Stoppd by the DFG

[Aaron&Julie]

Originally Posted by T Bone

Remember when we were (and still are) all fired up about the new boundaries?We are going to fish where we want and no one is going to stop us!Wades disposable kayak and gear ringing a bell.We are down to protest,maybe this is their way of doing the same.They are REAL people getting REALLY screwed.Think about it.

x3!

I remember all the rebellious souls who basically said that. Nobody seemed to want to tell them, "Don't do it, or I'll tell on you". It was kayak fishermen fed up with how we got screwed, and if one of us caught that trophy fish just inside an MLPA zone, we weren't going to be the ones to rat on him, when ALMOST all of us (kayak fishermen) know how WRONG these closures are. I guess that rebellious attitude has now been put into check, because one of our own might "narc" on us.

Yes, it is now law, and we all shouldn't be breaking laws. But, we do, especially when they are wrong. I don't get on the phone and call the Highway Patrol, every time someone is speeding. Otherwise, I'd never be off the phone. I don't call them if I see somebody doesn't have their seatbelt on, or a helmet on. Even as much as it drives me crazy, I don't call the HP when people are texting or talking on the cell phone while driving. I have 2 family members who are/were cops, they broke laws, too. Does everyone really believe no cop ever travels above 65mph when not on duty?

Everyone is surely entitled to their opinion here, including DSafety, etc, I just don't happen to agree with them.

But, I'm not going to be the one to help this country to continue to tarnish it's greatness, by taking freedoms away from us, especially when I know it is WRONG. And I certainly won't call the DFG if one of you is 100 yards over the MLPA line, or if a fish tows you into one of those zones, even though I could.

If I know someone is in the act of taking short fish (crustaceans), too many, fish out of season, or protected species, I'll call the DFG, because I believe in those laws, just as I would call the HP (when the opportunity presented itself) if a parent is driving their child around who should be in a car seat, and isn't.

I could care less if the motor-cyclist wants to take HIS LIFE in HIS HANDS. I don't care if they don't check everyone's shoes at the airport. If Terrorists want to hijack/blow-up a plane, they will, that was proven time and again, the year following 9/11.

I don't understand why anyone around here should want this thread deleted. The MLPA is upon us, and it is good to know where we stand.
If you think it is redundant, tedious, annoying, etc, don't bother reading it.

Aaron

[dorado50]

Originally Posted by Aaron&Julie

x3!

I remember all the rebellious souls who basically said that. Nobody seemed to want to tell them, "Don't do it, or I'll tell on you". It was kayak fishermen fed up with how we got screwed, and if one of us caught that trophy fish just inside an MLPA zone, we weren't going to be the ones to rat on him, when ALMOST all of us (kayak fishermen) know how WRONG these closures are. I guess that rebellious attitude has now been put into check, because one of our own might "narc" on us.

Yes, it is now law, and we all shouldn't be breaking laws. But, we do, especially when they are wrong. I don't get on the phone and call the Highway Patrol, every time someone is speeding. Otherwise, I'd never be off the phone. I don't call them if I see somebody doesn't have their seatbelt on, or a helmet on. Even as much as it drives me crazy, I don't call the HP when people are texting or talking on the cell phone while driving. I have 2 family members who are/were cops, they broke laws, too. Does everyone really believe no cop ever travels at or below 65mph when not on duty?

Everyone is surely entitled to their opinion here, including DSafety, etc, I just don't happen to agree with them.

But, I'm not going to be the one to help this country to continue to tarnish it's greatness, by taking freedoms away from us, especially when I know it is WRONG. And I certainly won't call the DFG if one of you is 100 yards over the MLPA line, or if a fish tows you into one of those zones, even though I could.

If I know someone is in the act of taking short fish (crustaceans), too many, fish out of season, or protected species, I'll call the DFG, because I believe in those laws, just as I would call the HP (when the opportunity presented itself) if a parent is driving their child around who should be in a car seat, and isn't.

I could care less if the motor-cyclist wants to take HIS LIFE in HIS HANDS. I don't care if they don't check everyone's shoes at the airport. If Terrorists want to hijack/blow-up a plane, they will, that was proven time and again, the year following 9/11.

I don't understand why anyone around here should want this thread deleted. The MLPA is upon us, and it is good to know where we stand.
If you think it is redundant, tedious, annoying, etc, don't bother reading it.

