Shooting robotic deer

Register to hide this ad
This guy deserves what he gets but...can you really be charged with shooting deer that's not really a deer? :confused:

MANATEE COUNTY: Oh, deer! Florida hunter shoots at robotic 'Bambi,' faces firearms charges - Florida - MiamiHerald.com

Actually it's not the fact that he actually shot the fake deer but more to the fact of where he and the deer were when he shot it. Here in South Dakota it's a crime to shoot any animal within 20 feet of any roadway, weather it's the animal being hunted or the one doin the hunting!
 
The NYS DEC does this regularly with decoys.

They'll set up a decoy in a visible spot along a roadway and wait for somebody to come along and shoot it from their vehicle.

You can be charged with discharging a firearm from a vehicle, discharging a firearm from a public roadway, loaded firearm in a vehicle, not to mention whatever charges could be written up pertaining the animal you thought you were shooting - did the culprit have the proper license and/or carcass tag, etc.
 
Hopefully the poacher get what he deserves. They do so much damage to both animal population and hunter reputation.

So what exactly is "trespassing by projectile, a third-degree felony, for shooting across a fence line". Dose this mean if you shot and had a ricochet or your bullet went through the deer and into another property you are now a felon. Yes I know about knowing what's behind your target just asking if this is what it means.

Hillbilly77 According to the news story "He said that he knew hunting season was closed and also knew that it was illegal to shoot deer from a roadway," the arrest report stated.
 
Last edited:
I recall a tale back in WI where some hunters happened upon one.
they played by the book, moving to a legal position. They fired the rifles dry, reloaded and ran em dry again when the warden came out telling em to cease fire.
The decoy was fairly well destroyed and the warden had no charges he could make stick, despite an attempt at destruction of gov property, which was rumored to have gotten thrown out.
 
ive never seen one but i understand they are in use here as well, glad to hear my tax dollar going toward something worthwhile for a change. go conservation officers go!
 
Always wanted to spot one of those and pull my truck over to the side of the road, put my orange cap on and charge at it full bore with a pump gun loaded with slugs shooting it full of holes while the C.O. watches from nearby. Just for a laugh.
If you we're licensed and in season and otherwise all legal what could they do but go pick up the pieces ?

Chuck
 
Always wanted to spot one of those and pull my truck over to the side of the road, put my orange cap on and charge at it full bore with a pump gun loaded with slugs shooting it full of holes while the C.O. watches from nearby. Just for a laugh.
If you we're licensed and in season and otherwise all legal what could they do but go pick up the pieces ?

Chuck

Wonder what would happen if you pulled over and cut loose with half a dozen blank 12 guage rounds? I need to check and see if shooting fake ammo at a fake deer is illegal.
 
I suspect the wildlife officers realize the "discharging a firearm from a roadway" and the "trespassing by projectile" are the charges that would stick in the end.
 
Wonder what would happen if you pulled over and cut loose with half a dozen blank 12 guage rounds? I need to check and see if shooting fake ammo at a fake deer is illegal.

Well now that would be very traumatic for the fake deer thinking it was being shot at. Shame on You! PETA is going to be very upset.

It's always interesting the direction these threads take. :D
 
How is this not entrapment?

It's all about catching people who wantonly break 2 or 3 major laws at once while poaching.

I have seen the robo-deer many times. They are ALWAYS located in a position where the easiest access would be a totally illegal shoot. Firing from a paved road/ main thoroughfare in farm country, or a snaky highway. You are at the least blocking traffic, and the roads they set up on are in no way a questionable farm road or trail.

I had a friend who was with a guide, and the guide TOLD him to take the deer. He said 'no- we are on a road. No way.' The guide took him up the road, and they commenced a stalk. When my friend came to see the buck from a now 'legal' angle, he did not like that the deer had not moved......not one inch in 5 minutes. Just bobbing it's head, and dipping to feed. He told the guide he did not want to take it.
The guide promptly shot it. And, the wardens came out and got to sorting thru their stuff.
The wardens hounded him and the guide trying to hit them with trespass, but the guide did have a permit to take hunters on the land. The guide had his tag. From the angle the guide shot, the road was not visible, nor in the line of fire.
In the end, they cut them loose- but my friend was done with the guide. Had he listened to the guide originally??? They BOTH would have been on the hook, in a huge way.
The robo-deer in Ca. are fairly convincing in the northern half of the state. In the south....... deer simply do not stand around in daylight for much of anything for more than 1.3 seconds without moving on.

Utah robo-deer were very convincing, as were Wisconsin robo-deer. (Except the Wisconsin decoy had many, many holes in it..... Indians from the reservation right by there have little regard for white man's game laws......)
 
The game warden can't force you to break the law.
Yes, but baiting a person into breaking the law is entrapment. In criminal law, entrapment is when a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit an offense that the person would not have been likely to commit otherwise.

So, I ask again, how is this not entrapment?

I realize that poachers are scum of the earth. I think they should be punished severely for their crimes. I also realize that the law enforcement in these areas is limited and that poachers are hard to catch. Even so, this sounds like entrapment to me and gives those caught with this method a way out.

I see the "bait car" in the same light. Obviously the cops wouldn't do it if they didn't gain some value from it. I'm sure most of those caught don't fight it hard and are happy to get off with a fine.
 
Yes, but baiting a person into breaking the law is entrapment. In criminal law, entrapment is when a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit an offense that the person would not have been likely to commit otherwise.

So, I ask again, how is this not entrapment?

I realize that poachers are scum of the earth. I think they should be punished severely for their crimes. I also realize that the law enforcement in these areas is limited and that poachers are hard to catch. Even so, this sounds like entrapment to me and gives those caught with this method a way out.

I see the "bait car" in the same light. Obviously the cops wouldn't do it if they didn't gain some value from it. I'm sure most of those caught don't fight it hard and are happy to get off with a fine.

Evidently the courts in many, many states where the robo-deer are used don't see it as entrapment. And I'm sure that someone has tried to fight it in the past as these robo-deer have been in use for over a decade.

Hillbilly77 had the right answer to your question IMO .."The game warden can't force you to break the law".

Don
 
Last edited:
Yes, but baiting a person into breaking the law is entrapment. In criminal law, entrapment is when a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit an offense that the person would not have been likely to commit otherwise.

So, I ask again, how is this not entrapment?

I realize that poachers are scum of the earth. I think they should be punished severely for their crimes. I also realize that the law enforcement in these areas is limited and that poachers are hard to catch. Even so, this sounds like entrapment to me and gives those caught with this method a way out.

I see the "bait car" in the same light. Obviously the cops wouldn't do it if they didn't gain some value from it. I'm sure most of those caught don't fight it hard and are happy to get off with a fine.

The culprit has free will.

In a case like a robo-deer, I don't see where the game warden has any influence on the shooters actions at any time.
In fact, there is NO interaction at all between the game warden and the person unless or until the trigger is pulled.

In your definition it states "offense that the person would not have been likely to commit otherwise".
I think somebody willing to shoot a trophy deer from a road is just that type of person. He would have been likely to commit the crime anyway.

It seems in my area, stings are set up in areas where a problem already exists, not areas where the game wardens just feel like going on a fishing expedition.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top