Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by coonrad, Nov 21, 2004.
Good call Rowdy! My anti-gun friends are e-mailing me "see"!!?!?!Pfttt! Just makes my blood boil.
Yeah, I tried to stay away from bringing up the basics on this. Figured it would spawn a new debate. But, semi auto's aren't needed at all while hunting big game. One shot placement should bring it down. If not, a quick hit of the bolt and you're reloaded. Don't need to fire as fast as I can pull the trigger (which to date, I've not had to drop a deer or elk with two shots, knock on wood). I agree, he was out with other intentions. Especially since it was private property, and sounds like a private treestand. My best guess there was a "what are you doing here, this is private property" and up went the gun shots. Probably not on the hunters end, but the guy with the best shooting platform. Very sad indeed. Just makes me cringe. My kids are wanting me to teach them how to hunt, and stuff like this scares me to death. Bad enough I had a similar experience. Luckily with mine, it was an uneducated hunter who had NO idea what he was doing. Not malliciously trying to kill me. LOL.
This may kick off something that I don't really want to start, but as an outdoorsman generally, fisherman first, hunter a distant second now, I don't have a problem with some forms of gun control. I don't think high powered simi-automatic (or full-auto) assault rifles are necessary for anyone other than the military or police. (I could see collectors being allowed to purchase and sell them w/o a pin). Also, I see no value in small caliber hand guns. You want a handgun - get a big one. The only thing I want in a handgun is stopping power, be it a person or a bear.
I will never say it is the gun that kill's a single person. Someone has to pull the trigger. But, in general, a multi-shot, high powered rifle is more likely to kill more people in a short amount of time than a single shot bolt action rifle can. This is just expressing a thought that came into my empty head while reading about this. Very sad for the people killed and injured.
play more video games and get it out of your system before picking up a gun, knife, grenade etc. - does wonders.
madness! macrowdy, i'm with you. that dude was hunting hunters.
saw some protesters this morning with a huge banner that read "the holidays are MURDER for turkeys." communists!!!
makes me want to move to canada, where the murder rate is almost none existant compared to the us.
Actually 8 people were shot, two of them were women. 5 people died including one of the women. Several of them were simply land owners and their relatives, not even hunters.
Ol' Chai had an SKS, that uses 10 round integral magazines and stripper clips if you have 'em handy. Since Chai hit some of the victims multiple times, this means he was carrying far more ammunition than any deer hunt might possibly need. It also indicates he had to reload, maybe several times. He wanted all the witnesses dead.
If they don't fry this little bastard, there is something really wrong with our justice system.
I hope both red and blue see this plain truth...
"If they don't fry this little bastard, there is something really wrong with our justice system.
I hope both red and blue see this plain truth..."
I couldn't agree more, this is just sickining....
I'd definitely recommend it, if for no other reason than to see that Canada is not the utopia that so many seem to think it is.
I don't have any info about this specific incident, but the perpetrator wasn't Vietnamese, he was Hmong. The Hmong fought on our side in the Vietnam war. After it was over they were persecuted, and many charitable groups like Lutheran Brotherhood out of Minnesota worked to get them out of their homeland. Anyway, they are big hunters and fishermen. I'll be interested to see the details of the confrontation and this guy's history.
fry him?? hell, burn him alive. didnt need him in the first place.
this is trivial but they do have 5 rd mags for hunting with sks. i assume the laws are the same in WI as here, so 5 is the limit. i doubt a guy like this heeded this law however. sounds like he wanted to outgun other hunters for a reason.
how old is this guy? i'm wondering if he was old enough to be a bit tweaked from the hostilities in SE asia, which goes far beyond the US-vietnam war. the people who grew up there anywhere near that era, all they knew was war. that's why it disturbs me that we let so many in. same goes for other war torn/violent nations. overcrowding does wonders too, seems to be standard policy here though. lessons will be learned though you know that's true.
Update NFR 5 Deer Hunters Shot
This is taken from MSN.com and is only brief cutouts.
Asked to leave, the trespasser, wearing blaze-orange and carrying a semiautomatic assault rifle, opened fire on the hunters and didn’t stop until his 20-round clip was empty, leaving five people dead at the scene and three wounded, authorities said. One of the wounded hunters died Monday.
Police identified the shooter as Chai Vang, 36
Locals in the Birchwood area, about 120 miles northeast of Minnesota's Twin Cities, have complained that the Hmong, refugees from Laos, do not understand the concept of private property and hunt wherever they see fit. In Minnesota, a fistfight once broke out after Hmong hunters crossed onto private land, said Ilean Her, director of the St. Paul-based Council on Asian Pacific Minnesotans.
Minneapolis police said they arrested Vang on Christmas Eve 2001 after he waved a gun and threatened to kill his wife. No charge was brought because she didn’t cooperate with authorities, spokesman Ron Reier said. St. Paul police say they were called to Vang’s house twice in the past year on domestic violence calls, but both were resolved without incident and no police reports were filed.
“The suspect got down from the deer stand, walked 40 yards, fiddled with his rifle. He took the scope off his rifle, he turned and he opened fire on the group,” Meier said.
'He hunted them down'
One of the men who was shot called for help on his radio, but it was too late. The gunman fired again, hitting the people who had just arrived on ATVs.
The gunman was “chasing after them and killing them,” Deputy Tim Zeigle said. “He hunted them down.” It is unclear whether anyone returned fire. The members of the hunting party had only one gun among them.
