Dog Shoots Man in Iowa Hunting Accident

[bcking 3,157]

14 minutes ago, Ban Hammer said:

whenever a gun is left unattended in a hunting situation, it should be unloaded (example: crossing a fence)

Yep that is great. That was clearly not the case here.

 

So what system is in place to punish whoever failed to do so? Is there any accountability? It seems like the person responsible for the gun may lose their hunting license. Is that only if the man shot presses charges? It should be regardless.

 

Proving yourself unfit to handle a weapon safety while hunting calls into question your ability to handle a weapon safely in all other situations. His license to carry a firearm (whoever was responsible) should be revoked until he demonstrates he is responsible.

[Boiler 45,715]

What license? You mean his Hunting tag?  Hunters Ed?

 

Would imagine no more hunting this season and yes they have draconian powers, more than the Sheriff.

[bcking 3,157]

10 minutes ago, Boiler said:

What license? You mean his Hunting tag?  Hunters Ed?

 

Would imagine no more hunting this season and yes they have draconian powers, more than the Sheriff.

I have no idea how hunting works, I've never claimed to.

 

My whole point is someone who proves that they can't responsibly use a firearm should not be able to own one.

[Boiler 45,715]

1 minute ago, bcking said:

I have no idea how hunting works, I've never claimed to.

 

My whole point is someone who proves that they can't responsibly use a firearm should not be able to own one.

You can see the hunting rules in your State, they like Driving vary by State.

 

I think you are confusing ownership and license. Bit like a Car not having a DL does not mean that you can not own a car.

[smilesammich 10,727]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

My whole point is someone who proves that they can't responsibly use a firearm should not be able to own one.

dickcheney would like to have a word with you.

Edited December 1, 2017 by smilesammich

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

6 hours ago, bcking said:

Yep that is great. That was clearly not the case here.

 

So what system is in place to punish whoever failed to do so? Is there any accountability? It seems like the person responsible for the gun may lose their hunting license. Is that only if the man shot presses charges? It should be regardless.

 

Proving yourself unfit to handle a weapon safety while hunting calls into question your ability to handle a weapon safely in all other situations. His license to carry a firearm (whoever was responsible) should be revoked until he demonstrates he is responsible.

Lemme help you out, since no one seems to be directly answering your valid questions.

 

There is no point system for gun ownership (or punishment) that I am aware of, anywhere.  CA might have something, but I have never heard of it.  

 

It’s called an accident for a reason.  I understand what you are saying about issuing points for negligence, but that just doesn’t happen.  He is not required to have a license to carry a weapon, most likely (only to carry concealed, and.shotguns that can be concealed are typically illegal).  He has to have a hunting license in order to hunt.  Not to own a long rifle or shotgun.

 

Your idea has merit, but I don’t think it would work any better than the current one for vehicle infractions (worse, I would warrant to guess).  As someone said above, hunting accidents happen infrequently, as hunting season is for a short time each year.  And said accidents are pretty rare, I would imagine.  (We’ve seen this one and the guy who supposedly killed a woman at 200 yds with a pistol after sunset... still not buying that story, personally)

 

As a gun owner, I’d have to be in a pretty hard-up way to lay a gun on the ground in the first place.  Wouldn’t want to get it dirty/wet.  I would be more likely to lean it up against a tree.  And the safety would be on, even if a round were chambered.  In short, it would take a pretty amazing chasing of events for me to get shot in the butt by my own weapon.

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, IDWAF said:

Lemme help you out, since no one seems to be directly answering your valid questions.

 

There is no point system for gun ownership (or punishment) that I am aware of, anywhere.  CA might have something, but I have never heard of it.  

 

It’s called an accident for a reason.  I understand what you are saying about issuing points for negligence, but that just doesn’t happen.  He is not required to have a license to carry a weapon, most likely (only to carry concealed, and.shotguns that can be concealed are typically illegal).  He has to have a hunting license in order to hunt.  Not to own a long rifle or shotgun.

 

Your idea has merit, but I don’t think it would work any better than the current one for vehicle infractions (worse, I would warrant to guess).  As someone said above, hunting accidents happen infrequently, as hunting season is for a short time each year.  And said accidents are pretty rare, I would imagine.  (We’ve seen this one and the guy who supposedly killed a woman at 200 yds with a pistol after sunset... still not buying that story, personally)

 

As a gun owner, I’d have to be in a pretty hard-up way to lay a gun on the ground in the first place.  Wouldn’t want to get it dirty/wet.  I would be more likely to lean it up against a tree.  And the safety would be on, even if a round were chambered.  In short, it would take a pretty amazing chasing of events for me to get shot in the butt by my own weapon.

