(Gould 0738) wrote in message ...
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.



If the 8 were armed they would have executed him and not the other way around.

Matt

If the 8 were armed they would have executed him and not the other way
around.

Matt



If the eight were unarmed, how the heck were they "hunting"?

Get a bunch of guys staggering around in a beer buzz vs. one sober guy scared
for his life. Evens the odds a bit. Then add the factor of some of your buddies
getting killed when the intended victim of a cruel "joke" takes the shot
seriously and begins firing back. If you aren't prepared to see people going
down on both sides of you and you panic as a result, the odds are evened a bit
more.

All those missing weapons are likely squirreled away in the bushes someplace.
How many people go hunting without a gun? Never heard of anybody doing that,
except the stereotypical cheating husband. :-)

On 25 Nov 2004 20:16:12 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

If the 8 were armed they would have executed him and not the other way
around.

Matt



If the eight were unarmed, how the heck were they "hunting"?

Get a bunch of guys staggering around in a beer buzz vs. one sober guy scared
for his life. Evens the odds a bit. Then add the factor of some of your buddies
getting killed when the intended victim of a cruel "joke" takes the shot
seriously and begins firing back. If you aren't prepared to see people going
down on both sides of you and you panic as a result, the odds are evened a bit
more.

All those missing weapons are likely squirreled away in the bushes someplace.
How many people go hunting without a gun? Never heard of anybody doing that,
except the stereotypical cheating husband. :-)

I've never heard of eight hunters going into the woods without at
least eight rifles. Usually there'd be a few pistols in the mix too.
At least this was the way we did it when I lived in Minnesota.

Maybe efficiency has outsourced the shooters. Now only one shooter is
used, and the other seven people carry all the dead deer.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

(Gould 0738) wrote in message ...
If the 8 were armed they would have executed him and not the other way
around.

Matt



If the eight were unarmed, how the heck were they "hunting"?

Get a bunch of guys staggering around in a beer buzz vs. one sober guy scared
for his life. Evens the odds a bit. Then add the factor of some of your buddies
getting killed when the intended victim of a cruel "joke" takes the shot
seriously and begins firing back. If you aren't prepared to see people going
down on both sides of you and you panic as a result, the odds are evened a bit
more.

All those missing weapons are likely squirreled away in the bushes someplace.
How many people go hunting without a gun? Never heard of anybody doing that,
except the stereotypical cheating husband. :-)


You have a point but its possible that they had their guns in their
trucks. If you go hunting you dont drive aorund with loaded guns
drawn. More likely they were in unloaded in cases in the trucks. Then
you get to your spot and see someone in your stand. So they dont take
out your gun and shoot him but rather they tell hiim to get the ****
out of there plus some racial stuff ...

The guy takes off and maybe someone fired a shot or even close to him
(no doubt wrong but NOT cold blooded murder). Then the guy with the
violence history snaps and takes them all down with his semi auto (why
the **** is he hunting with an assault weapon???? Isnt that one
against him?). shots in the back, dying people finished and all.

Makes snese to me but LUCKILY I wasnt there.

Matt

"Matt Lang" wrote in message
om...

The guy takes off and maybe someone fired a shot or even close to him
(no doubt wrong but NOT cold blooded murder). Then the guy with the
violence history snaps and takes them all down with his semi auto (why
the **** is he hunting with an assault weapon???? Isnt that one
against him?). shots in the back, dying people finished and all.

Can you provide the definition of an assault weapon? I keep hearing the term
"military style assault weapon" in the media and by gun control proponents
but, I don't understand the difference between a Remington Model 1200
carried by a civilian and a member of the armed forces. One is a hunting
weapon and the other is killing weapon.

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message ...
"Matt Lang" wrote in message
om...

The guy takes off and maybe someone fired a shot or even close to him
(no doubt wrong but NOT cold blooded murder). Then the guy with the
violence history snaps and takes them all down with his semi auto (why
the **** is he hunting with an assault weapon???? Isnt that one
against him?). shots in the back, dying people finished and all.