He was four at the most since the war ended in '74 if memory serves. He is probably U.S. born and American as anyone. Let's not rush to judgement here until the facts are known and hold our prejudicies if you will. There will be a trial and the facts will out. The jury will, hopefully, render proper judgement. He may prove self defense as he was shot at first by the guys on the ground who went bananas that someone was in their tree blind (just a posssible scenario). As for killing all the others, well, let's just say I am glad I am not his lawyer.
But how stupid to have a killing like this. Armed men getting in an argument over trespass and now 10 are dead. I don't argue with people with guns.
True story: goose hunting one time in the sixties in the Sacramento delta, I had pulled my boat up to an island of private property to hunt; thinking that as long as I was sitting in my boat, I was legal. A pickup comes by on the levee road and out jumps two dudes with shotguns pointing straight at my head. They were paid security jerks with no training about anything. Trespass, if that was even the case, is not punishable by murder in California either then or now. I might add that my own gun was pointiing at the ground. I never point my gun at anything I do not intend to kill.
There was a stand down after I agreed to move on. I had to think of more than myself. I had two teenage neighborhood kids with me in the boat and we are all alive because I kept a cool head.
I quit hunting after that incident as I felt it just wasn't worth it anymore.
Bob, the I wish I could say that I had not even the slightest thought about killing them but I did.
Hey Bob, could you point out where you were criticized in that other thread. Seeing as how mine was the only post after yours that somewhat took issue with closing the river you must have taken exception to what I posted in some manner.
I thought I made it clear that the response was not directed at any one individual, but I'll restate, it was a generic respsonse to the thread.
....thoughts not so thoughtful.......or are they?
For Scott Peterson, they have a "concrete" case against him....and it's standing up......
Violence at sporting events is maddening (NPI).....hockey leads the way.....
Every damn "fighter" should be banned from any league, except from the "ring" .....of course, all of it sends a "bad" signal to our entire society.
The shooter in Wisc "was capturered when he walked out of the woods, out of ammo". It wasnt the gun, it was the ammo......if he hadn't had the ammo....mmmmmmmmmm.
Maybe he was defending the poor defenseless deer, which are in epidemic proportions, over running everything, ie, highways, property; .....get a deer tag in Wisc, bag limit is five, (last I heard) and counting.....
Some fancy schmanzy lawyer is probably gonna get this guy off with at least second degree "M" because it wasnt pre-meditated (or?)...HE (the poor slob)ran out of ammo, (or he had more targets than he counted on).....what to do, what to do? Here comes that migrane.......
Passive or reactive.......???
"drive defensively, carry a gun"
"Stand-up, be first in your neighborhood, throw the first punch"
"don't be a schmo, throw the first blow"
"fight for your rights, with your right"
.....entrapranurial, bumper stickers, heh?
Now, relax folks, this post is laced with sarcasm, humor, predictions and latent issues of fact......
This irresponsible twit from "Bangh-pao" is responsible, no matter "whos" to blame, or what "caused" it.....
be it sports......spectator-ing, hunting, driving, parenting, fishing, poaching, or cooking a turkey.....
its all about Personal responsibility.....
I agree with what you say about sports. Those basketball players should go to jail for a long time... for each person they assaulted. That is jsut ridiculous. THey think they are kings amoung men. We treat them that way. It's got to stop. All they can do is throw some pig though a metal rim. Big deal. Your still going to jail buster.
Glad you caught that one. hehehe :thumb:
It is nice to read more of the story. Hmong? hmm cool those kids from "Vietnam" that moved into my neighborhood during the mid and late 70's, I wonder if they were Hmong too.
The most Ironic thing is that he was "wearing blaze-orange" you know, to make sure that people didn't accidentally shoot his ass. hahaha
This is all jacked up.
MAC :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
...would it have made any difference if he was from Oak Harbor? Sounds a bit racist from where I sit. No need to turn a criminal act into an us vs them situation. Apologies if I misinterpreted the remark.
I agree that whatever provoked this guy is irrelevant to his guilt. I could be wrong but my wild ass guess is that there must have been a dispute that included racial slurs directed at the individual in the tree stand, or possibly warning shots fired in his vicinity. It might have been one person in the hunting party who was trying to prove his machismo to the rest of the group. Otherwise hard to explain how the shooter snapped the way he did. This does not in the slightest bit excuse his actions but it just goes to show us that there is not necesarily strength in numbers.
The next nagging question I have for gun owners and gun rights advocates (of which I am sure there are more than a few on this board):
I support the right to bear arms for self protection, hunting and private collections but the decade long ban on assault weapons has just been lifted, and (forgive my ignorance here on specific weapons types) but it appears that this was a mass murder that was conducted with one of these weapons. Could it have been purchased in the last few weeks since the ban was lifted? If it was, it will strengthen many people's already strong opinions that these military grade weapons should again be outlawed.
How do the hunters, gun collectors, NRA members on this site feel about this? "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is an argument that I often hear. But how much damage could this guy have done with a standard hunting rifle? People would have had time to scatter and a lot of them would have lived as a result.
Jerry D said that semi auto's aren't needed at all while hunting big game, this seems so frickin obvious to me (a non-hunter -but willing to learn). Why do we need to keep these things legal? Is there a justifiable civilian use for these things that could not be served by other more conventional firearms? I'm just asking.
I'm not attacking anybody's right to bear arms but if the right to bear arms includes these military style weapons, where do we draw the line? SAM's?, RPG's? Flamethrowers?
ChrisW, the I think there needs to be a line