Hunting Violation Checkpoints:

[tombogan03884]

This is long but worth reading

Posted by Eugene Volokh:
Hunting Violation Checkpoints:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_09_06-2009_09_12.shtml#1252620396


   The [1]Sacramento Bee reports:

     The California Department of Fish and Game will stage three
     roadside checkpoints in Placer County on Sunday in an effort to
     catch hunting violations....

     "The checkpoint is there to find violations of the Fish and Game
     Code," said Placer County Game Warden Brian Moore. "It could be
     anything -- out of season hunting or animals that are fully
     protected -- that could come through." ...

     Wardens will stop vehicles to inquire about hunting and fishing
     activity and check licenses.

   That's pretty clearly a Fourth Amendment violation, under the Supreme
   Court's decision in [2]City of Indianapolis v. Edmond (2000), which
   held that similar checkpoints aimed at uncovering drug couriers were
   unconstitutional. Here's a relevant excerpt from Edmond:

     The Fourth Amendment requires that searches and seizures be
     reasonable. A search or seizure is ordinarily unreasonable in the
     absence of individualized suspicion of wrongdoing. Chandler v.
     Miller, 520 U.S. 305, 308 (1997). While such suspicion is not an
     "irreducible" component of reasonableness, we have recognized only
     limited circumstances in which the usual rule does not apply.

Read the rest at the link

[TAB]

like it or not, Fish and game wardens here have almost as much search and seizure powers as the USCG( which is 2nd, only behind a federal marshel)

[tombogan03884]

like it or not, Fish and game wardens here have almost as much search and seizure powers as the USCG( which is 2nd, only behind a federal marshel)

TAB, Since I DID read the WHOLE article, it is BLINDINGLY obvious that you DID NOT go to the link and read the whole thing.
If you had gone beyond the "teaser" that I posted you would have learned that the "check points" mentioned will most likely be declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

[MikeBjerum]

TAB, Since I DID read the WHOLE article, it is BLINDINGLY obvious that you DID NOT go to the link and read the whole thing.
If you had gone beyond the "teaser" that I posted you would have learned that the "check points" mentioned will most likely be declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Because they have been in other states.  Many states are holding their wildlife departments to the Constitution when it comes to searches ... No more unannounced or forced entry to ice houses or blinds, and no forced searches of vehicles.