Can someone with no tag carry my spare rifle?

[JohnnyB]

Not only is it legal, it is a good idea. Solo hunting is out of fashion. The new thing is rifle caddies. I bring several friends depending on terrain. If I jump a buck at close range, I blast away with a iron sighted brush gun. As the buck evades and heads to open ground I call for my medium caliber rifle with fixed power. Dang missed again. Luckily, this young buck stops on the crest of a hill only 1700 short yards away. With a snap of my fingers, buddies begin handing me tripods, wind gauges, the latest long range rifle with super cartridge topped with a small telescope. Oh snap, I forgot spin drift, this lucky buck is off again. One last friend to call, bring up the mortar...

 

[NDMULEY]

I have a question for the guys that say no need for a backup. What if you 8 miles from camp stalking big bull. Slip gun hits rocks. Your screwed without 1. Buddy has backup your still good to go.

 

[KSP277]

I'll see if I can help break the 100 post mark

they aren't "just making up law", they are investigating something that appears hinky- that's what they/we are paid to do; if you don't think there will be some questions about a fella toting a big game rifle, during a big game season in an area with big game- you're being naive

I’ll 2nd that.

 

[KSP277]

I have a question for the guys that say no need for a backup. What if you 8 miles from camp stalking big bull. Slip gun hits rocks. Your screwed without 1. Buddy has backup your still good to go.

If we’re gonna play the WHAT IF game you gotta get way more creative than that.

 

[sndmn11]

I'll see if I can help break the 100 post mark

they aren't "just making up law", they are investigating something that appears hinky- that's what they/we are paid to do; if you don't think there will be some questions about a fella toting a big game rifle, during a big game season in an area with big game- you're being naive

Folks sure seem to not be able to grasp that this is legal and a law cannot be made up on the spot so a summons can be written.

The stretch of reasonable suspicion is lost pretty quick when the only element is someone being in the woods with a firearm....which is not illegal. What questions would you ask that would extend the contact beyond a handful of minutes?
You observe no actions of hunting. You have no evidence of hunting. You have no admission of hunting. You simply have a person doing something that is absolutely legal (I'm sure you saw the response from CPW, and I am probably the only one who has gone through the Colorado Revised Statutes looking for a possible violation). So what would the hat be hung on to support a lengthy contact? Would it matter if it were in a season or not?
The guy wants to do something legal that has zero bearing on any person in this thread, and folks are giving him a hard time. I think that is more wrong than what he is asking about.

 

[AK Troutbum]

Not only is it legal, it is a good idea. Solo hunting is out of fashion.

What?? Not that I ever considered hunting solo “fashionable”, but if hunting solo is wrong, I don’t want to be right. Some of my most enjoyable hunts have been when I’ve been by myself.

Sorry, I’m not trying to derail the thread, carry-on.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KSP277]

The stretch of reasonable suspicion is lost pretty quick when the only element is someone being in the woods with a firearm....which is not illegal. What questions would you ask that would extend the contact beyond a handful of minutes?
You observe no actions of hunting. You have no evidence of hunting. You have no admission of hunting.

Define “hunting”. Again....2 guys, 2 rifles, camo, elk calls, binos, sneaking around the woods. Both doing the exact same thing. 1 has tag, the gun bearer does not. How do you not see that saying “ oh me? Yeah I’m just carrying his spare rifle.” Probably ain’t gonna be the end of that conversation. I fell into this worm hole and looked at the CRS also. Your 100% correct it appears to be legal. But it’s outside the norm enough they’re probably going to have a really long lunch break with the warden. At a minimum. I think it falls back to what they, they being the game warden, decide is actually “hunting”. If the gun bearer is blowing a call or glassing up elk or holding a decoy.... that sounds like hunting to me, and there he sits with a rifle and no tag. All the good intentions in the world and his only and I do mean ONLY explanation is “it’s a spare gun”. Sounds like a tough sale to me.

 

[mtwarden]

yeah I think we've determined it's legal, but it's not non-suspicious; you will be questioned, you probably will be watched and you probably will be checked on your way out- sorry that is just the way it is

I've caught numerous folks hunting without a license over the years, mostly non-residents (tougher license to get/more $) and most were hunting with someone who had a license- it's simply a red flag when a warden sees someone afield toting a rifle during a hunting season and the individual doesn't have a license

so in summary- yes it's legal, yes you won't get a citation if you're not hunting, yes you will be inconvenienced if a warden is about

 

[mtwarden]

OK we've done it- we went over a 100 posts- yeehaw!

 

[Fatcamp]

My work here is done.

