• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Young hunter who killed hiker gets 30 days

thx997303

Regular Member
Joined
May 7, 2008
Messages
2,712
Location
Lehi, Utah, USA
imported post

Ugh, quoting and editing text on my phone is not easy.

Never mind, Stylez you are no friend to the RKBA

You support this "common sense gun control" which as we all know is gun bans.

And yes, I made a grammatical error. And I don't care.
 

XD40coyote

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
706
Location
woman stuck in Maryland, ,
imported post

I thought hunter safety classes were mandatory in all states now? But even if they are not, or you can hunt your own private land w/out a lisc, common sense should dictate to anyone not retarded and over the age of 10. One common failure is the parents of the kid, did this kid's dad or some other close male role model not teach him to ID an animal before taking a shot?

Next question, does the state in question require hunter's ed to get a hunting lisc? Sounds like he was hunting public land, so a lisc would be required. So was he poaching? I took hunters ed back in 2000 so I could get a hunting/trapping lisc to trap. The class was nearly all about gun safety, gun safety, and gun safety- including NOT shooting at shaking bushes or moving outlines. This kid is either mildly retarded and was poaching, or he had his Ipod on the whole hunters ed class and passed the class by cheating.

I can see where some 75 year old man might do something stupid like this, since hunters ed wasn't required years ago and if he got a hunting lisc first in 1970 or something, he would be grandfathered in and not have to take hunters ed, but a 14 year old kid?

BTW there are yahoos in my area who do stupid poacher things, like shoot across public roads, shoot across flat fields at night from their truck windows, or shoot livestock. The DNR officers seem to never be around to catch these bozos either. I am sure they catch some, such as using a "robodeer", but the vast majority of the time, DNR response time is an hour or more. Maybe landowners should be allowed to use deadly force when they see this crap happening.
 

Nutczak

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
2,165
Location
The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

The kid that shot the woman broke what I considerthe number one safetyrule in hunting, "be sure of your target and beyond". The kid F'ed up and killed a person! He did not know it was a person, and pulled the trigger before verifying his target. He deserves whatever punishment he gets.

Now did this lady knowshe was wandering around in the woods during an open hunting season? why didn't she have somearticle ofBlaze orange clothing on? it is common sense really, if your going to be out in the woods with people hunting game with rifles, Make sure you can be seen! it is not so you aren't mistaken as game, it is more so you can be seen in the background and do not blend in with the environment.

Has anyone seen the picture of the guy that got shot in the back of his head with a broadhead tipped arrow? Him and his buddy were archery hunting, his buddy thought his friend was a deer due to his hair color, and shot him in the back of his head! Stupidity abounds in all walks of life! look at some of the people that have drivers licenses!

The last time I went deer hunting with a rifle, I saw movement coming through the bushes and suspected it was a deer because it was a light brown color and had white on/in it too. As I was patiently waiting to see what it was. Out popsa women wearing a light brown suede jacket with a white collarand white knit hat!
WTF? out in the woods dressing up the exact same color as a deer during hunting season?
I walked over to her and asked ifshe knew it was an open deerhunting season. her reply was "Oh, I look nothing like a deer"

I offeredher a blaze orange hat and vestto wear on her way back to whereshe parked and pointed out a very open direct route.She declined and statedshe wasgoing to finishher hike (wearingher deer colored outfit during gun-deer season) instead!
I would compare that amount of ignorance to a skinny unarmed white guy walking downthe street at nighttime in the southside of Chicago nearhousing projects with $100 bills taped to your shirt yelling racial slurs.
 

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

Nutczak wrote:
Now did this lady knowshe was wandering around in the woods during an open hunting season? why didn't she have somearticle ofBlaze orange clothing on?
Go back and read my earlier post.

Like I said: if you have never had any interest in hunting, you may not even know that it is hunting season.

You can complain all you want, but the responsibility lies with the hunter, not the ignorant hiker. The hunter is the one pointing guns at stuff.
 

Washintonian_For_Liberty

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Messages
922
Location
Mercer Island, Washington, USA
imported post

shad0wfax wrote:
GWRedDragon wrote:
Well, I think what 'arms' they were talking about does matter. Should a person be allowed to own a nuclear weapon? It has no bearing whatsoever on a militia, does it, and it poses a serious threat: someday the technology for such WMDs may be so trivial that even a lone crazy person would be able to easily recreate it. If we do not restrict such 'arms', at that point society is doomed.

