Bowmar’s Sentenced for Wildlife Violations

[BTaylor]

No it shouldn't.

How Will A Felony Conviction Affect My Life? - Gale Law Group

How Will A Felony Conviction Affect My Life? - A felony conviction in Texas is a serious thing that can have lifelong consequences. Not only can it have a lasting impact on your life, but it can also lead to the loss of basic civil rights.

galelawgroup.com

).

If you think all of that is a fitting response to a game violation, you're wound too tight.

It wasnt "a" game law violation. "A" game law violation gets you a ticket. Again the animal has no relevance. There are consequences to actions. They sowed and they reaped.

 

[Jammintree]

I don’t understand enough about the case to have a valid opinion. But from what I can tell it seems like the sentence was severe because the couple jumped on the cost tails of a poaching ring that authorities had been trying to catch. The bowmars were using the poachers to generate content that they could then post on their channels and social media to make profit. In the process of generating content the bowmars actually created the evidence the law needed to bust the poachers. They were dumb for getting tangled up in this.

 

[sweats]

No it shouldn't.

How Will A Felony Conviction Affect My Life? - Gale Law Group

How Will A Felony Conviction Affect My Life? - A felony conviction in Texas is a serious thing that can have lifelong consequences. Not only can it have a lasting impact on your life, but it can also lead to the loss of basic civil rights.

galelawgroup.com

).

If you think all of that is a fitting response to a game violation, you're wound too tight.

I'm going to disagree, but hopefully explain the nuance of my position. In principle, poaching a single deer, I would agree should not result in a felony. However, without an escalating series of punishments/deterrents, including the serious limitations of being a felon your link mentions, we end up with an even deeper two tiered justice system.

Let's take for example, speeding. I would guess many people go above the speed limit regularly and consider it no big deal. Suppose the only and maximum punishment for each incident of speeding is just a $500 ticket. Effectively, that just becomes the cost of driving as fast as you want if you are sufficiently wealthy and only the common folk are really bound by the speed limit.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[Jammintree]

We are also talking about 2 people who are accumulating quite a history…

this was more than shooting one deer too many:

Judge Hits Bowmars in Poaching Case | Deer & Deer Hunting

The couple was slammed with $90k in fines, restitution and probation, and loss of hunting privileges.

www.deeranddeerhunting.com

they also committed consumer fraud:

Ankeny company hit with $5 million lawsuit alleging consumer fraud • Iowa Capital Dispatch

A federal lawsuit alleges an Ankeny company has defrauded consumers by overstating the amount of protein in its products.

iowacapitaldispatch.com

And there’s his truck burn:

Josh Bowmar Burns Truck to the Ground While Filming Prescribed Fire Video

Blatant safety violations show exactly what not to do when using prescribed fire for habitat management

www.realtree.com

so we can’t compare this to the time our dad shot a deer out of season to feed his family during the depression. The BOWMAR’S are on a whole other trip, which appears to be about generating content for their subscribers and making money.

 

[Jammintree]

And why does it matter? These knuckleheads are a leading voice for the current image of hunting. What they do, post and PROMOTE impacts how the public views the hunting community, but even more importantly, their content is watched by hunters, and YOUNG hunters watch this crap and learn from it. Hunting content is curriculum. I will sleep better at night knowing that if my 12 year old step son starts following Bowmar content, that he also finds news articles and discussion forum threads that call them out.

 

[will4554]

huh? calling out of work isnt a felony, what in the world are you talking about? the wire fraud claim has been debunked and youre grasing at straws a bit here. i dont disagree that we're pretty highlt regulated, however the lacey act is supposed to protect our wild game species, so while it may have some flaws depending on personal opinion, it makes sense to keep enforcing like we have for the past 120 years or so.

18 USC 1343 is what you’re referring to. And you’re wrong.

 

[Nutterbuster]

We are also talking about 2 people who are accumulating quite a history…

this was more than shooting one deer too many:

Judge Hits Bowmars in Poaching Case | Deer & Deer Hunting

The couple was slammed with $90k in fines, restitution and probation, and loss of hunting privileges.

www.deeranddeerhunting.com

they also committed consumer fraud:

Ankeny company hit with $5 million lawsuit alleging consumer fraud • Iowa Capital Dispatch

A federal lawsuit alleges an Ankeny company has defrauded consumers by overstating the amount of protein in its products.

iowacapitaldispatch.com

And there’s his truck burn:

Josh Bowmar Burns Truck to the Ground While Filming Prescribed Fire Video

Blatant safety violations show exactly what not to do when using prescribed fire for habitat management

www.realtree.com

so we can’t compare this to the time our dad shot a deer out of season to feed his family during the depression. The BOWMAR’S are on a whole other trip, which appears to be about generating content for their subscribers and making money.

Is the article that mentions the burn referencing the truck fire burn? If so, I didn't know it burned the neighbor's cabin.

If he filmed while the fire spread to his neighbor's place...he earns the coveted uber-douche award.

 

[thedutchtouch]

18 USC 1343 is what you’re referring to. And you’re wrong.

Correct, that is what I am referring to, wire fraud. Incorrect that I am wrong. You are. Read the text of the law you're citing, sheesh.

