a safe 2019

[Robhuntandfish]

so i read this article and thought - didnt we have a safer year a couple years back with no fatalities? 

[rob-c]

3 hours ago, Rattler said:

Precisely.  I'm saying safety rules apply to the shooter.  The orange recommendation is there because not all shooters follow the safety rules.  If all shooters strictly followed rule #3, the orange rule would become unnecessary.

All I'm saying is, adding it to the safety rules places the blame on the victim not wearing orange instead of the shooter not following rule #3.  Keep in mind there are many non-hunters in the woods too and they wear orange because they percieve all hunters as idiots.  Adding it to the safety rules supports that perception.

I get what your saying, but every year for spring turkey you hear of at least one guy in full camo being  shot by another. Pretty positive I’ve never read where the shooter was not ticketed / held negligent . 

[grampy]

3 hours ago, moog5050 said:

Are you serious?  OK - I will argue.  I don't care who is at fault.  My daughter will be taught to wear orange in gun season because its a worthwhile step to take for HER safety.  I am not looking to lay blame when an accident occurs.  If there is something I can do to help avoid it,. I will.  In fact, I would blame myself if an accident occurred because I told her not to wear orange to prove a point.  That's just plain silly IMO.  Rant over. 

And if you don't think that teaching hunters to wear orange in gun season is not already part of the safety course, you would be wrong.

We as NYS Hunting Safety Instructors, ALWAYS highly encourage the wearing of blaze orange, or pink at every hunter ed class. And wear it ourselves while giving the course.

There is something I will do during field studies. Before the start of the class, I'll take two "stuffed hunters" and place them on a slight uphill. One with a blaze orange vest and hat will be behind a tree about 40 yards up the hill.

The second "hunter" will be dressed all in camo, at 20 yards. With some good brush around it, simulating a ground blind situation. When the students get to the station, I'll say there are two hunters here in front of you. Can you pick them out? 90% of the time, the FARTHEST "hunter" in orange will be identified first.

[Nomad]

3 hours ago, rob-c said:

I get what your saying, but every year for spring turkey you hear of at least one guy in full camo being  shot by another. Pretty positive I’ve never read where the shooter was not ticketed / held negligent . 

I can tell you, one . My friend and co worker was moving spots ,walking through the woods with his son , they kicked up a Tom who ran off then took flight . Another hunter sitting against a tree shot at the Tom as he was a few feet off the ground, and shot the Son in the face .

Two DEC cops investigated one stood where the victim was the other sat where the shooter sat . They said the sitter could not see the standing officer in his green uniform , no tickets issued .

 

Edited February 5, 2020 by Nomad

[TACC]

Never heard of wearing pink instead of orange, when did this start?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[BowmanMike]

Oooooh,now pink is prettier than orange. Problem solved!!!

This discussion is a little silly.

Here are a couple of facts.

There are a few to a few million idiots in this world.

If wearing orange would help you not get shot by one of them,i would not care one bit where that morsel of information is written down.

I walked up on two guys wearing full camo on state land last gun season. I was with my wife and dog,they had no clue we were walking up behind them on the access road. You know what camp i think they are in...

[Rattler]

Maybe if we charged every shooter with a felony when someone gets shot, we wuld have far fewer shootings every year.  If everyone knew how serious it would be, where no excuse would be tolerated, they would be more serious about following the rules of firearm safety.

I've seen too many examples of shooter negligence attempting to be excused away by both the shooter and their defenders, to know many people do not give the issue the respect it deserves.

Make the penalty severe enough to make everyone conciously consider where that bullet is going to go, every time you send it, and I'll bet the safety numbers get much better the very first year.

There's to much desire to kill game and not even desire to be safe about it.  That needs to change.

[Rattler]

15 hours ago, Nomad said:

I can tell you, one . My friend and co worker was moving spots ,walking through the woods with his son , they kicked up a Tom who ran off then took flight . Another hunter sitting against a tree shot at the Tom as he was a few feet off the ground, and shot the Son in the face .

Two DEC cops investigated one stood where the victim was the other sat where the shooter sat . They said the sitter could not see the standing officer in his green uniform , no tickets issued .

I'm out of likes or I would've given this one.

BTW:  Dick Cheney almost killed a man quail hunting.  The man was accused of being in the wrong spot causing the accident.  Cheney skated away unscathed.  That disgusts me.

 

[Deleted Account]

 

Just now, Rattler said:

I'm out of likes or I would've given this one.

BTW:  Dick Cheney almost killed a man quail hunting.  The man was accused of being in the wrong spot causing the accident.  Cheney skated away unscathed.  That disgusts me.

 

No to mention that the guy he shot...apologized to him! It's a crazy world.

Edited February 6, 2020 by Splitear_Leland

[Rattler]

Seems I got my "likes" back all of a sudden.  Not sure how these are controlled here.  

[Five Seasons]

everybody just sits in a stand overlooking a foodplot now. I wish we had the orange army walking through the woods during gun season.

