I do know the Rangers put vehicles in lots and catalog the contents to catch car thieves. They will sometimes leave something attractive on the passenger seat. It is quite possible all he was doing was documenting the vehicle.
I do know the Rangers put vehicles in lots and catalog the contents to catch car thieves. They will sometimes leave something attractive on the passenger seat. It is quite possible all he was doing was documenting the vehicle.
Whoa.... so if said person sees an iphone or a wallet in a locked car, you say he would not commit what is clearly a crime, but somehow the temptation is just too great if it happens to be otherwise the same vehicle put there by law enforcement. So that allows him to flash the "entrapment" card, and therefore has committed no crime??? Give me a break. A crime is a crime. Would you feel the same about poachers shooting at robotic deer from a vehicle and across a highway? There are plenty of such "setup" cases caught by rangers resulting in firm convictions, not ruled as entrapment.I'm all for law enforcement keeping an eye out for parking lot thieves, especially in problematic lots, but I'm disappointed to hear they leave out bait and tempt potential criminals. It would seem this would leave an obvious entrapment defense. Leaving something of value in clear sight on the passenger seat may induce someone to commit a crime who otherwise normally would not....said the defense.
Whoa.... so if said person sees an iphone or a wallet in a locked car, you say he would not commit what is clearly a crime, but somehow the temptation is just too great if it happens to be otherwise the same vehicle put there by law enforcement. So that allows him to flash the "entrapment" card, and therefore has committed no crime??? Give me a break. A crime is a crime. Would you feel the same about poachers shooting at robotic deer from a vehicle and across a highway? There are plenty of such "setup" cases caught by rangers resulting in firm convictions, not ruled as entrapment.
I just don't get the "us versus them" attitude when encountering a ranger or other law enforcement person who is clearly performing the job they were hired to do - protecting us and the environment according to the law. Get to know a ranger, seek them out and spend a few minutes in conversation instead of avoiding them when you see them at the trailhead or in the woods. You might be pleasantly surprised. You never know when you might really need one.
Personally, I have seen fewer than a dozen rangers in 8+ years. Half of those at the LW parking lot. I recall seeing the rest over three hikes - twice a single ranger, and once 2 or 3. New York and the DEC are (reportedly) far more restrictive.
Tim
Your points are always well stated but I think using the word "oppressive" is really overkill. I just don't get that feeling when I'm in the Whites.
No, I hear you, it just stinks to be honest. I miss being out west where you can just do whatever and rangers are just few and far between. Here in the Whites you cant throw a rock without hitting one. Don't get me wrong, an innocent man fears no law, but they are everywhere. You cant sleep at trailheads, you cant park overnight, you cant camp here or there, you have to pay to park, I guess maybe I should just go where its not so oppressive and I just might.
No, it really doesn't. No court would support this defense in a situation like this.I'm merely saying this kind of thing falls directly within the legal definition of entrapment.
I don't have issues with setting up bait vehicles in parking lots to catch folks from breaking into cars. Generally its takes months to catch someone working the lots as the lots are remote by nature.
I have seen more than a few folks getting stranded in a parking lot at the end of the day with a broken window looking at trying to find a way to block up a window and having to drive home. I expect they too would support active attempts at catching folks.
I'm with Sierra on this. Out west, there are many fewer restrictions, and no one ever seems to question your activities.
Sounds like you've never ventured into the High Sierra. It's about the most regulated area I've ever hiked (one could argue for good reason). While weaving through (grandfathered) grazing cattle in the La Garita Wilderness on a Colorado Trail thru hike, I wished for more "restriction."
I would opine that comparing East and West is like apples and oranges.
To the original post, I would have walked up and asked the ranger what s/he was up to.
I'm all for law enforcement keeping an eye out for parking lot thieves, especially in problematic lots, but I'm disappointed to hear they leave out bait and tempt potential criminals. It would seem this would leave an obvious entrapment defense. Leaving something of value in clear sight on the passenger seat may induce someone to commit a crime who otherwise normally would not....said the defense.
But I also like to NOT feel like I'm watched.
......ya never know. Wait until the Drones are deployed.
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?16558-125-for-a-trinkle-at-Lincoln-Woods&highlight=fined
Don't get me on drones brotha! I don't like the Gov't automation at all. I don't believe we should have the LPR (plate readers) out there either. If the cops want to get my azz they need to earn it. Not have a device alert them i didn't pay the $37 for my annual NYS inspection! Red light cameras? Hell no! All about control IN THE NAME OF PUBLIC SAFETY.
Since 911 there has been a tremendous subjugation of federal duties thrust upon local LE and it has moved local LE more toward militarization which keeps cops from normal, every day engagement in non-confrontational situations with the public. Add that just about every Governor puts extreme pressure upon SP agencies to extract lots and lots of revenue (tickets) from their own people; no wonder so may now have a very different view of popo than the historical past.
"OFF SOAP BOX"
Enter your email address to join: