Do you wear Orange? If so why? If not Why not? :)

[Doc]

Unless you are hunting on a rifle range that has the foreground and background cleared and a bulldozed-up earthen backstop, there is not a hunter around that can honestly say that there is not some hunter hunkered down in camo somewhere behind the deer that they are shooting at. With today's effective camo patterns, hunters can hide almost in plain sight. So while you certainly should take note of what is going on in the background, and what is moving into the background before shooting, that rule does realistically have it's limitations. Trying to pick out some little detail behind the deer that doesn't belong, is one of the strong points of blaze orange. It's not fool-proof, but far far better than not wearing it.

Also, there have been links posted earlier on this thread that lead to stats that show that over-whelmingly, more hunting shooting incidents occur where the victim was not wearing blaze orange. Those stats include NYS numbers.

Doc

[JimS]

I agree 100 % that it is often very hard to tell if there is a hunter in cammo down range. I wear orange whenever I am on state land  simply because I don't know how safe the other guy is out there. When I head in to my "stand" it is usualy dark out and I am using a flashlight. If I see another light off in the distance (that does not leave the area) I will do 1 of 2 things. Go elsewhere, or not shoot in that direction. If I choose to stay I will signal with my light until I get a response.  If it is daylight and I see another hunter that is going through the area I wave an orange hat or vest until I get a wave back so we both are aware of each other. If another hunter is all cammoed up and does not indicate his position by waving to you or hanging something orange in the tree above him he is just plain foolish. I have removed my camo gear when I hunted from a ground blind to lessen observed movement but I hang my vest above me so other hunters know someone is out there. 9 out of 10 times I am in the same spot most of the day. There is plenty of time to take a good look around to see what is downrange. Too often I see where things like houses and trailers were hit by strays and people were injured or killed. If you are careful to know what is beyond your target it will cut down on a good portion of "accidents". We all know there is no magic bullet that will prevent all hunting accidents but some common sense will reduce them. The simple fact that some hunters get shot while wearing orange proves it is not a fool proof system. The few I remember from the area I live were in orange. My biggest concern with another law is that as a nation our govt. is dumbing us down. When I see so many laws and recalls on products that are aimed at keeping the general population safe it makes me cringe. Most of us were kids once ( or twice, lol )and we managed to make it to adulthood without all the "safetys" our leaders now have in place. We rode bikes without helmets and pads, played with toys that had small parts and lead based paint and knew the difference between a tv show and real life. Sorry to go off the main topic but I think everyone can see what I am getting at. It is time for parents to teach right from wrong and common sense again instead of the Govt. making another rule to protect us. Sorry for such a long reply.

Jim

[SQ2Hunter]

I hunt private property so I do NOT wear orange. I use to wear orange years ago when we drove deer but we havent done that in more than 10 years. We mainly treestand hunt and I dont think orange would make a bit of difference. I wouldnt wear orange even if it was mandated.  I love how many individuals are confused as to why NY doesnt have a mandatory orange law but when it comes to buck restrictions they feel their rights are being violated....Strange!

[Culvercreek hunt club]

We mainly treestand hunt and I dont think orange would make a bit of difference. I wouldnt wear orange even if it was mandated.  I love how many individuals are confused as to why NY doesnt have a mandatory orange law but when it comes to buck restrictions they feel their rights are being violated....Strange!

Seems a little like apples and oranges to me. They both would be regulations (which you obviously aren't too keen on following) but one is safety and one is a managment strategy. Your view that orange would not make a difference ...can you clarify...not make a difference in being seen by a hunter...seen by a deer?

[SQ2Hunter]

We mainly treestand hunt and I dont think orange would make a bit of difference. I wouldnt wear orange even if it was mandated.  I love how many individuals are confused as to why NY doesnt have a mandatory orange law but when it comes to buck restrictions they feel their rights are being violated....Strange!

Seems a little like apples and oranges to me. They both would be regulations (which you obviously aren't too keen on following) but one is safety and one is a managment strategy. Your view that orange would not make a difference ...can you clarify...not make a difference in being seen by a hunter...seen by a deer?

