Thread: Poaching, let's get this straight

Agreed. So arseholes who trespass to shoot animals on private property should be charged with aggravated burglary and dealt with to the full extent of the law. No different to walking into someone's home with a loaded weapon in my eyes. Its time to tidy this shit up.

Originally Posted by sdogg73

Agreed. So arseholes who trespass to shoot animals on private property should be charged with aggravated burglary and dealt with to the full extent of the law. No different to walking into someone's home with a loaded weapon in my eyes. Its time to tidy this shit up.

But if the Law is also doing the poaching as seen on camera and others poaching pigs in Opotiki by law from outside the area when does it stop . If you expect people to follow the law don't do it yourself . RE the law

Originally Posted by kawekakid

But if the Law is also doing the poaching as seen on camera and others poaching pigs in Opotiki by law from outside the area when does it stop . If you expect people to follow the law don't do it yourself . RE the law

And here in lies the problem. Because some of the worst offenders are police very little is done when reported. I never have and never will shoot private land without permission. I have clients on the verge of getting "nasty" with people caught on their land and keeping the law out of it, Which is going to open up a whole other can of worms.

Originally Posted by sdogg73

Agreed. So arseholes who trespass to shoot animals on private property should be charged with aggravated burglary and dealt with to the full extent of the law. No different to walking into someone's home with a loaded weapon in my eyes. Its time to tidy this shit up.

There is no such thing as aggravated burglary, and clearly there is a huge difference between carrying a loaded weapon into a home and carrying it across open space.

Clearly there is also a difference between shooting wild animals on private land and stealing domestic stock on private land..

If you don't understand the differences, perhaps less opinion would be appropriate... it is patently obvious that most don't understand the law..

Originally Posted by Sidney

There is no such thing as aggravated burglary, and clearly there is a huge difference between carrying a loaded weapon into a home and carrying it across open space.

Clearly there is also a difference between shooting wild animals on private land and stealing domestic stock on private land..

If you don't understand the differences, perhaps less opinion would be appropriate... it is patently obvious that most don't understand the law..

New Zealand Crimes Act 1961-232. Look it up.
And in my eyes there is no difference in where you carry a loaded firearm in relation to this, a farm is someone's home and workplace. Would you feel safe with some muppet sneaking around and wondering am I going to catch a stray round anytime soon.
Illegal access is illegal access. Just because its a feral animal you can't legally take it from private property.
Less opinion would be appropriate.

Originally Posted by sdogg73

New Zealand Crimes Act 1961-232. Look it up..

As sdogg73 has said.............

232Aggravated burglary

• (1)Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years who,—
  • (a)while committing burglary, has a weapon with him or her or uses any thing as a weapon; or
  • (b)having committed burglary, has a weapon with him or her, or uses any thing as a weapon, while still in the building or ship.
  
  (2)Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years who is armed with a weapon with intent to commit burglary.
  
  and the link................
  
  
  Crimes Act 1961 No 43 (as at 19 August 2013), Public Act 232 Aggravated burglary – New Zealand Legislation
  
  

Originally Posted by sdogg73

New Zealand Crimes Act 1961-232. Look it up.
And in my eyes there is no difference in where you carry a loaded firearm in relation to this, a farm is someone's home and workplace. Would you feel safe with some muppet sneaking around and wondering am I going to catch a stray round anytime soon.
Illegal access is illegal access. Just because its a feral animal you can't legally take it from private property.
Less opinion would be appropriate.

Here are the facts...

Burglary is the breaking and entering of a building with intent to commit a crime therein... there is no such thing as aggravated burglary...

Aggravated assault and aggravated robbery are different and separate charges which may provide the intent for the separate charge of burglary. There is no such thing as aggravated theft.

You cannot commit burglary without a building...(or in some case law, other established structures) people are charged with two offences usually, burglary and theft, burglary and assault, burglars and ag robbery etc.. the later offence is mostly required to establish the intent required by law for the charge of burglary to be established.

