Man mistakesfd hiker for deer, shoots kills him

RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior MemberPosts: 4,646 Senior Member
This is from our local paper here. Their website is subscription only so no link. but here's the story:
A guy is hiking an improved, designated hiking trail. No gun, not hunting. But also no orange. He's not far off a county road.
A man in his 50s who lives on that road about 150 yards away is sitting on a swing in his back yard. He sees movement, retrieves his 30 30 from the house and shoots.He hits the hiker in the upper back killing him.
Sheriffs office, ASP, and AG&FC are investigating. No arrest yet.
I purposely put this here rather than the hunting section. This isn't hunting it's murder.
Does are legal here. Bucks have to have at least 3 points on one side. So you have to see the sex, then count points if it's a buck. There is no excuse for for this.
opinions?
Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs

Replies

  • ghostsniper1ghostsniper1 Banned Posts: 2,645 Senior Member
    The guy was negligent. There is no reason to fire a shot just because something is rattling the bushes. I'd say a hunter and man of his age should have known better.
  • Ernie BishopErnie Bishop Senior Member Posts: 7,099 Senior Member
    So sad for the loss of life and for the family and friends who will grieve a long time because of stupidity and irresponsibility of the shooter.
    I would expect him to be arrested soon.
    Ernie

    "The Un-Tactical"
  • Fat BillyFat Billy Senior Member Posts: 1,813 Senior Member
    There is no excuse. Not knowing what you are shooting at isn't murder but would probably qualify for man slaughter. The shooter made the shot at movement not a valid target. Knowing there is a hiking trail is near adds to the issue. A 150 yard shot with a 30-30 indicates the shooter was decent with a rifle and should have known better than to fire. The hunting rules in the area indicate you need to SEE your target and evaluate if it is a legal target. Not wearing bright colors during hunting season is not recommended but not illegal. I'd say bad shoot equals trajic outcome. :down: Later,
    Fat Billy

    Recoil is how you know primer ignition is complete.
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 15,177 Senior Member
    While I agree that this is uncalled for, it would be a stretch to call it murder....more like negligent homicide... On one hand, the shooter failed to positively identify his target, which is negligent on his part, on the other hand the shootee was wandering around in the woods during deer season with no orange on, which was really stupid on his part.... there's a reason stupid hurts...and there's plenty of stupid to go around in this case....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 4,808 Senior Member
    This isn't hunting it's murder.

    I wouldn't go as far as calling it "murder". Negligent homicide for sure.

    I know some states require hunters to wear blaze orange during hunting season, but is ANYONE in the woods required to wear orange?
    I have ran into mt bikers during hunting season and they were wearing orange (smart), but it is not required for hunters in Idaho.
    The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me.

    Ayn Rand
  • jbp-ohiojbp-ohio Senior Member Posts: 9,596 Senior Member
    Well, if they aren't wearing orange they are fair game to look at through a rifle scope........ :wink:














    (I wouldn't go near the woods during shotgun season, orange or not)
    "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    I wouldn't go as far as calling it "murder". Negligent homicide for sure.

    I know some states require hunters to wear blaze orange during hunting season, but is ANYONE in the woods required to wear orange?
    I have ran into mt bikers during hunting season and they were wearing orange (smart), but it is not required for hunters in Idaho.

    Okay, I concede negligent homicide. But he should get max penalty. This was no accident. Yes they require orange here and at the trailheads they even have signs recommending it. Don't know if this trail had the signs. We sometimes see hikers, mtn. bikers in our area. They almost always are wearing orange. But I don't care if the victim in this case was wearing a deer hide duster with the hair still on. My WIFE is out there. (wearing orange). A message needs to be sent. Like the campaign against drunk driving.
    I'll step down off my soap box now. But this happens every year. And they always call it a "hunting accident." Which it ain't.

    Edited to answer your question. No. Purely recreational users are not required to wear orange.
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Actually, if hunters did take the time to verify what they were about to shoot, the "Orange" requirement wouldn't be on the books. No excuse because they "Thought" it was a deer...idiots with buck fever or plain lazy and poor hunters.