Aaron

EXCELLENT! .......now all cells and vhf's to be checked at the door so the "drop the dime" issue won't come into play.

[T Bone]

The fish in my avatar was caught in what is now an MLPA.Just past the reserve.Decided to drop a bait one last time before quitting for the day.

[yaky yak]

As pissed off as us fishermen are about losing prime sportfishing area, think how it is for those who likelihoods depended on these areas to pay their bills and feed their familys. They have lost a lot and have a lot to loose. "If" these traps were inside the MLPA area I say it shows courage and American spirit. These boundrys are only a month old. It's not like they have been in effect for years.
I am sure some citizens would of called the the local cops if they had seen the Boston tea party going down too in the 1700rds, but if not for acts like that there wouldn't be an USA today.
The DFG I believe are between a rock and a hard place. Let them do their jobs as they see fit.
I am waiting for some citizen MLPA patrol to jam me up, right or wrong I'm causing a seen. Now I have to worry about my fellow fishermen(victims) policing my actions? There are always a Judas do gooder who'll go above and beyond.
I don't know you Sir, and I respect your right as a human being, but don't you think your just a little petty. Most snitches hide behind anonymity, but your right out there with yours. Who you trying to impress?

[Saba Slayer]

"Can't we just get along?"
Bob did what he thought was right. We all make our decisions on where we draw the line...
"Aaron said..."If I know someone is in the act of taking short fish (crustaceans), too many, fish out of season, or protected species, I'll call the DFG, because I believe in those laws, just as I would call the HP (when the opportunity presented itself) if a parent is driving their child around who should be in a car seat, and isn't.
"BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN THOSE LAWS" that's the basis of Aaron's believed right to call the DFG...well apparently we "draw the line" on whether a law is enforceable or not based on our own set of moral rights.
Do you call the HP if you see a drunk driver, or a dangerous speeder cutting in and out of traffic endangering others? Or only...."just as I would call the HP (when the opportunity presented itself) if a parent is driving their child around who should be in a car seat, and isn't."
Who's Right? Who's Wrong? The age old question?
Let's Go Fishin'...
The Hooping should be good once this rain stops...go get some Bugs and Crabs ands enjoy the beautiful Southern California areas that are still open to us!!!!!!!!!! ......and TURN IN YOUR REPORT CARDS!!!!!!!!!!
Jim / Saba Slayer

[jorluivil]

Originally Posted by Saba Slayer

"Can't we just get along?"
Bob did what he thought was right. We all make our decisions on where we draw the line...
"Aaron said..."If I know someone is in the act of taking short fish (crustaceans), too many, fish out of season, or protected species, I'll call the DFG, because I believe in those laws, just as I would call the HP (when the opportunity presented itself) if a parent is driving their child around who should be in a car seat, and isn't.
"BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN THOSE LAWS" that's the basis of Aaron's believed right to call the DFG...well apparently we "draw the line" on whether a law is enforceable or not based on our own set of moral rights.
Do you call the HP if you see a drunk driver, or a dangerous speeder cutting in and out of traffic endangering others? Or only...."just as I would call the HP (when the opportunity presented itself) if a parent is driving their child around who should be in a car seat, and isn't."
Who's Right? Who's Wrong? The age old question?
Let's Go Fishin'...
The Hooping should be good once this rain stops...go get some Bugs and Crabs ands enjoy the beautiful Southern California areas that are still open to us!!!!!!!!!! ......and TURN IN YOUR REPORT CARDS!!!!!!!!!!
Jim / Saba Slayer

[yaky yak]

Mr. Dsafety,
Your views and action are different then mine, and I let emotion over ride my common sense. If I saw someone blatantly taking a BSB, or a grossly over limit of game I may take some kind of action. I don't agree with what you did, but I shouldn't of call you a derogatory name.
It takes a lot of guts to do what you thinks right in this world. Especially when it's not excepted well.
Your views aren't mine and visa versa. I'm not apologizing, but I do admit I should keep my opinions to my self.

[yaky yak]

Mr. Dsafety,
Your views and action are different then mine, and I let emotion over ride my common sense. If I saw someone blatantly taking a BSB, or a grossly over limit of game I may take some kind of action. I don't agree with what you did, but I shouldn't of call you a derogatory name.
It takes a lot of guts to do what you thinks right in this world. Especially when it's not excepted well.
Your views aren't mine and visa versa. I'm not apologizing, but I do admit I should keep my opinions to my self.

