Various precincts of the respectable press and the blogosphere having gotten wrapped around the axle regarding Vice President Cheney’s hunting accident, I thought a little background on quail hunting in Texas (by an actual Texas quail hunter!) might be in order.
It is not uncommon for a quail hunter to get “peppered”, due to the tendency of quail to fly somewhat erratically at relatively low levels. Unlike ducks and dove, which come in high, and pheasant, which take off vertically, quail often fly at head level. Not to mention that quail often live in brushy country where visibility can get a little short, and people tend to hunt them with open chokes which spread the pattern out. Serious injuries are rare, due to the small pellet size, open chokes, and (often) smaller gauge guns used by quail hunters.
I myself have just barely avoided shooting an actual pickup (bright red, thank you, about 20 yards away) while quail hunting, and have had a member of my party peppered (not by me, thank the gods). It was a pretty typical incident – a few stray pellets in the neck, no harm done. It is, in short, easy even for a very conscientious shooter to have an accident.
That said, based on the rumor and speculation in the press, it sounds like what happened to Mr. Whittington was a little more than your typical peppering. The length of his hospital stay alone points to more of a direct blast than a few stray pellets.
The typical rules of gun safety simply do not apply in their usual way when hunting upland game. To verify, to the same degree as with a rifle or pistol, that there is nothing at all in your line of fire before shooting would preclude wingshooting at quail, grouse, and other birds, where you are swinging your gun through a low-flying bird at high speed. For that reason, safety is assured to a large degree by having a disciplined shooting line – everyone stays more or less in line, and everyone knows where their zone of fire is.
The story is that Whittington came up behind Cheney, or that Cheney shot Whittington when he was behind him. Someone can come up behind another hunter and still be in his designated zone of fire, and everyone in the party has a responsibility to stay clear of each other and not show up where unexpected. Its possible but by no means certain that Vice President Cheney was only negligent, and that there was some contributory negligence by Mr. Whittington.
Here in Texas its just good manners to say that it is your fault if you get involved an accident like this (as Mr. Whittington has apparently done). That said, the crashing silence from the Vice President is a little disturbing. Not to blow this accident out of proportion (as the partisan press is busily doing), but he needs to stand up and take responsibility like a man.
The current complaint from the press that they were left out of the loop tells us a lot more about their self-regard, and about how well they have trained the Bush White House to treat them as enemies and tell them nothing, than it does about anything else. Still, the VP needs to hold a press conference, say his mea culpas, mix in some good words for Mr. Whittington, utter a few nostrums about gun safety, and generally be a gentleman (in the older sense of the word) about this.
UPDATE: Cheney finally takes the podium. Looks like the mea culpa I would expect of him.
RC, what is the game for practicing quail (if there is one)? Skeet? It can’t be trap. Just trying to get a handle on the fire zones from my sporting experience.
That said, the dude is lucky it was just a 28. With the injuries he has with that, a 20, 16, or – unlikely for quail – a 12 would have been a lot worse. Maybe the V-Prez should challenge himself and just stick to .410’s from now on.
I didn’t realise quail hunters were so willing to get a few pellets in the neck in pursuit of their sport. It is, I suppose, like rock climbers or downhill mountain bikers who are prepared to accept a few broken bones in pursuit of their sport. But somehow having the injury directly inflicted by another person’s error, rather than your own, would make it harder for me to accept.
I always found that the danger posed by wild animals when walking in, say, Montana, is slightly thrilling. And yet the equal danger posed by hunters, in say, New Hampshire, is rather depressing.
So if Whittington dies, will Cheney be charged with a felony?
Blame the press for the White House not notifying them. What’s odd is that it took so long for the press to be notified. What were they doing? Getting their stories straight? And the VP’s office thinks it’s perfectly normal to appoint the ranch owner his press secretary, just because she owns the property where it happened. Ya gotta wonder if the VP would have ever notified anyone.
And now the WH sits on the fact that Whittington had a heart attack.
Curiouser and curiouser.
Robert, I think you are missing something here.
The story I have heard, reported faithfully by all the British media, is that Dick Cheney goes around shooting innocent senior citizens, probably for fun. Given that we already know that Cheney is Darth Vader with fewer working body parts, this is highly plausible.
