Berry picker shot by bear hunter in VT

[ripple]

That I have to hike in fear of these people just plain sucks.

It also sucks to have to drive in fear on the way to the trail, b/c of drunk drivers. Then there is the fear of bears, and crazy chipmunks. Not to mention falling tree branches, and black flies. I better just stay home. Or I could just think the odds are small, use my head to stay as safe as possible, and not fear anything.

 

[Capoken]

BEUCS - you win the award for intolerence. I'm sorry you think it sucks - but hunters have the right to hunt - and it is very necessary. Let's not trample others rights because of one bad apple. Should we all not drive because some people drive drunk and kill people? That sucks too.

 

[RGF1]

Ho hum. This debate really is getting off track despite the efforts by Lawnsale and Yardsale and I. Im NOT making excuse for ANY negligence by ANY hunter. If you think I am (hello NH Mtn Hiker ) then your wrong and I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.
Look, no stupidity is excusable. Period. You kill someone in the woods you deserve every bit of legal fallout you get. But trying to wax philisophical about how hunters "should not this and that" is getting tiresome. Lets face it, every 21+ year old that goes out to a bar should know better than to drink and then drive, but there are idiots that do it EVERY DAY! Well, there are idiots in the woods with guns too but, (thankfuly) like the drunk driver they are very few (actually your more likely to be killed by a drunk driver, which is a testament in and of itself.) The entire point that most of the posters here are trying to put forth is that adding orange to your attire is a simple safety "suggestion." You dont want to wear orang in the woods, then fine. Its your right and your perogative, just come out and say you dont. But quite hiding behind the whole "why should I wear orange its the other guy who is supposed to be safe" attitude. If you want to to come walking through my hunting area, in orange or not, then go ahead. Its not guys like me or Yardsale and lawnsale you need to worry about. I hope no one ever, ever, ever, EVER has to go through what the berry picker did. But if you want sympathy from me should it happen despite the precautions we here suggested, then your outta luck. Red square me if ya want, but its the truth, and sometimes the truth hurts. So go ahead, I can take it like a man.
Im done with this thread.
Brian

Sorry brain but that attitude is just what will get hunting banned. You as the person with the weapon are in control period. If you have no sypathy for a person who is shot and did not have blaze onrange on I really do not now what to say. Hunting is not a right it is a privlege .
As for driving yes there are drunk and other dangerous drivrs I can see them I can stop my car and call the police to take them off the road. the police patrol the roads if they see the idiot they arrest them . If a drunk hits and killss or hurts some one he is doing state time. If a Hunter does nothing much happens he might lose his licesne to hunt . Hunters in NH are not even responsible for medical bills if they wound some one that person has to take them to court.that is just plain imoral . That is the problem make hunters responsible for thier actions and this debate would not take place If there was a law that stated if you kill a person while hunting you do LIFE . I bet accidents would decrease dramtically. Yes there are very few. There sdhould not be any at all It really sounds as if some are saying it is your fault if you do not wear orange . I do because of nit wits i di nit like that I have to buy extra stuffbecause of a few idiots and the fact they can get away with murder literally .
Once again there is not a right to hunt it is a privlege granted by the state and land owner.

I find this coment partuclalry insensitive

" I hope no one ever, ever, ever, EVER has to go through what the berry picker did. But if you want sympathy from me should it happen despite the precautions we here suggested, then your outta luck. Red square me if ya want, but its the truth, and sometimes the truth hurts. So go ahead, I can take it like a man.
Im done with this thread. "


No one should be shot and ther is not a excuse the person that was shot
does deserver full sympaty you are in fact blaming the victim.

Here is a good example of where I am coming from.
I own guns . If I today ,I go out to shoot targets and I hit and wound or kill some some I am going to do time and pay thier medical bill. But If I do the exact same thing while hunting , I might not face any punshiment at all. that is what makes my self and others up set.
Lets be honest If some one using a high powered laser guided rifle with a high powerd scope cannot tell the differnce between a human and game they really should not be hunting.
As A Safe gun owner this attitude is deeply troubling .

