2 ms·

You also missed a direct question on intent; namely, "Reads to me like your intent was to play fetch and count on legal ambiguity. Was it?" So far we have not

You also missed a direct question on intent; namely, "Reads to me like your intent was to play fetch and count on legal ambiguity. Was it?" So far we have nothing on the table to differentiate fetch play in the park from training as well.

giantg2 6y ago
No. There's the letter from an official agency stating that the actions we perform are complaint with the law. Also, if there's no definition/differentiation then it goes to the defendant under the legal doctrine of lenity or even reasonable doubt. Hell, you can throw entrapment in there too if you got permission/clarification from the government and they later prosecuted you for it. You can throw in all the stuff you want about not having special equipment or a (non-existent) training license, but those facts alone would not be enough to prove guilt, especially when the majority of the people training don't have a training license nor special equipment. Remember, you're supposed to be innocent and the prosecution has the burden of proof. It seems that's not really the case when they take irrelevant facts that apply to the majority of people field training and use them to prosecute people.
- ddingus 6y ago
  No, why? What was your intent? To train your dog? I am looking really hard to see a solid defense here. I do not have it yet. I think the law is shit, frankly. But, all I really have here is your game of fetch should be permitted because it is part of some other training regimen. So, what is that training and how does a game of fetch contribute to it? Put more simply, how is your game of fetch not like any other game of fetch? Now, you should also know I could give two shits about what you do with your dog. Probably a lot of the stuff I do with mine :D What you are battling here is people are not so inclined to see your position as genuine. I did not, and thought it worth a go as a general exercise. So far it has been interesting! Your actions and framing align most strongly with what I stated earlier, depending on ambiguity to get an off leash game of fetch in the on leash park. If I were stuck with that scenario and in need of the park, I would just make sure some meaningful and unambigious training happened, because fuck 'em. No joke. Someone, somewhere may just be wound up two clicks too tight. Most of what you appear to be depending on falls under wide discretion however, others wound up or not, your path is clear: Maximize their ability to defend discretion in your favor and it will land in your favor more than not. You appear to be trading on good will as if it were entitlement. That kind of thing fails often. Good will is not an entitlement. It can be garnered, cultivated, encouraged, but not expected or demanded. A nod to the spirit of the laws, some charm and consideration go a loooooong way. If you have to explain the technicality? Doomed. All this has gotten me out of a ton of vehicle and outdoors type citations and scenarios. I could revise my position given you can tell me either: Something other than fetch happened in the park , or how your game differs from the norm, or otherwise was necessary to do in that park and contribute meaningfully to a training regimen of some kind, any articulable kind. Otherwise a person would likely see you playing with your dog off leash. You gotta flesh something like this out a LOT more for it to play out favorably in my experience. I am not talking about licenses or any of that either. I am talking about giving them something solid that speaks to training. It is missing from this discussion and it absolutely should not be. I asked for it multiple times too: I had similar discussions with others many years ago. A few tweaks in how I go about things like this did result in a dramatic shift in good will coming my way. Good luck.

giantg2 6y ago

No. There's the letter from an official agency stating that the actions we perform are complaint with the law. Also, if there's no definition/differentiation then it goes to the defendant under the legal doctrine of lenity or even reasonable doubt. Hell, you can throw entrapment in there too if you got permission/clarification from the government and they later prosecuted you for it. You can throw in all the stuff you want about not having special equipment or a (non-existent) training license, but those facts alone would not be enough to prove guilt, especially when the majority of the people training don't have a training license nor special equipment. Remember, you're supposed to be innocent and the prosecution has the burden of proof. It seems that's not really the case when they take irrelevant facts that apply to the majority of people field training and use them to prosecute people.

ddingus 6y ago
No, why? What was your intent? To train your dog? I am looking really hard to see a solid defense here. I do not have it yet. I think the law is shit, frankly. But, all I really have here is your game of fetch should be permitted because it is part of some other training regimen. So, what is that training and how does a game of fetch contribute to it? Put more simply, how is your game of fetch not like any other game of fetch? Now, you should also know I could give two shits about what you do with your dog. Probably a lot of the stuff I do with mine :D What you are battling here is people are not so inclined to see your position as genuine. I did not, and thought it worth a go as a general exercise. So far it has been interesting! Your actions and framing align most strongly with what I stated earlier, depending on ambiguity to get an off leash game of fetch in the on leash park. If I were stuck with that scenario and in need of the park, I would just make sure some meaningful and unambigious training happened, because fuck 'em. No joke. Someone, somewhere may just be wound up two clicks too tight. Most of what you appear to be depending on falls under wide discretion however, others wound up or not, your path is clear: Maximize their ability to defend discretion in your favor and it will land in your favor more than not. You appear to be trading on good will as if it were entitlement. That kind of thing fails often. Good will is not an entitlement. It can be garnered, cultivated, encouraged, but not expected or demanded. A nod to the spirit of the laws, some charm and consideration go a loooooong way. If you have to explain the technicality? Doomed. All this has gotten me out of a ton of vehicle and outdoors type citations and scenarios. I could revise my position given you can tell me either: Something other than fetch happened in the park , or how your game differs from the norm, or otherwise was necessary to do in that park and contribute meaningfully to a training regimen of some kind, any articulable kind. Otherwise a person would likely see you playing with your dog off leash. You gotta flesh something like this out a LOT more for it to play out favorably in my experience. I am not talking about licenses or any of that either. I am talking about giving them something solid that speaks to training. It is missing from this discussion and it absolutely should not be. I asked for it multiple times too: I had similar discussions with others many years ago. A few tweaks in how I go about things like this did result in a dramatic shift in good will coming my way. Good luck.