Vice President Dick Cheney Shoots Hunting Colleague

[michaeledward]

Breaking news that the Vice President unloaded a shotgun full of bird shot into a fellow hunter.

Maybe this should be posted in the Study .....

The other hunter is reportedly conscious and aware.

The Vice President should be denied a hunting license for the rest of his life.

 

[Lisa]

do you have a link to the story?

 

[michaeledward]

I imagine by now, every news site in the country has the same AP story.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CHENEY_HUNTING_ACCIDENT?SITE=MOSPL&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&SECTION=HOME

The Vice President should also be prohibited from Hunting on private property for the rest of his life, as was apparently the case here.

 

[Grenadier]

Sheesh, some people are a bit too quick to pull the trigger, and I don't mean the VP. If I read the news reports correctly, here's what happened:

1) The lawyer nailed a bird, went to retrieve it.

2) Cheney and his friend saw another group of birds and shot one.

3) The lawyer who got shot did not make his whereabouts known to Cheney his friend. The fault would lie with the shootee, not the shooter.

If anything, this is from CNN:

Whittington shot a bird and went to look for it in the tall grass, while Cheney and the third hunter walked to another spot and found a second covey.

Whittington "came up from behind the vice president and the other hunter and didn't signal them or indicate to them or announce himself," Armstrong told the Associated Press in an interview.

 

[mrhnau]

The Vice President should also be prohibited from Hunting on private property for the rest of his life, as was apparently the case here.

Lets see what the laws say first, shouldn't we? In cases like this that happen (somewhat infrequently, but it happens), what is the common outcome? What laws were broken? What prosecution does the law allow? The guy suing? No death occured, so lets just relax, and make sure proper laws and procedures are followed.

I do wish him a speedy recovery. God speed!

 

[michaeledward]

3) The lawyer who got shot did not make his whereabouts known to Cheney his friend. The fault would lie with the shootee, not the shooter.

Oh, Please.

 

[Grenadier]

Oh, Please.

No. It is the responsibility of hunter to announce, or at least alert others that he is harvesting the shot game. That is the of the most important things they stress in hunter's education.

 

[michaeledward]

Lets see what the laws say first, shouldn't we? In cases like this that happen (somewhat infrequently, but it happens), what is the common outcome? What laws were broken? What prosecution does the law allow? The guy suing? No death occured, so lets just relax, and make sure proper laws and procedures are followed.

I do wish him a speedy recovery. God speed!

As they are on private property, there is quite likely no laws broken.

How many people does one get to shoot before the privilege of hunting is revoked?

 

[mrhnau]

Oh, Please.

Have you hunted Micheal?

 

[michaeledward]

Have you hunted Micheal?

No.

 

[Grenadier]

As they are on private property, there is quite likely no laws broken.

How many people does one get to shoot before the privilege of hunting is revoked?

I encourage you to read up on how hunting works. If you down a bird, it is your responsibility to make your whereabouts known to others while retrieving it. You don't just walk behind someone unannounced, especially if you're in an obscured area.

It's an accident, plain and simple, and the fault is not with Cheney. Nothing "criminal" was done in any way, shape, or form, by Cheney.

In the meantime, may Mr. Whittington make a speedy and full recovery. It was birdshot from a fair distance, so the odds of both a speedy and full recovery happening are quite good.

 

[michaeledward]

I have made no claim that laws have been broken, nor that a crime committed. Yes, it is an accident. However, to claim that the hunter was not at fault for being aware of what was in front of the barrel of his weapon is ridiculous on its face.

 

[mrhnau]

I have made no claim that laws have been broken, nor that a crime committed. Yes, it is an accident. However, to claim that the hunter was not at fault for being aware of what was in front of the barrel of his weapon is ridiculous on its face.

Quail tend to hang out in brush. In my area, the brush tends to be quite large. A grown man can easily be obscured behind such brush. This is why a hunter announces his presence, since he can not be easily seen. Its not "ridiculous on its face".

 

[terryl965]

Well he was probaly frustated with the president and just got off a little of his frustation, that is all.
terry

 

[michaeledward]

If it is not ridiculous on its face, I repeat an earlier question; "How many people do you get to shoot before you lose the privilege of hunting?"

Or, as one hunter put it ... "If you pull the trigger, it ain't no accident."

 

[mrhnau]

I have made no claim that laws have been broken, nor that a crime committed. Yes, it is an accident. However, to claim that the hunter was not at fault for being aware of what was in front of the barrel of his weapon is ridiculous on its face.

The Vice President should also be prohibited from Hunting on private property for the rest of his life, as was apparently the case here.

So, if no law was broken, then why should be have his huntint licence revoked? and not allowed to hunt on public property?

Lets look at different example.

Consider you get in a car wreck, and someone is injured. Would you claim they should never drive? Would you claim they can't ever get a licence again? If no crime was committed, what would be your justification for such action? Car accidents happen all the time. Shoud every person deemed "at fault" have their licence revoked?

No, lets look at it from another angle. Would you recommend someone who used a car to run someone down and commit murder have their licence revoked? how about killing someone who kills someone while drunk driving? I'd understand someone recommending a revokation at a blatant law violation, but not an accident

 

[mrhnau]

If it is not ridiculous on its face, I repeat an earlier question; "How many people do you get to shoot before you lose the privilege of hunting?"

Or, as one hunter put it ... "If you pull the trigger, it ain't no accident."

How many car accidents before you lose your licence?

 

[Jonathan Randall]

I'll reserve judgment on this until there is more information available. First reports often contain grave errors in fact. It's possible, or even probable, that this is a "mutual mistake" type situation. Accidents do happen. BTW, I personally dislike this admin. - but I don't think it's right to jump to premature conclusions.

 

[Makalakumu]

Accidents happen. Accidents with firearms are often deadly. This is why a discipline approach to hunting and a strict adherence to the rules was taught to me and my four brothers, by my father, whenever we went out. There were two big mistakes here. The lawyer failed to announce himself and the VP wasn't aware enough of his firing lines. No quail is worth being unsafe and no amount of inattention is worth your life. The fact that the VP was involved in an accident isn't so much of an issue, IMO. Practicing good gun safety is the moral of this story, IMO.

 

[Lisa]

I believe both men are at fault. It is the responsibility of every hunter to make his whereabouts known and also the responsibility of every hunter to make sure the path they are shooting down is clear. That is why Hunter Safety courses are so important and probably should be retaken every few years before licenses are given out. Just my two cents.