Thousands did.

In a war, you shoot at the enemy until he dies or surrenders, not just
until he
turns his back on you.

Hunters=enemies? shoot them?

Matt

John was using the opportunity to make a post election dig at his least
favorite candidate. Although John has admitted he would have done the same
thing in identical circumstances, he often said that
Kerry shooting a fleeing enemy in the back
(an enemy who momemnts earlier had fired on a US Navy Swift Boat), was absolute
proof that Kerry should not have been elected POTUS. Hey, maybe he was right,
as he wasn't. :-)

However, in a war, (not when hunting), it is my impression that the rules of a
formal duel do not apply. It isn't necessary to wait until a referee indicates
that its time to open fire, and nobody gives a ding if you have your back
turned. Attacking from behind, in some circumstances, is considered good
strategy, not "unsportsmanlike conduct".

If there might have been an excuse for the hunter defending himself by
returning fire, (assuming the other group began actually began firing first),
there isn't an excuse for chasing them down individually after they have fled
the scene and shooting them after the threat had been dispersed.