Bird Brains

[Tiger in Spain 0]

Bird brains

Feb 16, 2006

by John McCaslin

"Does anyone in the mainstream media hunt? Or know anything about hunting? Why do I bother asking?" writes Humberto Fontova in a letter sent to The Beltway Beat. (Actually, sir, we loaded up on dove and duck over the New Year's holiday. Why do you ask?)

"'Buckshot, buckshot, buckshot,' the term referring to the ammunition used in Vice President Dick Cheney's hunting accident, appears everywhere from The Washington Post to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. So please listen up: If Harry Whittington had been hit in the face and chest at 30 yards with buckshot, he would have died instantly," Fontova writes.

"Instead he was hit with birdshot, OK? These are very small pellets powered by a light charge of powder designed to kill small, light-skinned game like quail. Buckshot gets its name because it's designed to kill 200-pound deer. Army Rangers and Marines use buckshot-loaded shotguns for close range combat. OK?"

CARELESS AS CHENEY

A poll of 883 South Dakota bird hunters, conducted before Vice President Dick Cheney's weekend hunting accident, asked: "Have you ever been peppered with shotgun BBs?"

It so happens 484 of the hunters, or about 55 percent, replied "yes." And 365 of them said they were wearing orange vests when sprayed.

The poll was conducted by Pheasant Country ("where pheasant hunters come to roost"), a Web site sponsored by the Sioux Falls Argus-Leader newspaper.

PASS THE TWEEZERS

As one gun rights advocate describes the crime scene, James and Sarah Brady, founders of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, were "dancing in blood" after Vice President Dick Cheney's hunting accident over the weekend.

(Perhaps one day I'll write about a well-known Washington reporter who peppered a fellow columnist with shotgun blast after aiming low at an elusive bird.)

James Brady, the former White House press secretary wounded alongside President Reagan by John Hinckley Jr., said after the vice president's embarrassing bird hunt: "Now I understand why Dick Cheney keeps asking me to go hunting with him."

Reacts Joe Waldron, executive director of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms: "Only Jim Brady would be allowed by the mainstream press to make such a crude and crass comment and not be called down for it."

<snip>

ready....aim....LINK

[LegalEagle 22]

There's not much value in that story.

Shotgun "BBs" are much bigger than 7 1/2 shot that was used.

If the question had been "How many of you have had birdshot penetrate through your skin?", the percentage would have dropped to single digits.

Cheney was at fault. He was negligent. This attorney he shot is covering for him. It was really amusing to hear an attorney (especially a rich one) get up and talk about "accidents" just happening. Attorneys don't know of any "accidents." We know about "negligence." If that attorney sued Cheney, it would be a "slam dunk" (like that term? *grin*) that the victim would be awarded damages.

Cheney was wrong. He handled the event wrong. He should be ashamed, but since he is all powerful, he isn't phased.

[Tigermike 3,050]

Legal, have you ever been bird hunting? I mean specifically quail hunting?

[LegalEagle 22]

Legal, have you ever been bird hunting?  I mean specifically quail hunting?

220890[/snapback]

Well, I walked behind my dad quail hunting from age 5 to 8 yr. At 8 years old I got my first shotgun. I have quail hunted, dove hunted, squirrel hunted, rabbit hunted, deer hunted, turkey hunted, grouse hunted, pheasant hunted, duck hunted, goose hunted, prairie chicken hunted. I have killed some of all listed above plus an occasional woodcock, Wilson's snipe, etc. as opportunity permitted.

I've sprayed enough lead in my life to contaminate the ground and water for many years to come.

Guess what, I have never been "stung" by a birdshot in my life, much less had one penetrate my skin.

When I was young, we always had liver and white pointers. My last bird dog was a Brittany Spaniel. I need two new knees and am currently unable to bird hunt.

If that answers your question, now what?

[Tigermike 3,050]

Legal, have you ever been bird hunting?  I mean specifically quail hunting?

