Duck protester shot - Page 2

flappist · 19-03-2011, 07:55 PM

Now what would the view here be of a protester running onto the track at WSID or Heathcote during a drag race protesting against "hooning" and getting hurt in the process?

FPV8U · 19-03-2011, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

Now what would the view here be of a protester running onto the track at WSID or Heathcote during a drag race protesting against "hooning" and getting hurt in the process?

So far the majority on here are of the view the women was at fault for getting shot do you really think the result would be different in the above scenario?

fmc351 · 19-03-2011, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

Now what would the view here be of a protester running onto the track at WSID or Heathcote during a drag race protesting against "hooning" and getting hurt in the process?

Apples and oranges.

You can easily not pull a trigger, if youre not Elmer Fudd. Its much harder to pull up or swerve when a car is pushing the limits of grip.

g220ba · 19-03-2011, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

the 14 yr old should never have pulled the trigger. He certainly is not gun smart.

Tunnel vision, focusing solely on the target and not seeing anything else until it's too late?

Very harsh to say the kids not gun smart because of this incident.

flappist · 19-03-2011, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

Apples and oranges.

You can easily not pull a trigger, if youre not Elmer Fudd. Its much harder to pull up or swerve when a car is pushing the limits of grip.

Well in that you are such a secret person.

Let us all know about your personal experiences shooting and hunting, specifically ducks......

Or are you just blabbering on about something you know nothing about as usual.

pulpist · 19-03-2011, 08:12 PM

Did he bag the duck?

**Full Noise** · 19-03-2011, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pulpist

Did he bag the duck?

No. He bagged a pig.

Stefan · 19-03-2011, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

If I remember correctly you have a history on here as an anti-gunner.

So at what age should a person be able to hunt ducks?

Or fish?

Or harvest carrots? (murdering plants is such a crime, ask any tree hugger)

Food does not from from a magic machine in the back of Woolworths......

Shooting a gun and harvesting carrots are both very dangerous activities.

You have a history as been a redneck with a love for guns...opinions are like a/holes.

flappist · 19-03-2011, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Full Noise

No. He bagged a pig.

No pigs are quite intelligent, they are often difficult to shoot as they know not to stand in front of the big noisy stick.....

geckoGT · 19-03-2011, 08:23 PM

Firstly I will say that I believe it is the woman's own stupid fault, she knowingly put herself in harms way, against the law to make her point. She did this knowing the risk and the result was the price that she declared she was willing to pay by stepping into the water.

As for the boy, considering it seems she copped a few pellets, the spread was not enough for the shooter to not know that there was someone at risk of being hit. Any good gun operator not only knows where the target is but has a heightened awareness of who else is around and always puts safety first.

Who would have been at fault if he shot another duck hunter? I am tipping the boy would cop some criticism.

**SSD-85** · 19-03-2011, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Full Noise

No. He bagged a pig.

FGII-XR6 · 19-03-2011, 08:28 PM

no he got a stupid cow

Quote:

Originally Posted by pulpist

Did he bag the duck?

burkie_21 · 19-03-2011, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

One thing though, while the lady placed herself in that danger, the 14 yr old should never have pulled the trigger. He certainly is not gun smart.

i heard from friends shooting at the lake that she was waist deep in the water wearing camo gear!!! camo gear is ment to be worn so you don't get seen, obviously this worked for her cos he didn't see her. gun smart has nothing to do with sheer stupidity

TURBOTAXI · 19-03-2011, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pulpist

Did he bag the duck?

Lol @ this.

#4's within 50 meters will hurt allot.

I dont get why people would be hating on the duck shooting, I have seen some of the shooters practice at Frankston, many ducks have an excellent chance of escape.

**GasoLane** · 19-03-2011, 08:32 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-k5J4RxQdE

Sorry, but someone had to do it

flappist · 19-03-2011, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Firstly I will say that I believe it is the woman's own stupid fault, she knowingly put herself in harms way, against the law to make her point. She did this knowing the risk and the result was the price that she declared she was willing to pay by stepping into the water.

As for the boy, considering it seems she copped a few pellets, the spread was not enough for the shooter to not know that there was someone at risk of being hit. Any good gun operator not only knows where the target is but has a heightened awareness of who else is around and always puts safety first.

Who would have been at fault if he shot another duck hunter? I am tipping the boy would cop some criticism.

Yes but the duck hunters are not hiding and lurking in front of the targets trying to interfere.