The last report I heard referred to Whittington as the “Cheney Victim” – and I have even seen the BBC’s take on it yet.
Why is it odd that it took a while for the press to be notified ,who the hell are the press.It is more likely that everyone was concerned about the injured man,this kind of inconsiderate act goes on at accidents all the time,people have even been known to call ambulances first.
Yes, obviously it was an evil plot by the NeoCons, in conjunction with the secret armanents division of Halliburton – you know, the one based in an inactive volcano crater – who developed special birdshot pellets that can induce a heart attack on hit. I mean, of course Dick Cheney won’t be prosecuted – that would just be too simple by half wouldn’t it? It’s far better that there be a complete White House coverup and that Mr Whittington be suitably silenced – dropped into the Vice President’s piranha tank would do it nicely I should think.
I don’t agree with quail hunting because they’re such cute little critters and are to small to bother with. I mean, what’s the point? I can see it with a wild boar or a pheasant, but a quail?
Now, if it had been Dan Quayle…
He doesn’t have to do squat. I couldn’t care less about Cheney’s or anyone else’s quail hunting, especially if this kind of accident is common and nobody died or got seriously injured.
People are getting blown off in Iraq, ambassies are getting torched by fanatics over cartoons yet I’m supposed to agonize about some rich old Texan getting peppered ? Please.
What’s the point? They’re good eating!
The WH should have told the press just becuse it was inevitable. But to hear the newsies howl now because “the people have a right to know” etc is bloody rich.
The biggest story of the entire month… globally…. is a bunch of cartoons that 95% of that press WILL NOT SHOW US. Presumably, we have “no right to know” what the focus of this enormous world-shaking story is.
It is all so clear. As long as it is a US administration, US soldiers, corporate baddies, or (let’s be fair) virually anyone ELSE in the gunsights, all for the truth. The INSTANT it is the press people themselves who are forced to directly and personally face the ramifications of what they print or broadcast……..
Well, we all see the answer, as clear as day, don’t we?
One could call it craven, pusillanimous, weaselly.
But the oft-used, but recently well under-used, basic term will do.
Cowards.
“The current complaint from the press that they were left out of the loop tells us a lot more about their self-regard, and about how well they have trained the Bush White House to treat them as enemies and tell them nothing, than it does about anything else.”
Exactly.
And tonight Charles Krauthammer said on FoxNews’ Special Report with Brit Hume that this was a press story about a press story. Even though the prima donnas of the White House press corps are busy being outraged, Dick Cheney wanted to avoid having Whittington and his family beseiged by reporters right off the bat. It’s too bad it was a slow news day with nothing really important happening … if you call Iran’s belligerence and nuke making nothing really important…
Quails or Whittingtons?
The quail looked like it might attack our Vice President’s party with its Beak of Mass destruction. So Mr Chaney exercised his fundamental human right of massive shock ‘n’ awe pre-emption with his precisely targetted smart weapon.
Unfortunately there is always a small risk of collateral damage to innocent bystanders in these cases; but Mr Whittington is only a damn lawyer anyhow and he’s 78. Does he want to live for ever already?
Mr Whittington commented: “It’s a privilege to be almost iced by the second most important man in the Greatest Hyperpower in the History of the Universe Ever. This is my last word on the matter. Or on anything.”
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11355784/
Oh, nonsense.
Sorry to be so blunt.
Having spent shot fall about you from 100 yards away is one thing, and I agree that this is not unusual. It is also not dangerous.
Being shot at a range of 30 yards, and having a pellet or pellets lodge next to the heart, for God’s sake, is very unusual, and speaks to a high degree of negligence on someone’s part. I don’t know who is at fault, but at least one person did something incredibly stupid.
Never ever let your gun
Pointed be at anyone . . . .
If the Vice President, bless his heart, doesn’t have enough awareness of his surroundings, or enough trigger control, to check fire when a person comes into his field of view, then he needs to quit bird hunting. All this talk about turning quickly to track the bird and not seeing Mr Whittington is just so much BS – you can see over the sights of a shotgun to know where the shot is going. If in doubt – don’t shoot. It’s just that simple.