    A good punishemnet would be to somehow padloack a a rack on their heads and kick them out in the hunting areas during deer season and see how fast they would be praying a hunter wouldn't "Mistake" them fer a deer.....:angry:
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 15,177 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    A good punishemnet would be to padloack a a rack on their heads and kick them out in the hunting areas during deer season and see how fast they would be praying a hunter wouldn't "Mistake" them fer a deer.....:angry:

    I'd just crawl into a bush and go to sleep until season was over...
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 4,808 Senior Member
    Okay, I concede negligent homicide. But he should get max penalty. This was no accident. Yes they require orange here and at the trailheads they even have signs recommending it. Don't know if this trail had the signs. We sometimes see hikers, mtn. bikers in our area. They almost always are wearing orange. But I don't care if the victim in this case was wearing a deer hide duster with the hair still on. My WIFE is out there. (wearing orange). A message needs to be sent. Like the campaign against drunk driving.
    I'll step down off my soap box now. But this happens every year. And they always call it a "hunting accident." Which it ain't.

    Edited to answer your question. No. Purely recreational users are not required to wear orange.

    Believe me, I'm NOT defending the DB that pulled the trigger.

    A couple years ago, there was a 16 year old kid black bear hunting in Washigton. He shot and killed a man (off trail) wearing a black coat. He wasn't charged with anything, as it was ruled an accident. I think there was a push to include EVERYONE in the woods in WA to wear orange during hunting season.
    The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me.

    Ayn Rand
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    And some folks say the 30-30 is only good as a 100 yard deer rifle...

    A little dark humor eh?
    I can do that. This incident does nothing to prove the efficacy of a 30 30 on DEER at over 100 yards. However. Every hiker this guy has shot was DRT
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    I'm not picking on hunters, but this kind of incident gives all gun owners/sportsmen a blackeye and makes us appear like a bunch of careless buffoons.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,773 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    I'm not picking on hunters, but this kind of incident gives all gun owners/sportsmen a blackeye and makes us appear like a bunch of careless buffoons.

    Agreed. Wooded areas are used for LOTS of activities not just hunting and people shouldn't have to worry about morons taking a shot at them just for being in the woods. That said, given that these incidents are way too common I limit my hiking and mountain biking to non-hunting season and areas where hunting is prohibited.

    BTW we do need more serious punishments for this kind of hunting negligence. There really is no excuse. Know your target and what's behind it, period. Even if the shooter doesn't serve jail time he should at a minimum it be convicted of a felony and never allowed to own a firearm again.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    I'm not picking on hunters, but this kind of incident gives all gun owners/sportsmen a blackeye and makes us appear like a bunch of careless buffoons.

    I agree. Somewhere there's a PETA blog blowing up with posters making glib comments about this. Speaking of PETA and to Wambli's point. My mind tends to work that way too. But in this case I just think that everyone is not like us and knowledgeable about the outdoors. But if the victim were a member of PETA would this incident be ironic or purely poetic justice?
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    Agreed. Wooded areas are used for LOTS of activities not just hunting and people shouldn't have to worry about morons taking a shot at them just for being in the woods. That said, given that these incidents are way too common I limit my hiking and mountain biking to non-hunting season and areas where hunting is prohibited.

    BTW we do need more serious punishments for this kind of hunting negligence. There really is no excuse. Know your target and what's behind it, period. Even if the shooter doesn't serve jail time he should at a minimum it be convicted of a felony and never allowed to own a firearm again.

    I guess it's true what they say about there being a first time for everything. We are in complete agreement.
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 15,335 Senior Member
    There is absolutely no excuse for the negligent homicide that the hunter committed, but I do have to say that hiking in the woods during hunting season without wearing orange is asking for trouble and obscenely stupid.

