| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
OT : Who do you believe, the Hmong or White Hunters ?
|
Based on the way you phrased the question, I suppose there is absolutely no
possibility that the "white" hunters engaged in racially oriented insulting and no possibility that some (possibly) drunken hunter fired a shot at the "gook" just for fun. This isn't a racial deal. It's a case where some trash talking got out of hand and a crazy man started shooting people as a result. Anyone who insists on looking at this from a racial perspective is only, in my opinion, helping establish that it *could have* (not to say it did) happened just as the murdering nut job says it did. |
On 23 Nov 2004 22:48:08 -0800, (steve) wrote:
Suspect says hunters provoked him Vang says he was surrounded, called names and shot at before shootings Yes - the good old race card. Let's just call it what it was - idiotic behavior on both sides resulting in eight people dead for no reason. Later, Tom |
|
Who do I believe / What do I believe happened? It's certainly possible that the Hmong man just snapped after being nicely or even crudely/rudely asked to leave. But it seems more likely to me that a man would have to be provoked pretty well to take up shooting other men. So, with what is known and claimed now, I'd guess that the other party went beyond just pointing out that the Hmong man was on their property and asking him to leave. ~ Now, if the Hmong man shot them because he was called names or felt intimidated then, of course, that's wrong. But if they fired any shot at him, even if just into the air, then his firing back seems more justified. About race: It seems very possible that the whites, the Hmong man, or both could have had racial tensions driving their actions. But so what? It's a man's *actions* he should be judged on. Gould Wrote: This isn't a racial deal. It's a case where some trash talking got out of hand and a crazy man started shooting people as a result. Anyone who insists on looking at this from a racial perspective is only, in my opinion, helping establish that it *could have* (not to say it did) happened just as the murdering nut job says it did. Seems you think the guy who did the shootings is a crazy man and a murdering nut job. But, what if he was shot at first? What would you do if a group of people with guns were around you and one took a pot shot at your feet or something? Would you just run hoping they didn't shoot you? 'cause if they did shoot you, who would tell your side to the cops? Or would you fire back? |
"Dave Hall" wrote in message ... On 23 Nov 2004 22:48:08 -0800, (steve) wrote: Well, if I were facing multiple counts of murder, I'd try to kick up some dust in an attempt to save my butt. It's just human nature. It certainly wouldn't be the first time the "racial persecution" angle was used as a potential defense. It also wouldn't be the first time a group of one race tried to intimidate a lone-person of another. But even if true, shooting people is not the appropriate response, unless his life was directly threatened. If he could somehow prove that he was shot at first, I'd tend to look a little more sympathetic toward him. But how can the guy proove he was shot at first? Maybe they'll find a bullet from the other's gun? Or maybe they'll be able to show one of those guns was fired recently? But they were, after all, out hunting. Wouldn't be totally out of the question for them to claim (or actually) to have shot their riffels recently in that area. |
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 08:37:55 -0500, "Gary Warner"
wrote: Who do I believe / What do I believe happened? It's certainly possible that the Hmong man just snapped after being nicely or even crudely/rudely asked to leave. But it seems more likely to me that a man would have to be provoked pretty well to take up shooting other men. We have a Hmong population in the local area and it's not unknown for somebody to ask, for instance, to move a car and get assaulted in return. It is a cultural issue and I'm not at all sure what causes it. So, with what is known and claimed now, I'd guess that the other party went beyond just pointing out that the Hmong man was on their property and asking him to leave. ~ Now, if the Hmong man shot them because he was called names or felt intimidated then, of course, that's wrong. But if they fired any shot at him, even if just into the air, then his firing back seems more justified. Having similar experiences on my own property with hunters, it can get testy even if you are being totally polite. Some people, white caucasian people I might add, don't seem to hold property rights as closely when it's not their property being used and abused. I don't want people on my property that I don't know are there - that's all I ask. That's how the property is posted - in big yellow signs spaced 100 feet apart, call me first please. If I had a dime for every time that has been ignored over the years, I'd have fifty bucks. :) The point is that one man went berserk threatened or not. Based on the accounts of the incident, I would suspect that alcohol was involved somehow. We'll probably never find out. Later, Tom |
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 08:40:59 -0500, Gary Warner wrote:
But how can the guy proove he was shot at first? It seems to me, the two different accounts are varied and *detailed* enough, that a good forensic team would be able to sort out which is the more truthful. One thing that doesn't bode well for Vang, by his own words, he chased down one man and shot him in the back. IMO, it would be difficult to plead self-defense on that. |
One thing that doesn't bode well for Vang, by his own
words, he chased down one man and shot him in the back. IMO, it would be difficult to plead self-defense on that. The guy was panicked, enraged, or both. Still no excuse. My guess is the scenario probably developed like this; 1) group of hunters finds another hunter in their tree stand. 2) argument breaks out 3) hunters demanding tree stand say some ugly things, evicted hunter agrees to leave. 4) somebody thinks it would be funny to fire a shot into the air, or into the general direction of the retreating hunter (but well wide to miss) to see if it would frighten him into a hastier, and more amusing exit. 5) evicted hunter interprets shot as an attack, returns fire. 6) firefight breaks out. ((why did none of the large group of hunters manage to hit their target? Aiming through beer goggles? Who knows?)) 7) evicted hunter goes "postal", is overcome by rage and blood lust, and commits atrocities well beyond anything that could be justified as "self defense". If I were on the jury for a case like this, and the facts proved to be consistent with my theoretical outline, I'd find a tiny speck of reasonable doubt *might* exist up until the point where the large group of hunters fled and the evicted hunter began chasing them down to kill the people he had missed in the original gun battle..... Even then, can you imagine what must have been going through the accused hunter's mind as the large group was on their walkie-talkies and cell phones calling in "reinforcements" and folks started arriving on ATV's to join in the fray? There's no excuse at all for what happened, but I think the story line "Gook goes beserk and begins shooting down a bunch of good, white, Christian Republicans without provocation" is extremely unlikely to be accurate. Did the news report identify the ethnicity of the dead hunters? Does anybody *know* whether any or all were white, or does that simply work as a device to fire up an easily identified and stereotyped group? |
News report I saw locally said the large group only had one gun between them. I don't know if this was the first group or the enlarged group after reinforcements arrived. If they were all armed...how come no one was able to shoot back. I always said give the deer a gun to shoot back. Obvious where the odds would lie. |
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 08:40:59 -0500, "Gary Warner"
wrote: "Dave Hall" wrote in message .. . On 23 Nov 2004 22:48:08 -0800, (steve) wrote: Well, if I were facing multiple counts of murder, I'd try to kick up some dust in an attempt to save my butt. It's just human nature. It certainly wouldn't be the first time the "racial persecution" angle was used as a potential defense. It also wouldn't be the first time a group of one race tried to intimidate a lone-person of another. But even if true, shooting people is not the appropriate response, unless his life was directly threatened. If he could somehow prove that he was shot at first, I'd tend to look a little more sympathetic toward him. But how can the guy proove he was shot at first? Maybe they'll find a bullet from the other's gun? Or maybe they'll be able to show one of those guns was fired recently? But they were, after all, out hunting. Wouldn't be totally out of the question for them to claim (or actually) to have shot their riffels recently in that area. And such is the nature of the conundrum. The defense will claim that he was shot first, but will not be able to prove it. It then boils down to a case of he said, vs. he said. There are more witnesses on the side of the hunters, but when playing race card, they expect that to trump other conflicting testimony, even if it's true. Sorry about the cynicism..... Dave |
