Would You Support a Blaze Orange Compromise?

[HuntOrBeHunted]

Laugh if you want, the stats are what they are & it certainly isn't the BO that makes the difference.

 

Please enlighten us with your opinion on why there is a difference. Maybe it's just a coincidence, maybe not.

 

It's certainly not out of the realm to suggest that those that voluntarily wear BO might be a little more safety conscious dispite the absurd posts that suggest just the opposite.

 

 

So because someone doesn't agree with your theory their post are " absurd " really?  There's no law saying you have to do it so for you to think your way is paved in gold thats pretty " Absurd " if you ask me.

 

 

This is yet another opinion based thread the laws are clear so the rest doesn't matter.  If you shoot someone hunting just have fun rotting in prison.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

The really interesting stat is the one that shows BO wearers are less likely to be victims of accidental discharge.

 

 

While the anti BO crowds points to this as an absurdity ("magic bullet") that discredits the statistics, perhaps it demonsrtates that those thay wear BO have a bit more common sense than those that don't & are therefore more likely to employ good gun safety habits.

 

I never clinb into a ladder stand with my gun & I make sure there isn't a bullet in the chamber when hoist the gun up with a rope.

So it is in the AD cases, were the shooter or victim in BO? or Both? or neither? seems odd and should make any difference if the victim of the AD had orange on or not and to correlate that to gun safety doesn't make sense to me since the victim may not be the shooter. I can't make heads or tails of the info for the AD numbers.

[wildcat junkie]

So it is in the AD cases, were the shooter or victim in BO? or Both? or neither? seems odd and should make any difference if the victim of the AD had orange on or not and to correlate that to gun safety doesn't make sense to me since the victim may not be the shooter. I can't make heads or tails of the info for the AD numbers.

Note that I posed it as a question, not a stement.

 

I agree that the only stats that are relavant would be the mistaken for game, in the line of fire & to a far less extent, ricochet if the angle wasn't significant.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Note that I posed it as a question, not a stement.

 

I agree that the only stats that are relavant would be the mistaken for game, in the line of fire & to a far less extent, ricochet if the angle wasn't significant.

I understand. was just wondering if you had come across anything additional about it.

[growalot]

SO NO ONE CLICKED ON THAT LINK I Posted.....

[HuntOrBeHunted]

Clicking on a link might provide a fact or two that could flaw their flawless opinion!!

[Doc]

The really interesting stat is the one that shows BO wearers are less likely to be victims of accidental discharge.

.......perhaps it demonstrates that those that wear BO have a bit more common sense than those that don't & are therefore more likely to employ good gun safety habits........

 

That may be the explanation. It certainly is not beyond the realm of possibility. Otherwise it seems to be just a very unlikely coincidence.

[Doc]

SO NO ONE CLICKED ON THAT LINK I Posted.....

You're right. That one got right past me. So I went back and checked it out, and it really does put the point across. So, here it is again:    http://www.adfg.alas...=huntered.video

 

 

[ncountry]

You're right. That one got right past me. So I went back and checked it out, and it really does put the point across. So, here it is again:    http://www.adfg.alas...=huntered.video

 

Watched it. Great demonstration of the visibility of bo. Does not affect my opinion on making it a law. Betcha a helmet law INSIDE a car would save more lives..   .

 

 

lol.....JK....... Everybody has their opinions....

[Doc]

Watched it. Great demonstration of the visibility of bo. Does not affect my opinion on making it a law. Betcha a helmet law INSIDE a car would save more lives..   .

 

 

lol.....JK....... Everybody has their opinions....

No, when it comes to making it a law, I really don't care. Like I said a few times already, I would never argue against it becoming a law and wouldn't lose a wink of sleep over it, but I am not about to go on some campaign to turn it into law.

[gjs4]

If you want to wear blaze do it- only left end folks need a law for their beliefs. As for people saying it's stupid not to; our sport is filled with stupid people. My ground- my rights. If it starts w gun season for deer... Why not ducks or .... Do what you want and don't impose. Safe hunters don't need orange.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Doc]

One thing is for sure, I am not afraid of a blaze orange law. I can imagine a lot of slippery-slope scenarios most of which are completely ridiculous and fictitious. There is always some danger in randomly entering into that kind of mentality too.

 

But I do choose my fights, and this one doesn't sit real high on my priorities. Anyway, I suppose there is something to be said for the Darwin style removal of idiots to improve the species ..... lol.

[wildcat junkie]

If you want to wear blaze do it- only left end folks need a law for their beliefs. As for people saying it's stupid not to; our sport is filled with stupid people. My ground- my rights. If it starts w gun season for deer... Why not ducks or .... Do what you want and don't impose. Safe hunters don't need orange.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Seems that plenty of "right end folks" want laws that infringe on other's rights. But, oh, that's different.

 

Ducks & turkeys see color, deer do not. Bow hunters must get very close to game & even after raising the bow, make a lot more movement drawing a bow compared to aiming a rifle & squeezing a trigger. Non of these examples are likely to result in a fatality under all but the most extraordinary circumstances.

