know what you are shooting?

[rubicon]

check this out www.rexkramer.com/bigdeer.wmv

[Skinny Shooter]

Yep, and check this out: Vice Pres Cheney shoots hunter (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/12/D8FNQ2T00.html)
And there weren't even any bushes around for "rustle" to hide in... :rolleyes:

[fabsroman]

I watched the video, and I still cannot understand what the problem was. It is kind of like a guy I knew that invited me to hunt on his property, but asked me only to shoot does. Isn't the whole dream about big game hunting shooting that big buck. I have no idea why the other guy was so bent out of shape that a huge buck was killed by his buddy. I also don't understand why they kept saying that he had to get his check book out. Was this a ranch where you have to pay for the deer you kill based upon the size of the deer? That really sucks.

I think people are taking hunting way too far. So many people are fixated on shooting the biggest buck, the most limits in a year, or the most waterfowl/birds/game compared to their buddy. I blame the media/hunting shows for a lot of this stuff.

I'm going to visit that website and see what the ranch is about.

As far as Cheney is concerned, my wife told me about it, and I could see how it might happen while upland hunting. However, I would need to know all the facts before forming an opinion.

[gd357]

That particular ranch is a regular stop for the Realtree bunch, and that guy was obviously on a "management" deer hunt where he was supposed to kill a mature 8 or 9 point buck (it sounds like they had a particular deer in mind). He evidently saw this deer at last light, and didn't look at the antlers, just shot. Instead of taking a mature cull buck, he shot a "trophy" class animal (that hunt costs a heck of a lot more, possibly based on the score of the rack). The hunt probably took place in the pre-rut, and the idea behind cull hunts is to take lesser deer out of the herd before most of the breeding takes place. Woops.:rolleyes:

gd

[gd357]

I looked up the pricing on their web site, here it is.

Trophy Fees - Hunts Types Available
140-150 B&C $100/inch - Management Hunt - up to 140 B&C
150-160 B&C $200/inch - Limited Hunt - up to 155 B&C
160-170 B&C $300/inch - Super Hunt - Unlimited
170 B&C + $400/inch

Evidently this guy was after a $100/inch deer and probably shot one that was $300 or $400/inch (according to rexkramer.com that bad judgement call cost him an extra $14,570)

A bigger concern is why everyone in the truck has a beer - the driver included.:( :mad:

gd

[M.T. Pockets]

It's not a place I'll be going to hunt anytime soon. If they want the guy to shoot a particular deer, maybe they should have a "guide" from the ranch with him to tell him which one. I'm sure it's a legal hunt, but it just wouldn't be for me.

[fabsroman]

gd,

I looked at the price list last night, and I can assure you that I will never pay that kind of money to kill a deer, or anything else for that matter. Okay, let me rephrase that. I would have to be making over a million a year before I paid anything like that.

I understand the entire concept of taking "cull" bucks before the breeding season, but didn't think about it while watching the video. I just thought it was a regular old hunt and they just wanted the guy to kill a "cull" buck that they saw while they were out hunting the day before.

Regarding the beers in their hands, I find it rather sad. There are way too many hunters that combine hunting and drinking together. That might even be worse than drinking and driving.

[gd357]

fabs,
Yeah, not good. The rexkramer website doesn't give me good feelings about that group at all. Whether handling firearms or a motor vehicle, alcohol is a bad idea. And they seem to be doing both at the same time.:rolleyes: I wouldn't be caught dead hunting on a place like that. (and i use the term hunting loosely)

If I'm gonna spend that much to go on a hunt, it'll be in Africa. And it'll be for a heck of a lot more than one animal.;)
And it'll be a long time before I can pull that off - if ever

gd

[rick savage]

that is why i don;t hunt high fence, why did;nt they put yellow ribbons on the ones to kill?

[McPat]

I'd like to comment on the "Cheney " thing. I asked my 11 year old daughter what was wrong with that picture after she had heard about it in school. She promptly replied that he didn't know what was beyond his target. Good for her. C'mon Dick!!!
McPat

[skeeter@ccia.com]

Maybe the VP thought upon hearing the word.."Quail"....that it was indeed the Dan one?.....humm..''...wonder what he did with his 'sign'?

I indeed feel for the man on the receiving end there. Once on a hunt, an x hunter friend of mine took a pop at a running bunny my beagle brought between us...it just so happened I was in a creek bottom over the knull....but upon hearing the shot and feeling the bb's on my jacket, I dove for the dirt..I love that heavy canvas outfit....

[gmherps]

Originally posted by Skinny Shooter
Yep, and check this out: Vice Pres Cheney shoots hunter (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/12/D8FNQ2T00.html)
And there weren't even any bushes around for "rustle" to hide in... :rolleyes:

Say again? He was in tall grass retrieving a bird.

[Skinny Shooter]

gmherps, that was a play off of the "that rustle in the bushes might really be "Russell".

[fabsroman]

Guys, we do not know all the facts here. I can see how something like this could happen.

For instance, lets say the guy who got shot, an attorney, leaves off the right side of the group to retrieve a downed bird, and the group continues to move forward and hunt. When the attorney goes to pick the bird up, the bird gets up again and flies all the way to the left backside of the hunting group. The attorney goes over there, picks up the now dead bird, and starts to return to the hunting group on the left side, not the right side from whence he came. Now, Cheney figures the attorney left the group on the right side. A quail gets up and starts flying to the left and then curves around and heads behind the group on the left side. Cheney is tracking the bird, never thinking that his buddy, the attorney is coming up from the left side and he pulls the trigger on the bird. Now, for those of us that bird hunt, we all know that when you pull the trigger, the shot will hit further on along the swing. Hence, Cheney might never have seen his buddy when he pulled the trigger.