[Aaron&Julie]

Originally Posted by Saba Slayer

just as I would call the HP (when the opportunity presented itself) if a parent is driving their child around who should be in a car seat, and isn't.
"BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN THOSE LAWS" that's the basis of Aaron's believed right to call the DFG...well apparently we "draw the line" on whether a law is enforceable or not based on our own set of moral rights.
Do you call the HP if you see a drunk driver, or a dangerous speeder cutting in and out of traffic endangering others? Or only...."just as I would call the HP (when the opportunity presented itself) if a parent is driving their child around who should be in a car seat, and isn't."
Jim / Saba Slayer

Jim, I don't know if we've met, but yeah, I would call the HP about a drunk driver or dangerous speeder, but like I said, "When the opportunity presented itself". I'm not going to risk a ticket, by talking on the cell phone while driving. And I may make the judgement call, that there's no way the HP is going to catch the guy/gal, when I call, therefore I don't call.
I like your views, but if you know Bob, whom I've nothing against, is he going to call the DFG if your fish takes you into the MLPA area?
If you know the fish are biting along the border of an MLPA area, and you hook up, is he going to call the DFG, because he had his GPS on, and you didn't and you were 50 feet beyond the border?
This topic escalated because those jackasses off of Laguna, had no license, lobster card and took dozens of under sized bugs in an MLPA area.
Most of us hate the MLPA, but as for those jackasses off of Laguna, we'd all hate them even before the MLPA.
I hate the lobster pots off of La Jolla, because my fish goes around their lines. But, I don't hate the lobster fishermen who are trying to make a living and got screwed by the MLPA, and I just won't be the one to point out their pots are over the line, to some degree. And even if you disagree with me, I won't be calling the DFG if you are hooked up or fishing in an MLPA area. Wrong is wrong.

[robmandel]

I've been following this for a bit, and hesitated to chime in, but here's the thing. there's two kinds of crimes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_in_se

Malum in se - Evil in itself. Murder, rape, assault, etc., need no proving as to the wrongness. they are evil because they are evil, and to others especially.

the other is

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum

malum prohibitum - evil because it's prohibited by law. everything from building code violations to prostituion are evil only because it's said so by law.

now, where do i draw the line? were the "violators" malum in se or malum prohibitum? obviously the latter. thus, they committed no wrong, but that proscribed by law.

I'm going to back further than Jefferson, to one of his main inspirations, John Locke:

for wherever the power, that is put in any hands for the government of the people, and the preservation of their properties, is applied to other ends, and made use of to impoverish, harass, or subdue them to the arbitrary and irregular commands of those that have it; there it presently becomes tyranny, whether those that thus use it are one or many.
...
May the commands then of a prince be opposed?
...
To this I answer, that force is to be opposed to nothing, but to unjust and unlawful force;

Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers #78 (http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa78.htm):

Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing.
...
There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.

Ok, what's that all mean. Well, laws such as the MLPA are malum prohibitum. There is nothing evil as for fishing, so much the silliness and sheer stupidity of this act that fishing 10 feet from the boundary is perfectly legal, 1 foot inside illegal. A simple legal designation, an invisible boundary, which is most difficult to ascertain and indeterminant as well (being that modern commercial GPS units will provide within 15-20 feet accuracy) is all that separates legal from otherwise.

It is in the words of John Locke (who is the philosophical forebear of the Dec. of Ind.) an act of tyranny, and thus must be opposed, with force if necessary.

As for the law itself, it runs counter to the greater laws, both constitutional and common. There is no malum in se, no harm to others, no crime being committed, yet rights clearly abridged. The law is clearly null and void. Now, the state has the guns and the wherewithal to make our lives hell, and no, I can't ask anyone here to risk theirs and their family's health and well being, despite being morally and legally justified. Even if you win, the state has rendered your life a tragedy. As Albert Jay Nock so aptly put it, "Our enemy, the state".

However, respect for the law and those who would enforce I have not. Help I will not. I will fight it as much as I can.

Let me simplify this, those who would help "enforce" the MLPA are aiding and abetting tyranny and evil.

I am sorry if you are offended by this, but there is no amelioration available, as in "I respect but...". Ain't gonna cut it. If you saw all that they did to us, and how they did it, it is a knife in our backs, and I can't lessen my feelings or moderate my words.