A regulation is a regualtion you can break it down any way you want safety, management etc. Maybe if I was hunting public land or in a hunt club I would wear orange but the bottom line orange or no orange its the hunters responsibility to know exactly what they are shooting at most accidents are caused by shooting at movement and orange is NOT a guarantee that would  have been prevented.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Do you wear a seatbelt?

[steve863]

Maybe if I was hunting public land or in a hunt club I would wear orange but the bottom line orange or no orange its the hunters responsibility to know exactly what they are shooting at most accidents are caused by shooting at movement and orange is NOT a guarantee that would  have been prevented.

Yeah, you are right that it's the hunters responsibility to know what they are shooting at, but do you trust every hunter out there to make that right decision on when to or not to shoot?  If you do, you surely have way MORE faith in your fellow man than I do!  If blaze orange will give me a fraction of a percent more safety than I don't know why anyone wouldn't wear it?

[burmjohn]

I'll be wearing my broken up b/o this weekend.  Its just not worth it not to, even on private property.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

We mainly treestand hunt and I dont think orange would make a bit of difference. I wouldnt wear orange even if it was mandated.  I love how many individuals are confused as to why NY doesnt have a mandatory orange law but when it comes to buck restrictions they feel their rights are being violated....Strange!

Seems a little like apples and oranges to me. They both would be regulations (which you obviously aren't too keen on following) but one is safety and one is a managment strategy. Your view that orange would not make a difference ...can you clarify...not make a difference in being seen by a hunter...seen by a deer?

A regulation is a regualtion you can break it down any way you want safety, management etc. Maybe if I was hunting public land or in a hunt club I would wear orange but the bottom line orange or no orange its the hunters responsibility to know exactly what they are shooting at most accidents are caused by shooting at movement and orange is NOT a guarantee that would  have been prevented.

I believe BO is more visible. and I agree with Steve, a fraction increase in safety is a good thing. I am NOT for more regulations but saying if it were passed you would not follow it is irresponsible.

I wear it and I actually take the vest off once on stand and put it around the tree I am in. I also wear a BO hat at all times during gun. That orange movement is an eye catcher.

My concern about those not wearing Bo is this, and this has been stated previously, you could have PERFET target identification.....have a good back stop and at 100 yards you would not pick up a camo'd hunter sitting in cover...in the background. unless you are in a treestand shooting at close range the 100% guaranteed safe shot is a myth. BO increases the likelyhood of seeing that person opposed to camo.

[SQ2Hunter]

We mainly treestand hunt and I dont think orange would make a bit of difference. I wouldnt wear orange even if it was mandated.  I love how many individuals are confused as to why NY doesnt have a mandatory orange law but when it comes to buck restrictions they feel their rights are being violated....Strange!

Seems a little like apples and oranges to me. They both would be regulations (which you obviously aren't too keen on following) but one is safety and one is a managment strategy. Your view that orange would not make a difference ...can you clarify...not make a difference in being seen by a hunter...seen by a deer?

A regulation is a regualtion you can break it down any way you want safety, management etc. Maybe if I was hunting public land or in a hunt club I would wear orange but the bottom line orange or no orange its the hunters responsibility to know exactly what they are shooting at most accidents are caused by shooting at movement and orange is NOT a guarantee that would  have been prevented.

I believe BO is more visible. and I agree with Steve, a fraction increase in safety is a good thing. I am NOT for more regulations but saying if it were passed you would not follow it is irresponsible.

I wear it and I actually take the vest off once on stand and put it around the tree I am in. I also wear a BO hat at all times during gun. That orange movement is an eye catcher.

My concern about those not wearing Bo is this, and this has been stated previously, you could have PERFET target identification.....have a good back stop and at 100 yards you would not pick up a camo'd hunter sitting in cover...in the background. unless you are in a treestand shooting at close range the 100% guaranteed safe shot is a myth. BO increases the likelyhood of seeing that person opposed to camo.

