Update - Deryl Ring and confrontation with snowmobilers..

[Leafy]

Deryl was 62 when this confrontation with the trespassing recreationalists happened. I am sure Deryl would have grown up old school, spanked his children and taught them respect as his generation didn't coddle nor worry what someone else thought

Unfortunately we have created a society where respect is gone, personal property means nothing and there is no consequences to deter most douche bags.

The man had enough and stood his ground, big friggen deal. If this 62 year old man would not have had the shotty, ( which the breach was open ) we wouldn't even be discussing this..

[KegRiver]

Originally Posted by Leafy

Deryl was 62 when this confrontation with the trespassing recreationalists happened. I am sure Deryl would have grown up old school, spanked his children and taught them respect as his generation didn't coddle nor worry what someone else thought

Unfortunately we have created a society where respect is gone, personal property means nothing and there is no consequences to deter most douche bags.

The man had enough and stood his ground, big friggen deal. If this 62 year old man would not have had the shotty, ( which the breach was open ) we wouldn't even be discussing this..

If he had not had that shotgun he would most likely be spending the rest of his life in a wheal chair or on life support.

People who have no respect for private property also have no respect for the rights of others, and no respect for the law. They are capable of anything because in their minds, the law does not apply to them.

That is the society we have created. James Roszko was not an anomaly, he was a symptom.

[huntwat]

Originally Posted by norwestalta

No worry of damaging the snow but I've seen where a snow mobile trail gets packed and next thing 5 dozen elk are using it to get to the haybales.

And I suppose those elk wouldn't have made it to those hay bales if it wasn't for the machines???
Anyways, back on point, the guy used a gun illegally. Pretty simple.
Like I said, ammo for the anti's.

[beltburner]

It's interesting how when a random person reads through threads like this without any preconceived notions about it; the landowners/farmers seem like the crazy violent ones of the groups.

[Blastoff]

He should of got more than 50 hours, it's BS that he needed to go with a shotgun, without shotgun would have been enough

[Cinch]

Originally Posted by Immigrant

In sask the trespassing law states the land needs to be posted. If no sign that says "no trespassing" or "private property" it is a free for all. If you find someone on your unposted land, you can tell him to leave. If he refuses, or comes back later he is trespassing.
So the snowmobilers in this case were in the clear because there were no signs to tell them to keep out

That is no longer the case in regards to ATV/OTV, bird watching, berry picking, etc. With the exception of licensed hunting, trapping and fishing a person must have permission to enter private land. Thus, landowners must post their land to keep out hunters, trappers, and fishers. The law was changed 4 years ago but enforcement is a joke.

[fishunter327]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

If he had not had that shotgun he would most likely be spending the rest of his life in a wheal chair or on life support.

People who have no respect for private property also have no respect for the rights of others, and no respect for the law. They are capable of anything because in their minds, the law does not apply to them.

That is the society we have created. James Roszko was not an anomaly, he was a symptom.

OMG really?

[expmler]

Originally Posted by beltburner

It's interesting how when a random person reads through threads like this without any preconceived notions about it; the landowners/farmers seem like the crazy violent ones of the groups.

More like the ones tired and frustrated with having to deal with entitled, disrespectful, trespassing, douche bags every weekend.

[igorot]

The judge should have awarded the GO-pro to the farmer to solve his trespassing problem . Don't give me the "why should I it is my land I do what I want" . We do not live in a perfect world and life was never fair. If you do the crime suck it up and do the time. And remember you own the right to the land but nobody own the land itself

[icehunter]

I didn't read all the comments but its real friggen simple...just because some one else took a sled or what ever across some one"s land...doesn't mean you are entitled to do the same thing.Its real easy...you just drive up to the farmers door,or acreage owner...or what ever and ask for PERMISSION to cross the land...Once you get permission and follow the rules of gates or fences...then you proceed...its called RESPECT...they OWN the land...you don't...

[huntwat]

Originally Posted by icehunter

I didn't read all the comments but its real friggen simple...just because some one else took a sled or what ever across some one"s land...doesn't mean you are entitled to do the same thing.Its real easy...you just drive up to the farmers door,or acreage owner...or what ever and ask for PERMISSION to cross the land...Once you get permission and follow the rules of gates or fences...then you proceed...its called RESPECT...they OWN the land...you don't...

Absolutely, but if you don't do that, it doesn't give anyone the right to use a gun.

[Bushrat]

Originally Posted by huntwat

Absolutely, but if you don't do that, it doesn't give anyone the right to use a gun.

I saw him carrying a gun, nowhere did I see him using a gun, he might as well have had a Christmas card in his hand.

[huntwat]

Originally Posted by Bushrat

I saw him carrying a gun, nowhere did I see him using a gun, he might as well have had a Christmas card in his hand.

right, and there is laws against committing a crime while in possession of a gun

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by Blastoff

He should of got more than 50 hours, it's BS that he needed to go with a shotgun, without shotgun would have been enough

X2
He was lucky the gun wasn't taken and used on him. If you decide the situation is dire enough that you need a gun, you better be prepared to use it.