Vang said he started walking away and saw the man with the rifle take it off his shoulder. Vang said he looked back again, when he was about 100 feet from the group, and the armed man was pointing the rifle at him. Then, Vang said, he dropped to a a crouch position and the man fired a shot at him, hitting the ground 30 to 40 feet behind Vang. Vang said he took off the scope of his SKS semi-automatic rifle and fired two shots at the armed man, who dropped. I'm not a hunter, but this last sentence in Vang's statement seems a bit incredible to me. If, in fact, you were being fired upon at relatively close range without benefit of cover, and feared for your life, would you really take the time to remove the scope from your rifle before returning fire? I don't believe I would, unless there's some reason that the scope would prevent successfully returning fire that I'm not aware of. To me, this part of Vang's statement brings serious doubt to his claim of being fired upon first. |
"by his own
words, he chased down one man and shot him in the back. IMO, it would be difficult to plead self-defense on that." Yes and that's why I believe Vang is telling the truth about the slurs and who shot first. He's too honest for his own good. |
[snip]
The other unarmed hunters ran and Vang fired, with two or three men dropping, he said. Two other men ran toward the cabin, about a quarter-mile away, and Vang said he chased one, who was yelling, "Help me. Help me." Vang said he got within 20 feet and shot the man in the back. .... shot a fleeing man in the back .... [snip] Vang ran back to the original shooting scene, saw one of the victims standing and said, "You're not dead yet?" and fired one more shot. .... shot a dying, helpless man ... [snip] I hope he will rot in hell. Matt |
|
Seems you think the guy who did the shootings is a crazy man
and a murdering nut job. But, what if he was shot at first? If he was shot at first: The guy crossed the line after the original firefight where he killed a couple of folks. The surviving hunters fled, and if one account is accurate one guy (who probably peed himself) was running down a trail calling "help, help!" when the nut job chased him down and shot him in the back. Not exactly self defense. We had a similar case up this way a couple of years ago. Some kid stole a car out of a guy's driveway. The guy woke up in time to see the kid take off down the road, so he grabbed a pistol, jumped into his other car, and gave chase. After tracking his stolen car for a few miles, the auto owner pulled up along side and shot the car thief through the side of the head. There was a lot of discussion that the auto owner was "defending his property" and therefore justified in murdering the thieving juvenile. Makes about as much sense, to me, as declaring "self defense" when the attacker is running away and you have to chase him down in order to kill him. What would you do if a group of people with guns were around you and one took a pot shot at your feet or something? Would you just run hoping they didn't shoot you? 'cause if they did shoot you, who would tell your side to the cops? Or would you fire back? I don't think anybody can accurately say what they would do in a hypothetical situation where other people are shooting, but I'd like to think that if I dove for cover, fired back, ran like hell, or otherwise kept my butt intact I wouldn't chase people down to shoot them in the back. |
I always said give the deer a gun to shoot back. Obvious where the odds
would lie. Al Cummmings, who wrote a bunch of cruising guidebooks years ago, once worked as a radio DJ in Seattle. One year, on the opening day of deer season, he put on a hollowed out trophy head and stood next to one of our busy arterials with a rifle, pretending to take aim at passing motorists. In the 60's this was funny. Somebody would gun him down or call the Homeland Security forces on him these days. |
Didn't some Vietnam war hero do the same thing?