Its not irresponsible i dont live my life in fear of being shot or whether or not I might make it crossing the road.  I highly doubt you follow every rule and regulation put in place by our lawmakers.... Hey this thread is -do you wear orange why or why not. Its to debate my use or non-use. And there is no evidence that proves 100yards down the trail you would be able to pick up the orange or not.

[Doc]

There were links posted earlier on this thread (page 15) for those that are interested in the facts of the argument. These articles and studies show that without a question blaze orange saves lives in a whole bunch of states and has the potential to save more in states that have yet to see the wisdom of such a requirement. There are also stats about the percentages of hunting incidents and the correlation to wearing blaze orange. There also is a chart that breaks down the contributing reasons for hunting accidents which shows a strong visual correlation. Those that didn't read these items of research should now go back and do so. Don't try to guess at the stats or make up what you think  or wish that the stats show. Read and learn, then discuss from an educated position. The work has been done for you. Here are some links that I found:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00044112.htm

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/resources/hunting/safety/docs/Hunting_Associated_Injuries_and_Wearing_Hunter_Orange_Clothing.pdf

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3MRuEfjx3l0J:www.dfw.state.or.us/resources/hunting/safety/hunter_orange.asp+Reasons+for+mandatory+blaze+orange+while+hunting&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

I would be willing to read any credible opposing articles that anyone can point me to. I haven't found any yet.

As far as the arguments that a B/O law is going to shake the very foundation of democracy I think I would like to reserve that particular argument for laws that really threaten to do that and not cheapen it by trying to apply it to such insignificant things as a B/O regulation.

Doc

[Mr VJP]

OK Doc.  This horse is dead and still being beaten.  I'll agree to mandatory B/O law when it is forced upon every hunter in the woods.  By that, I mean every bow hunter as well.

If it is that effective, let this be a law that effects every hunter equally.  And if it has no effect on deer hunting success, bow hunters have no argument against it being forced upon them either.

If a law isn't equal for all, it's a bad law!

[Doc]

OK Doc.  This horse is dead and still being beaten.  I'll agree to mandatory B/O law when it is forced upon every hunter in the woods.  By that, I mean every bow hunter as well.

If it is that effective, let this be a law that effects every hunter equally.  And if it has no effect on deer hunting success, bow hunters have no argument against it being forced upon them either.

If a law isn't equal for all, it's a bad law!

If you can show me statistics where lack of B/O is a demonstrated safety problem in bow season, I'll go along with that. I am not for passing laws that have no purpose.

Doc

[Mr VJP]

Well, bow hunters do sometimes get shot by other bow hunters, do they not?  So I guess until we make them wear B/O we won't know if it improves things, now will we?

[Mr VJP]

Here's the deal in a nut shell......

If you don't like hunting, don't hunt.  Do not try to tell others not to.

If you don't like guns, don't own one.  Don't try to prevent others from owning one.

If you like Blaze Orange for hunting, wear it.  Don't push to get a law passed to force your will on others.  That you have no right to do.  That is a desire for power and control.  That is one of the biggest problems in America today. 

In most cases we have little or no power to stop such control, short of armed insurrection.  In this case, we do have the power to stop it.  Unless, we as hunters, do it to ourselves.  And that would be very sad.

When you boil it down to it's base,  the purpose of every law is control of others through authoritative power.  That is the basic purpose of this law.

[Doc]

Well, bow hunters do sometimes get shot by other bow hunters, do they not?  So I guess until we make them wear B/O we won't know if it improves things, now will we?

I don't know. I never heard of it happening. Well, wait a minute. I do remember seeing some gross picture of a kid with an arrow sticking out of his head but I don't think that had anything to do with hunting. I suppose anything is possible and like I said, if I can be shown statistics where the lack of B/O is a demonstrated safety problem in bow season, especially if it is anywhere near the gun stats shown in those three articles that I linked, I would have no problem with extending it into any season that shows a need for it.

By the way, when you read those articles, take particular note of the little chart that is at the bottom of one of them that shows what the authorities determined were contributing causes for the shooting incidents. You'll find that the major one was mistaking the hunter for game. That's a real tough one to imagine when you're dealing with a bow. In fact most of those categories would be hard to imagine being a cause in an archery scenario. As you read down through those , try to substitute an arrow for the bullet and then apply some common sense and you will come to the same conclusion that I have. The choice of weapon definitely makes a difference as to whether B/O would have any impact on the results. I think that is why no one is seriously talking about any requirements of B/O for bowhunting.