220890[/snapback]

Well, I walked behind my dad quail hunting from age 5 to 8 yr. At 8 years old I got my first shotgun. I have quail hunted, dove hunted, squirrel hunted, rabbit hunted, deer hunted, turkey hunted, grouse hunted, pheasant hunted, duck hunted, goose hunted, prairie chicken hunted. I have killed some of all listed above plus an occasional woodcock, Wilson's snipe, etc. as opportunity permitted.

I've sprayed enough lead in my life to contaminate the ground and water for many years to come.

Guess what, I have never been "stung" by a birdshot in my life, much less had one penetrate my skin.

When I was young, we always had liver and white pointers. My last bird dog was a Brittany Spaniel. I need two new knees and am currently unable to bird hunt.

If that answers your question, now what?

220915[/snapback]

That's good, then that you know how to bird hunt. During all those hunts did you ever move up into a position where you were not supposed to be? If you had what would your Dad have said and done? If you did how long would you have had to wait to go on the next hunt?

My only point for asking is that you make the following value judgment:

Cheney was at fault.  He was negligent.  This attorney he shot is covering for him.  It was really amusing to hear an attorney (especially a rich one) get up and talk about "accidents" just happening.  Attorneys don't know of any "accidents."  We know about "negligence."  If that attorney sued Cheney, it would be a "slam dunk" (like that term? *grin*) that the victim would be awarded damages.

Cheney was wrong.  He handled the event wrong.  He should be ashamed, but since he is all powerful, he isn't phased.

220601[/snapback]

It would appear that is your partisan self talking rather than a logical thinking bird hunter.

I also started hunting at an early age. My great grandfather, grandfather, father and uncles all participated in my hunting education. They did their jobs before I ever was trusted completely to do what was right and correct. Not only correct for me but correct for the entire hunting party. I was fortunate that they were all very careful and did things correctly. If any of the younger boys/men started doing things incorrectly someone would speak up. Usually either my great grandfather or my grandfather. When they spoke everyone listened.

The hunting incident in Texas that you are so indignant about has been explained by all parties concerned, but you and the dems want to make it a scandal for the VP and therefore the entire Administration. It is a NON story. It is a NON scandal. No matter how high the horse is you want to ride in on, it is nothing more than an unfortunate hunting accident. Fortunately for all concerned the man was not injured more than he was.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Tigermike.......are you arguing with the ambulance chaser?

[LegalEagle 22]

PT, you are sooooo very wrong once again. NEVER in upland game bird hunting do you shoot to the side or behind you unless you use the utmost care to ensure that the bird has cleared the other hunters PRIOR TO leveling the gun on it.

Cheney was negligent. He is at fault. If he was sued, he would pay. End of story. This would be true if Bill Clinton shot him.

FMI - If Clinton had been hunting with Cheney and shot Cheney under the same set of facts, would you be defending Clinton the same as you are defending Cheney? Could you please make that answer under oath.

Oh, my knees, you ask. I wore 'em out praying for you PT!! *grin*

[Yep, I know I'm leaving myself open here for cheap shots. But none of you would take a cheap shot at me would you? ]

[Tigermike 3,050]

No I would never take a cheap shot ambulance chaser.

NEVER in upland game bird hunting do you shoot to the side or behind you unless you use the utmost care to ensure that the bird has cleared the other hunters PRIOR TO leveling the gun on it.

Cheney was negligent.  He is at fault.  If he was sued, he would pay.  End of story.  This would be true if Bill Clinton shot him.

FMI - If Clinton had been hunting with Cheney and shot Cheney under the same set of facts, would you be defending Clinton the same as you are defending Cheney?  Could you please make that answer under oath.

Oh, my knees, you ask.  I wore 'em out praying for you PT!! *grin*

[Yep, I know I'm leaving myself open here for cheap shots. But none of you would take a cheap shot at me would you?  ]

220932[/snapback]

See Legal you have unknowingly answered the question and killed your assumption.