 

[204guy]

I've caught numerous folks hunting without a license over the years, mostly non-residents (tougher license to get/more $) and most were hunting with someone who had a license- it's simply a red flag when a warden sees someone afield toting a rifle during a hunting season and the individual doesn't have a license

If allowed can you expound on what it took to get a conviction since possession of a rifle isn't in itself a crime? Did they actually have to shoot an animal or was it something more subtle?

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

[sndmn11]

Define “hunting”. Again....2 guys, 2 rifles, camo, elk calls, binos, sneaking around the woods. Both doing the exact same thing. 1 has tag, the gun bearer does not. How do you not see that saying “ oh me? Yeah I’m just carrying his spare rifle.” Probably ain’t gonna be the end of that conversation. I fell into this worm hole and looked at the CRS also. Your 100% correct it appears to be legal. But it’s outside the norm enough they’re probably going to have a really long lunch break with the warden. At a minimum. I think it falls back to what they, they being the game warden, decide is actually “hunting”. If the gun bearer is blowing a call or glassing up elk or holding a decoy.... that sounds like hunting to me, and there he sits with a rifle and no tag. All the good intentions in the world and his only and I do mean ONLY explanation is “it’s a spare gun”. Sounds like a tough sale to me.

It seems you are forgetting that he said the rifle would be in the backpack. You have never seen a guide have a spare rifle in a scabbard on their horse in case their client has a booboo? I have never heard of a person who is calling, holding a decoy, or glassing, getting hooked for hunting without a license....that would sum up a large majority of folks every single year. Gosh, Rokslide would be full of poachers then. There are no laws against any of those three things.

First season is October 13-17 this year. Would you be any more or less suspicious of this legal act if it were occurring on the 10th, 13th, or 18th? What about in June or February? It is the same legal act.

It's a spare gun, I am working on my fitness, I might do some target shooting, I am worried about predators, I am worried about people, etc........none of those are illegal. (You don't carry a spare gun or two or three or four on duty?)

Would we be on full alert if I had my recurve for stump shooting, or battling a grouse, while in the field calling for my friend during archery season?

My wife and I have simultaneous 4th season tags. If she harvests her bull, should I carry her rifle because I have the only valid tag then? Because she is no longer hunting and we don't want her to possess a rifle without a valid license?

Any Law Enforcement Officer is not in a position to define a crime, or define the meanings of terms in a legal sense. That is 100% the purpose of those in legislation. Again, they cannot make up laws (or definitions) as they go along. Have you ever testified, "Well, today I decided to define a DUI as _______."? I hope not, and imagine that you quoted the statute from memory, council read it to you, or you asked to read it from the book. Laws are written specifically for the reason to eliminate confusion that can be had by multiple definitions. Parks and Wildlife Officer Jones doesn't "define" something, while Parks and Wildlife Officer Smith "defines" the same thing very differently. Neither "defines" anything because neither are legislators who write or judiciaries who interpret, and they both use the same book of statutes with the same information contained within.

How does one arrest/cite/summons, meet probable cause, or develop reasonable suspicion for a non-existent violation?

By this logic driving the speed limit warrants a stop and detention because at some point the driver just might violate in the future. Sorry guys, I respect your opinions formed in your own respective states, but my experience lands me on it being a tough sell to get past a minute's worth of reasonable suspicion.

 

[mtwarden]

If allowed can you expound on what it took to get a conviction since possession of a rifle isn't in itself a crime? Did they actually have to shoot an animal or was it something more subtle?

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

obviously the observation of killing an animal would certainly do it; without an animal it's usually a combination of observations/evidence most often leading to a confession

sadly lots of cases of someone who didn't have a license killing an animal and then using someone else's license

 

[tt_johnsclist]

OMG not only is this thread alive still but I once again feel compelled to jump back in!! I hope that we all understand this is not a question of whether it is legal to carry a gun in the woods or not, it is a question of whether by doing so with your buddy on an elk hunt are you “hunting” and thus need a license.

The Colorado laws themselves are in place, the warden does not have to make them up as they go: “(25.5) “Hunt” means to pursue, attract, stalk, lie in wait for, or attempt to shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or take wildlife. “Hunt” does not include stalking, attracting, searching, or lying in wait for wildlife by an unarmed person solely for the purpose of watching or taking photographs of wildlife.”

Again, I was ticketed as a “buddy” in another state years ago for carrying game calls along on a hunt because by definition I was pursuing game and thus “hunting”, and I had no rifle on me! Colorado definition above reads basically the same as that states definition so for me this is a no-brainer, I would not carry this guys rifle for him and the email from Colorado that he received suggests the same.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sndmn11]

The Colorado laws themselves are in place, the warden does not have to make them up as they go: “(25.5) “Hunt” means to pursue, attract, stalk, lie in wait for, or attempt to shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or take wildlife. “Hunt” does not include stalking, attracting, searching, or lying in wait for wildlife by an unarmed person solely for the purpose of watching or taking photographs of wildlife.”