You also have to ask yourself why the attorney didn't drop to the ground when he saw a bird flying between he and Cheney and Cheney swinging the gun after the bird. You can bet that I would be hitting the dirt in that circumstance. If you are in the dirt, there is very, very little chance of you getting hit by a fellow hunter tracking a flying target.

[TheeBadOne]

http://tommcmahon.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/accidents.gif

[fabsroman]

Great.

I have been trying to say for years that cars are more deadly than guns, yet we allow all types of people, even convicted felons, to use them. Heck, Maryland evens allows people to get their driver's license back after their 3rd DUI after waiting 18 months. They can get it back after their 4th DUI after waiting 24 months, some of which will probably be in jail.

[Skinny Shooter]

I'd rather be hunting quail with Dick Cheney than joyriding through Chappaquidick with Teddy Kennedy. :D :D :D

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v161/xm15e2/2.jpg

[rick savage]

you think he;ll look closer next time

[petey]

Analyze it all you want fabs....the man did dead wrong and it's a bad wrap for the whole hunting industry in my mind. Accidents shouldn't happen if you use your head. Believe it or not I haven't even followed the story, nor do I want to. After hearing a short clip about it on the radio on the way to work it kind of really made me mad....then I hear later they get a warning for not having the correct licenses/stamps? what's up with that?

Some people shouldn't even be allowed to hunt...which probably includes many of our "great" leaders. Just another great selling point for those anti's out there....Thanks Mr. Cheney:rolleyes: (My true opinion as the owner of this site)

[Skyline]

At one point in my life I did a lot of bird hunting. A lot of pheasant hunting with dogs. I saw a lot of close calls with guys swinging on birds that flushed..........they get excited. That's why there are rules and proper protocal on bird shoots. There were several mistakes made here.....by the shooter and the victim.

In a few weeks, days, hell tomorrow......something else will happen and this will go away, as it should. If this wasn't one of the fearless leaders that did it, it could hardly be called news.

This was unfortunate...............but oh well....lets get over it!

[fabsroman]

Petey,

I am not trying to analyze it, because I have no idea what the facts are. However, I know accidents happen and that is why they are called accidents. They happen with guns and they happen with cars, both of which can be deadly, and that is even with all the rules in place.

Personally, I think there would be a lot less car accidents if EVERYBODY obeyed the speed limit (and I don't mean by doing 10 mph over it), stopped at stop signs, and did not try to beat amber lights by accelerating. Have you, or anybody you know, ever been at fault in an auto accident?

As far as hunting goes, accidents do happen even when all the rules are followed. I have made a couple of mistakes in my time. One time, I was dove hunting. I just got to the farm and intended on hunting a standing corn field that was about 200 yards long and 80 yards wide. I started walking down one of its lengths and my brother started walking down the other length, figuring that we would set up on each side and watch each others back. Well, a dove flushed from the edge of the field and headed over the corn, but quartering away from me. I figured there was no way my brother could be that far in front of me, so I shot the bird. Little did I know that my uncle was hunting the field also. He was further up and I ended up shooting the leaves out of the tree above him. When my brother finally got to where my uncle was, my uncle asked him who was shooting on the other side of the field. Of course, my brother told him it was me and he could not believe it was me because I am the most safety conscious person and he figured I would never shoot that close to him. Problem was that I didn't even know he was there.

On another occassion, and idiot was still hunting with a bow during firearms season and he was wearing a ghillie suit that looked really good. After being on stand for several hours, probably around 5 hours, I saw a bush moving about 100 yards away. Back then, I was too poor to afford binos, so I brought the scope up to check it out. It took me a couple of minutes to find the orange fletching on his arrows before I finally figured it out. Meantime, the only thing that prevented his death was the mechanics of the gun, but if for any reason the hammer had come down on that gun, he would have been dead. Who is to blame on that one? I didn't follow the rule of not pointing my gun at anything I do not want to kill and he didn't follow the rule of wearing orange during firearms season. On top of that, he didn't have permission to hunt the farm.

Accidents will always happen, and it is easy to condemn somebody without knowing all the facts.

Yeah, my first impression was that the antis would be all over this, but then I thought that I am glad that we have a President and Vice President that hunt. I knew that Bush liked to hunt, but I didn't know that Cheney loved to hunt. I was glad to hear that news.

As far as the warning on the upland bird stamps is concerned, the Texas DNR had been giving warnings to everybody this year about the stamp because the law was just changed 5 months ago to require the stamp. The DNR treated Cheney and the rest of the group just as they would have treated any other hunter that did not have the stamp. Cheney's camp sent in the $7 for the stamp as soon as he got back.

Accidents happen eveyday, this one just made the news because it was the Vice President of the United States.

[skeeter@ccia.com]

We all know cheney didn't shoot him because he wanted something to do....just lucky thing situation wasn't in reverse..Cheney just needs to tell the reporters is all it was..accident...so they can go home now..untill he does so..it won't go away..
We all as hunters know not everyone in the woods are hunters and even on state game lands, are people just out for a walk..unaware of orange. You as a hunter will get a fine for being there without orange if is the season but a nonhunter is not required to wear it. Signs are posted in our just opened to hunting county parks that hunters wear orange...so should you.
I have confronted spring tky hunters moving through the woods without the orange req when moving..only to be told..oh..didn't know that...bigest problem in the sport is not everyone reads the darn rules...same goes with our local sportsmens club..read the rules..
Fabs...accidents don't happen...they are caused for what ever reason.