The gentleman who was shot was not at that point in time actually hunting. He had finished his shots and was supposed to be well behind the shooters. When hunting in large parties everyone should know who the shooters are and where the dogs and shooters are. The shooters have responsibilities and those waiting to move up and shoot have responsibilities. If any of the hunting party do not follow the rules and abide by them then accidents can and do happen. For you to place blame on only the shooter is wrong.

BTW - You must be hunting those birds that have been caged their entire life. They sit on the ground and you almost have to kick them to make them "get up." I haven't hunted in years, but the last time I did, the birds were moving so fast that if I had not know before hand where all other hunters were and they knew where the shooter was no one would have ever shot a single bird. Those little buggers fly fast!

As far as what would and would not have happened if it had been Clinton & Cheney hunting. It would never happen. But Bill did shoot Monica and you dems have been screaming for years that it was no big deal.

[LegalEagle 22]

TM, I assume your last response was in jest. Nowhere will you find that the person pulling the trigger is not responsible to ensure it is a safe shot.

In my younger years when I was an avid quail hunter, we never wore orange. No one I was with ever got shot. We generally wore that "Carhart brown" but even wore camo. Today, most everyone would wear some orange. In a drunken stuper, I can see how someone could shoot a fellow hunter in the heart. Otherwise, nah.

Question, would the Secret Servicemen who know what happened, be entitled to any privilege against being placed under oath and being required to tell the truth?

You asked about quail on the ground. . . Do they fly?

[Tigermike 3,050]

TM, I assume your last response was in jest.  Nowhere will you find that the person pulling the trigger is not responsible to ensure it is a safe shot.

In my younger years when I was an avid quail hunter, we never wore orange.  No one I was with ever got shot.  We generally wore that "Carhart brown" but even wore camo.  Today, most everyone would wear some orange.  In a drunken stuper, I can see how someone could shoot a fellow hunter in the heart.  Otherwise, nah. 

Question, would the Secret Servicemen who know what happened, be entitled to any privilege against being placed under oath and being required to tell the truth? 

You asked about quail on the ground. . . Do they fly? 

220952[/snapback]

It seems that you wish to manufacture a scandal for the VP (for partisan reasons?) and place all blame on Cheney's hunting behavior, apparently without checking for all the facts. The Texas Parks and Wildlife reports that Mr. Whittington stopped to retrieve a downed bird, and was not in his position in the hunting line, nor did he let anyone know he had changed position and fallen behind. Mr. Whittington is guilty of a lapse of caution and good sense. I learned at an early age when hunting to know exactly where everyone in my party was, and I made sure that they knew where I was. Mr. Whittington, it seems, might be as much at fault as the Vice President. Either way it is really not an issue or a scandal is it?

There are several rules for hunting and I will not list them all here. But here are several:

1. If you are separated never never never walk up on someone without calling out first. On that point Mr. Whittington was in error.

2. There is a responsibility of all in the group to know each other's location at all times during the shoot. If I heard that from my Grandfather repeated once in the field, I heard it a thousand times. "If you don't know where your partners are, don't ever fire until you do." So on that point Cheney was in error.

3. In a line of hunters, each hunter has a responsibility to know where the hunter is on either side. Each hunter also has a responsibility maintain their place relative to the other hunters and not move into the line of fire. A hunter shooting at a bird on the move expects to have a certain field of fire based on these premises. It is no different from target shooting at the range. The "range safety officer" checks that the range if safe, declares the range is hot, and give permission to fire. This applies equally to a group of fifty military personnel or a group of two in the backyard. If another person knows you are shooting and wanders onto the range without notification, that person is liable to be shot. Not deserving to be shot, but it is a mistake to move into the line of fire. The inherent danger of upland bird or rabbit hunting versus deer hunting or target shooting is that the bird or rabbit is on the move, rapidly on the move.

