I heard that animal rights activists are signing up for hunter ed classes to fill up slots.
Then don't show up.
The intent being to stop people from getting hunting licenses.
Does anybody know if this is true?

I heard that animal rights activists are signing up for hunter ed classes to fill up slots.
Then don't show up.
The intent being to stop people from getting hunting licenses.
Does anybody know if this is true?

that's messed up
people usually wait on standby, so that fills some spots

Just show up about 30-60 mins before the class to sign up for the waiting list.

There are always no-shows and they are usually able to fill in the seats right before the class starts.

I took the class last year and maybe a dozen people thatregisterd showed up. Had about 27 people on stanby and we all got in. I came 3 hours early to standby since the class was filled.

I asked a HunterEd instructor  why so many no-shows and he mentioned something along the lines that certain people trying to "rooster" block.

Wish they would charge or have a penalty fees for repeated no shows. But no point cause they can give a fake name over the phone

[quote author=Shoboshi link=topic=19206.msg174433#msg174433 date=1431994659
Wish they would charge or have a penalty fees for repeated no shows. But no point cause they can give a fake name over the phone
[/quote]

They could charge a $25 deposit, collected via online registration and credit card.  The $25 gets refunded if you bother to show up.

[quote author=Shoboshi link=topic=19206.msg174433#msg174433 date=1431994659
Wish they would charge or have a penalty fees for repeated no shows. But no point cause they can give a fake name over the phone


They could charge a $25 deposit, collected via online registration and credit card.  The $25 gets refunded if you bother to show up.

+1.   These are the same morons that have been driving up the numbers in the lanai hunt lottery but that's all gonna change next year. 

I see those cock blocks just complaining to their credit card companies and have charges reversed.  I prefer seeing the old school check/money order as form of payment.

Sounds like the story I heard is true.
As I understand it, hunters ed is acceptable as a safety class to allow permits for purchase.
So by engaging in such activity, they are actually infringing on a constitutional right, which would make it a federal civil rights violation.
Which means the FBI would have jurisdiction over the investigation.
How does that sound?

Do it!

Sounds like the story I heard is true.
As I understand it, hunters ed is acceptable as a safety class to allow permits for purchase.
So by engaging in such activity, they are actually infringing on a constitutional right, which would make it a federal civil rights violation.
Which means the FBI would have jurisdiction over the investigation.
How does that sound?

You'll need to prove identity, intent to prevent others from attending with no intent to show up themselves. 

I think each person registering should provide a copy of an ID -- to validate the information for the course certificate, of course.  Once people have to give real names and personal info, a certain number will be reluctant to make bogus reservations.

The rest should be tracked.  If a pattern of making repeated registrations for multiple classes can be shown, that information should be analyzed to come up with legal and effective methods to deter people from doing this.  Maybe a 12 month restriction from making a reservation.  If they are really trying to take the class, they can show up for walk-in registration the day of the class.

Sounds like the story I heard is true.
As I understand it, hunters ed is acceptable as a safety class to allow permits for purchase.
So by engaging in such activity, they are actually infringing on a constitutional right, which would make it a federal civil rights violation.
Which means the FBI would have jurisdiction over the investigation.
How does that sound?

FBI would not have jurisdiction. These are private individuals so they would not satisfy the "state actor" or "government action" required under the typical due process and equal protection constitutional analyses.

Even so, the court would be unable to identify a protected class, a suspect class, or a semi suspect class.

I'm not saying that what may be happening is right, but I'm just saying that you would most likely not  succeed under a constitutional claim.

FBI would not have jurisdiction. These are private individuals so they would not satisfy the "state actor" or "government action" required under the typical due process and equal protection constitutional analyses.

Even so, the court would be unable to identify a protected class, a suspect class, or a semi suspect class.

I'm not saying that what may be happening is right, but I'm just saying that you would most likely not  succeed under a constitutional claim.

...
I don't understand what you said.
Care to suggest a solution to the problem?

FBI would not have jurisdiction. These are private individuals so they would not satisfy the "state actor" or "government action" required under the typical due process and equal protection constitutional analyses.

Even so, the court would be unable to identify a protected class, a suspect class, or a semi suspect class.

I'm not saying that what may be happening is right, but I'm just saying that you would most likely not  succeed under a constitutional claim.

The classes come under the jurisdiction of the DLNR, to me it wouldn't matter if Frodo Baggins or my 3rd uncle twice removed teaches the class since they are doing so under the auspices of a state agency.

I think legally the class has to be free.  Rather than charge people $25 at the time they sign up, charge them if they don't.  Example:  Someone enters their personal info to sign up, they get a slot.  They show up, no charge.  They don't show up you assess a fee against them - kinda like when you pay your car registration late.

The classes come under the jurisdiction of the DLNR, to me it wouldn't matter if Frodo Baggins or my 3rd uncle twice removed teaches the class since they are doing so under the auspices of a state agency.

I think legally the class has to be free.  Rather than charge people $25 at the time they sign up, charge them if they don't.  Example:  Someone enters their personal info to sign up, they get a slot.  They show up, no charge.  They don't show up you assess a fee against them - kinda like when you pay your car registration late.

Maybe a closer parallel is the public library.  You can check out books for free, but missing the return date costs you.  If you don't clear the amount owed, no more check out privileges. 

So, miss a class, owe a fine.  Can't make another reservation without clearing what's owed.

don't think the problem is with hunter ed. more with the submitting the tags for the actual hunt as you don't need to show a license at the time the tags are submitted for the drawing. you can submitt up to 8 tags per group and only need to show a license at check in.

...
I don't understand what you said.
Care to suggest a solution to the problem?

My apologies.  I realize now that I may not have been entirely clear.  I'll break up my response into two separate concepts: the FBI (a federal law enforcement agency), and the judicial branch.

For the FBI to have jurisdiction, I think there would need to be some sort of violation of the law, or the Constitution.  In this case, you couldn't really sue the state for blocking access to the classes.  You suggested that you wanted to go after the people that are purportedly sabotaging the enrollment.  These people that you're trying to go after don't seem to be breaking any laws, so there is probably no reason for the FBI to get involved.


If you're claiming that there is some kind of violation of your Second Amendment right under the US Constitution, and you wish to bring your claim into some kind of state or federal court, the court will most likely dismiss your case on several grounds.  Among other things, the Second Amendment only applies to the Federal government, and the State and Local governments through incorporation under the Fourteenth's DPC.  This means that you would need to point to some government (or semi-government) entity as being the actor which has denied you of Equal Protection, or Substantive Due Process.

Unless you can prove that there was a government actor or action, you will probably not succeed on the basis of a violation of your Second Amendment right.  Your rights under the Second Amendment are not civil rights, or at least not in the way that you speak of them.  Unless you allege other facts, you will not be able to bring any kind of civil rights claim for a violation of the Second Amendment.  Typically civil rights claims are based off of some kind of discrimination in which an individual is denied Substantive Due Process or Equal Protection of the laws based on the individual's placement into a group or class.  Of the groups or classes that the court has recognized as being suspect or semi-suspect are: race, sex, religion, physical limitation, alienation, and national origin.  Recently, the court has been pushing the bounds of adding sexual orientation to that list of classes, but the court has not clearly defined the correct level of scrutiny to apply to those types of cases.

Regardless, i doubt that you'd be able to allege that you belong to one of those classes unless you were to say something to the effect of, "They're denying me the ability to attend Hunter's Education courses because I am _____ (race, sex, religion, handicapped, an alien, from X country)."