 

[BEUCS]

I'm not convinced that the comparison between deaths due to drunken drivers and deaths due to hunting accidents (unless it's due to a drunken hunter) holds up. I do'nt expect a good outcome from someone who gets behind the wheel of a car while drunk, I do however have high expectations of hunters and the way they handle themselves and their weapons. As a driver I take the same precautions while driving whether or not I'm concerned about drunk drivers. But as a hiker I have to take the xtra precaution of trying not to get shot during hunting season presumably because the hunter does'nt recognize the difference between me and a bear, deer, moose or whatever before they pull the trigger. I mean think about it.
I'm not intolerant of hunters or hunting, I was just venting my frustration about having to protect myself from "being shot!"

 

[ripple]

I mean think about it.
I'm not intolerant of hunters or hunting, I was just venting my frustration about having to protect myself from "being shot!"

I am frustrated by having to look both ways crossing the street. I mean come on. Why should I have to do that? Oh b/c it my job to look out for myself, knowing there are cars on the road. I get it.

 

[jbrown]

So let's review the points here and possibly go on to better things:

1. It is beyond a doubt the responsibility of the hunters to determine for a certainty that the target is indeed game.

2. Hunters who fire upon a target that they have not first positively identified as game should be held criminally liable if this act results in the injuring or, God forbid, death of a human.

3. Hikers or other peoplpe who venture out in the backcountry during hunting season would be well advised to make themselves easily visible by wearing brightly colored clothing.

4. A hiker or other person who does not make himself or herself more easily visible with bright clothing is taking a risk but is in no way at fault if he or she is shot.

5. Hikers and hunters will share the woods for years to come. Let's try to do it peaceably.

Thus endeth the sermon.

 

[Umsaskis]

Thus endeth the sermon.

Most of these threads are upbeat and happy, but there seems to be a lot of frustration in this one. It's an important topic to discuss, and I think jbrown's points just about sum up what most people have been saying. So let's all be careful and responsible, whether we hike, hunt, or both, looking out for our safety and the safety of others. That way, this issue will hopefully never come too close to home.

 

[Shewolf]

So let's review the points here and possibly go on to better things:

1. It is beyond a doubt the responsibility of the hunters to determine for a certainty that the target is indeed game.

2. Hunters who fire upon a target that they have not first positively identified as game should be held criminally liable if this act results in the injuring or, God forbid, death of a human.

3. Hikers or other peoplpe who venture out in the backcountry during hunting season would be well advised to make themselves easily visible by wearing brightly colored clothing.

4. A hiker or other person who does not make himself or herself more easily visible with bright clothing is taking a risk but is in no way at fault if he or she is shot.

5. Hikers and hunters will share the woods for years to come. Let's try to do it peaceably.

Thus endeth the sermon.

Standing ovation!!!! I agree that this a good summation of the thread. Obviously the thread includes quite a few impassioned views regarding this subject matter. But let's all face facts folks, accidents happen and it's part of being human. In the case of the berry picker, the hunter's horrifying actions after shooting the individual reflects issues way beyond this thread. I'm not defending stupid people, but if you read enough warning labels on goods out on the marketplace, you'll realize that our civillation is full of them. BUT, there are accidents that occur with every precaution taken...it only takes a split second of letting your guard down. Yes, if you are toting around a rifle/shotgun/weapon of some kind for hunting, you have the responsibility to take every precaution before pulling that trigger.

BUT as jbrown pointed out, "Hikers or other people who venture out in the backcountry during hunting season would be well advised to make themselves easily visible by wearing brightly colored clothing." "A hiker or other person who does not make himself or herself more easily visible with bright clothing is taking a risk but is in no way at fault if he or she is shot.

Ok, maybe you don't want to wear orange out in the woods, I'm sure there are other ways you can make yourself more visible and identifiable as human. (ok, I'm sure there are folks out there who no matter what they wear are never identifiable as human...) Really, why take the risk and what does it cost us to work with each other out in the backcountry?

 

[Stan]

I call urban legend. Never happened.

-dave-

My wife's grandfathers owned farms in Maine and both had problems with hunters shooting cows. Whether for sport or by mistake, I don't know, but she'll attest to the fact her bampas were pretty annoyed by it and they didn't appreciate having to bury the carcas.

 

[NewHampshire]

Alright, Ive calmed down a bit. I know I said I was through with this thread, but will make this one last post.

RFG1, I will admit my comment was insensitive and I will apologize for it. But as for the rest of my points I firmly stand by them.

jbrown, all I can say is "VERY WELL WRITTEN!" Thank you!