[bigsixfive 328]

Ok, at first glance, this cracked me up:

But Bill did shoot Monica

Nowhere will you find that the person pulling the trigger is not responsible to ensure it is a safe shot.

Sorry, I've been up a while...

[Captain Liger 0]

PT, you are sooooo very wrong once again.  NEVER in upland game bird hunting do you shoot to the side or behind you unless you use the utmost care to ensure that the bird has cleared the other hunters PRIOR TO leveling the gun on it.

Cheney was negligent.  He is at fault.  If he was sued, he would pay.  End of story.  This would be true if Bill Clinton shot him.

FMI - If Clinton had been hunting with Cheney and shot Cheney under the same set of facts, would you be defending Clinton the same as you are defending Cheney?  Could you please make that answer under oath.

Oh, my knees, you ask.  I wore 'em out praying for you PT!! *grin*

[Yep, I know I'm leaving myself open here for cheap shots. But none of you would take a cheap shot at me would you?  ]

220932[/snapback]

Here's a novel idea: SHUT UP

[AUslug 1]

Last time I heard, Cheney didn't shoot the guy in the heart, the bird shoot traveled throw his system and ended up in the heart. Why is this still a story, Cheney didn't shoot the guy on purpose, the guy is on the mend. The only reason why it has gotten so much air time is because the White House Press Corp got scooped by some po dunk Texas newspaper and they got their panties in a wad.

[CCTAU 3,341]

If you've never been peppered with birdshot, then you've really never hunted birds on a large field. Shot goes up, shot comes down. But you are a pitiful lawyer if you think you could win this case. Hunting has always been a personal responsibility activity. Accidents are always a possibility. That is known by all involved. And if you are idioot enough to leave the group and then come bck unannounced, then you probably will get shot. And it really doesn't matter if it was the shooters mis-shot or not, YOU STILL GOT SHOT. So the level of responsibility in this case falls on the guy who hid in the bushes unannounced.

You would not win one penny. Especially in the state of Texas where people understand the nature of hunting. This is an unfortunate event that should high-lite the dangers of hunting even for the skilled. One must always be aware of their surroundings.

Snd yes, I know many folks who have been peppered and had the shot enter their skin.

And as for you liberal statement of polluting the ground with shot, that's bullshirt and has NEVER been proven. Ducks do not eat the lead shot to their demise. The studies were crap, but the libbies jumped on it. All they did was create a more lucrative market for shot makers.

[LegalEagle 22]

TM and CCTAU or whatever your name is.

You don't know squat about hunting if you think it is not Cheney's fault for shooting the guy.

Once again, I can guarantee you that he would win damages against Cheney if he sued.

It's not the guy's fault for looking for his downed bird, and Cheney was responsible for knowing where he is at all times by your own admission.

It is amazing that the radical Republican blinders extend this far. Why have none of you stated that Bill Clinton would not be at fault under the same circumstances?

BTW, I lived in Texas and quail hunted in Texas. I have never been with anyone who has had their skin penetrated with birdshot.

I have hunted in fields of 200+ acres. I don't know what you call a large field.

If I was hunting with you guys, I'm sure I'd be shot to hamburger, probably intentionally. If you hunt with folks who have their skin penetrated with shot, then you must be the shooter.

[LegalEagle 22]

Here's your Texas Hunter Safety Course

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/learning/hunte...ics/index.phtml

In here you will find:

Consider all of your responsibilities

Be prepared and know your limitations

Clearly identify your target and what lies in front or it and beyond it before you shoot

Never lose self-control

Always follow the 4 c's: careful, considerate, capable and courteous

Never drink alcohol or use drugs before or while hunting

clearly identify your target

remain ethical and safe at all times

Avoid hill top shots, or shots with an obscure background.

Look around and see who or what might be in the line of fire

Perhaps you would like to review this website and point out where it says that Cheney was in the right by shooting the guy.