[norwestalta]

Originally Posted by huntwat

right, and there is laws against committing a crime while in possession of a gun

So just a thought. If I'm outside working on my farm with my sidearm and a guy bee lines across my hay field to ask permission to hunt and I give him a blast and tell him to get the eff off my land in those words I've just assaulted him with my weapon because I had it on my person?

[airbornedeerhunter]

Originally Posted by norwestalta

So just a thought. If I'm outside working on my farm with my sidearm and a guy bee lines across my hay field to ask permission to hunt and I give him a blast and tell him to get the eff off my land in those words I've just assaulted him with my weapon because I had it on my person?

If you struck him like Ring did you would be charged with assault.

You could also be charged with possession of a weapon dangerous to the public regardless if it is on your property or not.

Even if you didn't strike him and simply gestured that you would while screaming at him and in possession of a firearm you would be charged, why? Because in Canada you can "assault by gesture".

Just a question though? If a hunter had enough respect for you and your property to approach you and ask for your permission to access your property, why would you respond that way?

[norwestalta]

Originally Posted by airbornedeerhunter

If you struck him like Ring did you would be charged with assault.

You could also be charged with possession of a weapon dangerous to the public regardless if it is on your property or not.

Even if you didn't strike him and simply gestured that you would while screaming at him and in possession of a firearm you would be charged, why? Because in Canada you can "assault by gesture".

Just a question though? If a hunter had enough respect for you and your property to approach you and ask for your permission to access your property, why would you respond that way?

If he had the respect that you mention he wouldn't of drove through the middle of my hay field.
Many would understand if they've ever tried haying in a rutted up hay field.

[huntwat]

Originally Posted by norwestalta

So just a thought. If I'm outside working on my farm with my sidearm and a guy bee lines across my hay field to ask permission to hunt and I give him a blast and tell him to get the eff off my land in those words I've just assaulted him with my weapon because I had it on my person?

Well... I guess you just don't get it.

[expmler]

Originally Posted by airbornedeerhunter

If you struck him like Ring did you would be charged with assault.

You could also be charged with possession of a weapon dangerous to the public regardless if it is on your property or not.

Even if you didn't strike him and simply gestured that you would while screaming at him and in possession of a firearm you would be charged, why? Because in Canada you can "assault by gesture".

Just a question though? If a hunter had enough respect for you and your property to approach you and ask for your permission to access your property, why would you respond that way?

Where is the respect shown by driving across someone's hay crop. Guys with respect can easily find out who owns the land and where he lives. Then come to the yard and knock on the door.

[airbornedeerhunter]

Originally Posted by norwestalta

If he had the respect that you mention he wouldn't of drove through the middle of my hay field.

You never said anything in your original post about driving!

Yes, if someone drove across your fields then that is a dick move, still can't assault him though.

[airbornedeerhunter]

Originally Posted by expmler

Where is the respect shown by driving across someone's hay crop.

He never said anything about driving! I just "bee lined it" to the fridge to get a beer.

[norwestalta]

Originally Posted by huntwat

Well... I guess you just don't get it.

I get it perfectly well. Stay off if it don't belong to you. Pretty easy concept for most.

[expmler]

Originally Posted by airbornedeerhunter

He never said anything about driving! I just "bee lined it" to the fridge to get a beer.

What would you say if I (a stranger) "bee lined it" to your fridge for a beer.

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by expmler

What would you say if I (a stranger) "bee lined it" to your fridge for a beer.

Comparing your hay field to a persons home? Really? There's a reason why people getting caught in other people's homes arnt charged with trespassing.... both are wrong though, one just more than the other

[airbornedeerhunter]

Pretty heated debates going on here. If I may segue for a minute- listen, if you are victim of trespassers there is a right way and wrong way to deal with it. I have never trespassed in my adult life and all the property's I access I have the express consent of the owners to do so.

For all those advocating for the use of force or the possession of a firearm while exhibiting that force against an individual, I can guarantee you that you have never had to deal with the criminal court system, the RCMP or the Canadian Firearms Center. As someone who has ( a long time ago) I can guarantee you that you would regret your actions if you did what he did.

You would be arrested, you would be charged, you would be released on conditions, you would have your PAL/POL/RPAL "frozen" pending disposition of the case, you would get a lawyer, you would spend anywhere from a few thousand to upwards of ten grand in lawyer fees, you could lose your firearms for an indefinite or pre-determined period of time, once either the case was disposed of by a not guilty finding or the period of time had passed that you could not be in possession of firearms it would take several more months for the CFC to re-activate your PAL so you could either pick up the guns from the RCMP or legally be in possession of one at all.

No one is arguing that the sledders were right or that the owner was frustrated and rightfully PO'd at the situation but assault and assault while in possession of a weapon are black and white under the CC of Canada.