Ok, maybe its time we moved on to a more lighthearted topic.

Brian

 

[Grumpy]

Eee-e-e-ek!

Pardon my grumpiness on this, please, but why in the world are we up to 70-plus posts kicking around a proposition that nobody actually has advanced?

(Nobody has actually proposed that a berrypicker’s or hiker’s failure to wear bright colors exonerates or mitigates the behavior of a person who shoots him by mistake.)

The non-proposition, a fiction that does not otherwise exist in this discussion only has been created and repeated numerous times as a strawman to be knocked down for the sake of over and over again making a point upon which there has been virtually universal agreement from the outset. (That is, the shooter stands responsible for correctly identifying his target and not endangering others.) How silly.

In creating the strawman, sensible suggestions regarding the wisdom of wearing bright colors and taking other personal precautions during hunting season have been totally and unreasonably mischaracterized. That causes tension first and eventually raw feelings between participants. And it is simply not necessary.

Thus ends the Grumpster’s sermon for this evening.

G.

 

[yardsale]

For anybody still following this thread to decide if they will hike during hunting season, note that *florescent orange* has morphed into *bright colors*as the discussion has progressed. They are NOT the same. Some allegedly bright colors are not so bright under low light conditions. Secondly, most if not all hunters are trained to look for hunter orange as a danger signal, and not to fire. Who knows how a hunter with impaired judjment might view some other color. Personally don't want to know.

 

[BEUCS]

I do'nt know much about color blindness but let's hope it does'nt include flourescent orange...otherwise were back to praying the hunter can tell the difference between animals and humans.

 

[jjmcgo]

Check out this website

for an explanation of why we wear fluorescent orange. It's the deer that are color-blind.
http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dfwmr/sportsed/safety.html

 

[Grumpy]

for an explanation of why we wear fluorescent orange. It's the deer that are color-blind.
http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dfwmr/sportsed/safety.html

Great link that tells the story perfectly. The last photo is a real persuader!

G.

 

[ADackR]

bingo!!!

where do you stand??? just wear orange during this time of year!!1

 

[Double Bow]

I had wondered the point of wearing camoflage and bright orange together. It didn't make sence to me before. Now it does.

I do think though that bright colors would still do the job. There's nothing in particular special about orange. Not too many deer or bear are cardinal red or tennis ball yellow.

 

[--M.]

The Point of Hunter Orange per se

I believe it now has a gestalt quality, apart from the sum of its angstroms: people (especially hunters) now see it and immediately think NOT to kill its wearer. It has become code for "PLEASE DON'T KILL ME."

I have an unbelievably yellow rain-coat that I often use in cold weather on the trail. It would otherwise serve, but

a.) It's not quite as distinguishable as hunter orange (which one presumes is scientifically chosen for precisely this reason), and

b.) It doesn't advertise my status as non-wildlife as effectively as "Hunter Orange" per se.

See what I mean?

--M.

 

[NH_Mtn_Hiker]

I had wondered the point of wearing camoflage and bright orange together. It didn't make sence to me before. Now it does.

I do think though that bright colors would still do the job. There's nothing in particular special about orange. Not too many deer or bear are cardinal red or tennis ball yellow.

There is quite a difference, especially in low light situations. International Orange (hunter orange) is widely regarded as the easiest color to spot in the woods. At dawn and dusk, colors like bright red, yellow, and such are no easier to see than tan or brown. Besides, in the autumn there are plenty of bright colors to blend in with. Haven't you heard of Fall Foliage.

 

[NH_Mtn_Hiker]

I believe it now has a gestalt quality, apart from the sum of its angstroms: people (especially hunters) now see it and immediately think NOT to kill its wearer. It has become code for "PLEASE DON'T KILL ME."

I have an unbelievably yellow rain-coat that I often use in cold weather on the trail. It would otherwise serve, but

a.) It's not quite as distinguishable as hunter orange (which one presumes is scientifically chosen for precisely this reason), and

b.) It doesn't advertise my status as non-wildlife as effectively as "Hunter Orange" per se.

See what I mean?

--M.

But......it would be useless against a background of freshly fallen autumn (yellow, such as Poplar) leaves...wouldn't it?