[LegalEagle 22]

Here's a view from someone who knows hunting:

http://www.norwichbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.d.../1024/LIFESTYLE

There is no excuse for shooting another person "by accident."

If our vice president had followed the most basic hunting safety rule -- positively identify your target and what is behind it -- he could have avoided this "shot heard round the world."

Well, I'm done on this one fellows. You can lead a mule to water BUT . . .

At least you have been exposed to the truth, learn from it or not.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

Give me a break, LE. No excuse for shooting another by accident? You've got to be out of your mind.

Not once have you mentioned the shootee had a little responsibility to bear in this accident. He is just as much responsible for getting shot as Cheney is for shooting him. I'll check that one off as blind partisan hatred for the man clouding your judgement.

[LegalEagle 22]

You are another person I will never go hunting with. One of us is blinded by political fevor and radicalism, but it is not I oh Spanish one.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

I see it for the accident it was, and accidents exactly like this one happen every hunting season. To pin the blame squarely on the shooter in this instance is wrong, and in this case, stems from a strong partisan bias clouding your judgement.

FYI, I have been a hunter for 30 something years. If it flys, runs, hops, slithers, or crawls; I've probably taken a shot at it. I can tell you from experience there is a strict discipline that must be maintained in the woods by everyone in the hunting party, and this is especially true in bird hunting. When the covey of birds is flushed, you have a split second to react or you miss the birds. You can't have people moving off all by themselves. That is inviting danger. Each person in that party has to know where the others are at all times and maintain that discipline throughout the hunt. They are all responsible for safety.

[LegalEagle 22]

I've got well more than 30 years hunting, but someone fresh out of a hunter safety course, would surely disagre with you.

I'm done with this. You aren't going to see the light, and I'm not going hunting with you or any of your irresponsible buddies that seek to make the victim out to be responsible for this shooting. I've shown you reference after reference WITH LINKS.

Bye now.

Damn, when will Spring Practice start?

[Captain Liger 0]

It is amazing that the radical Republican blinders extend this far.  Why have none of you stated that Bill Clinton would not be at fault under the same circumstances?

221076[/snapback]

It is equally amazing that looney liberals, such as yourself, have nothing better to whine about. Pathetic.

Maybe you should find out if the VP had a valid Texas hunting license on him as well. If he didn't then I'm sure you could trump up some charges on him since nothing will come of this simple hunting accident. Yes, simple. A mistake. An accident. Something done not on purpose.

Riddle me this couselor, when attending law school is it a requirement to be placed in an open MRI so as to extract ALL of one's common sense?

At any rate, turkey season is almost upon us. Wanna go sometime?

[quietfan 233]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11361657

Vice President Dick Cheney on Wednesday accepted full blame for shooting a fellow hunter and defended his decision to not publicly reveal the accident until the following day. He called it “one of the worst days of my life.”

“I’m the guy who pulled the trigger that fired the round that hit Harry,” Cheney told Fox News Channel....

“You can talk about all of the other conditions that exist at the time but that’s the bottom line and — it was not Harry’s fault,” he said. “You can’t blame anybody else. I’m the guy who pulled the trigger and shot my friend.”

Texas officials said the shooting was an accident, and no charges have been brought against the vice president.

So either 1) Harry Whittington (the vicitm) was not at fault, 2) Harry Whittington shares some of the blame, but Cheney doesn't know any better, or 3) Cheney knows Whittington shares part of the blame but is being dishonest (perhaps with good motives) in taking all the blame himself.

Frankly, I don't think what happened on the field is a big deal--hunting accidents unfortunately do happen all the time. From what I know now, I feel no reason to overly criticize Cheney's actions on the field. I'd like to think all hunters have 100% awareness of everything around them before they pull a trigger, but I know these sort of things happen many times around the country during hunting season(s). (Should further facts come out, such as if he was perhaps under the influence of alcohol or something, then I'd reconsider. But I'm not going to go there without further evidence)

The only reason for this story to be a big controversy is because of Cheney's actions after the accident. The story has legs because of his PR blunders following the accident.