    I understand the concept of knowing your target and what is beyond but even a few hundred yards out in thick woods I can see a tiny flash of orange and know not to shoot anywhere in that area whereas, I would have never have noticed if they didn't have the orange on.

    This year, some idiot was in a camouflage pop-up blind but didn't mark it. That was hard to pick out in the distance. An orange flag would have been the smart thing to do. A couple years back, a couple and their grey/brown colored dog went hiking through the woods with no orange. The least they could have done was to put an orange handkerchief on the dog!

    I have never come close to shooting anyone out there, but it scares the crap out of me that people can be that stupid. Just the thought of shooting someone by mistake gives me the willies, and it pisses me off that people are so careless to go out in the woods like that during hunting season.
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 7,179 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    While I agree that this is uncalled for, it would be a stretch to call it murder....more like negligent homicide... ....
    Definitely. Murder requires the "intention" to kill.
    :that:
    JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
    THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 11,006 Senior Member
    Some lady was walking her dogs where we were elk hunting this fall, no orange on, the first we knew they were there her tawney brown dog was bum rushing MHS while he sat on a log, the dog hit the brakes just as I was bringing my rifle up, mom called off the dog just in time. I pretty much thought a wild canine or feline was attacking MHS until the dog hit the brakes, that was a fun adrenalin dump for all of us.

    No orange in the woods during a big game season is asinine.
    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 23,982 Senior Member
    So sad for the loss of life and for the family and friends who will grieve a long time because of stupidity and irresponsibility of the shooter.
    I would expect him to be arrested soon.

    ^that
    A Veteran is someone that served in the Military, it does not matter where they served.
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 23,982 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    While I agree that this is uncalled for, it would be a stretch to call it murder....more like negligent homicide... On one hand, the shooter failed to positively identify his target, which is negligent on his part, on the other hand the shootee was wandering around in the woods during deer season with no orange on, which was really stupid on his part.... there's a reason stupid hurts...and there's plenty of stupid to go around in this case....
    ^ that too
    A Veteran is someone that served in the Military, it does not matter where they served.
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,496 Senior Member
    This is one reason I like to limit the range on the shots I take while hunting, I like to know what is behind the game I am shooting at, at ranges of 200 meters plus, it is hard to know what will happen if your shot misses.
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 15,177 Senior Member
    DoctorWho wrote: »
    This is one reason I like to limit the range on the shots I take while hunting, I like to know what is behind the game I am shooting at, at ranges of 200 meters plus, it is hard to know what will happen if your shot misses.

    How so? I shoot deer fairly regularly at 300 yards +/- and there is never a question in my mind where that bullet is going to end up if I miss or have a shoot through....Long before any game ever shows up I've played all the angles and checked out the potential impact area thoroughly....If it's not completely safe I just move on or find another angle to shoot from.....just part of responsible hunting...
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • 5280 shooter II5280 shooter II Senior Member Posts: 3,923 Senior Member
    CHIRO1989 wrote: »
    No orange in the woods during a big game season is asinine.

    Ditto. CO regs say hunters HAVE to wear 500 sq in. on torso AND head, and STRONGLY recommends wearing it even if not hunting......too many people hunting here from states where they shoot at movement in the brush.

    Now this brings me to another gripe......This is my land, this is your land.....but there's hunting going on and there may be an idiot with a rifle.....DON'T be that idiot out sight-seeing w/o some orange on.....and please try to refrain from the area that you know is infused with hunters.....all you're doing is spooking the game.

    Reason I say this is cause of what happened to JB, CHIRO, and MHS.......and our group. People driving up a remote area that clearly weren't hunting......just driving around sight-seeing.
    God show's mercy on drunks and dumb animals.........two outa three ain't a bad score!
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 15,335 Senior Member
    Agreed. They are more than welcome to bird watch, hike, or whatever, but don't be a dumbass. It is like walking down the road at night while wearing dark clothing. It is a stupid idea.
  • bruchibruchi Senior Member Posts: 2,582 Senior Member
    Negligent homicide, okay, long prison term, yes and he gets to wear orange.
    If this post is non welcomed, I can always give you a recipe for making "tostones".
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,496 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    How so? I shoot deer fairly regularly at 300 yards +/- and there is never a question in my mind where that bullet is going to end up if I miss or have a shoot through....Long before any game ever shows up I've played all the angles and checked out the potential impact area thoroughly....If it's not completely safe I just move on or find another angle to shoot from.....just part of responsible hunting...