Can you provide the definition of an assault weapon? I keep hearing the term
"military style assault weapon" in the media and by gun control proponents
but, I don't understand the difference between a Remington Model 1200
carried by a civilian and a member of the armed forces. One is a hunting
weapon and the other is killing weapon.

good point. I dont think there isnt , but ask in rec.guns.

There are however semi auto rifles which are very suitable to fire
lots of controlled rounds in short time, suitable for combat and there
are semi auto rifles which arent. This is no black and white criteria
though...

If one hunts with an i.e. AR15 I would say he is hunting with an
assault rifle ..

Matt

What a biased comment. Now we have drunken hunters, that tried to execute a
scared guy.

It was early in the morning, as some were traveling in the dark to the deer
stand. They find a guy in the stand who does not belong there and accost
him. Whether they fired or not, the scared guy shoots a couple. And from
the news report. They radio, probably on FRS radios that one of the people
has been shot. Several of the "hunters" are still at the cabin and jump in
ATV's to help the shot person. They could have assumed it was a hunting
accident. They did not bring their guns along, as they were on a recue
mission for an injured person. They left the guns at the cabin. They would
still be called hunters, as they were at their property to hunt deer, and
you would call them hunters even if they were in camp. And nowhere is there
any mention of drunkeness.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
If the 8 were armed they would have executed him and not the other way
around.

Matt



If the eight were unarmed, how the heck were they "hunting"?

Get a bunch of guys staggering around in a beer buzz vs. one sober guy
scared
for his life. Evens the odds a bit. Then add the factor of some of your
buddies
getting killed when the intended victim of a cruel "joke" takes the shot
seriously and begins firing back. If you aren't prepared to see people
going
down on both sides of you and you panic as a result, the odds are evened a
bit
more.

All those missing weapons are likely squirreled away in the bushes
someplace.
How many people go hunting without a gun? Never heard of anybody doing
that,
except the stereotypical cheating husband. :-)

(Gould 0738) wrote in message ...
If the 8 were armed they would have executed him and not the other way
around.

Matt



If the eight were unarmed, how the heck were they "hunting"?

Get a bunch of guys staggering around in a beer buzz vs. one sober guy scared
for his life. Evens the odds a bit. Then add the factor of some of your buddies
getting killed when the intended victim of a cruel "joke" takes the shot
seriously and begins firing back. If you aren't prepared to see people going
down on both sides of you and you panic as a result, the odds are evened a bit
more.

All those missing weapons are likely squirreled away in the bushes someplace.
How many people go hunting without a gun? Never heard of anybody doing that,
except the stereotypical cheating husband. :-)


Could it be that they were not drunken bums as all you folks seem to
say... Funny how all of the slurs here are at the victims Anyway,
could it be that they all woke up, stepped out to have a smoke or
stretch, saw the guy or signs of him and innocently went over to ask
him to leave, in fact, not having started "hunting" for the day yet?
Of course, that kind of thought would make me crazy I guess... OH,
BTW, they are investigating to see if the guy might be involved in a
similar execution a couple of years back in a similar private property
situation..
Also, they Hmung or whatever they are, do not resepect individual
private property rights as a culture, just to add a little perspective
to your specualation...

Also, they Hmung or whatever they are, do not resepect individual
private property rights as a culture, just to add a little perspective
to your specualation...

Certainly no racial bias evident in a statement like that......

And it is all speculation from all sides. A "he said vs. he said". Nobody
discussing this has made a blanket statement that any facts or representations
are irrefutable.
It's all theoretical at this point.

Also, they Hmung or whatever they are, do not resepect individual
private property rights as a culture, just to add a little perspective
to your specualation...

Except THEIR OWN I suppose, but the others property is the hmong
property.

I am sure if you step on hmong property and try to hunt there they
wont be as nice. But then what else are they gonna do besides shooting
you?

It must feel safe to have these people there ...

Matt