Chatham deer’s death leads to charges

[pupchow]

What a clusterphuck.

Investigation into Chatham deer's death leads to charges

Interesting charges.

"CHATHAM — The killing in November of a large whitetail buck that Chatham residents knew as “The Judge” was a factor in the arraignment Friday of a man on charges of firing an arrow too close to houses, Orleans District Court records show.

Eric Rego, 26, of Chatham, was released on his own recognizance after he pleaded not guilty to eight counts of discharging a firearm within 500 feet of a dwelling in connection with the Nov. 8 incident. Rego also pleaded not guilty to two counts of discharging a firearm near a highway and one count of hunting with an improper bow and arrow, records state."

 

[Frizzle Fry]

I'm sorry - what? He's been charged with discharging a firearm for firing a bow?

 

[Squire]

A celebrity deer?

Anti-hunting, another liberal witch-hunt to antagonize political opponents.

 

[Mark from MA]

I'm sorry - what? He's been charged with discharging a firearm for firing a bow?

WTF? Over

A bow is not a firearm. How does that work. He could be charged with Hunting or releasing an arrow within 500 feet or 150 feet of a road.

Good he pleaded not guilty. He will win.

 

[Penniepup1]

I guess I need to put a suppressor on my bow.

 

[terraformer]

He could be charged with Hunting or releasing an arrow within 500 feet or 150 feet of a road.

What? Releasing an arrow is not a crime, period. Hunting is.

 

[MachineHead]

He’s going to straight up the river if he held that bow in a pistol-grippy fashion and more than 10 arrows in his quiver.

 

[EJFudd]

The entire news story is screwed up. Read it again. It makes no sense.

 

[n1oty]

Another reason why I do not hunt in Mass, but instead go to Maine.

 

[Fixxah]

How big was said Tic Taxi?

 

[Blackmore]

Yikes!

 

[MisterHappy]

What? Releasing an arrow is not a crime, period. Hunting is.

Actually, it is, per:

Section 58

Section 58. A person shall not discharge any firearm or release any arrow upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway, or within one hundred and fifty feet, of any such highway, or possess a loaded firearm or hunt by any means on the land of another within five hundred feet of any dwelling in use, except as authorized by the owner or occupant thereof.

At least in my IANAL reading.

In fact, I've pointed out the irony that the "except on a range" exemption for guns, does not apply, at least in any MGL I've seen, to archery.

 

[slap shot]

The entire news story is screwed up. Read it again. It makes no sense.

Because the story is screwed up. Read the comments, definitely some perps posting.

 

[TLB]

So you can't hunt within 500 feet of someone else's dwelling (without permission, I assume) in Mass even with a bow and arrow?

This is based on the distance to the actial house, as opposed to the property line, right?

Obviously crossbow requires another permit.

Is the act of hunting firing the arrow? I.e. can you track down the animal without trespassing, but within 150 feet of road and 500 feet of another's dwelling?

 

[TLB]

Actually, it is, per:

Section 58

Section 58. A person shall not discharge any firearm or release any arrow upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway, or within one hundred and fifty feet, of any such highway, or possess a loaded firearm or hunt by any means on the land of another within five hundred feet of any dwelling in use, except as authorized by the owner or occupant thereof.

At least in my IANAL reading.

In fact, I've pointed out the irony that the "except on a range" exemption for guns, does not apply, at least in any MGL I've seen, to archery.

Interesting, so can you hunt in your own yard with bow and arrow, as long as you don't release the arrow within 150 feet of the road (with the distance to neighboring house being irrelevant)?

I thought back yard archery was legal, except your cite indicates you need a big yard.

I am assuming "hard surfaced highway" is a paved road.

 

[pupchow]

So you can't hunt within 500 feet of someone else's dwelling (without permission, I assume) in Mass even with a bow and arrow?

This is based on the distance to the actial house, as opposed to the property line, right?

Obviously crossbow requires another permit.

Is the act of hunting firing the arrow? I.e. can you track down the animal without trespassing, but within 150 feet of road and 500 feet of another's dwelling?

Unlawful to hunt within 500' of a building in use, w/o owner's permission.

You cannot track an animal on posted land w/o permission, but there is no other restriction that I'm aware of in that regard.

 

[pupchow]

Interesting, so can you hunt in your own yard with bow and arrow, as long as you don't release the arrow within 150 feet of the road (with the distance to neighboring house being irrelevant)?

I thought back yard archery was legal, except your cite indicates you need a big yard.

I am assuming "hard surfaced highway" is a paved road.

Hunting and target shooting are two different scenarios.

