accountability should be held at an even playing field...baowu2 might not get his ticket over turned, but he should at least have the opportunity to present a defense.
it would be like you buying something from the mall, then deciding to return it the next day not realizing you had forgotten your receipt at home...next thing you know a security guard mistaken you for a shoplifter...you can't blame the guy for doing his job, but at the same time you know you're innocent, so you would naturally plead your case.
not quite the same scenario, but the same underlying principle...so when you choose to deal with semantics rather than the issue of intent, then that's when justice becomes obscure.
That I can relate to as it happened to me in my youth, only I did not forget my receipt, I presented the receipt when I exchanged a pair of jeans for a larger pair. I was stopped on my way out of the store by the guard who accused me of sneaking in to the store without any jeans, taking two off the shelf and then exchanging one for the other (effectively getting a pair of jeans for free). While a brilliant plan, it was not true, (I was not the shoplifting mastermind as I so appeared to him) and I had to plead my innocence.
But this example is of course another Red Herring.
As you said yourself, you plead your case because you are innocent. baowu2 HAD "the opportunity to present a defense" when he appears in court to dispute the ticket. However, he cannot dispute the ticket as he already admitted his guilt. The only reason he can present why he should be let off the hook is because someone else was let off the hook when they were also guilty. This is difficult to prove as there is no court record (if they never had the citation heard in court), and it would be costly to search the court records to find such a precedence (it is only a $105 fine after all, do you want to spend days pouring over court records to save $105 for a fine you deserved).
-
I guess it is for guys like you ?
I have another friend. He had a serious heart attack requiring major surgery while he was vacationing in Southern California. He is from the lower mainland and had no current travellers health insurance.
The hospital bill was approx 125k.... The hopspital informed him after finding out he had no insurance that they had a charity that was perhaps willing to cover all or part of the bill.
My friend informed the administrators that they should use it for someone who really needs it. He cut a cheque for the full amount.
I guess he is stupid as well ?
I would suggest he is an honorable man who put others needs ahead of his own.
It's unfortunate that he didn't have travel insurance, however if the heart problem was a pre-existing condition he wouldn't have qualified for travel insurance anyway.
-
This is difficult to prove as there is no court record (if they never had the citation heard in court), and it would be costly to search the court records to find such a precedence (it is only a $105 fine after all, do you want to spend days pouring over court records to save $105 for a fine you deserved).
actually not true....just like where we are required to keep records and attain paper work...it is also a requirement for dfo....every ticket is numerated with a hard copy and must be accountable for audit or reference.
-
actually not true....just like where we are required to keep records and attain paper work...it is also a requirement for dfo....every ticket is numerated with a hard copy and must be accountable for audit or reference.
Ah, but are you suggesting that DFO (or provincial COS staff) search their own records for you to find the evidence that you need to dispute a ticket they gave you so you do not have to pay a fine they want you to pay? I did not say that the DFO or COS would not have records, I just do not think they are going to spend time and money searching their own records for you to dispute your ticket. Perhaps you could make a FOIPA request, but you would need to know the specifics of what you are searching for. The court records you can search yourself (or pay a lawyer to search), but as I said, there is no record if the case does not go to court.
-
Ah, but are you suggesting that DFO (or provincial COS staff) search their own records for you to find the evidence that you need to dispute a ticket they gave you so you do not have to pay a fine they want you to pay? I did not say that the DFO or COS would not have records, I just do not think they are going to spend time and money searching their own records for you to dispute your ticket. Perhaps you could make a FOIPA request, but you would need to know the specifics of what you are searching for. The court records you can search yourself (or pay a lawyer to search), but as I said, there is no record if the case does not go to court.
once again, i was specifically responding to your statement regarding the courts not having access to the citation in question... and not to blow things out of proportion, the courts can easily issue a subpoena which compels DFO to submit documents or face penalties themselves...refusal of submission will automatically nullify the charges.
-
once again, i was specifically responding to your statement regarding the courts not having access to the citation in question... and not to blow things out of proportion, the courts can easily issue a subpoena which compels DFO to submit documents or face penalties themselves...refusal of submission will automatically nullify the charges.
