PA man convicted of drone hunting.

**Palerider** · February 24th, 2024, 06:58 PM

It does seem much like entrapment. But what*s interesting to me is the article stated game wardens warned him it was illegal last year but he and his lawyer had a different interpretation. Right now that was not a winning strategy.

Before drones are allowed I*d prefer the state approved the use of hand held thermals to help recover if needed. It gets dark as shit in some of our woods and thermal would help. But then you get into the slippery slope of are you using it to find game.

**Sandcut** · February 24th, 2024, 07:20 PM

Functionally, how is this any different than using search dogs?

**DukeConnor** · February 24th, 2024, 07:35 PM

Originally Posted by Here4now

I believe the article states the drone was used after legal hunting hours and only to find a "supposed" wounded deer.

I get that but where does it stop.
I will rephrase my opinion. I am against drones anytime.

**GunLawyer001** · February 24th, 2024, 09:12 PM

Originally Posted by Palerider

It does seem much like entrapment. But what*s interesting to me is the article stated game wardens warned him it was illegal last year but he and his lawyer had a different interpretation. Right now that was not a winning strategy.

Before drones are allowed I*d prefer the state approved the use of hand held thermals to help recover if needed. It gets dark as shit in some of our woods and thermal would help. But then you get into the slippery slope of are you using it to find game.

Entrapment requires much more than LEO asking someone to do something. It requires an unreasonable degree of coercion & pressure, something no ordinary law-abiding citizen could refuse.

There was an old case where undercover DEA agents told the defendant that if he didn't participate, they'd kill his family. They told the court "that's what real drug dealers would do". Held not to be entrapment.

On the other hand, John DeLorean was targeted by DEA (or maybe FBI, I forget) at the worst moment of his life, when he had a factory in Ireland making his eponymous cars, he was going bankrupt, hundreds of workers and dealers were going to be ruined, and Feds met him and made him an offer that if he financed 1 drug deal, he'd make enough to save it all. Then they arrested him. He was acquitted.

**knight0334** · February 24th, 2024, 09:41 PM

Originally Posted by Palerider

It does seem much like entrapment. But what*s interesting to me is the article stated game wardens warned him it was illegal last year but he and his lawyer had a different interpretation. Right now that was not a winning strategy.

Before drones are allowed I*d prefer the state approved the use of hand held thermals to help recover if needed. It gets dark as shit in some of our woods and thermal would help. But then you get into the slippery slope of are you using it to find game.

Not even close to "entrapment". It takes baiting AND entrapment, and that baiting has to be some form of coercion. ..like they forced you to do it, and even that in some circumstances can take a massive amount of pressure.

Your personal choice to NOT commit the crime has to be entirely eliminated for baiting and entrapment to apply.

**STBear** · February 24th, 2024, 10:22 PM

Originally Posted by Sandcut

Functionally, how is this any different than using search dogs?

Search dogs are legal.

**free** · February 25th, 2024, 01:11 AM

Originally Posted by Coops

https://www.foxnews.com/us/pennsylva...deer-carcasses

Sounds like entrapment to me.

It hardly seems like entrapment when:

1). You advertise the service to the public.

2). You're warned it's illegal.

3). You agree to provide the advertised service anyway.

That said, this seems totally fucking stupid. If you've shot and wounded a deer, why in the fuck would you have a policy that makes it harder for someone to finish it off, thereby allow it to walk around suffering?

**Daycrawler** · February 25th, 2024, 01:45 AM

They can say it's illegal, however I'll play devil's advocate. Where does it say in the PA Game commission handbook that drones may not be used? This reminds me of the open carry argument. If it isn't illegal, then I should be able to do it. Show me the law. Cite the law. What law was broken? This guy was not hurting anyone with his little drone business.

The only law here that was broken was questioning the bunny cop's authority. IMO the PAGC sucks!

**SevenMilePete** · February 25th, 2024, 03:29 AM

Originally Posted by Palerider

It does seem much like entrapment. But what*s interesting to me is the article stated game wardens warned him it was illegal last year but he and his lawyer had a different interpretation. Right now that was not a winning strategy.

Before drones are allowed I*d prefer the state approved the use of hand held thermals to help recover if needed. It gets dark as shit in some of our woods and thermal would help. But then you get into the slippery slope of are you using it to find game.

What is the difference between a drone and a dozen trail cameras, or a thermal and a set of high power binoculars? You don't hunt with a camera. Not until the drones are armed can they say that drones are used for hunting. I can't believe a good lawyer can't make a jury see this.

**free** · February 25th, 2024, 03:44 AM

Originally Posted by Daycrawler

They can say it's illegal, however I'll play devil's advocate. Where does it say in the PA Game commission handbook that drones may not be used? This reminds me of the open carry argument. If it isn't illegal, then I should be able to do it. Show me the law. Cite the law. What law was broken? This guy was not hurting anyone with his little drone business.

The only law here that was broken was questioning the bunny cop's authority. IMO the PAGC sucks!

The smart move would be to file a lawsuit to get a declaratory judgement as to the legality.

Just going ahead and doing something after you're told it is illegal by the people who will arrest you for doing it is just kinda stupid.