How Much Responsibility...

does Orvis have in rectifying this situation?

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...383209,00.html


Some, none or the "trespasser" got off easy.


g.c.

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 23:03:46 -0600, George Cleveland
wrote:

does Orvis have in rectifying this situation?

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...383209,00.html


Some, none or the "trespasser" got off easy.


g.c.

Well, first, the story is obviously a hoax, because at least according to some
here on ROFF, Colorado is the land of "public" land...

....but that said, "Orvis" has no responsibility because "Orvis" didn't make the
laws. Now, if I were the ranch manager's boss, and the story is true as
written, the manager would be unemployed, and I'd attempt to intercede as to the
points, but I'd feel no _obligation_. And that said, this just shows what
happens when idiots are allowed to make laws, and those objectively versed in
the law aren't. OTOH, assuming the story is true as written, why was the guy
even in court - as the story is written, something just doesn't sound, well,
complete, story-wise.

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 23:03:46 -0600, George Cleveland
wrote:

does Orvis have in rectifying this situation?

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...383209,00.html


Some, none or the "trespasser" got off easy.


g.c.

Well, first, the story is obviously a hoax, because at least according to some
here on ROFF, Colorado is the land of "public" land...

....but that said, "Orvis" has no responsibility because "Orvis" didn't make the
laws. Now, if I were the ranch manager's boss, and the story is true as
written, the manager would be unemployed, and I'd attempt to intercede as to the
points, but I'd feel no _obligation_. And that said, this just shows what
happens when idiots are allowed to make laws, and those objectively versed in
the law aren't. OTOH, assuming the story is true as written, why was the guy
even in court - as the story is written, something just doesn't sound, well,
complete, story-wise.

George wrote:does Orvis have in rectifying this situation?


http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm.../article/0,129
9,DRMN_85_3383209,00.html


Some, none or the "trespasser" got off easy.


g.c.

In Texas he probably would have been shot by the landowner. 98% of the state is
privately owned.

Big Dale

George Cleveland wrote:
does Orvis have in rectifying this situation?

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...383209,00.html


Some, none or the "trespasser" got off easy.

How much responsibility does *Orvis* have ? None. All Orvis
did is endorse Three Forks Ranch as a nice enough place to
spend 7,000 bucks. The ranch manager could have cut the guy
some slack but how do you tell the difference between a guy
who's lost and a guy who's knowingly trespassing ?

But the gist of the article, that Colorado should change the
law to require land to be posted, that's just common sense.

--
Ken Fortenberry

George Cleveland wrote:
does Orvis have in rectifying this situation?

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...383209,00.html


Some, none or the "trespasser" got off easy.

How much responsibility does *Orvis* have ? None. All Orvis
did is endorse Three Forks Ranch as a nice enough place to
spend 7,000 bucks. The ranch manager could have cut the guy
some slack but how do you tell the difference between a guy
who's lost and a guy who's knowingly trespassing ?

But the gist of the article, that Colorado should change the
law to require land to be posted, that's just common sense.

--
Ken Fortenberry

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 23:03:46 -0600, George Cleveland
wrote:

does Orvis have in rectifying this situation?

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...383209,00.html


Some, none or the "trespasser" got off easy.


g.c.

Well, first, the story is obviously a hoax, because at least according to
some
here on ROFF, Colorado is the land of "public" land...

...but that said, "Orvis" has no responsibility because "Orvis" didn't
make the
laws. Now, if I were the ranch manager's boss, and the story is true as
written, the manager would be unemployed, and I'd attempt to intercede as
to the
points, but I'd feel no _obligation_. And that said, this just shows what
happens when idiots are allowed to make laws, and those objectively versed
in
the law aren't. OTOH, assuming the story is true as written, why was the
guy
even in court - as the story is written, something just doesn't sound,
well,
complete, story-wise.

Ah, at last an answer to the age old question, "What happens when you cross
a double-naught legal eagle with a double-naught philosopher?"!

