No im crystal clear with it. Im not having an argument about this . We will agree to disagree .Quote:
Originally Posted by Spook
Printable View
No im crystal clear with it. Im not having an argument about this . We will agree to disagree .Quote:
Originally Posted by Spook
How the hell do you shoot someone when you have fully identified your target
Neckshot, PM sent. nothing I want to get into on this thread. :)
Does anyone know what the crime would be , if this was in another country ? . Ie shooting someone wearing blaze while hunting . ? As in serious jail time ?
FFS.
We talk about self discipline like it is a magic quality, that everyone has.
Who hasn't driven pissed? Is there any risk of killing a whole family doing that?
I dont actually think that the wording "positively identify your target" actually gets the intended message across, which is surely "don't shoot a human", so perhaps it should just say that. The current wording actually detracts from the true message in my opinion. I can't help but think think that instead of mentally questioning "is that a human?" when looking at a target, some people are questioning "is that really a deer?" and deciding that it is. The human bit never entered their head... I think that the true intent of that particular rule is critically missing or not stated and therefore not instilled in some peoples psyche.Quote:
Originally Posted by moonhunt
Several people have been shot in NZ while carrying an animal. The shooter identified the animal, just did not notice unusual posture or movement... Ricochets, how about the homekill guy couple years ago that identified the cattle beast, and the bullet still struck his assistant. Not saying that is the case here, but freak accidents do happen. Bullets also have an amazing ability to go through stuff and continue on to hit something/someone else...Quote:
Originally Posted by moonhunt
Spook, while you obviously feel pretty strongly about this, there is a fairly large (legal) difference between "blatant munder" i.e. intention, and negligent homicide. If it was intentional, don't you think the police would have charged him accordingly ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spook
Manslaughter / culpable homicide / negligent homicide. Sentence depends on the country (SA = 10-15 years). In South Africa, if you shoot someone (even if it is a burglar in your house), you automatically get charged with murder and culpable homicide (ala Oscar). The cops leave it to the courts to figure out if was self-defence, accidental or intentional.Quote:
Originally Posted by Munsey
Maybe more accurate to say he thought he had plenty of self disciplne.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan F
Spook clearly thinks he has plenty too, hopefully his self-assessment is more accurate.
Read this and stop bein pickee at each other ..
Poor poor family
Shooting victim 'such a treasure' - national | Stuff.co.nz
It seems to vary a lot, here's one from USA, this guy is facing 4 years max I believe Upstate DA: Garden City man indicted in hunting accident that killed Malverne firefighter Charles Bruce - NewsdayQuote:
Originally Posted by Munsey
I would say there are a lot more deer round now than there was when I started hunting in the early 80's.Quote:
Originally Posted by misfire
I tend to agree Barefoot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barefoot
It is truly piss easy to get deer now where I spend most of my time compared to the early and late eighties. There were fuck all dedicated hunters back then as it was to hard.
I would struggle to remember going for a hunt in the last 10-15years without at least seeing an animal
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Totally disagree personally. I think anyone who is aware that there may be other people in their area that they may misidentify and therefore not assume it's the targeted animal and use that thought process of 'this may be a person' (or a another animal that they aren't after).Quote:
Originally Posted by Spook
These people should be welcomed.
Being aware of the ability to make mistakes makes you actively pursue not making them.
They need to make the firearms 'test' a prerequisite to the seminar. Conducted like the lerners test, sit in the corner and do it in silence by yourself with no one coaching you.
It should be remembered that Government deer culling ended in the 80's, therefore it's entirely possible that the deer numbers increased from almost f..k all thereafter. My point is that in proportion to the hunter/ deer success rate today, it's marginal for the run of the mill average Joe hunter. I have no doubt that those of us with above average skills and hunting areas available only to some of us, are more successful.
As far as automatic murder charges laid with regard burglars shot in South Africa... nope,it's up to the circumstance at the time. Mostly decided really quickly by the attending 'cops'. Africa is a very strange place...
I think we might be going around in circles a bit here, It seems we're all aware of the fact that we might encounter and intitially mis-identify other hunters in the bush but where we're getting mixed up is what happens at this stage.
I agree with Spook in that if you think there is a chance of you going out and shooting someone, bury your guns in a fuckin deep hole and seek psychiatric help.
But then I also see Nibblets point that we can all mis-identify what we have encountered, for instance I've seen deer and thought they were people. So if your aware of this and keep it in your mind you are more likely to take the time to clearly identify.
Id like to say it would never happen to me, for one I'm not and over-excitable chap and never really experienced full on buck fever, not even face to face with a good stag at 10m, and secondly I hunt were there are large amounts of wallabies that I often mistakenly stalk in on. I just dont see the point of letting a round off if for one you dont know what your shooting at and secondly you dont know where your going to hit it, its just a really fuckin stupid thing to do on so many levels.
There is a lot of true words posted here, however I can't help thinking when reading half of this that "we" are missing the point...
Half the eggs I know that call themselves hunters should be fucken well given a decent lesson in manners, common sense, respect, beer drinking-rifle handling 101etc...
I trust only one or two guys I know personally. Maybe a few more...but
do you guys actually think half of you are that shit hot?
In Rotorua, where egos rule supreme, it is almost embarrassing associating oneself as a pig hunter or even a hunter.
Egos aside; (mine will be soon).
When I see a deer or a pig I firstly think "human or dog". I have been caught out many times now and the pig has crossed or the deer has spooked- there can be no other way. Can there?
Go well and go safely.
Dan
And it's not deer numbers or the lack there of that makes us do this. We have always done this.
Couldn't agree more. If you can't be confident on making a clear shot on an animal to ensure a clean kill then why the F would you take the shot??? And if it's a person then someone sure as hell isn't identifying a clean kill shot let alone even identifying if it's the target species or not?! Just crazy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rushy
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Everyone who has a firearm license must know the firearms laws. It is not that hard. Unfortunately there are exceptions. Sane people know they are out there for hunting a deer or two, not man hunting. It is not enough writing shit load of things only in the forums. The people who need to understand the importance of the firearms law, especially the rule no 4 (Identify the target beyond all doubt) are not the members of this forum. We need to do something to get this message throughout the country. As a responsible hunting community we need to do something rather than discussing this sitting on our couches. Its time to think about what can we do.
Jo