"Specifically, to convict an alleged offender under § 1343, a federal prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:

1. the defendant knowingly devised or participated in a scheme to defraud someone by using false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises;
2. the false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises were about a material fact;
3. the defendant had the intent to defraud; and,
4. the defendant transmitted or caused to be transmitted by [wire, radio, television or internet] some communication in interstate commerce to help carry out the scheme to defraud."

So now go ahead and explain to me how me telling my boss I am sick and then doing whatever I want during my off day factors into interstate commerce. You're being ridiculous. Yes it could be a lie, but it's not a felony.

(As an aside I have multiple types of leave personally so can just take a mental health day or something so in the extremely small chance you win this back and forth I'm still not worried about the feds coming for me) Setting my personal situation back aside, I still think your statement is incorrect. Got any evidence of anyone convicted of a felony for calling out of work for a BS reason? I'm not saying people that got fired or had repercussions at work, I'm talking arrested by the feds and put in prison for calling out and getting caught in the lie. I don't think you'll find any examples to back up your opinion. People that get prosecuted for this sort of thing are because they are filing fraudulent paperwork- workers comp or disability or that sort of lie, which therefore fits the scheme to defraud as well as the interstate commerce as those are federal programs.

I found one possible example to support your claim on the surface but it falls apart when you actually look at it- , a Georgia man who called out from a fortune 500 company claiming covid, and submitted false medical paperwork. That's the kicker though, the lie wouldn't have been fraud, the false paperwork was.

Just like lying outside of court isn't perjury because it isn't under oath, lies are not always fraud, and they are rarely wire fraud.

But at the end of the day, you're entitled to your opinion, I just disagree with it and am challenging the facts you're asserting as support. Your turn!

 

[thedutchtouch]

Correct, that is what I am referring to, wire fraud. Incorrect that I am wrong. You are. Read the text of the law you're citing, sheesh.

"Specifically, to convict an alleged offender under § 1343, a federal prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:

1. the defendant knowingly devised or participated in a scheme to defraud someone by using false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises;
2. the false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises were about a material fact;
3. the defendant had the intent to defraud; and,
4. the defendant transmitted or caused to be transmitted by [wire, radio, television or internet] some communication in interstate commerce to help carry out the scheme to defraud."

So now go ahead and explain to me how me telling my boss I am sick and then doing whatever I want during my off day factors into interstate commerce. You're being ridiculous. Yes it could be a lie, but it's not a felony.

(As an aside I have multiple types of leave personally so can just take a mental health day or something so in the extremely small chance you win this back and forth I'm still not worried about the feds coming for me) Setting my personal situation back aside, I still think your statement is incorrect. Got any evidence of anyone convicted of a felony for calling out of work for a BS reason? I'm not saying people that got fired or had repercussions at work, I'm talking arrested by the feds and put in prison for calling out and getting caught in the lie. I don't think you'll find any examples to back up your opinion. People that get prosecuted for this sort of thing are because they are filing fraudulent paperwork- workers comp or disability or that sort of lie, which therefore fits the scheme to defraud as well as the interstate commerce as those are federal programs.

I found one possible example to support your claim on the surface but it falls apart when you actually look at it- , a Georgia man who called out from a fortune 500 company claiming covid, and submitted false medical paperwork. That's the kicker though, the lie wouldn't have been fraud, the false paperwork was.

Just like lying outside of court isn't perjury because it isn't under oath, lies are not always fraud, and they are rarely wire fraud.

But at the end of the day, you're entitled to your opinion, I just disagree with it and am challenging the facts you're asserting as support. Your turn!

Ugh I'm being an annoying blowhard again.

 

[gcr0003]

Ugh I'm being an annoying blowhard again.

Doesn’t sound any worse than kyler and nutters rants

 

[thedutchtouch]

Doesn’t sound any worse than kyler and nutters rants

I could do a lot worse to be named among that group, but they both have a good amount more experience and helpful input to back up their verbosity than I do lol.

 

[Jammintree]

Is the article that mentions the burn referencing the truck fire burn? If so, I didn't know it burned the neighbor's cabin.

If he filmed while the fire spread to his neighbor's place...he earns the coveted uber-douche award.

im not sure about the cabin; I’ll sleuth around and see if I can ascertain a more complete story.

It appears in the video that once the truck caught fire his order of operations was:
1: set up all the cameras to film (he has someone filming on the ground and a drone pilot getting aerial footage)
2: blow on the truck and fire with a blower
3: get all his gear out of the truck
4: conduct video interview addressing his subscribers while bullets explode in the fire.
5: call girlfriend (she advises 911)
6: call 911, never mention exploding bullets. At this point the truck is mass of molten steel. By the time fire department arrives the truck is nearly gone, including tires…

 

[BackSpasm]

Doesn’t sound any worse than kyler and nutters rants

W/hat real comfort does this statement give him though?

 

[Jammintree]

Is the article that mentions the burn referencing the truck fire burn? If so, I didn't know it burned the neighbor's cabin.