You cannot commit burglary on land.

I don't give a stuff what your eyes say should be the case... the law says different and thankfully it is more appropriate than your opinion... if you can't tell the difference, at least the law can...

Illegal access is not an offence.... trespass is the term you are looking for... and basically you only trespass after having been told to leave and you fail to do so.

There are other offences associated with firearms and property which do apply... you cannot shoot across private property without permission for example, and as pointed out earlier wild animals belong to the crown until lawfully taken. Kind of makes it hard to claim ownership of a wild animal having shot it unlawfully...

Emotive opinion has no place in this discussion and particularly when backed up with little knowledge of the law.... I think most are out of their depth judging by what I have seen written so far..

Whoops..

just checked the Ag burglary... provisions provisions in more recent Ammendments..... however still relates to buildings etc as other comments....

Originally Posted by Sidney

Illegal access is not an offence.... trespass is the term you are looking for... and basically you only trespass after having been told to leave and you fail to do so.

Is it trespassing if there is a sign saying that you can't be there without permission? Or does someone have to catch you and verbally ask you to leave?

Originally Posted by square1

Is it trespassing if there is a sign saying that you can't be there without permission? Or does someone have to catch you and verbally ask you to leave?

As far as I understand I can trespass you today. I don't have to know you, or even have any reason for doing so. I can trespass you even if you are in another island from me.

Weren't the cops doing blanket trespass in Southland on people on certain country roads?

Originally Posted by square1

Is it trespassing if there is a sign saying that you can't be there without permission? Or does someone have to catch you and verbally ask you to leave?

To be really honest I am not sure that a sign is sufficient. What I do know is that trespass is not completed until you have been warned to leave and failed to do so. I would think that you would have to establish that the sign had been seen, that the contents of the warning on the sign were legally sufficient to constitute a legal warning. The "trespassers will be prosecuted" sign is not legally sufficient to met the legal requirements of notice.

There are other offences when firearms are involved when it comes to being unlawfully on private property... as pointed out by others...

Brad...

In so far as this thread may educate some about their legal responsibilities or rights it is not a waste of time. Provided of course we concentrate on the facts and not the emotional opinion.... and to be honest the emotion appears to be mostly from a landowner perspective...

I take your point about about mushrooms and apples. I would also make the point that a lot of people are a lot more precious these days than they used to be about such things. It may have always been technically wrong to jump the fence for a few mushrooms, but in the past few worried about it and we are the poorer for being so indignant now.

People also keep harping on about the similarities regarding private property whilst ignoring the very obvious differences.. it is not the same for the simple reason of proximity. Wandering around my 800 square meter section with a firearm in a built up residential area, is entirely different to some furtive poacher sneaking around your back paddock trying not to attract your attention whilst in the pursuit of a wild animal that does not belong to you.

That being said it is illegal to do so... if you wish to take that risk, to potentially lose your firearms licence, to be convicted of an offence with firearms which may affect your travel plans and immigrant status for other countries, then I guess you can.... personally I would think that it may not be worth the risk...

Originally Posted by Sidney

To be really honest I am not sure that a sign is sufficient. What I do know is that trespass is not completed until you have been warned to leave and failed to do so. I would think that you would have to establish that the sign had been seen, that the contents of the warning on the sign were legally sufficient to constitute a legal warning. The "trespassers will be prosecuted" sign is not legally sufficient to met the legal requirements of notice.

There are other offences when firearms are involved when it comes to being unlawfully on private property... as pointed out by others...

Brad...

In so far as this thread may educate some about their legal responsibilities or rights it is not a waste of time. Provided of course we concentrate on the facts and not the emotional opinion.... and to be honest the emotion appears to be mostly from a landowner perspective...

I take your point about about mushrooms and apples. I would also make the point that a lot of people are a lot more precious these days than they used to be about such things. It may have always been technically wrong to jump the fence for a few mushrooms, but in the past few worried about it and we are the poorer for being so indignant now.