O.k., let us, for the moment, assume that all of the above is something
other than yet another inadvertently humorous exercise in serial
self-immolation.......just because we can.

First, Orvis isn't LEGALLY responsible for anything......not because they
didn't write the law (hey, the Nurnberg defense is still passé, ainna?), but
because there isn't anything for them to be responsible FOR. Neither Orvis
nor any of its agents has been accused of doing anything illegal.

Whether or not Orvis bears any MORAL responsibility for what occurred in the
situation described is impossible to determine definitively without more
information. If, as the careful reader is left to suppose, this was an
incident notable for its rarity then Orvis has nothing to worry about. On
the other hand, if there is any real basis for Dentry's not so subtle
insinuation (which, as even the casual observer can hardly miss, is
undeniably the case) then Orvis has a lot to answer for.

See how simple these things are when viewed as something other than fuel for
yet another futile attempt at self-justification?

Wolfgang
still, the boy IS funny.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 23:03:46 -0600, George Cleveland
wrote:

does Orvis have in rectifying this situation?

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...383209,00.html


Some, none or the "trespasser" got off easy.


g.c.

Well, first, the story is obviously a hoax, because at least according to
some
here on ROFF, Colorado is the land of "public" land...

...but that said, "Orvis" has no responsibility because "Orvis" didn't
make the
laws. Now, if I were the ranch manager's boss, and the story is true as
written, the manager would be unemployed, and I'd attempt to intercede as
to the
points, but I'd feel no _obligation_. And that said, this just shows what
happens when idiots are allowed to make laws, and those objectively versed
in
the law aren't. OTOH, assuming the story is true as written, why was the
guy
even in court - as the story is written, something just doesn't sound,
well,
complete, story-wise.

Ah, at last an answer to the age old question, "What happens when you cross
a double-naught legal eagle with a double-naught philosopher?"!

O.k., let us, for the moment, assume that all of the above is something
other than yet another inadvertently humorous exercise in serial
self-immolation.......just because we can.

First, Orvis isn't LEGALLY responsible for anything......not because they
didn't write the law (hey, the Nurnberg defense is still passé, ainna?), but
because there isn't anything for them to be responsible FOR. Neither Orvis
nor any of its agents has been accused of doing anything illegal.

Whether or not Orvis bears any MORAL responsibility for what occurred in the
situation described is impossible to determine definitively without more
information. If, as the careful reader is left to suppose, this was an
incident notable for its rarity then Orvis has nothing to worry about. On
the other hand, if there is any real basis for Dentry's not so subtle
insinuation (which, as even the casual observer can hardly miss, is
undeniably the case) then Orvis has a lot to answer for.

See how simple these things are when viewed as something other than fuel for
yet another futile attempt at self-justification?

Wolfgang
still, the boy IS funny.

"George Cleveland" wrote in message
...
does Orvis have in rectifying this situation?


http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...ticle/0,1299,D
RMN_85_3383209,00.html


Some, none or the "trespasser" got off easy.


g.c.

Checking the "Summer Guide" for fishing may lead one to the conclusion that
this is indeed a fictitious story meant to inflame rather than inform. After
visiting the "Escapes Planner" and clicking on fishing as the activity, July
as the desired event month, and all seven of the regions, I discovered that
there is no fishing in Colorado anyway (according to this site)!

Methinks the database needs updating, or maybe this is some sort of plot to
keep fisherman out of Colorado!

Jim Ray

"George Cleveland" wrote in message
...
does Orvis have in rectifying this situation?


http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...ticle/0,1299,D
RMN_85_3383209,00.html


Some, none or the "trespasser" got off easy.


g.c.

Checking the "Summer Guide" for fishing may lead one to the conclusion that
this is indeed a fictitious story meant to inflame rather than inform. After
visiting the "Escapes Planner" and clicking on fishing as the activity, July
as the desired event month, and all seven of the regions, I discovered that
there is no fishing in Colorado anyway (according to this site)!

Methinks the database needs updating, or maybe this is some sort of plot to
keep fisherman out of Colorado!

Jim Ray