Putting the magic back into fishing!

[nottskev]

Sadly people have no faith in the law: "do unto others as you would do unto yourself"

Perhaps you were thinking of where Luke 6:31 records Jesus saying, “Do to others as you would have them do to you.” ? This is an entirely different concept.

A moment's thought - often worthwhile for a philosopher/prophet - would reveal that there are many things that you can "do unto yourself", forgive me if I don't specify, that the law quite rightly forbids you from doing to others or, indeed, doing in public.

 

[sam vimes]

I don't have a high regard for rod licences, the closed season or the EA in general. However, I still can't sensibly argue that it isn't law that an angler in England and Wales has to have a rod licence to fish. It matters not one whit whatever the landowner does, does not do, or says.

No doubt that amounts to legal sophistry to some, but you can argue the same for every law ever written. Society makes laws. People abide by them, or not. Whether you disagree with them is immaterial. Until they are changed or successfully challenged in court, they remain extant. Those that disregard them are law breakers.

In the case of rod licence dodgers, there is more than enough evidence to suggest that the courts disagree entirely that someone paying for a day ticket, but having no rod licence, is doing nothing illegal. People get fined for exactly that on a regular basis. I don't suppose that those running the fishery were complaining, nor were other anglers on the fishery. Those that get caught in such environments are just unlucky/stupid enough to be fishing a fairly popular fishery that is worthwhile for the vanishingly small number of EA bailiffs to actually check.

 

[103841]

Those that get caught in such environments are just unlucky/stupid enough to be fishing a fairly popular fishery that is worthwhile for the vanishingly small number of EA bailiffs to actually check.

And there are those that when challenged by an official claim not to be fishing but playing air guitar and when the police are called “divebombs into the river”

Sophistry? No, more like pure fantasy and if not, someone who dodges the laws because they know they’re in the wrong.

 

[mikench]

A fishing forum and someone admits he won't buy a licence; unbelievable!

“Never play chess with a pigeon.

The pigeon just knocks all the pieces over.

Then shits all over the board.

Then struts around like it won.”

 

[Weirdoh]

All fun and jokes aside, I am amazed that not one single member here has of yet grasped how the law works in this country. Yes I give many humorous "made up" scenarios or use analogies and yes I am weird I suppose because I hold to a different viewpoint on rod license, I have to go it alone against popularity of opinion and keep my defenses up because I deserve to be unliked, I get it.
However, all of you are missing what committing a crime is and to have a criminal convicted of a crime requires proof of intent and evidenced by witnesses. Anyones opinion of me as a poacher is unfounded unless they can prove it and I have always maintained that should I ever have the intent to tresspass and steal another mans property and it can be proven beyond all reasonable doubt then I deserve all the sentence and should wear all the badges and accept all the insults. I could of never mentioned I do not have a license and just asked questions but then I would be untrue to myself. The truth is simple, until someone has been convicted of poaching or aggravated tresspass then it can not be truthfully said he is a criminal, this is bearing false witness. The EA have to get the conviction to show a criminal has been brought to justice.

Personal opinions and egos simply fail on points of law or do not go far enough in explaining how I or anyone else could EVER be convicted of a fishing crime when:

A: It has not been reported.
B: Has not been witnessed.
C: No one has reported to of suffered loss or damage to personal property.
D: No one has suffered physical harm.
E: No ones Freedoms or rights of way were met with resistance.

The EA and the government can say and do whatever they like because they get to indemnify real crimes, you pay towards it and when and where they cause serious harm and losses to anyone they choose, you will get what you paid for and own a share in their criminal activity. It just hasn't sunk in yet. Not a single person here has even explained WHY you even need a license, where someone does not set out to cause harm or loss for what purpose could you EVER need a license. Ever likely you all resort to stupidity where your at a loss to explain such a simple point of law.

 

[108831]

Listen,there are two types of people in this conversation,the law abiding ones who do everything to stay on the right side,then there are the others,criminals,which side do you sit on weirdoh,you decide,when you do perhaps every sensible member here will block you,leaving you to sing to yourself...

 

[nottskev]

You flatter yourself that your smart thinking has eluded us all.

We can simply see that your ingenious re-writing of fishing without a license as a matter of "no offence" is a nonsense.

Please - stop telling us how right you are, but do let us know how you get on when your fantasy comes into contact with reality and you are faced with prosecution for not having an EA license.

From your posts, you seem to fish all over the place - canals, rivers, as well as secretive private places where fishing takes place between consenting adults - so we can hope it's not long til your house-of-cards defence is tested in court.

Normally, I'd be inclined to think "Good luck to you, mate", but you do keep insisting you're too smart to buy a license like us mugs.......

 

[sam vimes]

What a load of cobblers. Fishing without a rod licence is a crime all on its own. Hardly crime of the century, but a crime nonetheless. You don't need to trespass or steal for it to be so. You don't have to knowingly fish without a licence for it to be an offence. Ignorance of the law, simple oversight, or forgetfulness, is not a valid defence. Whether you like it or not doesn't matter.

 

[Weirdoh]

Perhaps you were thinking of where Luke 6:31 records Jesus saying, “Do to others as you would have them do to you.” ? This is an entirely different concept.

A moment's thought - often worthwhile for a philosopher/prophet - would reveal that there are many things that you can "do unto yourself", forgive me if I don't specify, that the law quite rightly forbids you from doing to others or, indeed, doing in public.

Show acts of kindness towards others if that is what you want others to show you.
I am not sure what else you could be reffering too. If your asked to give the truth do not give a lie.