Ah, but you would still need a specific citation for the court to request in the subpoena (the name of your friend who got the charge dropped perhaps?). However, you would probably need more than one to establish a breach of policy. If you produce five cases where people were given tickets for not providing a license that were later dropped when the license was faxed in (and I would doubt you would have 5 specific cases to subpoena), but DFO then produces documentation of hundreds of tickets that were upheld even when proof of a ticket was provided later, then you have really not established unfair treatment on your part, as you were treated the same as the majority of the cases. It was the 5 other cases where the policy was breached. This is what I mean when I say that you cannot really expect to be left off the hook just because someone else was. If an officer is in a good mood, or perhaps is just lazy and not interested in doing the paperwork, and lets you off the hook with a warning, you cannot use that to say it is policy to let everyone off the hook with a warning. DFO may, however, go back and discipline those officers that had breached the policy and caused you to be such a thorn in their side.
-
Ah, but you would still need a specific citation for the court to request in the subpoena (the name of your friend who got the charge dropped perhaps?). However, you would probably need more than one to establish a breach of policy. If you produce five cases where people were given tickets for not providing a license that were later dropped when the license was faxed in (and I would doubt you would have 5 specific cases to subpoena), but DFO then produces documentation of hundreds of tickets that were upheld even when proof of a ticket was provided later, then you have really not established unfair treatment on your part, as you were treated the same as the majority of the cases. It was the 5 other cases where the policy was breached. This is what I mean when I say that you cannot really expect to be left off the hook just because someone else was. If an officer is in a good mood, or perhaps is just lazy and not interested in doing the paperwork, and lets you off the hook with a warning, you cannot use that to say it is policy to let everyone off the hook with a warning. DFO may, however, go back and discipline those officers that had breached the policy and caused you to be such a thorn in their side.
once a standard is set, it's very difficult to deviate from it...it doesn't matter if a thousand tickets were issued, if there's a record of any of them being retracted, it opens the door for a defense depending on circumstances and the criminal history of the defendant.
-
suck it up ...you got caught for making a mistake and not properly checking all your gear before fishing.
pay the fine and learn the lesson, if you get off you have learned nothing other than you don't really need to take your licence with you at all times.
I can't believe this subject has warranted 6 pages of responces
-
I can't believe this subject has warranted 6 pages of responces
nothing wrong with a healthy and civil debate...might even help some people in the future.
-
nothing wrong with a healthy and civil debate...might even help some people in the future.
Lol yes I learned if I get a ticket don't come on here and whine
-
Lol yes I learned if I get a ticket don't come on here and whine
better yet, don't do anything stupid to get a ticket. ;)
-
This thread shows who needs to get out and go fishing the most. To the OP you got a ticket for not be able to produce a license, not for not having bought a license. Be a man pay the fine you are guilty of. To all the losers who are making up lies to get out of fines you are the reason why the justice system is so plugged up and back logged. You all clearly put your own greed and money before your ethics or morals. It's GREAT to hear that CO's are out there doing their jobs catching those who are breaking the law. As an angler in BC it is your responsibility to know the regs for the body of water which you choose to fish. CHECK THE REGS BEFORE YOU GO OUT!!!
-
Have been following this thread since day one and feel the need to comment.The resulting interest in this and the ensuing scrutiny of the process could not be bought for any money.I see this as an ex cellant thing for the fish.As for me I will try my best to be a follower at all times of the regs.If I should slip up inadvertently in future I will take my lumps.The regs are there for all of us and without them the type of chaos we see from time to time on our waters would be norm not the exception.
-
Well, as much as it sucks pay the fine. Of course it sucks!! But you broke the law, technically. Just think of your money as a "donation".
John
-
It must of been 30 years ago I bought a license and discussed this issue with the vendor. He warned me to carry it always and avoid the ticket. I mentioned that in Saskatchewan most COs would give you a chance to bring your license into a regional office if you'd forgotten it at home, much like the mounties do for drivers licenses, and if you were issued a 'failure to produce' ticket the CO would be a special case. The vendor said 'I think you'll find they're all pretty special around here.' Ever since then I just assumed BC wardens were really strict about it. I just keep all that stuff in my wallet all the time anyway and don't remove them until the next year goes in or the season ends.