John H Thousands did. In a war, you shoot at the enemy until he dies or surrenders, not just until he turns his back on you. |
"Gould 0738" wrote in message ... I always said give the deer a gun to shoot back. Obvious where the odds would lie. Al Cummmings, who wrote a bunch of cruising guidebooks years ago, once worked as a radio DJ in Seattle. One year, on the opening day of deer season, he put on a hollowed out trophy head and stood next to one of our busy arterials with a rifle, pretending to take aim at passing motorists. In the 60's this was funny. Somebody would gun him down or call the Homeland Security forces on him these days. Wow! Up here the police put out deer & moose silhouettes trying to entice poachers to take a shot. They get takers each year. |
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 17:32:59 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 08:37:55 -0500, "Gary Warner" wrote: Who do I believe / What do I believe happened? It's certainly possible that the Hmong man just snapped after being nicely or even crudely/rudely asked to leave. But it seems more likely to me that a man would have to be provoked pretty well to take up shooting other men. We have a Hmong population in the local area and it's not unknown for somebody to ask, for instance, to move a car and get assaulted in return. It is a cultural issue and I'm not at all sure what causes it. Means nothing. We have a white population in this country who would string up a black man for looking at a white woman, and recently we had some white men in Texas who hooked a black guy up to their truck with a chain and dragged him to death. And there are prominent black religious leaders who have children out of wedlock, form tax free groups that distribute cocaine, incite riots in which Jewish and Korean innocents are killed and swear false witness against innocent people ruining reputations and careers. And those two particular individuals are from blue states. What's your point? My point was there is a cultural divide between different ethnic groups and we need to bridge that somehow - not increase the tension by blaming any one particular group. I'm not interested in any finger pointing discussion with you or anybody else. All the best, Tom -------------- "What the hell's the deal with this newsgroup... is there a computer terminal in the day room of some looney bin somewhere?" Bilgeman - circa 2004 |
Wow! Up here the police put out deer & moose silhouettes trying to entice
poachers to take a shot. They get takers each year. Easily defended, unless you have a specific season for silhouettes. :-) |
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:06:48 GMT, "Don White"
wrote: "Gould 0738" wrote in message ... I always said give the deer a gun to shoot back. Obvious where the odds would lie. Al Cummmings, who wrote a bunch of cruising guidebooks years ago, once worked as a radio DJ in Seattle. One year, on the opening day of deer season, he put on a hollowed out trophy head and stood next to one of our busy arterials with a rifle, pretending to take aim at passing motorists. In the 60's this was funny. Somebody would gun him down or call the Homeland Security forces on him these days. Wow! Up here the police put out deer & moose silhouettes trying to entice poachers to take a shot. They get takers each year. Our DEP has access to three choppers with some very sophisticated IR and low light hardware. They set up motion sensors in restricted areas (like my woods) to catch poachers. Once the sensors trigger, it's relayed by satellite to Hartford and they dispatch a chopper. Caught thirty last year (two in my woods). Later, Tom |
Gould 0738 wrote in message ... I always said give the deer a gun to shoot back. Obvious where the odds would lie. Al Cummmings, who wrote a bunch of cruising guidebooks years ago, once worked as a radio DJ in Seattle. One year, on the opening day of deer season, he put on a hollowed out trophy head and stood next to one of our busy arterials with a rifle, pretending to take aim at passing motorists. In the 60's this was funny. Somebody would gun him down or call the Homeland Security forces on him these days. I think I told this story before, so for those that have heard it, delete, delete. It's another Mrs. E. story. By now you should all have a clear mental image of this lady's personality. Anyway, this occurred several years ago, when we were living in our first house and still had young kids at home. It was November and our next door neighbor was an avid hunter. One evening I arrived home from work only to find Mrs. E. in near hysterics. She hussled me down to one of the bedrooms, pointed at a window that faced our neighbor's yard and screamed, "Look!" The neighbor who had obviously returned from a hunting trip had hung a couple of gutted deer by their hind legs from a tree branch to drain. I am not a hunter, and Mrs. E. is an animal lover, so she was screaming at me that she was going to call the police, have the neighbor arrested, all kinds of stuff. I tried to calm her down and explained that although it was not pleasant, it was perfectly legal and he was within his rights. I also explained the draining process required before the meat was cut up and either frozen or cooked. It took some doing, but finally she calmed down and accepted it for what it was. A few weeks later Mrs. E. decided it was time to decorate the house and yard for Christmas. Again, I came home one day to find that she had purchased and set up some of those white, wire deer lawn displays with the lights and all. Later that evening, I happened to look out the bedroom window and saw another wire deer, lights and all, hung by the rear legs on a tree in direct view from our neighbor's house. Eisboch |