 

[103841]

I did say in an earlier thread that we should show some sympathy, trolls often have a troubled background, this one is hellbent on invading and demeaning every thread and every member. If I’m proven wrong I’ll be the first to apologise but to do that the individual would have to unmask himself and reveal his true identity, can’t see that happening anytime soon.

 

[Weirdoh]

What a load of cobblers. Fishing without a rod licence is a crime all on its own. Hardly crime of the century, but a crime nonetheless. You don't need to trespass or steal for it to be so. You don't have to knowingly fish without a licence for it to be an offence. Ignorance of the law, simple oversight, or forgetfulness, is not a valid defence. Whether you like it or not doesn't matter.

If it is a crime then it should not be hard for the EA to show their injuries or show by stating loss of personal property. Are you a witness?

 

[Weirdoh]

I did say in an earlier thread that we should show some sympathy, trolls often have a troubled background, this one is hellbent on invading and demeaning every thread and every member. If I’m proven wrong I’ll be the first to apologise but to do that the individual would have to unmask himself and reveal his true identity, can’t see that happening anytime soon.

Forget sympathy, could we just stick to the truth please?

 

[Mark Wintle]

I've been buying rod licenses for 50 years and have to say that today it's so simple, cheap and easy to get one that it's a chore quickly achieved every March and a far cry from the complex bad old days when a simple trip just 20 miles to the east meant a different license. Because of my match fishing travel I can remember needing Wessex, Southern, Thames, Severn-Trent and Anglian, possibly South-west licenses, sometimes all in the same season, and on some matches where the local bailiff knew many anglers were from outside the region you could guarantee to be checked, made all the more difficult by having to find someone to sell you one as you could only buy them from tackle shops, not easy on a Sunday match. I still hold the all-time record for license checks in one day - four - in Wessex when all the area bailiffs had to report to Wareham for bank clearance and each bailiff that turned up decided to check me though the fourth one was told to get lost and relented when I named the bailiffs that had already checked me and told him that he was late...

 

[Weirdoh]

Listen,there are two types of people in this conversation,the law abiding ones who do everything to stay on the right side,then there are the others,criminals,which side do you sit on weirdoh,you decide,when you do perhaps every sensible member here will block you,leaving you to sing to yourself...

Ok so your now asserting I am a criminal (see above) so what evidence do you have to show I have been convicted of a crime? Innocent before being proven guilty?

Have I caused you personally any harm since I joined this forum?

 

[nottskev]

This is getting like the Monty Python cheese-shop sketch.

You really think something is a crime ONLY if it conforms to YOUR definition?

And you think you are innocent unless you do something you consider wrong?

That's really quite sweet - if it comes from a child at an early stage of mental and moral development.

But for an adult, it's extraordinarily egocentric and childish.

Do you think the authorities use your version of what is or isn't an offence - or theirs?

As I said, let us know how you get on in court, but please give it a rest. We've seen the sketch, and we know there's no cheese.

 

[103841]

Kev, I ask again, why would you risk your life jumping into a river in the dead of night to evade the police? The troll has requested I stick to the truth, he doesn’t know the meaning of the word.

 

[The Runner]

The EA and the government can say and do whatever they like because they get to indemnify real crimes, you pay towards it and when and where they cause serious harm and losses to anyone they choose, you will get what you paid for and own a share in their criminal activity. It just hasn't sunk in yet. Not a single person here has even explained WHY you even need a license, where someone does not set out to cause harm or loss for what purpose could you EVER need a license. Ever likely you all resort to stupidity where your at a loss to explain such a simple point of law.

I won't respond to the first sentence as I'm obviously too stupid to understand what on earth it means.

Re the rest, WHY you need a licence isn't a point of law, simple or otherwise. The FACT that you are required to have one is.
And intent isn't necessary to commit a crime whatever you say. Unless the fundamentals of our legal system have changed since I did a law degree.

That's all, I'm off to the pub. I don't intend to get drunk and disorderly, but if I do I will be a criminal....

 

[Weirdoh]

This is getting like the Monty Python cheese-shop sketch.

You really think something is a crime ONLY if it conforms to YOUR definition?

And you think you are innocent unless you do something you consider wrong?

That's really quite sweet - if it comes from a child at an early stage of mental and moral development.

But for an adult, it's extraordinarily egocentric and childish.

Do you think the authorities use your version of what is or isn't an offence - or theirs?

As I said, let us know how you get on in court, but please give it a rest. We've seen the sketch, and we know there's no cheese.

I think your at a loss to explain how the law works.I define a crime pretty much the same as most english dictionary translations. I would imagine it must be difficult for anyone trying to defend the lawless, this is why people stray from the major premise being debated and go off on a tangent or minor premise because they are obviously showing their lack of knowledge on simple points of law which is the crux of this debate. I have so far not been brought to a court for engaging in criminal activity, that is because my intentions are not based upon harming others (their feelings, their property, their rights, their physical wellbeing....) but if someone is blind to the facts I guess he has no choice but to show his ignorance and put his own intentions on full display.

 

[nottskev]

Read post 37. Twice.

 

[Weirdoh]

I won't respond to the first sentence as I'm obviously too stupid to understand what on earth it means.

Re the rest, WHY you need a licence isn't a point of law, simple or otherwise. The FACT that you are required to have one is.
And intent isn't necessary to commit a crime whatever you say. Unless the fundamentals of our legal system have changed since I did a law degree.

That's all, I'm off to the pub. I don't intend to get drunk and disorderly, but if I do I will be a criminal....

Firstly intent is EVERYTHING to the person who wishes to gain another mans property with out his express permission or prior knowledge ( that little thing called consent?). Secondly your law degree is worth zero. "0"