[Skinny Shooter]

My questions are why did it take so long for information to come out?
Why wasn't the president immediately notified that the Veep was the trigger puller in a hunting accident?
Why did it take an hour for any news of this incident to reach the President.

Here's a timeline from MSNBC:

2/11/06:
4 p.m.: Vice President Cheney begins an afternoon quail hunt with four other hunters on the private Armstrong Ranch in south Texas. They had been hunting earlier in the day, but took a break for lunch.
6:30 p.m.: Cheney accidentally shoots fellow hunter Harry Whittington while aiming for a bird. Secret Service agents and medical personnel with Cheney tend to wounds on Whittington’s face, neck and chest.

7:20 p.m.: An ambulance takes Whittington to Christus Spohn Hospital Kleburg.

7:30 p.m.: White House chief of staff Andrew Card tells President Bush there was an accident, but Card is unaware Cheney was involved.

7:50 p.m.: The head of the Secret Service office in McAllen, Texas, calls the Kenedy County sheriff to report the accident. The sheriff asks to speak to Cheney, and they schedule an interview for 9 a.m. Sunday. At the White House, presidential aide Karl Rove tells Bush that Cheney was the shooter, after talking to ranch owner Katharine Armstrong.

Almost an hour and a half later the sheriff is called??? What? :confused:
If this injured hunter was transported by EMS to the hospital, why wasn't LE sent to the scene because guns were involved? Why didn't the hospital notify LE that a patient came in with gunshot wounds. that's all pretty standard around these parts.

Saturday Evening:
Cheney and the rest of the hunting party sit down for dinner at the ranch. At some point, sheriff’s deputies who heard reports of the ambulance responding to an accident at the ranch stop at the front gate to see if anyone needs help, but are told no one needs assistance. The Secret Service earlier had said the deputies were seeking to interview Cheney, but on Tuesday they said that was not the case. Armstrong says no one at the dinner discussed announcing the accident to the public because they were all focused on Whittington’s well being.

What? The VP can't multi-task enough to think this needs to be reported??? If you're calm enough to sit down to dinner and enjoy a meal, you'd think he would have been on the horn to his boss.
How many "Aides" go with Cheney when he is on a trip?
Not one of them thought to make a statement? Why didn't the President's Office make a statement?

2/12/06
6 a.m.: White House press secretary Scott McClellan is awakened by a phone call from the White House situation room, informing him Cheney was the shooter. McClellan contacts the vice president’s office and urges that the information be made public quickly.
9 a.m.: Kenedy County sheriff’s deputies interview Cheney. Armstrong begins calling a reporter at the Corpus Christi Caller-Times and leaving messages. Armstrong says she told Cheney she wanted to tell the local paper what happened, and he agreed.

Noon: The reporter returns Armstrong’s call.

2:48 p.m.: The Corpus Christi Caller-Times posts a short report about the accident on its Web site after confirming the account with the vice president’s office.

3:34 p.m.: The Associated Press, following up on the local story, moves a news alert about the shooting.

Early Sunday evening: Cheney visits Whittington in the hospital before flying back to Washington.

2/13/06
6:20 p.m.: The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department issues its hunting accident report, which says the main contributing factor was a “hunter’s judgment factor” when Cheney sprayed his fellow hunter while aiming at flying birds. The report says both Cheney and Whittington were violating state game law because they did not have required $7 upland game bird stamps. Both are issued warning citations.

7:20 p.m.: The vice president’s office issues a statement saying it was not aware that Cheney needed the $7 stamp and that he has sent a check for that amount to the state.

Cheney's office staff allegedly took care of all permits and licenses needed for this hunt somehow that new stamp was overlooked by the state.

I have a strong dis-like for the white house press corps and media in general but I can't blame them for jumping all over Scott McClellan for not having better answers during his press conference. His repeated statements that you'll have to talk to the vice-presidents staff for more info just made me even more mad.
The handling of this incident has been a goof-up for the Bush Admin. If I shot another hunter and waited to notify LE or the PGC I'd be in serious trouble. How bad would GW have looked if a reporter would have blind-sided him on this before he had the full story? :rolleyes:

[fabsroman]

Skinny,

It is very easy to say "this should have been done and that should have been done". In essence, it is very easy to be a Monday morning quarterback, or for those of us that watch Monday night football, a Tuesday morning quarterback.

Do you think Cheney might have been in shock, denial, etc. During a crisis, there are seven stages that people go through, I cannot remember them all, and the length of time it takes to get through all of them depends on the individual person.

When you are on the outside of the entire situation, it is easy to see what should have been done. However, when you are on the inside, it isn't as easy.

Like I say, we all like to think we will do the right thing when the crap hits the fan, but until the time comes to make that decision, you cannot tell me for sure that you would do the right thing.


Skeeter,

Accidents do happen, and they are just that, accidents. An accident is something that is unintentional. Albeit, it might be the result of somebody not following the rules, etc.

For instance, how about the single car "accident" because of black ice? Is the driver truly at fault for that. How about when a tree falls in the middle of the road and causes an "accident," or should I just call that a crash?