If you all love your guns and your privilege of owning them, would you really risk all that to prove a point? Telling them to leave would have solved it and it is perfectly legal!

[airbornedeerhunter]

Originally Posted by expmler

What would you say if I (a stranger) "bee lined it" to your fridge for a beer.

I'd tell you that the bottle opener is in the top drawer next to the steak knives.

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by airbornedeerhunter

Pretty heated debates going on here. If I may segue for a minute- listen, if you are victim of trespassers there is a right way and wrong way to deal with it. I have never trespassed in my adult life and all the property's I access I have the express consent of the owners to do so.

For all those advocating for the use of force or the possession of a firearm while exhibiting that force against an individual, I can guarantee you that you have never had to deal with the criminal court system, the RCMP or the Canadian Firearms Center. As someone who has ( a long time ago) I can guarantee you that you would regret your actions if you did what he did.

You would be arrested, you would be charged, you would be released on conditions, you would have your PAL/POL/RPAL "frozen" pending disposition of the case, you would get a lawyer, you would spend anywhere from a few thousand to upwards of ten grand in lawyer fees, you could lose your firearms for an indefinite or pre-determined period of time, once either the case was disposed of by a not guilty finding or the period of time had passed that you could not be in possession of firearms it would take several more months for the CFC to re-activate your PAL so you could either pick up the guns from the RCMP or legally be in possession of one at all.

No one is arguing that the sledders were right or that the owner was frustrated and rightfully PO'd at the situation but assault and assault while in possession of a weapon are black and white under the CC of Canada.

If you all love your guns and your privilege of owning them, would you really risk all that to prove a point? Telling them to leave would have solved it and it is perfectly legal!

Yup. That's the smart thing to do.

[huntwat]

Originally Posted by airbornedeerhunter

Pretty heated debates going on here. If I may segue for a minute- listen, if you are victim of trespassers there is a right way and wrong way to deal with it. I have never trespassed in my adult life and all the property's I access I have the express consent of the owners to do so.

For all those advocating for the use of force or the possession of a firearm while exhibiting that force against an individual, I can guarantee you that you have never had to deal with the criminal court system, the RCMP or the Canadian Firearms Center. As someone who has ( a long time ago) I can guarantee you that you would regret your actions if you did what he did.

You would be arrested, you would be charged, you would be released on conditions, you would have your PAL/POL/RPAL "frozen" pending disposition of the case, you would get a lawyer, you would spend anywhere from a few thousand to upwards of ten grand in lawyer fees, you could lose your firearms for an indefinite or pre-determined period of time, once either the case was disposed of by a not guilty finding or the period of time had passed that you could not be in possession of firearms it would take several more months for the CFC to re-activate your PAL so you could either pick up the guns from the RCMP or legally be in possession of one at all.

No one is arguing that the sledders were right or that the owner was frustrated and rightfully PO'd at the situation but assault and assault while in possession of a weapon are black and white under the CC of Canada.

If you all love your guns and your privilege of owning them, would you really risk all that to prove a point? Telling them to leave would have solved it and it is perfectly legal!

You get it!!!!

[expmler]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Comparing your hay field to a persons home? Really? There's a reason why people getting caught in other people's homes arnt charged with trespassing.... both are wrong though, one just more than the other

He never said the fridge was in his home, maybe it is in a detached garage.

[expmler]

Originally Posted by airbornedeerhunter

Pretty heated debates going on here. If I may segue for a minute- listen, if you are victim of trespassers there is a right way and wrong way to deal with it. I have never trespassed in my adult life and all the property's I access I have the express consent of the owners to do so.

For all those advocating for the use of force or the possession of a firearm while exhibiting that force against an individual, I can guarantee you that you have never had to deal with the criminal court system, the RCMP or the Canadian Firearms Center. As someone who has ( a long time ago) I can guarantee you that you would regret your actions if you did what he did.

You would be arrested, you would be charged, you would be released on conditions, you would have your PAL/POL/RPAL "frozen" pending disposition of the case, you would get a lawyer, you would spend anywhere from a few thousand to upwards of ten grand in lawyer fees, you could lose your firearms for an indefinite or pre-determined period of time, once either the case was disposed of by a not guilty finding or the period of time had passed that you could not be in possession of firearms it would take several more months for the CFC to re-activate your PAL so you could either pick up the guns from the RCMP or legally be in possession of one at all.

No one is arguing that the sledders were right or that the owner was frustrated and rightfully PO'd at the situation but assault and assault while in possession of a weapon are black and white under the CC of Canada.

If you all love your guns and your privilege of owning them, would you really risk all that to prove a point? Telling them to leave would have solved it and it is perfectly legal!

Sure, leave your gun at home go and confront two sledders who already have shown no respect for you or the law. Then when they put you in the hospital you can take comfort in the fact that you did the lawful thing while you recover.

Or better yet, just stay in your house and let them do what they want.

At least the farmer stood up and accepted the consequences of his actions that day. Unlike the two trespassing douche bags who played victim in the media.