-
BIG DEAL
[/quote]
-
Tha is just great coming from the PERFECT PERSON that never lies,speeds,never takes more than fifteen minutes for coffee etc. BULL BOLOGNA Fight it--you will win for sure. I would not give those JERKS anything. They don`t even have a job they have a position. Have you ever seen the cops using CELL Phones while driving. The laws are meant to be for everone. Tell them to go to outer space. Don`t worry about it.
Sounds like you have a lot of growing up to do.... Many of us that have experienced dangerous drivers that threatened our families lives, have been stolen from, and have watched poachers and polluters destroy our environment. As a result we have learned to appreciate our law enforcement officers! We have also grown increasingly angry with the disrespect shown to these fine folks who are the foundations of our relatively orderly society.
I have found over the years that attitudes like yours are found in people that have had run ins with the law and because of their disrespect for the law have experienced the push back of the enforcement officers. I would suggest that more than 90% of the population has no negative feeling at all to law enforcement and like myself appreciate the sacrifices they make in fulfilling their duties.
I'm not being critical of you, just suggesting you have some growing up you need to do.
Edit: Just noticed your signature that says you are retired..... Can't believe someone 60 plus has the attitude toward law enforcement that a teenager might have!
-
Sounds like you have a lot of growing up to do.... Many of us that have experienced dangerous drivers that threatened our families lives, have been stolen from, and have watched poachers and polluters destroy our environment. As a result we have learned to appreciate our law enforcement officers! We have also grown increasingly angry with the disrespect shown to these fine folks who are the foundations of our relatively orderly society.
I have found over the years that attitudes like yours are found in people that have had run ins with the law and because of their disrespect for the law have experienced the push back of the enforcement officers. I would suggest that more than 90% of the population has no negative feeling at all to law enforcement and like myself appreciate the sacrifices they make in fulfilling their duties.
I'm not being critical of you, just suggesting you have some growing up you need to do.
Edit: Just noticed your signature that says you are retired..... Can't believe someone 60 plus has the attitude toward law enforcement that a teenager might have!
Couldn't agree more. I don't know why people have the audacity to whine and complain about the state of the fishery, and then say he should fight the ticket. Keep in mind, when all is said and done, it will cost the ministry MUCH more than hundred-something bucks you were fined. So for all those that say "spend it on fishing gear"...don't. Pay the money, have a goofy story to tell your friends as to why you gotta have your licence ON YOU at all times, and get over it.
J
-
Sounds like you have a lot of growing up to do.... Many of us that have experienced dangerous drivers that threatened our families lives, have been stolen from, and have watched poachers and polluters destroy our environment. As a result we have learned to appreciate our law enforcement officers! We have also grown increasingly angry with the disrespect shown to these fine folks who are the foundations of our relatively orderly society.
I have found over the years that attitudes like yours are found in people that have had run ins with the law and because of their disrespect for the law have experienced the push back of the enforcement officers. I would suggest that more than 90% of the population has no negative feeling at all to law enforcement and like myself appreciate the sacrifices they make in fulfilling their duties.
I'm not being critical of you, just suggesting you have some growing up you need to do.
Edit: Just noticed your signature that says you are retired..... Can't believe someone 60 plus has the attitude toward law enforcement that a teenager might have!
Amen brother....I'm tird of all the law enforcement bashing.
-
Amen brother....I'm tird of all the law enforcement bashing.
Couldn't agree with you more .... well said ;D
-
Couldn't agree with you more .... well said ;D
I agree. We have laws for a reason.
FYI/Best bet:
I laminate my licence and keep it in my smaller travel box folded into two and then ironed so its nice and flat. Its about the same as an an envelop and if it gets wet or gear rubs against it or tugs at it its still fine. When I catch a fish that I have to mark, I just peel back plastic write on it and reseal it with an iron.
-
i think it reasonable to bring your license in clearly showing when it was purchased and getting the ticket revoked. happened to my friend before. but i guess it will depend on the individual DFO