In the, most accidents are caused because somebody is careless/negligent and/or not obeying the rules. However, sometimes accidents happen even though all the rules are followed and everybody was being extremely careful.

[Skinny Shooter]

Originally posted by fabsroman
Skinny,
It is very easy to say "this should have been done and that should have been done". In essence, it is very easy to be a Monday morning quarterback, or for those of us that watch Monday night football, a Tuesday morning quarterback.

Do you think Cheney might have been in shock, denial, etc. During a crisis, there are seven stages that people go through, I cannot remember them all, and the length of time it takes to get through all of them depends on the individual person.

When you are on the outside of the entire situation, it is easy to see what should have been done. However, when you are on the inside, it isn't as easy.
Fabs, you're dead on if it was you or I in this situation. I would have been in shock if it happened to me. But the last I heard the VP doesn't travel alone.
He had the SS as bodyguards. His "Handlers" and/or Aides control his schedule, etc. I don't believe for one minute that Professionals like the SS couldn't react quicker to notify their command center in DC or that the Aides didn't have their act together enough to call the Boss.
Not sure how to make that more clear so we may have to agree to disagree.

[fabsroman]

I'll agree with you that there were some level heads there at the time. However, I think you will agree that sometimes a little investigation needs to be done to make sure that the facts are conveyed to the public correctly. Look at the response time we got with the West Virginia miners, and look how that turned out. Sometimes, speed isn't all it is cracked up to be when it turns out that things are inaccurate.

Sure, I could crank out a tax return in an hour without ever talking to the client about grey areas, but you can bet there would be mistakes in it.

At the end of the day, it is easy for people to criticize when they aren't in the other person's shoes. We can criticize this administration on 9/11, the war in Afghanistan, the war in Irag, the response to Katrina, and now the Cheney's shooting. Seems as though this administration has a lot on its mind and it has had to deal with a bunch of stuff the previous administration did not. I don't blame them for holding the information.

Let me ask this question, would it be such a big deal if it was anybody other than the Vice President that shot somebody. This is a big deal, and we are making a "federal case" of it because it was the Vice President. Why should we be entitled to know this stuff immediately. Does it have any effect on the nation as a whole. Is it required that this type of information be divulged to the American public? Somehow, I don't think this has anything to do with National Security.

At the end of the day, we can be mad at Cheney for making our fight to keep firearms harder. We can be mad at him and the administration for not disclosing this info to us immediately. However, in the end, I think we would be better off trying to support the guy.

I too was mad when I first heard about this, but I put myself in Cheney's shoes and started to feel bad for him. Can you imagine shooting your friend by accident and then having to deal with all this? I am surprised the man is still sane. On top of all that, we have a man lying in a hospital bed, yet the nation's comedians can find humor in all this. Utterly insane.

At the end of the day, I will agree to disagree about this whole thing, but I think my position is pretty clear. I am going to support Cheney until I find out that he shot the guy on purpose.

[huntingvet]

Fabrosman, I have to admit that I agree with you 100%. Here's my take on the situation.

Facts - Cheney shoots a guy that is still in a hospital with a potentially serious complication.

Pretty darn close to fact though I can't prove it - Cheney feels terrible and is embarassed. If given the opportunity to repeat that one second in time, Cheney would have let that bird go. All of us have been close to being in similar situations whether we admit it or not. For most of us the difference lays in whether we pulled the trigger or not, which may not have involved a conscious decision. Our hunting heritage is better served by an administration that also likes to hunt.

Debatable - The situation was TOTALLY preventable. As Fabrosman stated, we weren't there. I would like to believe that I would have had better judgement than to swing on a fellow hunter while pulling the trigger, but I wasn't there. Hopefully, I'll never be in that situation.

What I think we call all agree on - Cheney wounding a friend while on a hunting trip has absolutely nothing to do with his ability to lead our country. More importantly, do I really have to know that Cheney pulled the trigger on a shotgun that propelled bird shot toward another individual named "Whittington" striking him in the face, neck and possibly body unintentially on a Saturday afternoon in Texas? If so, would I then need to know the number of shot used, high brass vs low brass, type and make of shotgun (maybe Winchester or Browning is to blame?), etc?

Unfortunately the poor guy suffered from a lack of judgement, may have seriously harmed his fellow hunter and yes may be bringing light to our hunting heritage. However, why does it matter to so many so much?

[fabsroman]

The more I listen to this stuff on the news, the more it drives me crazy. Now, it appears that the media is upset that Cheney did not apologize for telling them right away about the incident. Did I miss something? Was the media upset at Clinton when he didn't tell them right away about Monica? What happened between Monica and Clinton was actually a crime. Last I checked, unless Cheney was completely reckless, what he did was an accident and not even a crime.

Cheney apologized on national TV to his friend about shooting him, but did not apologize to the White House press corp for not informing them immediately.

Do you guys think he should apologize to the media for not informing them right away? Mind you, from what I get of the chronology, he did inform them within 24 hours.

[Skyline]

The media should get stuffed!

[huntingvet]

Amen!

[Tater]

No matter what he does the media will tear him up.

