Thanks for the reply....
My rebuttal:
(please keep in mind that this is all in fun...also...I really don't have
any emotional investment in this process...I see it all as a good story...I
am rebutting merely to play devil's advocate and prolong the "philosophical"
debate)
I would agree that a foul-hooked fish is not technically "legal"....but you
must define "foul-hooked". I take the meaning of foul-hooked to mean
"hooked anywhere other than the mouth.
Now - your argument (with the above implied definition) is not
valid...sorry.
1) - I didn't foul hook the fish...my hook was not directly connected to ANY
part of the fish's body (mouth or otherwise)...so you could say that I
didn't even HOOK the fish, so foul hooking by the above definition didn't
happen
2) - even IF you say that I "hooked" the fish by the stringer....it WAS
attached directly to the fish's mouth, thus negating the charge that it was
foul hooked.
Try again.
Also - note that I will try to debate BOTH sides of the argument.....
Chris
I agree, exactly.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: [VFB] My first legal Halibut....maybe
Legal - No
Any fish hooked anywhere other than in the mouth is foul hooked. You
could have landed that fish with a scallop dragger.