I think it is safe to say that such 'arms' were nowhere within the imagination of the people who ratified the 2nd amendment. So in translating what they were trying to say to modern technology, it helps to look at the purpose of the 2a in the first place: to allow the people the weapons needed to fight a war against tyranny, either from abroad or from home. The line has to be drawn somewhere, and I think the most logical place is at 'weapons suitable for normal infantry troop use', though I would be willing to entertain an alternate 'anything designed for combat other than WMD' theory as well.

What was the most powerful weapon available to the colonists at the time of the American Revolution?

The Cannon was the weapon of mass destruction of the late 1700s. The militia had in fact buried a cannon at Concord specifically to resist the British troops.

Thus by absolutely logical extension, the well-regulated militias should have Strykers with a M68A1E4 105 mm cannon, M2 or MK240 HMG or MMG respectively and MK19 40mm launchers. The well-regulated militias should also have M1A1 or M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tanks and M2/M3 Bradley Tracked Armored Fighting Vehicles. All of the variants of the HMMWV (including ones with TOW missiles) are necessary to the security of a free state as well.

In fact, the only thing Congress has specific rights to that the states do not is the power to manage the Navy.

Why did our founding fathers choose to have the Navy seperate from the states? Because it was capable of projecting power abroad and it was capable of fighting wars abroad. Since only Congress has the power to declare war, it makes sense that Congress would control the means of projecting power to foreign countries.

Thus, by logical extension, the long range capabilities of the Air Force (especially long range bombers and air to air refueling tankers) are something I believe Congress should control. However, I believe fighter jets and short range aircraft, such as helicopters, are definitely within the militias rights to control as they only protect local areas and do not project armed might abroad in terms of foreign conflict. (At least not without the aid of aircraft carriers or air to air refueling tankers, which would both be controlled by Congress.) Long range nuclear weapons, such as ICBMs should logically be controlled by Congress.

To make a long story short, a standing army is unconstitutional and all of the weapons employed by the US Army should fall under the control of each individual states well-regulated militias. Furthermore, the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear such arms should not be infringed.

Yes, I'm making a case for private ownership of M203 40mm grenade launchers. Yes, I'm making a case for private ownership of RPGs, Mah-Deuce, M240s in turrets on top of vehicles, etc. It's constitutional.
+1000

I could not agree more. Private citizens already do own tanks and fighter jets, but the ammo is illegal for them to buy. If you have a decent machine shop and some elite machinist skills, you can easily make an RPG.
 

AWDstylez

Banned
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
2,785
Location
, Connecticut, USA
imported post

thx997303 wrote:
Ugh, quoting and editing text on my phone is not easy.

Never mind, Stylez you are no friend to the RKBA

You support this "common sense gun control" which as we all know is gun bans.

And yes, I made a grammatical error. And I don't care.


lawl @ strawman
 

XD40coyote

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
706
Location
woman stuck in Maryland, ,
imported post

I always wear a blaze orange vest when trapping during late muzzleloader season and the late shotgun season. The earlier shotgun season I pop my traps off for, too many yahoos who might put slug holes into foxes. Heck I had someone shoot one of my trapped coons with a .22 , I think it was early and not quite light enough out for them to see it was in a trap. Unfortunatly this person didn't bother to be sure the animal was dead. It was a clean through and through in the neck, and the raccoon had to sit there with this wound for a while. The trap itself makes the foot numb within 10 minutes, so that is a non issue vs it being shot in the neck.
 

thx997303

Regular Member
Joined
May 7, 2008
Messages
2,712
Location
Lehi, Utah, USA
imported post

Not a strawman sylez, merely stating my opinion on what your beliefs are.

And basically saying to hell with you and dismissing you for a mentally challenged drunk hippie.
 

AWDstylez

Banned
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
2,785
Location
, Connecticut, USA
imported post

thx997303 wrote:
Not a strawman sylez, merely stating my opinion on what your beliefs are.

And basically saying to hell with you and dismissing you for a mentally challenged drunk hippie.

So that'd make it a strawman. Just because it's your opinion doesn't make it any less of a strawman.

Based on what I've said, common sense gun laws =/= gun bans.

To state otherwise is a strawman. Do you understand now?
 
Top