People also keep harping on about the similarities regarding private property whilst ignoring the very obvious differences.. it is not the same for the simple reason of proximity. Wandering around my 800 square meter section with a firearm in a built up residential area, is entirely different to some furtive poacher sneaking around your back paddock trying not to attract your attention whilst in the pursuit of a wild animal that does not belong to you.

That being said it is illegal to do so... if you wish to take that risk, to potentially lose your firearms licence, to be convicted of an offence with firearms which may affect your travel plans and immigrant status for other countries, then I guess you can.... personally I would think that it may not be worth the risk...

I didn't want two post on this retarded thread again but.......you made me bite.
It no wonder farmers are more (precious) these days, 20 years ago stock wasn't getting shot by fucktards that cant find a deer!
Not that long ago a local framer at a popular road end had the shit kicked out off him by hunters who had left a gate open on his farm.
As for your last statement about me wondering around your town section with a gun, how is that any different two you wondering around my farm when I'm out there with my family?

As a recent poster said

"......Emotive opinion has no place in this discussion and particularly when backed up with little knowledge of the law.... I think most are out of their depth judging by what I have seen written so far.."

and judging from their last "whoops" post, I can only agree.

• Today, 10:39 AM
  
  
• 
  

Originally Posted by Kiwi Sapper

As a recent poster said

"......Emotive opinion has no place in this discussion and particularly when backed up with little knowledge of the law.... I think most are out of their depth judging by what I have seen written so far.."

and judging from their last "whoops" post, I can only agree.

• Today, 10:39 AM
  
  
• 
  

And you look like a dick in your photo....

The thing about that amendment is that is very recent... and I did attempt to edit my post immediately which I cannot do... hence my whoops...

The pertinent fact still was that burglary either way still relates to buildings not land... did you miss that bit?

Originally Posted by Sidney

Here are the facts...

Burglary is the breaking and entering of a building with intent to commit a crime therein... there is no such thing as aggravated burglary...

Aggravated assault and aggravated robbery are different and separate charges which may provide the intent for the separate charge of burglary. There is no such thing as aggravated theft.

You cannot commit burglary without a building...(or in some case law, other established structures) people are charged with two offences usually, burglary and theft, burglary and assault, burglars and ag robbery etc.. the later offence is mostly required to establish the intent required by law for the charge of burglary to be established.

You cannot commit burglary on land.

I don't give a stuff what your eyes say should be the case... the law says different and thankfully it is more appropriate than your opinion... if you can't tell the difference, at least the law can...

Illegal access is not an offence.... trespass is the term you are looking for... and basically you only trespass after having been told to leave and you fail to do so.

There are other offences associated with firearms and property which do apply... you cannot shoot across private property without permission for example, and as pointed out earlier wild animals belong to the crown until lawfully taken. Kind of makes it hard to claim ownership of a wild animal having shot it unlawfully...

Emotive opinion has no place in this discussion and particularly when backed up with little knowledge of the law.... I think most are out of their depth judging by what I have seen written so far..

Well I'm not sure how I managed to charge a teenager last month for Aggravated Burglary if it doesn't exist?! I guess he pleaded guilty to a charge that doesn't exist.

Burglary includes entering ships and enclosed yards, I would argue that a paddock with deer fencing around it is an enclosed yard.

Offenders aren't charged with two offences such as theft and burglary if they broke into a house and stole a TV, I don't know where you got that from but it's incorrect.

You can commit burglary on land, I've charged a person for it because he stole items from a fenced back yard.

Illegal access is an offence, it's called 'Unlawfully on Property' under the Summary Offences Act. Trespass is for when a warning has been issued in the past two years.

You need to make sure you know what you're talking about before accusing others of being wrong. Keep up the research but seek a little guidance on some of these things, from my small amount of experience I've learn't the law can be quite tricky to interpret.