[nyantler]

orange is a good idea to help other hunters see you... nothing worse than a guy in full camo sittingsitting still in the woods and you can't see him... good way to get your head blown off if a deer runs between the two of you. He knows where I am but i might never see him. I alway wear at least an orange hat.

[Doc]

Here's the deal in a nut shell......

If you don't like hunting, don't hunt.  Do not try to tell others not to.

If you don't like guns, don't own one.  Don't try to prevent others from owning one.

If you like Blaze Orange for hunting, wear it.  Don't push to get a law passed to force your will on others.  That you have no right to do.  That is a desire for power and control.  That is one of the biggest problems in America today. 

In most cases we have little or no power to stop such control, short of armed insurrection.  In this case, we do have the power to stop it.  Unless, we as hunters, do it to ourselves.  And that would be very sad.

Unfortunately the problem doesn't fit in a nut shell. A good bunch of the pages of this thread are devoted to examples and common sense explanations of how other people are impacted by poor safety choices of individuals. We have countless examples of laws on the books that are safety based and I (and most other reasonable people) feel are absolutely justified. The one that explains it the best is the safety belt law. My wife owes her life to that law. She, like the overwhelming percentage of the population at the time would not have been wearing that belt the day she got into a head-on crash. But because of the law she was obligated to do so. The fact that she did, kept her from being ejected through the windsheild. Now, she did not go off campaigning that her civil rights were being violated nor did she organize any armed insurrection to free her from the bonds of tyranny (and the seat belt). She along with many others in the years since that law was passed, thanked their lucky stars that someone had the forsight to mandate the presence and the use of that piece of safety equipment. Blaze orange is no different, and I really don't expect that anyone will be moved to armed insurrection because someone mandated that they use that piece of safety equipment.

Look, I don't expect everyone to agree with my position. However, think that the stats are clear. I think that law has merit and should be passed. I guess you think it some kind of civil rights infringement. I frankly reserve that argument for things of significance that really deserve that classification, but you certainly are free to call it whatever you want. So we most likely are not going to ever agree. But the fact that we don't agree is not going to stop me from speaking out in favor of such a law, and that is what I have consistantly done throughout this thread.

Doc

[Mr VJP]

According to an article published            in the Fall 2001 Minnesota DNR Firearms Safety and Hunter Education newsletter,            three people were shot with arrows in the 2000 season. These accidents            occurred in three states, Nebraska, Vermont, and Indiana. Two of the three            resulted in fatalities. The common thread in all of these incidents was            that none of the shooters were sure of their target and what was downrange            beyond it.

An Independence man taking part in the bowhunting season for deer and  turkey died Saturday after being mistaken for a turkey by a hunting  companion, the Missouri Department of Conservation indicated Monday.

 

  Ammon D. Cerda, 52, died Saturday evening in Lake Regional Hospital at  Osage Beach. He was flown there by medical helicopter from a hunting  site near Laurie, said Darrell Walden, Department of Conservation  district supervisor of protection Darrell Walden.

 

  Laurie is near the north shore of Lake of the Ozarks, about 75 miles northeast of Springfield.

 

  Hit by an arrow around dusk, Cerda was given CPR for about 15 minutes before the helicopter arrived, Walden said.

 

  "At this time, it appears Ammon was mistaken for a wild turkey," Walden  said. "He was wearing leafy camouflage and he was in a crouched  position."

 

  Cerda's hunting companion was not identified.

Illinois Hunter Killed By Friend In Bowhunting Accident

                From the Evansville Courier & Press:

Aaron J. Long, 20, was pronounced dead at the scene shortly  after 7 p.m. Thursday night. According to Wayne County Sheriff Jim  Hinkle, Long had been hunting near the Sam Dale Lake State Park with  several friends Thursday evening when he decided to come down from his  deer stand earlier than expected.

