Heavily armed wildlife police rescue baby deer from no kill animal shelter.

[TX69]

Good kill you Wisconsin citizen bitches

 

[stdreb27]

I'll chime in with some perspective: The shelter person mentions the agents were "armed to the teeth", but gives no details. He didn't mention any armored vehicle, LBE vests with rifle plates, carbines with lasers, or helmet cams. Considering the eventual fate of the fawn will be either getting hit by a truck or eaten as breakfast sausage, I'm thinking a grown man that names a fawn, "Giggles" and and can't bring himself to get on with his job dutes and move the feed bowl or water bottle is probably some tree hugger metro-sexual that considers a typical LEO's duty belt or drop-leg holster as "armed-to-the-teeth".
The shelter broke the law. The law was enforced. No person was hurt in the process.

I would typically agree with you. After all these left wing tree hugger's are the actual domestic terrorists...
The unibomber, elf etc.

But I have a problem with the rules... You have a fawn, you nurse it back to health. And you could go to jail for a long time. That's messed up...

 

[TX69]

How about sending 13 officers to deal with a fawn is that reasonable to you? I anticipate what your response will be.

Hey now! You be messin' wit "da Man's" job so back off, shut up and go pay your taxes citizen! [puff-lunge-chest] lol

 

[M. Sage]

I'll chime in with some perspective: The shelter person mentions the agents were "armed to the teeth", but gives no details. He didn't mention any armored vehicle, LBE vests with rifle plates, carbines with lasers, or helmet cams. Considering the eventual fate of the fawn will be either getting hit by a truck or eaten as breakfast sausage, I'm thinking a grown man that names a fawn, "Giggles" and and can't bring himself to get on with his job dutes and move the feed bowl or water bottle is probably some tree hugger metro-sexual that considers a typical LEO's duty belt or drop-leg holster as "armed-to-the-teeth".
The shelter broke the law. The law was enforced. No person was hurt in the process.

I think the person running that particular shelter is a woman...

The law was ridiculous, and the way it was enforced was heavy-handed. You don't need to send 13 officers and use aerial surveillance to enforce an administrative issue.

 

[Wabbit69]

I think the person running that particular shelter is a woman...

The law was ridiculous, and the way it was enforced was heavy-handed. You don't need to send 13 officers and use aerial surveillance to enforce an administrative issue.

First off, the employee is identified as Ray Schulze. The shelter president is Cindy Schultz. The video and the article identifiy Mr. Schulze as the one who lost sleep. Considering the single letter difference between last names, that one's hard to catch. No offense taken.

Again, there's no mention of what they consider "heavily armed" other than the blanket "it was like a SWAT team". This might sound cold, but watching the video, I'll stand by my gut feel that Mr. Schulze would wet his panties if he saw anybody that looked more authoratative than Barney Fife.

Second, the article states the LEO's had an "anonymous tip" about the fawn. Other than that, we don't know what else the tipster said to the DNR, and I doubt that will ever be revealed outside of the courtroom. Perhaps the manpower allocated to the bust was based on additional information, which certainly could have been wrong. Maybe the tipster was a neighbor with an axe to grind, or someone having a desire to acquire the property at a steeply discounted price. Maybe they just had extra man-power available because they're between game seasons? Who knows?

My point is, the article only gives one side of the story, and that side is obviously pretty biased. I am simply advocating the excercise of caution on jumping to conclusions.

I will concede that if those agencies regularly have that many officers waiting around for something useful to do, they have some cost-cutting opportunities they should look at.

 

[M. Sage]

To me, the core issue is the scope of a raid based entirely on someone not cutting a government agency in by paying a fee. That's the entire impetus behind the raid.

 

[Vaquero]

To me, the core issue is the scope of a raid based entirely on someone not cutting a government agency in by paying a fee. That's the entire impetus behind the raid.

Kinda goes for most federal raids. Doesn't it?

 

[breakingcontact]

Hulk smash!

 

[Wabbit69]

To me, the core issue is the scope of a raid based entirely on someone not cutting a government agency in by paying a fee. That's the entire impetus behind the raid.

That my very well be the case. Wouldn't be the first time. It strikes me that humanity has had that problem for thousands of years. Not sayin' it's right. Just sayin' this one's up to WI residents to deal with. Not worth gettin' our knickers in a knot over.

 

[M. Sage]

Kinda goes for most federal raids. Doesn't it?

I don't know about "most", but far too many of them...

 

[stdreb27]

To me, the core issue is the scope of a raid based entirely on someone not cutting a government agency in by paying a fee. That's the entire impetus behind the raid.

I wouldn't characterize it that way.
The deer is owned by the king... Err I mean government... Err... The people.

The government's position would be that they store public property. They don't just give those licenses to anyone, just educational and propagation farms. Where the moment you release them, they are now state property.

 

[M. Sage]

I wouldn't characterize it that way.
The deer is owned by the king... Err I mean government... Err... The people.

The government's position would be that they store public property. They don't just give those licenses to anyone, just educational and propagation farms. Where the moment you release them, they are now state property.

I have never been able to wrap my head around the concept of theft of public property. If it belongs to the public, it belongs to me, and I can't steal it...

 

[stdreb27]

I have never been able to wrap my head around the concept of theft of public property. If it belongs to the public, it belongs to me, and I can't steal it...

Lol, I tend to agree.