You obviously don't have great connections, or you wouldn't be so far off in virtually everything you posted.
1. If you do an analysis of the license costs and what the various licenses actually cover, you will find that TWRA is about in the middle of the pack in license costs like they have been for the past 30 years. They certainly aren't the cheapest, but they aren't the most expensive, either. And, you would also find that the states with the cheapest costs are getting directed funding from their state's General Funds. TWRA gets zero from the TN General fund.
2. I don't know the associated costs for defending the lawsuit. But, since it was done by the State Attorney General's office rather that private counsel, I suspect it is much less than you are thinking.
3. And, finally, contrary to your hit piece, there was zero "rogue" behavior on the part of the TWRA officers. They had the statutory authority to be on the property without warrant that was in effect since 1974. It passed TN constitutional muster when it was passed, and had not been challenge prior to this case. And, your US constitutional knowledge is pretty suspect. Under the US Constitution and the Open Fields Doctrine upheld by the US Supreme Court, there was zero legal requirement for the officers to obtain a warrant for that surveillance since it was well outside of any curtilage. When cases like this are worked, they are done with the assistance of state or federal attorney generals. From sitting in a pile of discussions with them on similar cases, there was not a legal reason at the time to obtain a warrant. The officers followed both statutes and court decisions that were in effect at that
You obviously don't have great connections, or you wouldn't be so far off in virtually everything you posted.
1. If you do an analysis of the license costs and what the various licenses actually cover, you will find that TWRA is about in the middle of the pack in license costs like they have been for the past 30 years. They certainly aren't the cheapest, but they aren't the most expensive, either. And, you would also find that the states with the cheapest costs are getting directed funding from their state's General Funds. TWRA gets zero from the TN General fund.
2. I don't know the associated costs for defending the lawsuit. But, since it was done by the State Attorney General's office rather that private counsel, I suspect it is much less than you are thinking.
3. And, finally, contrary to your hit piece, there was zero "rogue" behavior on the part of the TWRA officers. They had the statutory authority to be on the property without warrant that was in effect since 1974. It passed TN constitutional muster when it was passed, and had not been challenge prior to this case. And, your US constitutional knowledge is pretty suspect. Under the US Constitution and the Open Fields Doctrine upheld by the US Supreme Court, there was zero legal requirement for the officers to obtain a warrant for that surveillance since it was well outside of any curtilage. When cases like this are worked, they are done with the assistance of state or federal attorney generals. From sitting in a pile of discussions with them on similar cases, there was not a legal reason at the time to obtain a warrant. The officers followed both statutes and court decisions that were in effect at that time.
Google is free.. please show me all the states that surround Tennessee that charge their residents more than Tennessee does currently ( and Tennessee wants to go up more?) As far as my comment about TWRA officers acting in a manner that wasn't legal…. I guess that is why they lost their case. See the real issue here is some of us in law enforcement actually took our oath to the constitution at heart while others do things that never passed a simple smell test because that is the way we have always done it. That my friend is the bigger problem. They were 100% wrong and the courts got it 100% correct in the end and the TWRA lost end of discussion. Let me find a camera on my property and you charge me with theft when I take it down and lock it in MY safe and I will own you when we are done….As should every citizen of this great state or this nation. As far as the state attorney representing the TWRA and this costs from such representation. Sure, it is much cheaper than some big firm no doubt but at the end of the day it wasn't free and cost a pretty penny. A penny that should never have been spent nor passed on to those that are forced to pay for it. Listen, I have no idea what you do for a living…By your comments I could guess but will hold those in reserve but you put a lot of words down and proved nothing. Remember, anyone on here can do what I did and look up another state's hunting and fishing license cost…. I did long before making the first statement so I knew I was correct. You should do the same next time.