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Brilliant! How does one attempt to shoot, wound, kill, etc an animal if a rifle is in a backpack? With the rifle in the backpack, a person a long on a hunt would fit perfectly into the portion of the definition explicitly described as exclusions from hunting.

Evidence, observations, or admissions of HUNTING need to accompany the question at hand, as shown below.

obviously the observation of killing an animal would certainly do it; without an animal it's usually a combination of observations/evidence most often leading to a confession

If one notices that the definition of Hunting quoted above contains no mention of any weapon whatsoever. So, a weapon is not an element of the crime, and this the ONLY two elements that must be present are:
(a) pursue, attract, stalk, lie in wait for
(b) attempt to shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or take wildlife

Can a person be in violation without a weapon? You bet! They just need something from (a) and something from (b)...Bob made a noise like a rabbit and tried to strangle the coyote that came. Bad Bob.

Can a person kill an animal without a license? You bet! Jane was jogging near Golden, CO and stabbed the Mountain Lion that jumped on her. Jane did not pursue/attract/stalk/lie in wait for (a) so therefore she was not hunting. Good Jane.

Can a person pursue/attract/stalk/lie in wait for wildlife? You bet! Our original poster's friend can tag along on his hunt carrying 10 rifles or no rifles (this is irrelevant) as he himself is not hunting unless he does anything from (b) attempt to shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or take wildlife.

In all of these examples, as well as the statute and "hunting" definition, it is the ACTION that is outlawed, not the possession of a tool. I have not come across an illegal possession law that does not use the word possession and list the illegal item. This instance is not the outlier.

 

[KSP277]

I hope that we all understand this is not a question of whether it is legal to carry a gun in the woods or not, it is a question of whether by doing so with your buddy on an elk hunt are you “hunting” and thus need a license.

The Colorado laws themselves are in place, the warden does not have to make them up as they go: “(25.5) “Hunt” means to pursue, attract, stalk, lie in wait for, or attempt to shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or take wildlife. “Hunt” does not include stalking, attracting, searching, or lying in wait for wildlife by an unarmed person solely for the purpose of watching or taking photographs of wildlife.”





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you, I searched for COs definition of hunting but was unable to locate it. That’s the whole point I was trying to get across.

 

[maninthemaze]

The people on this thread that keep insisting that simply carrying a rifle through the woods during hunting season, isn't illegal need to get a grip of reality. They remind me of those idiots you see on youtube that pull up to DUI roadblock and won't roll down the window. They keep asking "am I being detained. Sure after a couple hours of harassing the cops they are eventually left to go on their merry way. But the next time they get pulled over, I'll bet instead of getting a warning, they get a ticket.

Why can't you just try and abide by the intention of the law and not the letter of the law. Hopefully your non-hunting, gun toting buddy is a lawyer.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[sndmn11]

The people on this thread that keep insisting that simply carrying a rifle through the woods during hunting season, isn't illegal need to get a grip of reality. They remind me of those idiots you see on youtube that pull up to DUI roadblock and won't roll down the window. They keep asking "am I being detained. Sure after a couple hours of harassing the cops they are eventually left to go on their merry way. But the next time they get pulled over, I'll bet instead of getting a warning, they get a ticket.

Why can't you just try and abide by the intention of the law and not the letter of the law. Hopefully your non-hunting, gun toting buddy is a lawyer.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

What law would exemplify the spirit of making that act illegal?

I have four years experience as a Police Officer in Colorado, one year as a Field Training Officer....and a 3" thick three ring binder full of various certifications relevant to that position. What reality am I missing on the matter?

 

[cnelk]

Interesting....

In some instances, game wardens may actually have more power than police officers when it comes to warrantless searches of persons or vehicles.
Typically, police officers must have probable cause or consent to search a person or a vehicle without a warrant. A 2012 California Supreme Court case found that even when a game warden lacks reasonable suspicion that a person has violated an applicable fish or game statute or regulation, they may still stop the suspect's vehicle and demand the suspect display any fish or game in the suspect's possession.

 

[KSP277]

What reality am I missing on the matter?

The part where ChrisAU’s gun bearer gets a big fine loses his rifle. Chris loses a big chunk of his trip. Chris and gun bearer have words. Tempers flare. Fisticuffs. Warden comes back. Both charged with assault. Trip ruined. Chris and ex friend share awkward ride back to Alabama with matching shiners. Swear to never speak to each other again. All because you wouldn’t let this shit die 4 pages ago! Save your friendship Chris!!! Leave the freaking spare at home!!