The rules of gun safety apply everywhere. There is no upland-bird exception, and a hunter who gets qauil-fever to the extent that he/she will shoot at an uncertain target is a hunter who should be hunting alone, if at all. And the rules about gun safety are not ‘nostrums’, they are rules to live by when dealing with dangerous implements.
It makes no odds that Mr Whittington was shot with a 28-gauge vs a 12- or 20-gauge. Pellet velocities are the same, pellets sizes are the same, and a standard 28-gauge upland load carries 3/4 oz of shot, vs 1 oz for 12-gauge and 7/8 oz for 20-gauge. A 28-gauge will kill or maim every bit as bad as a larger-bore gun.
Someone in that field – maybe more than one person – was incredibly foolish and thoughtless, and you cannot wave that away. And this is a poor post indeed, for attempting to minimize what happened – oh, he only got shot a little bit, happens all the time, no big deal. Robert Clayton Dean, no offence, but as much as I enjoy upland bird hunting, I won’t be accepting any invitations from you.
Disappointed in all concerned.
llater,
llamas
Alfred E. Neumann wrote
‘RC, what is the game for practicing quail (if there is one)? Skeet? It can’t be trap. Just trying to get a handle on the fire zones from my sporting experience.’
Quali are the original STOL bird. They tend to take off more-or-less straight up, to a height of 8-12 feet, and then engage their vectored-thrust capability and accelerate horizontally. They reach Mach 1.5 in a horizontal distance of about 14 feet. A hunter can either snap-shoot them on the rise, which is like shooting at a bottle-rocket, or wait for them to plane out and hope that the shot can overtake the bird.
Skeet and trap are useless for quail practice. There are some sporting-clays birds which mimic some parts of the quail launch procedure, and there used to be a popular clay-target game called ‘crazy quail’ which tried to train for quail shooting, but generally, the only way to learn how to shoot them , is to shoot them.
llater,
llamas
RC, what is the game for practicing quail (if there is one)?
I mostly practice on quail.
Having spent shot fall about you from 100 yards away is one thing.
Catching a few hot pellets from closer range is also not unusual. This being Texas, the local news took a 28 gauge shotgun to the range loaded with whatever Cheney was shooting, and put up a pattern or two. They were three feet across at 30 yards. The pattern was also remarkably uniform – lots of pellets at the edge.
Never ever let your gun
Pointed be at anyone
As I tried to explain, this rule cannot be applied in the same way when upland bird hunting as with deer hunting. When you are swinging on a bird in brushy country, you don’t have time to check every single thing that passes past your muzzle. This is why you have a designated area that everyone is supposed to stay out of.
No question what happened to Whittington was worse than your average peppering, but only in a matter of degree.
No question also that Cheney deserves something of a beating for this. I wish he would step behind the ppdium and take his licks like a man.
It makes no odds that Mr Whittington was shot with a 28-gauge vs a 12- or 20-gauge.
Pellet velocity is the same, but pellet count is higher, so a 12 gauge at the same range is going to hit you with more pellets, doing more damage. There’s a reason why people use larger gauge shotguns, and its not because they enjoy the recoil.
RCD wrote:
‘No question also that Cheney deserves something of a beating for this. I wish he would step behind the ppdium and take his licks like a man.’
and on that, I think we can agree.
If it was not that he had shot a friend, and, presumably, a political ally, who does not care to press the issue, it would be a very different matter, and the Vice-President might well have faced charges for what he did. Personally, I think he should at the very least be cited, and made to appear in court, as a criminal matter. The court would likely decide that it was an accident rather than culpable negligence, and he’d get off with a stern talking-to. But he should be made to do the perp walk and get slapped around verbally by the judge, just as any other citizen would. If I shot a stranger, even “by accident”, I would be taken up by the gendarmes and the matter investigated. Why has he not been? Because it was his friend? Or because he is the V-P? I know things are different in Texas, but this stinks.
‘Never ever let your gun
Pointed be at anyone
As I tried to explain, this rule cannot be applied in the same way when upland bird hunting as with deer hunting. When you are swinging on a bird in brushy country, you don’t have time to check every single thing that passes past your muzzle. This is why you have a designated area that everyone is supposed to stay out of.