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:15:06 GMT, "Eisboch"
wrote: Gould 0738 wrote in message ... I always said give the deer a gun to shoot back. Obvious where the odds would lie. Al Cummmings, who wrote a bunch of cruising guidebooks years ago, once worked as a radio DJ in Seattle. One year, on the opening day of deer season, he put on a hollowed out trophy head and stood next to one of our busy arterials with a rifle, pretending to take aim at passing motorists. In the 60's this was funny. Somebody would gun him down or call the Homeland Security forces on him these days. I think I told this story before, so for those that have heard it, delete, delete. It's another Mrs. E. story. By now you should all have a clear mental image of this lady's personality. Anyway, this occurred several years ago, when we were living in our first house and still had young kids at home. It was November and our next door neighbor was an avid hunter. One evening I arrived home from work only to find Mrs. E. in near hysterics. She hussled me down to one of the bedrooms, pointed at a window that faced our neighbor's yard and screamed, "Look!" The neighbor who had obviously returned from a hunting trip had hung a couple of gutted deer by their hind legs from a tree branch to drain. I am not a hunter, and Mrs. E. is an animal lover, so she was screaming at me that she was going to call the police, have the neighbor arrested, all kinds of stuff. I tried to calm her down and explained that although it was not pleasant, it was perfectly legal and he was within his rights. I also explained the draining process required before the meat was cut up and either frozen or cooked. It took some doing, but finally she calmed down and accepted it for what it was. A few weeks later Mrs. E. decided it was time to decorate the house and yard for Christmas. Again, I came home one day to find that she had purchased and set up some of those white, wire deer lawn displays with the lights and all. Later that evening, I happened to look out the bedroom window and saw another wire deer, lights and all, hung by the rear legs on a tree in direct view from our neighbor's house. LOL!!! Just out of curiosity, is Mrs. E a vegetarian? Later, Tom "Beware the one legged man in a butt kicking contest - he is there for a reason." Wun Hung Lo - date unknown |
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote in message ... LOL!!! Just out of curiosity, is Mrs. E a vegetarian? Later, Tom "Beware the one legged man in a butt kicking contest - he is there for a reason." Wun Hung Lo - date unknown No. She's Italian. Eisboch :-) |
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:54:56 GMT, "Eisboch"
wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote in message .. . LOL!!! Just out of curiosity, is Mrs. E a vegetarian? No. She's Italian. Ah.....well then.... One of my wife's friends is a vegetarian, vegan actually, really into animal rights and such and is still an avid hunter and fisher person. I've never quite figured it out. Later, Tom |
"Military records obtained by The Associated Press show he spent six years in
the California National Guard and earned a sharpshooter qualification badge. But his primary role during his time in the Guard, from 1989-95, involved clerical duties. After his discharge, he spent two more years in the Individual Ready Reserve. His records also include a Good Conduct medal." Obviously not the crazy man as first believed. |
After his discharge, he spent two more years in the Individual Ready
Reserve. His records also include a Good Conduct medal." Obviously not the crazy man as first believed. What does a good conduct medal have to do with mental health? |
"Gould 0738" wrote in message ... Seems you think the guy who did the shootings is a crazy man and a murdering nut job. But, what if he was shot at first? If he was shot at first: The guy crossed the line after the original firefight where he killed a couple of folks. The surviving hunters fled, and if one account is accurate one guy (who probably peed himself) was running down a trail calling "help, help!" when the nut job chased him down and shot him in the back. Not exactly self defense. snip It will be interesting if he can be linked to the shooting of a hunter in that same general area in 2001. Guy was found laying in the woods, shot twice in the back. A late 80's Nissan or GMC pickup was reported to have been seen in the area. Vang owns such a truck. And truck was reported to have 3 asians. Vang had two companions, who have not been located. Might be no connection, might be a connection. I wonder if they got a slug or two out of the 2001 guy. del cecchi |