The other point is the boy was exactly that, an inexperienced boy. There is only one way to gain experience and that is by doing.
If classroom lectures could replace real word experience there would be no need for P plates would there?

fmc351 · 19-03-2011, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

Well in that you are such a secret person.

Let us all know about your personal experiences shooting and hunting, specifically ducks......

Or are you just blabbering on about something you know nothing about as usual.

No wonder guns become harder and harder to own. More and more people oppose any sort of gun ownership. Less and less regard hunting as a viable and worthwhile pastime. We have limited support, publicly and politically.

Hope youre proud of yourself.

What youve just said is, that hunting is so terribly uncontrollable, that its highly likely that if a 12 yr old non hunting child wandered into bushland he could also be shot, despite not placing himself willingly in any danger. Yeah yeah, ducks. This wont simply be about ducks, it going to be about shooting and accidents in general.

The shot fired is pure reflex? Movement, sound? Or maybe its being completely oblivious to the area which will be effected by the shot? ie: Tunnel vision. Yeah, youd make a great teacher.

Sight the target, identify it, identify dangers (aware of all surroundings, where will the bullet go if I miss for example (yes Im aware it was a shotgun)), and then maybe shoot.

What about the banned ducks (non game species)? What a bout the laws regarding no shoot. How can you identify the species, and not notice its a human head?

Or how do you miss the human head within range of the spread of pellets? Even if as someone said, she was in camo, so are many hunters. If you cant see them, then you shouldnt be hunting either.

Oh i get it, most idiots out there shouldnt be, they ruin it for everyone else, god damned Rambos.

Seriously, do all hunters a favour and shut up. You do more harm than good.

**Full Noise** · 19-03-2011, 08:39 PM

I love this one.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/duc...-1226024497084

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bugger on the Herald Sun website

Bugger Posted at 12:29 PM Today
Does that count towards the hunters bag limit?
Comment 59 of 310

geckoGT · 19-03-2011, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burkie_21

i heard from friends shooting at the lake that she was waist deep in the water wearing camo gear!!! camo gear is ment to be worn so you don't get seen, obviously this worked for her cos he didn't see her. gun smart has nothing to do with sheer stupidity

Well, soldiers frequently identify people in one type of cam gear and decide to shoot them or not. Cam gear is not an invisibility suit.

Quote:

Yes but the duck hunters are not hiding and lurking in front of the targets trying to interfere.

The other point is the boy was exactly that, an inexperienced boy. There is only one way to gain experience and that is by doing.
If classroom lectures could replace real word experience there would be no need for P plates would there?

I agree completely, I am not saying the kid is solely at fault and should be strung up, I am just saying his youthful exuberance at taking the shot at the duck may have lead him to not taking as much care as he should.

Any accident is normally a combination of errors and normally although the law may say otherwise, realistically more than one person has a part responsibility. I think this situation is no different.

Just for the record for the benefit of others, as Flappist knows I do have a lot of experience with firearms of many different types, including shot guns.

flappist · 19-03-2011, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

No wonder guns become harder and harder to own. More and more people oppose any sort of gun ownership. Less and less regard hunting as a viable and worthwhile pastime. We have limited support, publicly and politically.

Hope youre proud of yourself.

What youve just said is, that hunting is so terribly uncontrollable, that its highly likely that if a 12 yr old non hunting child wandered into bushland he could also be shot, despite not placing himself willingly in any danger. Yeah yeah, ducks. This wont simply be about ducks, it going to be about shooting and accidents in general.

The shot fired is pure reflex? Movement, sound? Or maybe its being completely oblivious to the area which will be effected by the shot? ie: Tunnel vision. Yeah, youd make a great teacher.

Sight the target, identify it, identify dangers (aware of all surroundings, where will the bullet go if I miss for example (yes Im aware it was a shotgun)), and then maybe shoot.

What about the banned ducks (non game species)? What a bout the laws regarding no shoot. How can you identify the species, and not notice its a human head?

Or how do you miss the human head within range of the spread of pellets? Even if as someone said, she was in camo, so are many hunters. If you cant see them, then you shouldnt be hunting either.

Oh i get it, most idiots out there shouldnt be, they ruin it for everyone else, god damned Rambos.

Seriously, do all hunters a favour and shut up. You do more harm than good.