    Oh, so you can see fully well through bushes, trees, obstructions, even shadows under trees ? you are a better man than I am by far, I am also talking about the entire lay of the land, and a bullet can travel far faster and farther than I can see or run, 600 - 800 meters or so, .300 WSM, among others, so by the time it would take to walk an entire perimeter, a person or persons could walk up unknown to Me and get shot, it is not simply a matter of seeing at the range you are shooting at, but the farther distances a bullet can travel, especially the more powerful magnum rifle rounds.

    I think this is a way important part of hunter safety that is not emphasized enough.

    Edited to add:

    When I was at Jerry's place in Tennessee, We were shooting in a nearby field and at approximately 300 yards, maybe a bit more, I spotted a few people through the binoculars, and it is even harder to spot people when hunting, and many times the overall area is way larger and harder to cover visually, sometimes a square mile or so as even a spent bullet can injure someone.
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 15,177 Senior Member
    DoctorWho wrote: »
    Oh, so you can see fully well through bushes, trees, obstructions, even shadows under trees ? you are a better man than I am by far, I am also talking about the entire lay of the land, and a bullet can travel far faster and farther than I can see or run, 600 - 800 meters or so, .300 WSM, among others, so by the time it would take to walk an entire perimeter, a person or persons could walk up unknown to Me and get shot, it is not simply a matter of seeing at the range you are shooting at, but the farther distances a bullet can travel, especially the more powerful magnum rifle rounds.

    I think this is a way important part of hunter safety that is not emphasized enough.

    Edited to add:

    When I was at Jerry's place in Tennessee, We were shooting in a nearby field and at approximately 300 yards, maybe a bit more, I spotted a few people through the binoculars, and it is even harder to spot people when hunting, and many times the overall area is way larger and harder to cover visually, sometimes a square mile or so as even a spent bullet can injure someone.

    Doc..I suppose a lot of it depends on where you live....I live in Kansas and shoot over winter wheat fields that are a quarter section or larger in size normally bordered with hedge rows...Here you have to not only be concerned about whatever hunters may be out there, but livestock that may be around as well....by using a little common sense in setting up my hide and taking the lay of the land into consideration, I know exactly where that bullet is going to end up, should I miss or shoot through....safely buried in the ground....not sailing over the fence... If the deer isn't in an area that's absolutely safe to shoot into....you don't shoot....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    Ditto. CO regs say hunters HAVE to wear 500 sq in. on torso AND head, and STRONGLY recommends wearing it even if not hunting......too many people hunting here from states where they shoot at movement in the brush.

    Now this brings me to another gripe......This is my land, this is your land.....but there's hunting going on and there may be an idiot with a rifle.....DON'T be that idiot out sight-seeing w/o some orange on.....and please try to refrain from the area that you know is infused with hunters.....all you're doing is spooking the game.

    Reason I say this is cause of what happened to JB, CHIRO, and MHS.......and our group. People driving up a remote area that clearly weren't hunting......just driving around sight-seeing.

    In 1991 I was out there on a mule deer hunt. Some idiot shot a horse out from under a guide. It was in the paper. I've never used a guide. We used blaze orange panyairds(sp) and tied orange surveyor's tape in the stock's manes and tails. One guy even wore orange chaps.

    WE had a case here several years ago of a guy driving on I40 when a bullet came through his car door and hit him in the leg. The investigation concluded the bullet had first passed through a deer. Don't know if the shooter was aiming towards the freeway or not. But I've seen ricochets do some crazy things.
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.