Community > Advocacy, Agencies, Access
Trial sets precedent Verdict in grizzly bear shooting shows that people must jus
GoldTip:
--- Quote from: Atroxus on May 28, 2010, 12:37:40 PM ---
--- Quote from: GoldTip on May 28, 2010, 09:38:25 AM ---The key to this verdict as stated in the article is the bear was "40 yards away when it was shot and had not charged." That is a great plenty of distance for a bear to be away from you and remain quite handily out of harms way. I grew up on the western border of Glacier park. My parents still live there surrounded by national forests. In the last week my father has been within 40 yards of non charging grizzly bears 3 times. Hell, he could have re-carpeted his entire house with Grizzly hide twice and added in the 36x48 shop once with the non charging grizzlies he's had within 40 yards in the last 5 years. Hell, I was 15 yards from a Grizzly just last summer here in Washington. The point is, if you hunt in Grizzly country you can't be scared of them, period. Aware and respectful, yes, very much so. But this was a fair verdict, and to be honest, I am rather surprised they didn't nail him further if there was no evidence of a charge.
--- End quote ---
So by that logic if a bad guy with a knife is closing slowly from 21 feet you shouldn't shoot because he's not charging? I haven't done the math but I pretty sure that at 40 yards if the bear had charged it could have closed the distance pretty fast at over 30Mph, possibly fast enough to seriously injure or kill the guy before he could kill it. IMO any large predator that shows no fear of humans should be put down immediately before they make a snack out of one of us. We weren't there so the only one that really knows for sure how things went down is the guy that shot the bear. Who are we to say his life wasn't in danger. Obviously he *believed* it was, and reacted accordingly. Penalizing someone for acting in self defense even if that penalty is "only a misdemeanor" seems ludicrous to me.
--- End quote ---
Well in my opinion you've actually answered your own question. The bear was not advancing nor had it charged and therefore did not need to be shot. By your own description every black bear, cougar, or dog or human with a knife (within 21 feet) thats within 40 yards and doesn't display a fear of me should be shot. I really hope that is not what you are suggesting? Sure the bear could have charged and caused serious injury or killed the man, thats no reason to kill first and find out later. Evidently what happens later is you get charged with a misdemeanor and convicted. How long do you give the bear to not run away before you kill it? 5 seconds, 10 seconds? 2 minutes, 5 minutes? OK, if there bear has not demonstrated he is scared of me within the next 30 seconds, I'm gonna kill him just to make sure he doesn't attack me? That's just ludicrous. Maybe "someone" needs to stay outta the Grizzly woods, cause sure as hell, sooner or later your gonna find out, some of them ain't scared of you. They are going to guard their food and not run away. If he's a coming on then hell yeah, give him the dirt nap, but if he's just guarding his food, and not demonstrating a fear of you, I'm gonna convict you every time.
wolfbait:
Some people may not know bear behavior. most people have not been around to many grizzlies. Many go on what they have read or heard. Bottom line if a bear is showing agresive behavior at 40 yards in my opinion he don't have to long to live. I will not sacrifise my life trying to second guess any animal, two or four legged, and as far as the four legged predators I sure as hell would not run to WDFW AKA defenders of bullsh$t and tell them about it. By accident I got a little to close to a grizzly and some cubs last fall up the Twisp river, she was not a happy camper and neither was I, but she didn't force the issue so she is still alive. The grizzly bear issue is starting to look a lot like the wolf issue as far as defending ones self, and to me that is total BS.
rasbo:
be careful in some places,that gun fire is a dinner bell to a lot of griz
Wenatcheejay:
Guy should have done his part and been eaten like a good green person would have done. Human life is not worth such a precious Endangered Grizzly. :rolleyes:
ICEMAN:
Ya know what makes me sick about this whole thing is the frufru frilly bullcrap about the Jury and the Verdict.... Quote:“This verdict sent a message of healing and reconciliation.” Really?
They also elaborated on how wonderful it was to have a "hunter" on the jury. Really?
This is the whole problem. IMSAO (In my stupid ass opinion) the juries should be totally random from the population. You get what you get. Instead, they get a jury that has some hunter on it, and then feel that the verdict is "healing and reconciliatory".... What? Because a hunter was on the jury, now all hunters are OK with the verdict?
Can't we all just get along? :puke:
If some country boy shot a street thug in an innercity ghetto because he felt "threatened" or feared for his life, and we prosecuted the boy in the country.... should we worry about packing a jury and getting a healing and reconcilatory verdict? Too much political correctedness and posturing in my opinion. Seat a jury, get a finding, done. Quit politicizing the damned issues. :bash:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version