If he filmed while the fire spread to his neighbor's place...he earns the coveted uber-douche award.

based on the Bowmar’s local newspaper’s Facebook articles, the cabin Josh burned down happed in another blaze he set, 3 days prior to the truck fire…

edit: and there’s so much more!:

Ankeny hunters, supplement business owners plead guilty in federal poaching case

Josh and Sarah Bowmar own an Ankeny business and post hunting videos on YouTube. They pleaded guilty in a poaching case Wednesday.

www.desmoinesregister.com

 

[gcr0003]

W/hat real comfort does this statement give him though?

 

[Nutterbuster]

based on the Bowmar’s local newspaper’s Facebook articles, the cabin Josh burned down happed in another blaze he set, 3 days prior to the truck fire…

edit: and there’s so much more!:

Ankeny hunters, supplement business owners plead guilty in federal poaching case

Josh and Sarah Bowmar own an Ankeny business and post hunting videos on YouTube. They pleaded guilty in a poaching case Wednesday.

www.desmoinesregister.com

On reflection, I don't know if the fact that the fire that burned a cabin down was separate from the one where he burned his truck makes it better or worse.

Wonder if they sell something in a syringe to make his brain as big as his muscles?

 

[will4554]

Correct, that is what I am referring to, wire fraud. Incorrect that I am wrong. You are. Read the text of the law you're citing, sheesh.

"Specifically, to convict an alleged offender under § 1343, a federal prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:

1. the defendant knowingly devised or participated in a scheme to defraud someone by using false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises;
2. the false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises were about a material fact;
3. the defendant had the intent to defraud; and,
4. the defendant transmitted or caused to be transmitted by [wire, radio, television or internet] some communication in interstate commerce to help carry out the scheme to defraud."

So now go ahead and explain to me how me telling my boss I am sick and then doing whatever I want during my off day factors into interstate commerce. You're being ridiculous. Yes it could be a lie, but it's not a felony.

(As an aside I have multiple types of leave personally so can just take a mental health day or something so in the extremely small chance you win this back and forth I'm still not worried about the feds coming for me) Setting my personal situation back aside, I still think your statement is incorrect. Got any evidence of anyone convicted of a felony for calling out of work for a BS reason? I'm not saying people that got fired or had repercussions at work, I'm talking arrested by the feds and put in prison for calling out and getting caught in the lie. I don't think you'll find any examples to back up your opinion. People that get prosecuted for this sort of thing are because they are filing fraudulent paperwork- workers comp or disability or that sort of lie, which therefore fits the scheme to defraud as well as the interstate commerce as those are federal programs.

I found one possible example to support your claim on the surface but it falls apart when you actually look at it- , a Georgia man who called out from a fortune 500 company claiming covid, and submitted false medical paperwork. That's the kicker though, the lie wouldn't have been fraud, the false paperwork was.

Just like lying outside of court isn't perjury because it isn't under oath, lies are not always fraud, and they are rarely wire fraud.

But at the end of the day, you're entitled to your opinion, I just disagree with it and am challenging the facts you're asserting as support. Your turn!

Those communications cross state lines. And that’s exactly what the feds said when they charged that Georgia gentleman you’re referring to.

 

[boyne bowhunter]

On reflection, I don't know if the fact that the fire that burned a cabin down was separate from the one where he burned his truck makes it better or worse.

Wonder if they sell something in a syringe to make his brain as big as his muscles?

Under normal circumstances you'd expect an abundance of caution if you just had a controlled burn get out of hand resulting in property damage. I tend to think that, in the best case scenario, the prior incident gave them the idea to create some interesting clickbait.

In the worst case scenario I could see where they might try to somehow make a case to cover the previous burn accident by showing how easy it would be to have a burn get out of control using their own new vehicle. I mean who would burn up their own vehicle on purpose . . . right?

Edit: I'm mostly bothered by the massive amount of documentation being done and the complete lack of priority to get fire response. Myself, if it was a real life incident I'd be dropping the camera and calling 911.

 

[Nutterbuster]

Under normal circumstances you'd expect an abundance of caution if you just had a controlled burn get out of hand resulting in property damage. I tend to think that, in the best case scenario, the prior incident gave them the idea to create some interesting clickbait.

In the worst case scenario I could see where they might try to somehow make a case to cover the previous burn accident by showing how easy it would be to have a burn get out of control using their own new vehicle. I mean who would burn up their own vehicle on purpose . . . right?

Edit: I'm mostly bothered by the massive amount of documentation being done and the complete lack of priority to get fire response. Myself, if it was a real life incident I'd be dropping the camera and calling 911.

Yeah, but that's why you're just a beloved winner of the forum popularity contest and not a "swolt" instagram man-hoe getting rich selling brownies and chocolate milk as health food...

Loser.

 

[thedutchtouch]

Those communications cross state lines. And that’s exactly what the feds said when they charged that Georgia gentleman you’re referring to.

Which communications? And I'm still waiting for an example other than the one I provided and then dismantled, as the paperwork was the fraud, not the initial lie.

Edit: Actually, nevermind, I'm done, I should have stuck with my earlier self-realization instead of doubling down. You win. Goodnight all. (Leaving the initial reply as a reminder to myself, not as an attempt at doubletalk)