Another useless shooting which makes gun owners look bad.

[Gunner3456]

Story of shooting

Well the facts aren't all in yet of course, but a guy here in the valley saw some people spotlighting, so he says.

Next he decides to arm himself, leave his home, and go stop them it appears. I call that "taking the law into your own hands" if it's true.

The story says he confronted them and falsely claimed to be a reserve LEO.

They left in their pickup but came back and he wound up shooting and badly wounding one of them.

He's out on bail, the wounded will survive, and who knows where this ends.

I believe he should have stayed in his house, called 911, and if the cops didn't show in time, oh well... Maybe he could have gotten descriptions, license #s, etc., or maybe not.

All I know is that these irresponsible gun owners don't help us with our public relations about
gun ownership.

Read More

 

[hightower]

well dang it now we've got a couple of problems here.


1. Poachers! i'm a bad enough shot i don't need anybody else making my hunt more difficult, all the while bragging about their trophy's taking by unethical tactics.

2. "Sheepdogs" Guess what your not a cop, what you should have done was call them. Have fun in jail.

3. The 5th sign of the apocalypse. A .44 mag didn't cause instant death by disembowelment. Now i've got to save up for a .500sw for carry.


wait back to #2 he should have identified himself a cpl holder and shown his badge, they would have complied then!



Seriously this is a bad deal, it makes gun ownership look as a precursor to vigilantism, and that really scares liberals. A call to the cops is always a good first step when trouble is imminent. I mean that is why i pay taxes, and in turn their salaries.

 

[Gunner3456]

I agree with you. Poaching sucks, but it isn't a deadly threat and doesn't justify deadly force by a vigilante citizen.

Even if the guy he shot threatened him with a gun, the decision to go out and confront was already a mistake. If I was out spotlighting and a citizen threatened me with a gun, would I be justified in shooting him? That's a good question and the answer might be yes, but it still doesn't solve the problem.

It will be interesting to see how it winds up, but as gun owners it's a losing situation for us.

 

[gunnails]

Sounds like the victim was just scouting, The article said there were no weapons foundd on them and alcohol was not a factor.

Sounds like the shooter ia a real tool.

 

[Gunner3456]

Sounds like the victim was just scouting, The article said there were no weapons foundd on them and alcohol was not a factor.

Sounds like the shooter ia a real tool.

Yeah, that's really rural out there and good deer country. The story, I believe, says they were headed to the hospital. It wouldn't have been hard to ditch guns out there (wooded, sparsely settled) but who knows.

Isn't it illegal to spotlight even without a gun? I can't remember. It's been too long, LOL.

I'm sure there's a lot of investigating of two different stories going on. I just wish the idiot had stayed in his house and I'll bet he does by now, too.

 

[dobeman]

Unfortunately, stupidity is inextricably part of the human gene pool and again, unfortunately, stupid people can get guns. There is, unfortunately, no way - yet - to screen for it except after-the-fact. Stupid is as stupid does. Maybe one day, there will be a way to pre-screen stupidity and maybe it will be part of the background check process for gun ownership.

 

[Mutoman]

Yeah, that's really rural out there and good deer country. The story, I believe, says they were headed to the hospital. It wouldn't have been hard to ditch guns out there (wooded, sparsely settled) but who knows.

Isn't it illegal to spotlight even without a gun? I can't remember. It's been too long, LOL.

I'm sure there's a lot of investigating of two different stories going on. I just wish the idiot had stayed in his house and I'll bet he does by now, too.

Yup, it is illegal to spotlight wildlife, probably not an offense deserving the death penalty though.