Yes, a dirt road is not hard surfaced.

 

[terraformer]

Actually, it is, per:

Section 58

Section 58. A person shall not discharge any firearm or release any arrow upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway, or within one hundred and fifty feet, of any such highway, or possess a loaded firearm or hunt by any means on the land of another within five hundred feet of any dwelling in use, except as authorized by the owner or occupant thereof.

At least in my IANAL reading.

In fact, I've pointed out the irony that the "except on a range" exemption for guns, does not apply, at least in any MGL I've seen, to archery.

That statute is a mess. It's from 1967. It clearly was originally meant to apply only to hunting. It has no penalty or I can't see where the penalties come from.

 

[CCW]

What a clusterphuck.

Interesting charges.

"CHATHAM — The killing in November of a large whitetail buck that Chatham residents knew as “The Judge” was a factor in the arraignment Friday of a man on charges of firing an arrow too close to houses, Orleans District Court records show.

Eric Rego, 26, of Chatham, was released on his own recognizance after he pleaded not guilty to eight counts of discharging a firearm within 500 feet of a dwelling in connection with the Nov. 8 incident. Rego also pleaded not guilty to two counts of discharging a firearm near a highway and one count of hunting with an improper bow and arrow, records state."

By contrast: State Trooper Who Accidentally Shot Norton Woman Will Not Be Charged

 

[Mark from MA]

So you can't hunt within 500 feet of someone else's dwelling (without permission, I assume) in Mass even with a bow and arrow?

This is based on the distance to the actial house, as opposed to the property line, right?

Obviously crossbow requires another permit.

Is the act of hunting firing the arrow? I.e. can you track down the animal without trespassing, but within 150 feet of road and 500 feet of another's dwelling?

Act of hunting is not firing an arrow. It would be face value evidence of hunting, which is left a wide open cornucopia of things. In MA, just chasing and scaring an animal, could be considered hunting......

 

[MisterHappy]

That statute is a mess. It's from 1967. It clearly was originally meant to apply only to hunting. It has no penalty or I can't see where the penalties come from.

Hella mess. But it's there. I don't know if no penalty invalidates it, or makes it like the Wheel, in Thunderdome.

But, if the poor writing is explained to the legislature, will we be accused of "bullying"?

 

[Mark from MA]

That statute is a mess. It's from 1967. It clearly was originally meant to apply only to hunting. It has no penalty or I can't see where the penalties come from.

It is a hunting statute and what is being taught at hunters safety for years now......

Likely only penalty is loss of hunting license or something like that.

 

[terraformer]

Here is more mess. This prohibits the possession of a BB gun outside dear hunting season.

And I still can't find a penalty for §58...

Section 66. A person shall not, except during the prescribed open season when deer may be hunted lawfully with a shotgun, have in his possession a shotgun shell loaded with a rifled slug, single ball, buckshot of any size, BB shot or air rifle shot in any place where birds or mammals might be found, except on a skeet, trap or target range between sunrise and sunset; provided, however, that the director shall promulgate rules and regulations prescribing the type and size of such BB shot.

And this hot mess. So no possession of a rifle taking larger than .22 LR between the sunset and sunrise. NB: No qualifier about hunting. ie; No "in the woods" or "while engaged in hunting", etc; This dumpster fire is the epitome of MA law. Vague beyond recognition of any normalcy in any other jurisdiction. Everything truly is illegal in this shithole.

Section 67. A person shall not use or possess, where birds or mammals may be found, any rifle chambered to take larger than twenty-two long rifle ammunition, or any revolver or pistol chambered to take larger than thirty-eight caliber ammunition between the hours of one half hour after sunset to one half hour before sunrise of any day throughout the year.

ETA: And §78 provides some cover for non hunting uses to the hot messes of §66 and §67.

Section 78. Nothing in section sixty-six or sixty-seven shall be construed to prohibit an owner or tenant of land or his authorized agent, as provided in section thirty-seven from protecting his property nor prohibit a person from transporting firearms or ammunition to or from the commonwealth or to or from any range.

And I finally found the penalties. $500 and 30 days in jail for using a bow... WTF. These people are insane. And you lose your LTC for life BTW.

 

[MisterHappy]

Act of hunting is not firing an arrow. It would be face value evidence of hunting, which is left a wide open cornucopia of things. In MA, just chasing and scaring an animal, could be considered hunting......

If you have an arrow nocked, you're hunting; if you are walking in to your treestand, with your arrows quivered you're not hunting. If you're driving game, you're hunting. If you're walking in the woods, you're not hunting.