Once again, I’m sorry, but this is nonsense. You’re making excuses that don’t hold up. The rule applies, just the same. Maybe Mr Whittington should not have been where he was. But, to get to where he shot Mr Whittington, the V-P had to turn and swing his loaded gun through the line of shooters, to get behind himself. You may consider that sort of gun-handling to be acceptable, but that doesn’t make it so. Like I said – quail fever. No quail is worth the risk that that entails. If you can’t shoot the bird without sweeping your muzzles over your fellow hunters – let the bloody thing go. Even in Texas. Even if they are your buddies. This rule was born in driven-bird shoots 150 years ago, and for good reason, and the man who broke it was never asked back. And this accident just shows why it should still be a cast-iron rule today. Even in Texas. The V-P is bloody lucky that he’s not facing a charge of negligent homicide.
Still highly disappointed in all concerned.
llater,
llamas
Cheyney did issue a statement: Apologising (kind of) for having the wrong kind of license.
You have to admire the balls. The next day he offered a wimpy statement about giving Wittington a call, though.
You’re making excuses that don’t hold up. The rule applies, just the same.
We may be descending into semantics, but I will try one more time.
Everyone handling guns should endeavor to be sure they never point them at their friends.
When handling rifles and handguns, this rule is applied via the injunction to scrutinize your target and everything in the line of fire before shooting.
It is impossible to apply this level of scrutiny when wingshooting at upland game. You are covering a large zone when swinging on a bird, and you don’t have the time to confirm everything in your line of fire.
Thus, a different method of applying the rule applies, that of designated zones of fire. The shooter still has the responsibility to not shoot when he is aware of things in front of his muzzle he would rather not shoot (pickup trucks, elderly gentlemen, etc.). However, everyone shooting at quail does so without the high level of assurance that their line of fire is clear that they would have if, say, deer hunting.
The situation is very different, and so the ways and means of maintaining safety are different. To mechanically apply exactly the same safety techniques to wingshooting as you would to deer hunting would be to shut down quail hunting just as surely as requiring quail hunters to use center-fire rifles.
But, to get to where he shot Mr Whittington, the V-P had to turn and swing his loaded gun through the line of shooters, to get behind himself.
Maybe. We don’t know that, because we don’t know the details here. If, for example, Mr. Cheney is on the right end of the line, facing left, and Mr. Whittington is off to the right of the line, rejoining it, Mr. W would be behind Mr. C but still within his zone of fire, and Mr. C could swing on him without covering any other hunters.
IOW, there are scenarios that fit all the facts that do not involve egregious behavior by anyone.
I don’t know if that’s what happened, but neither does anyone else who wasn’t there.
J,
Most hunting accidents here in NH involve falling out of a tree stand, not getting shot at.
There is of course the occasional idiot, but I have people seemingly trying to kill me every day on the way to work. Mostly bad Boston drivers. I93 is far, far more dangerous than the woods.
This is Samizdata, where the facts are supoosed to get in the way of a good (or bad) tale. Hunting is far safer than boating, ORVs, skiing and Snowmobiling.
Regards
Earl, who is a New Hampshire resident hunter.
RCD – well, let’s not descend into semantics. And I agree, we were none of us there. I based what I said on the published statements of the ranch owner, who was there.
Even so, I would still say that the V-P, like any other bird hunter, should know where all the members of his party are at. If it had been some stranger – a photographer, let’s say, who snuck into cover to get a good picture of the V-P – then he might have some excuse, as honestly not expecting anyone to be where he was shooting. But Mr Whittington was his hunting partner, the V-P should know that he was bound to be around somewhere, and if he didn’t have a very good idea of where he was, he should not be shooting at anything until he did know. The very basis of a walk-up hunt is that it allows all the hunters to know and predict where all others will be, and where the safe firing zones will be, and if some member of the party wants to break off and hunt a separate covey out of the line, then all should know and understand what is going on. Obviously, that did not happen here, and others may bear some of the responsibility for that, but, in the end, it was Cheney’s finger on the trigger.