[Skinny Shooter]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060216/D8FQ27KO9.html

I want to make clear that I'm not faulting Cheney 100% for the shooting part. I'm not even upset about the gun issues that may result. The Anti's are always waiting in the wings with bared knives. My problem is with the way the aftermath has been handled. I may be solidly behind Bush in many areas but in this instance I'm not afraid to criticize this affair. However the opposition reacts to this, the administration is at fault for allowing it to get out of hand. And for allowing the VP to make the judgement call on how things should be handled.
How many people involved in these situations get to handle their own press releases? None.
He should have been the last person to initiate a press release. Amazing... I'm surprised that no one has picked up on this, especially you Fabs. How many clients get to make their own statements to the police without an attorney present? None if the attorney has anything to say about it. That attorney is a rational thinker who knows how to handle the situation.
Makes me wonder if there is a kernel of truth to the constant attacks by the Left that Cheney holds more power than Bush will admit.

I'll agree with you that there were some level heads there at the time. However, I think you will agree that sometimes a little investigation needs to be done to make sure that the facts are conveyed to the public correctly.

Fabs, how much time does it take to determine that Cheney accidentally shot someone? I think that was evident.
You need to re-read my post with the timeline.

Look at the response time we got with the West Virginia miners, and look how that turned out. Sometimes, speed isn't all it is cracked up to be when it turns out that things are inaccurate.

There is no comparison here between the two

At the end of the day, it is easy for people to criticize when they aren't in the other person's shoes. We can criticize this administration on 9/11, the war in Afghanistan, the war in Irag, the response to Katrina, and now the Cheney's shooting. Seems as though this administration has a lot on its mind and it has had to deal with a bunch of stuff the previous administration did not. I don't blame them for holding the information.

Actually I still stand behind my comments about how Katrina was handled. As to the withholding information part, I refer you back to the timeline. How can you sit down to dinner and not consider the public ramifications of what has happened?

In Cheney's own words: Cheney said he was concerned that if the story broke Saturday night when information was still coming in, some reports may have been inaccurate since it was a complicated story that most journalists had never dealt with before.

Which is why he shouldn't have been so involved in the decision making process.

Let me ask this question, would it be such a big deal if it was anybody other than the Vice President that shot somebody.

Absolutely it would be. As I stated in my last post, if you or I waited to report a shooting, we'd be in some serious trouble.

This is a big deal, and we are making a "federal case" of it because it was the Vice President. Why should we be entitled to know this stuff immediately. Does it have any effect on the nation as a whole. Is it required that this type of information be divulged to the American public? Somehow, I don't think this has anything to do with National Security.

It has to do with leadership and responsibility. And I don't think they handled this well.

I too was mad when I first heard about this, but I put myself in Cheney's shoes and started to feel bad for him. Can you imagine shooting your friend by accident and then having to deal with all this? I am surprised the man is still sane.

Thank you. You are making my point for me that he should have been removed from all decision-making about this incident.

At the end of the day, I will agree to disagree about this whole thing, but I think my position is pretty clear. I am going to support Cheney until I find out that he shot the guy on purpose.

Why was a private citizen allowed to make a statement to the press when the White House should have been at the forefront?

And to make myself clear, my arguments have nothing to do with the event. It is the improper handling of the aftermath.

[fabsroman]

Skinny,

I doubt you and I would be in any trouble whatsoever if we accidentally shot a hunting partner and forgot to call the media.

Now, if we accidentally shot a hunting partner and left them for dead without calling law enforcement, then we would be in deep do do.

I think you are confusing what is required of a person when they accidentally shoot somebody. Last I checked, phoning the media isn't on my list of things to do, and I don't think it should be on Cheney's list of things to do either. Do politicians have to phone the media when they get arrested for a DUI or they are involved in a serious auto accident that is their fault? I seriously doubt it. So, why does Cheney have to phone the media right after he pulls the trigger.

If I am not mistaken, the authorities were contacted in a timely manner and a timely investigation was done. Whittington even corroborated Cheney's account of the events. If they failed to contact the authorities for 24 hours, then I will agree with you. Problem is, I tried to bring up a timeline and I couldn't.

If your issue is merely a case of the media not being informed in a "timely" manner, then I think you are dead wrong. If by accident I shot a friend of mine, or a loved one, you can bet that I wouldn't want the media breathing down my neck right away. Heck, the media probably wouldn't be that fired up if it was me doing to shooting.

Don't fall for the liberal media's hype and spin on this.

[Skinny Shooter]

Hi Fabs, the problem with this internet stuff is it's hard to get a point across sometimes so bear with me. Not sure how you're getting that I'm only upset about the media...
I do think they (media) need to be notified in a timely manner but not in the way this situation has been handled.
More importantly, I want to know why there were delays in reporting it to the police and and why the person involved was allowed to call the shots (bad pun :D). I won't go through more of that because it's all in my posts.
Do you agree that someone other than Cheney should have been making the decisions? Would you allow a client to make decions in court? Bush deferred to Cheney which I believe was a mistake.

To say it again, Cheney should not have been as involved in the decision-making as he was.
Now if an Aide did the deed and Cheney was there, he had the impartiality as a 3rd party to make decisions.

The timeline I refer to is in one of my posts that has some of the text in red
From my previous posts:

7:50 p.m.: The head of the Secret Service office in McAllen, Texas, calls the Kenedy County sheriff to report the accident. The sheriff asks to speak to Cheney, and they schedule an interview for 9 a.m. Sunday. At the White House, presidential aide Karl Rove tells Bush that Cheney was the shooter, after talking to ranch owner Katharine Armstrong.