Thanks for some of the education. I admit I'm clueless on these things.

 

I agree it probably wouldn't work well, for the same reason you give. The points system for driving is horrible. I'd much support fixing that first. Far more impactful. Get all the idiot drivers off the road.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

48 minutes ago, bcking said:

Thanks for some of the education. I admit I'm clueless on these things.

 

I agree it probably wouldn't work well, for the same reason you give. The points system for driving is horrible. I'd much support fixing that first. Far more impactful. Get all the idiot drivers off the road.

As has been said here already, the guy is a tool for laying down his gun and not having the safety on.  Anytime one is handling a weapon, the safety should be on unless it is pointed in a safe direction, the target has been identified, and one is ready to shoot.  To leave one laying around, loaded, with the safety off, is pretty foolish.  Hence him getting his very own “Darwin Award”.  

 

Lucky for him his gun didn’t shoot someone else.  Could have ended much worse for him.

[bcking 3,157]

12 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

As has been said here already, the guy is a tool for laying down his gun and not having the safety on.  Anytime one is handling a weapon, the safety should be on unless it is pointed in a safe direction, the target has been identified, and one is ready to shoot.  To leave one laying around, loaded, with the safety off, is pretty foolish.  Hence him getting his very own “Darwin Award”.  

 

Lucky for him his gun didn’t shoot someone else.  Could have ended much worse for him.

Agreed.

 

The question is then -

 

Should we have a system in place so that next time he is an idiot, he doesn't hurt someone else? It seems like he'll get away with it this time because he only hurt himself. What if there is a next time and someone else is killed?

[Ban Hammer 13,417]

13 hours ago, bcking said:

Thanks for some of the education. I admit I'm clueless on these things.

 

the nra hunter safety course taught me this very situation 45 years ago......
if you want to know more about firearms, the nra teaches courses, and people at gun ranges are more than happy to help too.

[bcking 3,157]

Just now, Ban Hammer said:

the nra hunter safety course taught me this very situation 45 years ago......
if you want to know more about firearms, the nra teaches courses, and people at gun ranges are more than happy to help too.

I don't want to know more for myself, I have no interest.

 

I would have an interest in making sure other people are safe though. I hate the idea that this guy can go hunting again when he recovers without any repercussions. What if the next time the gun accidentally goes off and kills someone he is with? We would have seen it coming, since the guy has already demonstrated he doesn't know what he is doing. He should be required to take a course before he can go out again.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

5 minutes ago, bcking said:

I don't want to know more for myself, I have no interest.

 

I would have an interest in making sure other people are safe though. I hate the idea that this guy can go hunting again when he recovers without any repercussions. What if the next time the gun accidentally goes off and kills someone he is with? We would have seen it coming, since the guy has already demonstrated he doesn't know what he is doing. He should be required to take a course before he can go out again.

We don’t take motorcycles away from riders who ride without helmets, not even from those who get into accidents while not wearing helmets.  Usually, stupid has to fix itself.  One way or the other.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

11 minutes ago, Ban Hammer said:

the nra hunter safety course taught me this very situation 45 years ago......
if you want to know more about firearms, the nra teaches courses, and people at gun ranges are more than happy to help too.

You said NRA. Gonna trigger some cars to fly into the ditch

[bcking 3,157]

23 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

We don’t take motorcycles away from riders who ride without helmets, not even from those who get into accidents while not wearing helmets.  Usually, stupid has to fix itself.  One way or the other.

A motorcycle not wearing a helmet would be endangering themselves only.

 

This man going out hunting with other people could potentially endanger others.

 

I've never claimed we are doing the right thing with automobiles. We are horrible in this country. There are many many drivers on the road that shouldn't have a license. I'm all for fixing that as well.

20 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

You said NRA. Gonna trigger some cars to fly into the ditch

Funny so far only you have brought it up. Who is really close to a ditch in this case I wonder?

Edited December 2, 2017 by bcking

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

A motorcycle not wearing a helmet would be endangering themselves only.

 

Funny so far only you have brought it up. Who is really close to a ditch in this case I wonder?

You might be surprised how distracting not wearing a helmet at 60-70 MPH can be. (If you’ve never done it, I mean.)

 

He’s the only one who has brought it up today.  You weren’t around the other 500 times that the NRA was called all kinds of disparaging names, all in the interest of saying they need to be shut down because they are to blame for the gun problems in the USA.  THAT’S what NB is referring to.