I don’t accept that there is an ‘upland bird’ exception to the basic rule of firearms safety – know your target and what is beyond. I have open before me a book on hunting published in England in 1912, which gives the following advice to young bird hunters:
‘When hunting in . . . cover, know where your neighbours are. Let game go before taking the slightest risk!‘
These basic rules have been known for a century or more, and nothing has changed to invalidate them. You’re suggesting that upland bird hunting is somehow different, and that a certain number of accidental shootings are both expected and acceptable. I don’t accept that – the only acceptable number of accidental shootings of this kind is zero, because these are not ‘accidents’ – they are carelessness born of a disregard of the most basic rule of firearms safety.
llater,
llamas
Hmmm, the VP accidently shot a lawyer, this is bad because…?
{/snark}
On the other hand, I’m pretty sure that there’s no constitutionally protected right to be a member of the White House Press Pool. Maybe if a few of the more egregiously stupid and insulting sort got their credential pulled it might smarten up the survivors. Or at least increase the level of civility which seems to be sorely lacking these days.
I think he should at the very least be cited, and made to appear in court, as a criminal matter.
Why? If Whitington wants to press charges or pursue civil litigation he can, otherwise, its not anyone else’s business. If I’m playing football with some friends and injure one of them is it automatically a criminal matter? Why would a hunting injury be any different?
The urge to get the state involved in matters that can be handled privately is what gets us into trouble.
The complaints about not calling a press conference and sending for the big media egos within milliseconds are idiotic. The most important concern should have been, and apparently was, that the injured man’s family hear about the accident first from someone other than David Gregory on national TV. They’re just ticked off because a local (Corpus Christi?) paper got the story first. Nothing was withheld improperly, nothing was distorted. End of story.
Shannon Love wrote:
‘I think he should at the very least be cited, and made to appear in court, as a criminal matter.
Why? If Whitington wants to press charges or pursue civil litigation he can, otherwise, its not anyone else’s business. If I’m playing football with some friends and injure one of them is it automatically a criminal matter? Why would a hunting injury be any different?’
Because someone was shot and seriously injured. And, unlike RCD, I do not accept that being shot and seriously injured is an acceptable and expected risk that goes along with upland-bird hunting.
When you play football with your friends, you accept that there’s a risk of injury that’s inherent to the game, that’s not the result of negligence or malice. That’s just how the game is. By your analogy, one of your football-playing friends could wander up to you and beat the living tar out of you, and (ATY) that would not be a crfiminal matter – you were playing football with your friends, after all.
By contrast, getting shot and seriously injured while out bird-hunting is not inherent to the game, and (IMHO) suggests gross carelessness which may rise to the level of negligence.
The criminal law is there precisely to remove the personal element from these matters. I doubt that Mr Whittington is inclined to sue the V-P, but that doesn’t change the potentially-serious nature of what the V-P did.
llater,
llamas
Are we sure Chenney didn’t think he was Quayle hunting?
Shannon Love,
The risk here is that the Vice President is the government in his public capacity.
I think that when it’s members of the government that are involved they must be held to the exact same reality that everyone else faces. They need the reality check.
I think the risk of involving government in this case is less than the risk of letting an official get a free pass for something that private citizens would be held to task for. Apparently, the Vice President actually had the police instructed to come back the next day to interview him. This has led to predictable speculation that alcohol is involved.
No Nick M, for that, they would have been hunting in a potatoe garden.
By contrast, getting shot and seriously injured while out bird-hunting is not inherent to the game, and (IMHO) suggests gross carelessness which may rise to the level of negligence.
I would agree with this. I think my posts above indicate this incident may go beyond the “usual” peppering incident. There are scenarios under which the VP was criminally negligent, and there are scenarios under which he was not. Much depends on facts not yet in evidence.
And, unlike RCD, I do not accept that being shot and seriously injured is an acceptable and expected risk that goes along with upland-bird hunting.
I don’t recall saying anything like that.
I don’t accept that there is an ‘upland bird’ exception to the basic rule of firearms safety – know your target and what is beyond.
I don’t think I have claimed that there is an exception. I have been trying to explain how the basic rule of firearms safety gets applied to quail hunting in a way that does not preclude quail hunting.
“Know your target” – with quail as with anything, make damn sure what you are pulling the trigger on is a quail.
“and what is beyond” – this part of the rule is implemented in some significant degree via a disciplined shooting line.
llamas, I guarantee you will never pull the trigger on a quail or grouse that is flying below the horizon if you apply the same scrutiny to what is beyond the bird that I do before I pull the trigger on a deer.