Almost an hour and a half later the sheriff is called??? What?
If this injured hunter was transported by EMS to the hospital, why wasn't LE sent to the scene because guns were involved? Why didn't the hospital notify LE that a patient came in with gunshot wounds. that's all pretty standard around these parts.
Something else to add, why did LE wait till morning to interview him? A regular citizen wouldn't have been given that luxury.
Now I don't subscribe to any of the kook theorys flying around that he was "drunk" or there was a woman involved. Blah, blah blah, which allegations at this time are pretty ridiculous.

you asked: Let me ask this question, would it be such a big deal if it was anybody other than the Vice President that shot somebody.

I responded: Absolutely it would be. As I stated in my last post, if you or I waited to report a shooting, we'd be in some serious trouble.

edited to add: Cheney hunting accident seen as a P.R. disaster (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11396608/)

Republican consultant Rich Galen, who was a senior adviser to both Newt Gingrich and former Vice President Dan Quayle, suggested that Cheney comes from an old school of thought dating to his days in the House in the 1980s “that you don’t respond to an attack from your opponent that raises the level of the discussion.”

“That entire doctrine has come and gone. Now the doctrine is you respond instantaneously, and where possible with a strong counterattack. A lot of that is because of the Internet, a lot of that is because of cable TV news,” Galen said.

On Cheney’s decision to leave it up to the ranch owner to tell a local paper the next day what happened, Galen said, “I’d use this as an example of how you can overthink a problem.”

“If you could rewind the clock, a better idea would be to get the vice president’s communications operations together with the president’s communications staff, and get something out, something on the wire, right away."


...As to Bush’s apparent willingness to let Cheney deal with the shooting problem himself, “There has never in American history been a White House where the president said to the vice president, ‘You handle the press,”’ Davis said.

Btw, if I make another post in this thread this dead horse just might come back to life so I better not. :D

Or, I've always been told to never debate an attorney which if I keep trying, we might beat the manbeef thread for total number of posts... ;)

[fabsroman]

Hey Skinny, you know us attorneys can talk and type all day. That is how we make our money.

I head the other night that law enforcement wasn't notified in a timely manner, and I do disagree with that. As far as waiting until Sunday to give a statement, remember that you always have the right to remain silent. Not that I have ever been put in this situation, but if a client of mine was arrested and I was called and the police wanted a statement right away, I would advise my client to keep his/her mouth shut until I spoke with him/her and that he/she could give a statement afterward. So, I don't think there was anything wrong with Cheney waiting until Sunday to give law enforcement a statement, but I do agree with you that law enforcement should have been notified right away.

I also agree that Cheney should not have been in charge of the entire situation, but I also do not think anybody in the White House should have been put in charge of the situation because they were not in Texas. At the end of the day, I do not know who was in Texas that might have been a good person to put in charge of the situation.

To sum it all up, I think failing to notify law enforcement in a timely fashion is a no no, but taking your time to give an accurate and investigated statement to law enforcement and the media is no crime.

[rubicon]

Come on Skinny, Dont quit now, Im enjoying watching you and Fabs agreeing to disagree so much I forgot what my opinion was! And Fabs I know you are up for at least a few more posts.

[fishnfrank]

The deer story is absalutley hilarious. They were at fault all the way around. He should have known what he was shooting at before he pulled the trigger. The owner should have either been there himself or provided a guide. Hope he wasn't married, "hey honey, I really screwed up. The deer hunt cost just a little more than I expected". Idiots. That's why I don't pay to hunt in the states. There are way too many deer just as big as that one shot on public land every year.

[M.T. Pockets]

I've been puzzled how the media missed the story from the beginning. Isn't there at least one media outlet in the country that has at least one full time reporter following the VP of the country everywhere he goes ? If it's so important for them to know what he's doing at all times maybe they should. Even if not by his side, don't you think the media knows where he is ? I seriously doubt that there wasn't anybody in the press that knew he was hunting on that ranch. Don't they have scanners ? Wasn't an ambulance called to the scene ? How do you keep that a secret ? It sounds to me that the press wants their stories handed to them instead of working for them.

As far as making a second call the the Sheriff's office at a later time. That is something I wouldn't have even thought of. When 911 calls are made, aren't they routed through the local Sheriff's office or State Patrol ? I would think one call to 911 to request an ambulance for a gunshot wound would be proper notice to the authorities. Like Skinny pointed out, hospitals are also required to notify law enforcement of gunshot wounds.

If there was any effort to avoid reporting it to law enforcement that would be wrong, but I don't see that as the case here. I don't see the need to report this to the media any sooner than they did. If they wanted this story they should have been covering the VP themselves, how the world do you hide an ambulance going to the scene where the VP is located ?

[Skinny Shooter]

Originally posted by rubicon
Come on Skinny, Dont quit now, Im enjoying watching you and Fabs agreeing to disagree so much I forgot what my opinion was! And Fabs I know you are up for at least a few more posts.


LOL :D :D

[fabsroman]

Rubicon,

You know I am always up for some more posting. Glad I actually like typing away at the computer, or my job would really suck. I think Skinny and I might have just agreed to agree.

[jl1966]

I think the fact that Cheney shot someone has been lost here in all the media bashing. I refuse to take up for anyone who does that. Suppose instead of a .28 Ga. he had been shooting a 12 with OO buck or a rifle? We would be talking about a death here. I believe target identification is one of the main rules of safe gunhandling. No matter your politics, it is inexcusable to pull the trigger on something you do not know what it is.