Yep as expected......all babble copied from somewhere else.

burkie_21 · 19-03-2011, 08:47 PM

maybe she should have worn the flouro that she had on in the photo

fmc351 · 19-03-2011, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 84ltd

Tunnel vision, focusing solely on the target and not seeing anything else until it's too late?

Very harsh to say the kids not gun smart because of this incident.

If you cant clearly see what youre shooting at, dont shoot. If you cant account for the spread of pellets, again, dont shoot. Wait for the right shot.

I dont know about your eyesight, but I can tell the difference between a duck, and a human head.

Jim Goose · 19-03-2011, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burkie_21

maybe she should have worn the flouro that she had on in the photo

Er... im guessing she was wearing it in the water to make herself visible... why would you put it on afterwards?

Serial_Fool · 19-03-2011, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

If you cant clearly see what youre shooting at, dont shoot. If you cant account for the spread of pellets, again, dont shoot. Wait for the right shot.

I dont know about your eyesight, but I can tell the difference between a duck, and a human head.

The article specifically says that the shooter was aiming for a "low-flying bird" at the time of the shooting. He didn't target her head intentionally, a few of the shots missed the bird and struck her.

She could have been hit at any time while drudging through the swamp inadvertently by the end of projectile's trajectory. It was only a matter of time.

**Full Noise** · 19-03-2011, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serial_Fool

The article specifically says that the shooter was aiming for a "low-flying bird" at the time of the shooting. He didn't target her head intentionally, a few of the shots missed the bird and struck her.

I’d say that would be fairly close to the mark.

Perhaps some of her supporters should see what someone looks like after they’ve “really” been shot with a shot gun.

**GasoLane** · 19-03-2011, 09:10 PM

Regardless of whether or not you like Duck hunting.....

If you know there are lots of people in a paddock/swamp with guns and...
Some of these people are city folk, like you, that go out only for Duck season and....
They all don't shoot as well as Michael Diamond and....
You go into the water before 10:00am and....
You stand in front of them....
There is a remote possibility you might get shot.

Auslandau · 19-03-2011, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

If you cant clearly see what youre shooting at, dont shoot. If you cant account for the spread of pellets, again, dont shoot. Wait for the right shot.

I dont know about your eyesight, but I can tell the difference between a duck, and a human head.

Just a couple of things .....

If you do not want to get shot ..... do not get between a gun and a target!

Duck shooting is not a spectator sport for this very reason.

I do not believe you were there so you (& I & others) cannot determine her level of stupidity and the competence of the shooter ........ if you have shot flying ducks before you would know the rapid movement that is involved in swiveling and leading the ducks before firing with 2 eyes open. If someone wants to jump in front of a gun, well they are really quite stupid.

Looking at her injuries ...... it looks to be a result of falling shrapnel rather than being lined up ..... but like yourself, I wasn't there so only speculating (Except her stupidity is an obvious)

Lets not get too personal in this discussion or thread will be closed ....... and not because I agree or disagree ......

fmc351 · 19-03-2011, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serial_Fool

The article specifically says that the shooter was aiming for a "low-flying bird" at the time of the shooting. He didn't target her head intentionally, a few of the shots missed the bird and struck her.

She could have been hit at any time while drudging through the swamp inadvertently by the end of projectile's trajectory. It was only a matter of time.

You need to read my first post (25).

I have not said she didnt contribute to her own situation, nor did I say the 14 yr old was deliberately targeting a human being. I did state that protesters should not be protesting in the way they do, its dumb and fraught with danger.

Many of my comments are on shooting in general, as that is the way this will play out.

I get it, he followed a duck, much like a skeet, and fired. Ive done that at Imbil, where the skeets come out of the trees, with trees everywhere. That range is in the bush, literally. However, that doesnt change the fact that some of his shot hit a woman. That in itself says something about shooting, that I as a shooter, dont want said. Its more ammo to the cause of banning hunting and guns.

She shouldnt have been there at all, let alone in the water. But anyone who says that is the way hunting is, is damaging the cause of hunting and gun ownership.

Honestly, gun owners are their own worst enemy.

Streets · 19-03-2011, 09:15 PM

g220ba · 19-03-2011, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

If you cant clearly see what youre shooting at, dont shoot. If you cant account for the spread of pellets, again, dont shoot. Wait for the right shot.

I don't see anything wrong with what you've said there but i posed the question as a possibility due to his inexeperience. I still believe it's a bit harsh to say he's not gun smart, i would say he's just not experienced.