“Mr. Long was sitting on a small ridge when his 16-year-old  friend walked up on him and mistook him for a wild turkey,” Hinkle  said. “He was struck in the upper back and died at the scene.”

Oregon bowhunter killed when shot in the head with an arrow

So, it does happen, doesn't it?

It's easy to support a law that only impacts others.  But not when it would impact you.

[Mr VJP]

I prefer to allow people to decide to use seat belts and helmets and blaze orange on their own.  That's called freedom of choice.

A law that forces one to do anything is the exact opposite, no matter how many people you want to protect from Darwin's law of natural selection where only the intelligent survive to breed the next generation.

If you protect stupid people from all forms of accountability they will breed stupid offspring and eventually take over the population.  If one isn't smart enough to know how to survive, I don't want laws passed that will protect them.

[Doc]

It's easy to support a law that only impacts others.  But not when it would impact you.

You must have missed it, but I am a gun hunter. I do wear B/O. This is not some law that effects everyone but me.

As far as the examples, it does point up the fact that the actual number of incidents involving archery equipment are basically insignificant. If the best you could find was a half dozen incidents from the entire country, I would say that that shows just what a rare occurrence that really is.

Also, unless I missed it none of the examples are from NYS. I am not supporting a national law. One of the reports that I linked had to do strictly with NYS stats and as you should expect, the numbers are are not merely a few incidents. The data is quite on target and focused only on the area that would be affected and is of a significant volume as to be not easily ignored or down-played. In other words, it has not been shown that there is any correlation between archery accidents in NYS and the use of blaze orange. Clearly not so with the gun data that you must have read by now.

[Mr VJP]

Those were just the examples I found with one minor search for the information.  Many more have occured but I don't have time to research all of them.

My point is, if you were forced to wear B/O while bow hunting, you would be effected, and you would protest!

You will support it against other gun hunters who don't feel the need to impose their beliefs on others through legislation, but would not like it if the same were done to you.

I don't care about the stats.  like the left wing loonies always like to say, "If it saves just one life...."

If the B/O law passes in NY, I will make it my personal mission in life to see to it that ALL hunters are forced to suffer from it.  Only by vigorously enforcing such a law will the law be seen for what it is and totally repealed.

[Mr VJP]

During the regular firearms season, I have a total orange suit that I wear. During muzzleloader season, I usually am not out in the woods but if I were, I would be wearing orange. I do not wear orange during bow season. That is a decision that I am actually starting to think about a bit. There is a portion of bowseason that overlaps turkey season. There is also a fairly active small game season in progress too. Depending on what other things are thrown into bow season in the future, I may decide that I should be wearing some blaze orange during bow season too.

Doc

Why don't we get NY to make this decision for you and force you to wear it when bowhunting?  Why should you have the choice?

Smellin' my breeze here Doc?

[Doc]

Those were just the examples I found with one minor search for the information.  Many more have occured but I don't have time to research all of them.

My point is, if you were forced to wear B/O while bow hunting, you would be effected, and you would protest!

You will support it against other gun hunters who don't feel the need to impose their beliefs on others through legislation, but would not like it if the same were done to you.

I don't care about the stats.  like the left wing loonies always like to say, "If it saves just one life...."

If the B/O law passes in NY, I will make it my personal mission in life to see to it that ALL hunters are forced to suffer from it.  Only by vigorously enforcing such a law will the law be seen for what it is and totally repealed.

Lol.... I don't think I have ever heard anyone trying to make the case that the accident rate in bowhunting is any where near as significant as the gun hunting rates. You have a tough argument to push there. I guess the reason that I have never heard that argument made before is that there is no realistic comparison. About the worst thing in bowhunting is self-inflicted wounds and that is not a B/O topic. You can try, but I don't think you are going to have a whole lot of success convincing anyone on that one..... .

[Mr VJP]

If it saves just one life, it's worth it.  Right Doc?  With your debate points in prior posts, you have no choice but to support it.  If it saves just one life, it should be done.

Or are you saying you wouldn't support it because it would now be a law that you don't want forced on you?