[fabsroman]

Okay, if he was shooting a 12 ga. with 00 buck or a rifle, I am going to assume that he wouldn't be swinging on a flushing bird, but would probably have time to think about the shot. Bird hunting is completely different than big game hunting unless you are trying to drive deer and shoot them when they get up, which I personally do not like because of the safety factor.

With upland bird hunting, a bird flushes and you have to shoot it before it gets out of range. You do not have the time to scan ahead of its flight and check to see if anybody is there. When it gets up, you mount your gun, you start tracking it, and when you get the muzzle in front of it you pull the trigger. If you shoot with one eye closed, like I do when I get ready to pull the trigger, you really have no peripheral vision, especially if it is a right to left bird and you are right handed. At the end of the day, you are using your memory of what is around you right before that bird flushes. If you are the man on the end of the line, that gives you the ability to swing all the way around.

As I have said a million times before, crap happens and we don't know all the facts on this one. He might be to blame and they both might be to blame for this accident. The rest of the hunters and the guide might also be to blame.

[Skyline]

Now I am a Canadian, so please bear with me, I might not be clear on this, but................as far as law enforcement agencies.............the VP would have Security Service there all the time. Aren't they considered a federal law enforcement agency and they would have been at the scene when it happened??

With 911 calls.............a call for an ambulance due to a gunshot wound should have generated a notification to the local law enforcement agency by the communications officer.......that is usually the policy. Calls to assist re a gunshot wound usually have paramedics asking "What are we getting into?" as well.

Personally I think this whole thing is an example of the media turning things into a frenzy....................I think there are probably more important things to concern ourselves with.

fabs is right...........mistakes were made.........S@#T Happens!

JMHO

[jl1966]

I am not a bird hunter as such. I have done some bird hunting, but very little. I must say however that I have never pulled the trigger without knowing what was behind my target. If I do not have time for that, then the bird gets away, better to pass the shot and be safe. The simple fact of the matter is that Cheney shot someone else, the gun was in his hands he pointed it at the other man and pulled the trigger. There is no excuse for it. If you went hunting with a bunch of guys and got blasted like this guy did, would you say @#$% happens? I am sure it was an accident, and Cheney is mortified. The fact remains, that he exhibited textbook poor gun and hunter safety.

[Skyline]

Well actually .....having guided lots of bird hunters and been a pretty ardent bird hunter myself, I have been nailed a few times by over- exuberent bird hunters swinging on birds and basically not doing what they were told. Fortunately nothing but stinging a couple stuck in the skin. This is most likely attributable to the fact that we were ususally wearing fairly heavy clothing. And, yes I basically did chock it up to "Oh well, S&%t Happens." No, I didn't hunt with the offending parties ever again.....ended the hunt for a couple of clients and verbally ripped a strip off them a mile wide.

Oh, I can tell you that the worst gun handling I see on a regualr basis is by bird hunters and guys on deer drives.................

What I mean is that................many pages later on every forum in the US and Canada...........and thrashed in the newspapers too death, I am tired of the subject!!!

I am a little more concerned now over what is going on in the middle east and in other parts of the world.

[fabsroman]

Like I said before, it is quite impossible to see everything when you are swinging on a bird. For example, if I am swinging right to left on a duck, and an eagle decides to come in from the left for a killing dive on this same duck, and the my shot is on target, as is the eagle, you can bet there will be a dead duck and a dead eagle, and I will have never seen that eagle. As I said before, it is almost impossible to make sure of the background, immediately before pulling the trigger, while upland hunting. The window to make the shot is about 2, maybe 3 seconds, depending on how quick the bird is and how it is moving. An upland hunter has to be aware of his/her surroundings all the time, and it doesn't help when people are walking all over the place.

I have had this issue with dove hunters moving all over the field instead of staying put.

At the end of the day, everybody should have gone for the downed bird and the hunting should have resumed afterward.

As previously stated, I believe there is a lot more for the media to worry about than Cheney and this accident. People die in sports and hobbies every day. Look at Dake Earnhardt. Stuff happens.

Now, lets worry about Iran getting nukes and China overpowering the US in both trade and military. Let's worry about the guys and gals overseas in the armed forces. See, the media isn't harping on that too much, because we don't get outraged about it and it isn't as controversial as it once was.

[Skyline]

fabs...........I totally agree.

[fabsroman]

SETTING THE (SAFETY) RECORD STRAIGHT . . . Vice President Dick Cheney’s hunting accident in Texas two weeks ago has generated immeasurable coverage by the media, some of which even poked fun at the incident. But while it was a prime opportunity to focus on hunter safety, it was almost as rare as a hunting accident to find safety statistics mentioned anywhere in the television or print media. In a column in Thursday’s New York Post, John Lott and Joni Ogle wrote, “A Nexis search of news stories found that in all the avalanche of news coverage none of the national television news broadcasts on [last] Sunday and Monday mentioned gun-hunters' safety record. Only three of the 76 newspaper and wire stories through Monday had mentioned anything about these accidents being rare.”

[Skyline]

You boys might enjoy this one.

Secret Service agents say Cheney was drunk when he shot lawyer
By DOUG THOMPSON
Feb 22, 2006, 07:35
Email this article
Printer friendly page

A written report from Secret Service agents guarding Vice President Dick Cheney when he shot Texas lawyer Harry Whittington on a hunting outing two weeks ago says Cheney was "clearly inebriated" at the time of the shooting.