There is a lot of bird hunting in Texas, and around thirty or so of these accidents a year. I would be shocked if more than a handful of them were prosecuted, or should be prosecuted.
I don’t know if any of you heard this but Cheney did not even have a seven dollar license to hunt quail. Luckily you do not need not any licenses to hunt lawyers it Texas.
There are some perceptive posts here, as well as some which strain credulity. Cheney shot a man by accident. He is at fault. The victim is also responsible in that he did not make his presence known.
Upland game hunting is not like a firefight in Viet Nam. Any hunter has the obligation to be SURE of his target and background where the shot will impact. Light shotgun field loads are spent in about 200 yards. Heavy waterfowl loads in about 400 yards. I have news for those who think a 28 ga is a toy. It’s not and can kill you easily at close range. As several posters have noted, being blinded by stray shot is the major fear upland hunting.
Well, the prevention is simple wear safety orange and eye protection. DO NOT hunt or shoot into cover you cannot see where the shot will impact. If you really have to hunt tall thick brush, send one hunter in and all else stay the hell back. A whistle is a nice touch to let your friends know where you are. Personally, I hate hunting with more than one other where I have to worry about other than left/right zones to fire in.
Focusing too intensely on the game is a real danger and leads to tunnel vision where one just swings on the bird and fires. This has maimed and killed many hunters. I suspect this is what happened with Cheney, coupled with a man in an unexpected location in the brush and with the sun in his face. Quail are fast as hell and response time is short. All contributed to an accident, hopefully Mr. Whittington will survive unimpaired. He’s lucky not to be blind. I know Cheney feels awful for the accident – it could have been worse.
As for the MSM Media Whores? f**k them and the horses they rode in on. Why don’t these pimps ask Teddy Kennedy about Mary Jo Kopechne left to slowly drown? Why did Saint Hillary suppress Vince Foster’s suicide note for 30 hours and the Rose law firm billing records under Subpoena for two years? These jackals have zero credibility.
I don’t see anything in Mr. McGilvray’s comment I would disagree with.
Clearly Mr. Cheney was, at a minimum, negligent (I think my original post sets this out as his best case scenario), and there is every possiblity that Mr. Whittington was contributorily negligent as well.
llamas,
And, unlike RCD, I do not accept that being shot and seriously injured is an acceptable and expected risk that goes along with upland-bird hunting.
You kidding right? Do you honestly believe that millions of hunters go out every year oblivious to the trivial but non-zero risk that they might get accidentally shot? Have you noticed the heavy use of bright orange hunting clothing? Why do you think they wear that stuff? Do you think it is like golf and plaid?
You obviously have absolutely no clue about quail hunting and think that it can be governed by the same rules and risk as firing range. Well, it can’t. There is nothing, absolutely nothing in this story that indicate “gross” negligence on the part of anybody. I would guess that both Cheney and Whittington each made an otherwise trivial mistake that only in combination at the exact right time led to an accident. Most accident occur that way.
In the state of Texas there are a couple of dozen accidental hunting shootings (with millions of hunters) every year. Very few provoke any kind of investigation. Why should they? A gun is just a tool. There is no reason to believe that either malice or negligence was involved every time someone gets injured by any tool. The only reason people are up in arms is because the tool involved was (cue dramatic music) a GUN!
If Jimmy Carter cold cocked someone with a framing hammer while doing his Habitat for Humanity thing, would you immediately conclude he was “grossly” negligent? After all, in construction as in hunting, if everyone perfectly follows the rules, pays perfect attention and never makes a mistake no matter how small, nobody would ever get hurt building houses.
Shannon,
No one in his or her right mind goes hunting expecting to get shot. Even having spent shot dropped on you is unacceptable, as I am sure you have surmised.
My bird hunting is mainly on private clubs. Safety orange is mandatory. I have an orange vest and a hat. Next year eye protection is mandatory, so I’ll get some decent glasses. I realy value my eyesight.
Hunting is definitely not like the firing line at a range. The Cheney – Whittington shooting is an accident, preventable only by hindsight. The term negligent applies only in that both men made mistakes. The only thing that makes this accident a big deal is that the left can use it to bash Bush & Cheney. If Ted Kennnedy shot and ate his children on TV, the left would exonerate him.