I'm not sure if you're sitting in a treestand, without an arrow nocked, if you're hunting, or meditating.

 

[MisterHappy]

It is a hunting statute and what is being taught at hunters safety for years now......

Likely only penalty is loss of hunting license or something like that.

It's a separate section, from the governing statutes for firearm discharge, which is

Ch. 269 Sec. 12E
Section 12E

This contains the exception for firearms discharge on a range, WRT setbacks.

When I teach HE, I reference both sections, as people always ask about archery practice in the back yard, and this is a weird twist, that, in the wrong location, could be an issue

 

[Mark from MA]

[QUOTE="terraformer, post: 5826813, member: 10161"

And I still can't find a penalty for §58...



And this hot mess. So no possession of a rifle taking larger than .22 LR between the sunset and sunrise. NB: No qualifier about hunting. ie; No "in the woods" or "while engaged in hunting", etc; This dumpster fire is the epitome of MA law. Vague beyond recognition of any normalcy in any other jurisdiction. Everything truly is illegal in this shithole.


[/QUOTE]

Yes...that one is awesome. One of the game wardens at my son's hunting safety class brought that one up. He said " MA has a night rifle ban, anything bigger than a .22 rifle in your vehicle or on your person at night is illegal" WTF. Of course people were asking about how they drive home at night from VT/NH, after hunting, etc.

All he said in a " You Must Respect My Authritay" type of manner was it was up to his discretion not to charge you.

Luckily, that fishcop has taken his pension and gone home....but I'm sure there are other fishcops like him itching to make that big arrest for having a rifle in your car at night.

 

[robjax]

I think it's time to go full retard and ban everything within 500 feet of a dwelling up to and including tiddlywinks...I mean you could get a lucky shot and hit someone in the eye... If I am reading the right....Rego shot at a deer that was never found. That is why he is not being charged with killing the judge. Nobody found the deer he supposedly hit. So who saw him hunting and who witnessed the shot? Where did that information come from. How do they know he was close to houses and roads if there is no evidence? Perhaps Rego forgot about his right to remain silent?

 

[TLB]

I think it's time to go full retard and ban everything within 500 feet of a dwelling up to and including tiddlywinks...I mean you could get a lucky shot and hit someone in the eye... If I am reading the right....Rego shot at a deer that was never found. That is why he is not being charged with killing the judge. Nobody found the deer he supposedly hit. So who saw him hunting and who witnessed the shot? Where did that information come from. How do they know he was close to houses and roads if there is no evidence? Perhaps Rego forgot about his right to remain silent?

He definitely talked too much and needs some new friends. Regarding trying to find the actual hunter that shot the Judge....not worth it and no good deed goes unpunished.

 

[Wheeler686]

The article says:

"Although Rego is alleged to have released one arrow, the eight counts are for the number of houses said to be in range of the shot, a report by state Environmental Police Officer says."

Just a question from a non-hunter here: If the cops catch a gang-banger who has shot and robbed an innocent grandmother on a city street, do they add charges of firing a gun within 500 feet of a dwelling? And is that charge multiplied by the number of dwellings within a 500 radius of the gangbanger’s shot?


“We tried to do what we were supposed to do,” Martin told the Times
Dumbass!

"Simmons and another Environmental Officer seized two bows and several arrows from Rego, and they took the deer carcass and Scherer’s antlered deer tag from Martin according to the report. After Simmons inspected and photographed the carcass, it was donated to Cape Cod Fish and Game, a private non-profit organization in Harwich that encourages hunting, fishing and shooting sports…."

What was the point of choosing that charity? By the actions of the Massachusetts authorities, it would have made more sense to bury the carcass with full honors after a beautiful ceremony, and force the hunters to make a donation to PETA.

“He wants blood,” Scherer said of (EPO) Simmons.

Perhaps Simmons' training, tenacity, and dogged investigative skills (not to mention man-hours) could be put to better use tracking down actual criminals, perpetrating actual felonies against the law abiding (human) citizens of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts

"Both noncriminal citations were converted to criminal complaints in the Orleans court"

Again, do urban police departments, prosecutors, and courts ever “convert noncriminal citations to criminal complaints” to be sure gangbangers, illegals, and other felons stay in prison for as long as possible?

Folks, admittedly I am not a hunter, I’m a city mouse. I’ve never had any interaction with the Massachusetts Environmental Police, so I can’t speak to their mission statement.

I also have no idea how big the budget of the Massachusetts Environmental Police is. But as a Massachusetts taxpayer, I do know whatever it is, it’s too much.

 

[slap shot]

once you give it a name i think it's murder...