 

Safe hunters (not wearing BO) are shot by idiots all the time. Those wearing BO are seldom shot by the same idiots. Check the stats.

 

The argument that mandatory BO would cause even more wreckless behavior is so ludacrous, it reflects on anyone making such a statement as grasping at straws to support their view. I guess that mandatory seat belt use & motorcycle helmet laws cause people to drive/ride more wrecklessly too right?

 

The point of this thread was a question of whether the majority of us would be open to accepting mandatory BO in exchange for extending the shooting hours to allow hunting during the best time to shoot a mature buck. As usual, knee jerk "right end people" jump to conclusions.

Edited December 11, 2014 by wildcat junkie

[wildcat junkie]

SO NO ONE CLICKED ON THAT LINK I Posted.....

I missed it the 1st time around.

 

A bit hokey, but it does a good job af showing the differece in visability under hunting conditions.

[gjs4]

Wow. Hope they mandate fall protection so your saved in the event you lose your stance atop the soapbox

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[fasteddie]

Wow. Hope they mandate fall protection so your saved in the event you lose your stance atop the soapbox

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

????????????  Who are you referring to ?

[wildcat junkie]

Wow. Hope they mandate fall protection so your saved in the event you lose your stance atop the soapbox

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

 

????????????  Who are you referring to ?

I think he was referring to me.

 

It's just the typical response when every one of the points that were cited in his post were debunked.

 

And I wonder what he was refering to when he mentioned my saved? What is the heck is my saved? I didn't even realize I had one.

Edited December 14, 2014 by wildcat junkie

[gjs4]

Debunked? Sorry pal.

How many hunters are shot each year? How many get hurt from stand falls? If you're about hunter welfare pursue the one that will make a much bigger difference not what fuels your agenda.

"You're saved" not "your". Boy I better watch my forum posting because you just got me.

"You're exactly what you were called out as" is the proper use of context. Versus "your points are all you want to hear or believe".

It is liberal logic to think by mandating a coat color you will be safer. There is no guaranteed safety in hunting.

As for other game seeing color; I know. That was my point. Left thinking again. Let's ban the bad guns and only good guns will be remaining.

Ever wonder why it's the same guys who post on here? Because some folks act like arrogant trolls when their opinion is confronted to the point of discouraging participation. I am as sorry for disliking your point as you are mine. I do not want anyone to get hurt in hunting nor do you. Why do you want orange? Because you must hunt around idiots (which is pretty much inevitable in NY). Go the route others have and give in to finding private or leaving the sport. If the DEC passes a law its to write fines in the one in a million chance one of the 10 ECOs is there.... It won't save you or me.

I am done. Kick my corpse all you want on this thread which I would bank on happening. Thanks for tearing me down on all my points and making the world a better/safer place. Your my hero.

Cheers

[Mr VJP]

States that have mandatory blaze orange laws have gone further now.  Turkey hunters must put an orange band around the tree they are sitting against and luminosity meters are being used to test the brightness of your orange to make sure it's as effective as it should be.  Old faded out orange, like you Dad's lucky vest, can now get you a $500 fine.

 

Go ahead, support a mandatory law.  Get back to me when it gets worse and you realize it was a dumb choice.

 

[jjb4900]

hmmm, someone asking to have a new law enacted........that's a new one.

[Mr VJP]

People that are control freaks do that.  They like the world to reflect what they believe it should.  Pompous.

 

[fasteddie]

What would be mandated next ? Orange guns and bows . Yes , it's an exaggeration but it's not that far fetched .

I still wear a Blaze orange vest and hat as well as my back tag holder is blaze orange but I don't think that blaze orange should be mandatory . What are "YOU'RE"   ( ) thoughts  ?

[wildcat junkie]

What would be mandated next ? Orange guns and bows . Yes , it's an exaggeration but it's not that far fetched .

I still wear a Blaze orange vest and hat as well as my back tag holder is blaze orange but I don't think that blaze orange should be mandatory . What are "YOU'RE"   ( ) thoughts  ?

Again the original "question" was if people would support mandatory BO in exchange for more realistic hunting hours. It was intended as a bargaining chip for the hand wringers in Albany. Many states have such hunting hours W/O significant hunter fatalities. Most if not al have mandatory BO.

 

Sadly, it appears that many others here don't seem to adhere to the sunrise/sunset law anyway so in their minds they would be getting nothing in return.

 

For me and you we would be giving up nothing since we already wear BO. My land is very lightly pressured. I hunt so that it is that way & it is somewhat of a sanctuary. When my gun goes off, the deer are at the end of their education. Adjoining land is not highly pressured. The only time I have seen deer in obvious escape mode in over 16 years was on a Thanksgiving day in 2001. Aparently one of my neighbors decided to go out before the dinner to stillhunt & ran 3 does by me. Most deer movement is natural, either mid morning of right at sundown. That extra 30 minutes, or less dending on light, would double my chances at killing mature bucks.

[fasteddie]

Okay ---- No , I would not support Mandatory Blaze Orange if the hunting hours were increased to earlier and later than they are now . I would not exchange one for the other .

[jjb4900]

No.....I would not.