I’m sure hunting quail is safer than putting glass panels on your roof to harness solar electricity.
My grandfather used to shoot quail from the hip, not from the shoulder, and I was told he was pretty good at it. My experience has been limited to eating the damn things, and personally I’d much rather have chicken, especially since you often bite into those little pellets. There is lots more meat on chicken, too.
It’s too bad Cheney didn’t shoot one of those officious reporters instead of the hardy old lawyer, aged 78… That would have been more of a public service than an accident.
As Cheney might say, the White House press corps can go fuck themselves.
As Cheney might say, the White House press corps can go fuck themselves.
Shannon Love wrote:
‘You obviously have absolutely no clue about quail hunting and think that it can be governed by the same rules and risk as firing range. Well, it can’t. There is nothing, absolutely nothing in this story that indicate “gross” negligence on the part of anybody. I would guess that both Cheney and Whittington each made an otherwise trivial mistake that only in combination at the exact right time led to an accident. Most accident occur that way.’
Well, my, my, my.
If Samizdata allowed it, I would post pictures of the mounted quail in my study. Also woodcock, pheasant, and so forth. All of them taken by these two hands, a dimming right eye, and a trusty Winchester.
It’s precisely because I do ‘have a clue’ about quail and other upland bird hunting that I said what I said. The detailed safety rules may not be precisely the same as they are at the skeet range, but the basic rule – know your target and what is beyond – is unchanged. It is the strict observance of that rule, which supercedes all others, that has made upland hunting the (relatively) very safe sport that it is. But that does not mean that the very-rare accidents that do occur are acceptable, or expected. Or ‘trivial’.
You call the mistakes that either the V-P, or Mr Whittington, or both, made, ‘trivial’. Well, I consider that the weight of a mistake is measured by the results, and the result of those ‘trivial’ mistakes lies in a hospital bed in Corpus Christi, really quite seriously ill.
No hunter, of whatever sort, goes out ‘oblivious’ to the risk, however small, of shooting something that shouldn’t be shot. But awareness of the risk, however slight, does not absolve the hunter of the responsibility to do everything possible to make sure that this sort of incident does not occur. Once again – know your target and what is beyond. It’s really very simple. The V-P broke this basic rule. He was careless, and this serious injury resulted. Whether or not his carelessness rises to the level of negligence, I could not say, and neither can you, because we were neither of us there. But I don’t see why he should get a ‘bye’ on this. A man is shot in the heart, yet it was decided, within hours, that this was an ‘accident’ and no-one is to blame?
Shooting your hunting buddies, or anyone else, is not inherent to the game of upland bird hunting, and, if the result of sufficient carelessness or reckless indifference, should be treated just like any other injury that results from such behaviour. If President Carter cold-cocks someone with a framing hammer while building a HoH house, we would at least look at the circumstances – was it an unforeseeable accident, or not?
As has been said, hunting is different than the target range, but I think those who say this may have (partly) the wrong end of the stick. Shooters who are used to shooting at the range can take some things for granted – that there will not be people downrange, that shot will always land where it will do no harm, that bullets will always end up in a backstop. There are fences, and walls, and barriers, to ensure that level of safety. When venturing afield, those inherent safety measures that one has become accustomed to are not there, and the shooter’s thinking must be adjusted accordingly.
I am pleased to see that the V-P manned-up and made a public staement expressing remorse and taking full responsibility for what happened. This is only what one would expect from anyone with some shred of honourable feeling. But expressing regret and accepting blame do not necessarily absolve him from the consequences of what he did.
llater,
llamas
Ten ways Dick Cheney can kill you
especially since you often bite into those little pellets
That’s why I always go for the head shot when I’m quail hunting.
As a lawyer, it will take superhuman restraint for Mr Whittington not to sue the Veep’s ass off for ‘shock and trauma and emotional distress’ etc etc. I know he’s pushing 80, but the compensation culture should be good for at least $10,000,000.
Maybe he’ll accept a Medal of Freedom in lieu?
Language Log on Cheney’s apology.
I’d heard somewhere that this was a released-bird hunt. I’ve been on one of these, and that was enough for me. I’m not saying that they should be against the law, but I am saying for they are for wussies. You might as well shoot the damn birds in their cages for all the challenge it presents.