|
What I find curious, if not suspicious, is "one gun between them," i.e., a
hunting party of several individuals, whether it was the first or second group. My first reaction was "guy went berserk..." My next reaction was "What could have made him go berserk?" Franko "Don White" wrote in message ... News report I saw locally said the large group only had one gun between them. I don't know if this was the first group or the enlarged group after reinforcements arrived. If they were all armed...how come no one was able to shoot back. I always said give the deer a gun to shoot back. Obvious where the odds would lie. |
The scopes I've seen mounted on Chinese made SKS can come off in about two
seconds...push in lock release, twist scope off rifle (clockwise when looking down from above)... Yes, you would have to remove it to use the iron sights on the rifle because the scope mount does not allow "peep-through." Iron sights are VERY easily used for short and medium distance because of the "unlimited" (more unhindered) field of vision. Scopes are good for long distance but have a very narrow field of vision -- difficult to aim at close objects. "RG" wrote in message news:kT4pd.157542$G15.63881@fed1read03... Vang said he started walking away and saw the man with the rifle take it off his shoulder. Vang said he looked back again, when he was about 100 feet from the group, and the armed man was pointing the rifle at him. Then, Vang said, he dropped to a a crouch position and the man fired a shot at him, hitting the ground 30 to 40 feet behind Vang. Vang said he took off the scope of his SKS semi-automatic rifle and fired two shots at the armed man, who dropped. I'm not a hunter, but this last sentence in Vang's statement seems a bit incredible to me. If, in fact, you were being fired upon at relatively close range without benefit of cover, and feared for your life, would you really take the time to remove the scope from your rifle before returning fire? I don't believe I would, unless there's some reason that the scope would prevent successfully returning fire that I'm not aware of. To me, this part of Vang's statement brings serious doubt to his claim of being fired upon first. |
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. |
Several hunters with only one gun is suspect. Other hunters arriving at the
scene supposedly without guns is suspect. Shooting eight, killing six, to defend yourself is suspect. I wonder what others would have done in his shoes: assuming what he stated was true about being surrounded and shot at, alone against a group of at least eight "hunters." "Matt Lang" wrote in message om... (steve) wrote in message . com... Suspect says hunters provoked him Vang says he was surrounded, called names and shot at before shootings By JOHN DIEDRICH, LEE BERGQUIST and TOM HELD Posted: Nov. 23, 2004 Hayward - The suspect arrested for shooting eight hunters, killing six of them, says he was surrounded by the group, called derogatory racial names and shot at before he opened fire, according to court records released today. Northwoods Shootings Suspect Chai Soua Vang, 36, of St. Paul, Minn., is suspected of shooting eight hunters, killing six of them. [massive snip] well a guy with a history of domestic and I even read gun invovled violence masacres 6 people (only ONE armed), some shot in the back. More unarmed people on ATV's arrive, they get executed as well. This isnt self defence. Even if they pulled the racial stuff on him, no reason to execute them all. This guy needs to be locked away for life also to warn people like him. Matt |
Tom,
Doesn't the motion sensors get tripped by wildlife? Paul "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:06:48 GMT, "Don White" wrote: "Gould 0738" wrote in message ... I always said give the deer a gun to shoot back. Obvious where the odds would lie. Al Cummmings, who wrote a bunch of cruising guidebooks years ago, once worked as a radio DJ in Seattle. One year, on the opening day of deer season, he put on a hollowed out trophy head and stood next to one of our busy arterials with a rifle, pretending to take aim at passing motorists. In the 60's this was funny. Somebody would gun him down or call the Homeland Security forces on him these days. Wow! Up here the police put out deer & moose silhouettes trying to entice poachers to take a shot. They get takers each year. Our DEP has access to three choppers with some very sophisticated IR and low light hardware. They set up motion sensors in restricted areas (like my woods) to catch poachers. Once the sensors trigger, it's relayed by satellite to Hartford and they dispatch a chopper. Caught thirty last year (two in my woods). Later, Tom |
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:54:21 -0500, "Paul Schilter"