Agents observed several members of the hunting party, including the Vice President, consuming alcohol before and during the hunting expedition, the report notes, and Cheney exhibited "visible signs" of impairment, including slurred speech and erratic actions, the report said.
According to those who have read the report and talked with others present at the outing, Cheney was drunk when he gunned down his friend and the day-and-a-half delay in allowing Texas law enforcement officials on the ranch where the shooting occurred gave all members of the hunting party time to sober up.

We talked with a number of administration officials who are privy to inside information on the Vice President's shooting "accident" and all admit Secret Service agents and others saw Cheney consume far more than the "one beer' he claimed he drank at lunch earlier that day.

"This was a South Texas hunt," says one White House aide. "Of course there was drinking. There's always drinking. Lots of it."

Cheney has a long history of alcohol abuse, including two convictions of driving under the influence when he was younger. Doctors tell me that someone like Cheney, who is taking blood thinners because of his history of heart attacks, could get legally drunk now after consuming just one drink.

If Cheney was legally drunk at the time of the shooting, he could be guilty of a felony under Texas law and the shooting, ruled an accident by a compliant Kenedy County Sheriff, would be a prosecutable offense.

But we will never know for sure because the owners of the Armstrong Ranch, where the shooting occurred, barred the sheriff's department from the property on the day of the shooting and Kenedy County Sheriff Ramon Salinas III agreed to wait until the next day to send deputies in to talk to those involved.

Sheriff's Captain Charles Kirk says he went to the Armstrong Ranch immediately after the shooting was reported on Saturday, February 11 but both he and a game warden were not allowed on the 50,000-acre property. He called Salinas who told him to forget about it and return to the station.

"I told him don't worry about it. I'll make a call," Salinas said. The sheriff claims he called another deputy who moonlights at the Armstrong ranch, said he was told it was "just an accident" and made the decision to wait until Sunday to investigate.

"We've known these people for years. They are honest and wouldn't call us, telling us a lie," Salinas said.

Like all elected officials in Kenedy County, Salinas owes his job to the backing and financial support of Katherine Armstrong, owner of the ranch and the county's largest employer.

"The Armstrongs rule Kenedy County like a fiefdom," says a former employee.

Secret Service officials also took possession of all tests on Whittington's blood at the hospitals where he was treated for his wounds. When asked if a blood alcohol test had been performed on Whittington, the doctors who treated him at Christus Spohn Hospital Memorial in Corpus Christi or the hospital in Kingsville refused to answer. One admits privately he was ordered by the Secret Service to "never discuss the case with the press."

It's a sure bet that is a private doctor who treated the victim of Cheney's reckless and drunken actions can't talk to the public then the memo that shows the Vice President was drunk as a skunk will never see the light of day.

Comment on this story

© Copyright 2006 by Capitol Hill Blue

We welcome reader comments:
Comment directly on this story in our blog or discuss other issues in ReaderRant.

[fabsroman]

I neither believe nor disbelieve that article.

There is way too much crap floating around in the media and the internet nowadays.

I would need to see the Secret Service "report."

[larryours]

Rubicon, gd, & M.T.
Hey guys, it sounds like hunting on that ranch is for "Ego" trips, I'd rather stay here in West Virginia and hunt for what ever is legal with my recurve, because what ever I kill with my recurve is a trophy to me, and awhole lot less expensive. I 'd almost bet my bottom dollar that the acorn fed spike buck I killed last fall, tasted better than the $14,570 buck. I know every one would like to kill a big buck, but to pay that much money to kill a big buck is like raping our hunting privilege, and murder for hire. It just goes against the grain, I can see paying a reasonable fee for the privilege to hunt on someone's property, to help off set property taxes, but when you get into paying x amount of dollars for a
certain animal, then, that's getting above and beyond hunting.

[rick savage]

diffirent strokes for different folks.forget cheney let;s hog hunt

[NoHarm]

Paying money to go and kill one of your fellow creatures of creation. Is that GOOD or evil?

[Tater]

I smell a troll:eek:

[TreeDoc]

Originally posted by NoHarm
Paying money to go and kill one of your fellow creatures of creation. Is that GOOD or evil?

That would be GOOD, food isn't free and there's plenty of room for all of God's creatures.........






....right next to the mashed potatos!

[captain2k_ca]

Originally posted by TreeDoc
That would be GOOD, food isn't free and there's plenty of room for all of God's creatures.........






....right next to the mashed potatos!


Don't forget the gravy.......

Tho I must say I prefer MANbeef

[DelDuck]

Originally posted by Tater
I smell a troll:eek:

Me too. :eek:

[muledeer]

Hmmmm taters and muledeer.
muledeer

[TheeBadOne]

http://members.aol.com/drewmaenza/trollhou.jpg

[Classicvette63]

If the ranch owner wants sympathy, it's in the dictionary right between scat and syhphillis. This crap, and that is exactly what it is, of having a fine line between which bucks you can shoot and which you can't has about worn out my patience. If you hunt long enough, you will be surprised by how big or how little a rack is once you are actually standing over it. It happens to everyone. Not knowing your target doesn't fly here. That ridiculous argument can be taken to any extreme. Ever shoot a doe that turned out to be a "button" buck? Ever shoot a "buck" with horns that didn't have the equipment out back?

Beer and guns have a lot in common. Nowadays a lot of folks make assumptions just from the mere mention of them. Firearms do not equate a trigger happy lunatic just as beer does not equate to a drunken alcoholic. If those guys were drinking all day, that is bad. If they were just having one at the end of a long day hunting, pass me one. Been there, done that.