If I had been in Cheney's position, I would have:

1) Followed Whittington to the hospital immediately out of concern, stayed clear of the actual medical staff in order to not impede treatment, but waited in the waiting room/lobby to find out as soon as possible how my friend was. I would not have just waited at the ranch to get a report.

2) While waiting on news of his condition, I would gotten in contact with the proper law enforcement authorities to report the accident and give my statement. At the very least, I would have had someone on my staff or the Secret Service make an immediate call to the Sheriff's office to find out what they needed me to do in that respect. I would have taken the initiative to contact them; I would not have made them come looking for me or asked them to make an appointment with me for the next day.

3) As Vice President, I would have known the story would have PR implications for my President and the Adminstration, so I would have check in with the White House personally as soon as possible. (If I didn't get the President himself, I would have at least talked to his staff members personally.)

4) If I felt too tired or emotional to face the press that evening, I would have at least issued a written statement to the press that evening and promised a live news conference before all reporters in the next 24-36 hours, depending on Whittingdon's condition. I would not have waited four days and then granted only a closed interview with only the most conservative of the major networks. Also, I would not have expected my gratious host, who is not a professional media consultant, to act as my frontwoman in breaking the story to the press.

5) I would not have simply enjoyed a quiet dinner at the ranch instead of doing all of the above.

* * * *

[For what it matters, I do not hunt, not that I have any problems with it--in fact I'm more than happy to enjoy all the good venison hunters will give me. It's just that my Dad was a fisherman, not a hunter, and raised me as such. But again, I don't think the actions during the hunt are particularly controversial or overly newsworthy.]

[CCTAU 3,341]

TM and CCTAU or whatever your name is. 

You don't know squat about hunting if you think it is not Cheney's fault for shooting the guy.

Once again, I can guarantee you that he would win damages against Cheney if he sued.

It's not the guy's fault for looking for his downed bird, and Cheney was responsible for knowing where he is at all times by your own admission. 

It is amazing that the radical Republican blinders extend this far.  Why have none of you stated that Bill Clinton would not be at fault under the same circumstances?

BTW, I lived in Texas and quail hunted in Texas.  I have never been with anyone who has had their skin penetrated with birdshot.

I have hunted in fields of 200+ acres.  I don't know what you call a large field.

If I was hunting with you guys, I'm sure I'd be shot to hamburger, probably intentionally.  If you hunt with folks who have their skin penetrated with shot, then you must be the shooter.

221076[/snapback]

You look at things thru your lawyer eyes. How many of these "accidents" are taken to court each year? Not many. Because under the law and under the definition of an "ACCIDENT," these things happen. One always hopes that this type of thng never happens to them, but it is a possibility for all hunters. Sure you may have gone hunting a time or two. But those of us who consistently spend time hunting and shooting as a sport or for just plain fun, have at one time or another been peppered with shot. Birds do not always fly straight up and humans do not always make the best decisions. But to think you would get one penney out of this........

Just pretty much proves you have been living the "blood-sucker" lifestyle too long.

And don't worry. You would never be invited to hunt anywhere I hunt. Libbies are not allowed. We don't spend dirty money.

Now. Go and sue somebody.........

[quietfan 233]

Slight digression of subject here, but...

While I personally don't think Whittington should sue Cheney based on the information we have at this time, I wouldn't be so quick to say he couldn't win his case if he did. In our litigious society, where someone can win a case against a restaurant because its coffee is too hot when spilled while driving, or when others can sue McDonald's for making them obese and not have the judge laugh them out of the court, anything can happen. I certainly think Whittinger has a stronger case than either of those two complaints!

[...but again, to me the issue isn't what happened in the field, it's how Cheney handled it after the shooting.]