paulschilter@comcast dot net wrote: Tom, Doesn't the motion sensors get tripped by wildlife? Paul "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:06:48 GMT, "Don White" wrote: "Gould 0738" wrote in message ... I always said give the deer a gun to shoot back. Obvious where the odds would lie. Al Cummmings, who wrote a bunch of cruising guidebooks years ago, once worked as a radio DJ in Seattle. One year, on the opening day of deer season, he put on a hollowed out trophy head and stood next to one of our busy arterials with a rifle, pretending to take aim at passing motorists. In the 60's this was funny. Somebody would gun him down or call the Homeland Security forces on him these days. Wow! Up here the police put out deer & moose silhouettes trying to entice poachers to take a shot. They get takers each year. Our DEP has access to three choppers with some very sophisticated IR and low light hardware. They set up motion sensors in restricted areas (like my woods) to catch poachers. Once the sensors trigger, it's relayed by satellite to Hartford and they dispatch a chopper. Caught thirty last year (two in my woods). Occasionally, but most of the time, at least around here, it's deer jackers. Later, Tom |
Eisboch,
I like her, she's got a sense of humor. Paul "Eisboch" wrote in message ... Gould 0738 wrote in message ... I always said give the deer a gun to shoot back. Obvious where the odds would lie. Al Cummmings, who wrote a bunch of cruising guidebooks years ago, once worked as a radio DJ in Seattle. One year, on the opening day of deer season, he put on a hollowed out trophy head and stood next to one of our busy arterials with a rifle, pretending to take aim at passing motorists. In the 60's this was funny. Somebody would gun him down or call the Homeland Security forces on him these days. I think I told this story before, so for those that have heard it, delete, delete. It's another Mrs. E. story. By now you should all have a clear mental image of this lady's personality. Anyway, this occurred several years ago, when we were living in our first house and still had young kids at home. It was November and our next door neighbor was an avid hunter. One evening I arrived home from work only to find Mrs. E. in near hysterics. She hussled me down to one of the bedrooms, pointed at a window that faced our neighbor's yard and screamed, "Look!" The neighbor who had obviously returned from a hunting trip had hung a couple of gutted deer by their hind legs from a tree branch to drain. I am not a hunter, and Mrs. E. is an animal lover, so she was screaming at me that she was going to call the police, have the neighbor arrested, all kinds of stuff. I tried to calm her down and explained that although it was not pleasant, it was perfectly legal and he was within his rights. I also explained the draining process required before the meat was cut up and either frozen or cooked. It took some doing, but finally she calmed down and accepted it for what it was. A few weeks later Mrs. E. decided it was time to decorate the house and yard for Christmas. Again, I came home one day to find that she had purchased and set up some of those white, wire deer lawn displays with the lights and all. Later that evening, I happened to look out the bedroom window and saw another wire deer, lights and all, hung by the rear legs on a tree in direct view from our neighbor's house. Eisboch |
The unarmed hunters were coming because they got a radio call that someone
had been shot. They were not out hunting when the call came. This according to the newspaper report. "Franko" wrote in message ... Several hunters with only one gun is suspect. Other hunters arriving at the scene supposedly without guns is suspect. Shooting eight, killing six, to defend yourself is suspect. I wonder what others would have done in his shoes: assuming what he stated was true about being surrounded and shot at, alone against a group of at least eight "hunters." "Matt Lang" wrote in message om... (steve) wrote in message . com... Suspect says hunters provoked him Vang says he was surrounded, called names and shot at before shootings By JOHN DIEDRICH, LEE BERGQUIST and TOM HELD Posted: Nov. 23, 2004 Hayward - The suspect arrested for shooting eight hunters, killing six of them, says he was surrounded by the group, called derogatory racial names and shot at before he opened fire, according to court records released today. Northwoods Shootings Suspect Chai Soua Vang, 36, of St. Paul, Minn., is suspected of shooting eight hunters, killing six of them. [massive snip] well a guy with a history of domestic and I even read gun invovled violence masacres 6 people (only ONE armed), some shot in the back. More unarmed people on ATV's arrive, they get executed as well. This isnt self defence. Even if they pulled the racial stuff on him, no reason to execute them all. This guy needs to be locked away for life also to warn people like him. Matt |
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:33 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com