[Rattler]

Agreed.  I remember those days well and saw a lot more deer moving then.  I still like doing drives.

[Just Lucky]

Wearing orange should be mandatory imo. To not wear it hunting I say you are asking for trouble and yes I think you are responsible for your own safety. Same reason you have conceal carry.

I find guys who hunt in full camo are usually on land they don't have permission to be on or not following hunting regulations. 

I have seen the flames come out of the muzzle of a gun from a guy trespassing and shooting at a deer between us in the moonlight while he was wearing full camo as to not be seen. I have shot a deer on over a hundred acres of private land to have someone in camo come out from behind a tree after my shot yelling don't shoot cause they were where they weren't suppose to be. I have gotten pictures of trespassers on trial cams on my hunting land in full camo but not in blaze orange. 

Just a few examples of why I support the need to wear orange, not only safety but also if people feel they can be seen they tend to be more honest

[Rattler]

How would you feel about a mandatory helmet law..... for automobiles?  It's for your safety.

If a guy is willing to trespass, do you think he will comply with an orange law?

Edited February 7, 2020 by Rattler

[Just Lucky]

2 hours ago, Rattler said:

How would you feel about a mandatory helmet law..... for automobiles?  It's for your safety.

If a guy is willing to trespass, do you think he will comply with an orange law?

Seatbelt laws are mandatory in cars, as are helmet laws with motorcycle  And yes more guys will comply if orange was mandatory because of where they get in and out of the woods.  

Edited February 7, 2020 by Just Lucky

[Rattler]

44 minutes ago, Just Lucky said:

Seatbelt laws are mandatory in cars, as are helmet laws with motorcycle   

I believe they should both be freedom of choice, not forced compliance.  The point is, how far will they go with their mandates?

After trespassers enter the woods, will they take it off?

[moog5050]

11 minutes ago, Rattler said:

I believe they should both be freedom of choice, not forced compliance.  The point is, how far will they go with their mandates?

After trespassers enter the woods, will they take it off?

Its only mandated for youth now.  Not sure why you are suggesting forced compliance with a "hunter safety rule".    If you don't want to wear orange, you don't have to.

[Rattler]

I was referring to seat belts and helmets.  

[Nomad]

I wear orange , I wore seatbelts before the law , and I wore helmets in states without helmet laws ( way to noisy with out my ears covered ) .

However my personal beliefs are those should be your own choice . If for weeding out the gene pool if nothing else .

[Five Seasons]

The problem with the helmet law stuff is that every time some idiot wrecks his Harley and dies because he's too cool for a helmet, my bike insurance goes up. So the argument that "it doesn't affect you, who cares" is false. Not to mention the driver is sometimes not a fault and now has to live with your death on his/her conscious. 

I don't like the idea of mandatory blaze orange, but wouldn't throw a fit if it was enacted, but would like the law to be similar to Mississippi. Only required on public land and not required when 12' or higher in a tree. The idea being, a private land owner should have a good feel for their land and who is hunting it and on public land, you may not be shooting at movement through a brush, but you also may not be aware of a hunter downrange and a bad shot may find a hunter... on the ground, but not in a tree. 

[Just Lucky]

3 hours ago, Rattler said:

I believe they should both be freedom of choice, not forced compliance.  The point is, how far will they go with their mandates?

After trespassers enter the woods, will they take it off?

I had seatbelt and helmet laws explained to me one time, it is not only about your personal safety but it is also about the guy who gets to clean your body parts off the road. 

And yes I do feel mandatory orange would discourage trespassing and other hunting violations with most people, not all. 

 

[Five Seasons]

1 hour ago, Just Lucky said:

I had seatbelt and helmet laws explained to me one time, it is not only about your personal safety but it is also about the guy who gets to clean your body parts off the road. 

And yes I do feel mandatory orange would discourage trespassing and other hunting violations with most people, not all. 

 

how and why would someone who is breaking the trespassing law also decide they should follow the orange law? its the same dumb argument as the back tag regs. 

[Nomad]

1 hour ago, Just Lucky said:

I had seatbelt and helmet laws explained to me one time, it is not only about your personal safety but it is also about the guy who gets to clean your body parts off the road. 

And yes I do feel mandatory orange would discourage trespassing and other hunting violations with most people, not all. 

 

What ? Been to hundreds of mva’s including motorcycle riders that were turned in a bags of broken bones , nobody gives a crap what I may have to red bag , or flush down the storm drain . Frankly most of the gross stuff you’ll deal with won’t be at mva’s .

Never heard that explanation, usually one hears its to keep, overall medical and insurance rates down , 

[Just Lucky]

1 hour ago, Nomad said:

What ? Been to hundreds of mva’s including motorcycle riders that were turned in a bags of broken bones , nobody gives a crap what I may have to red bag , or flush down the storm drain . Frankly most of the gross stuff you’ll deal with won’t be at mva’s .

Never heard that explanation, usually one hears its to keep, overall medical and insurance rates down , 

You would know more about that then me. Like I said that was what I was told

[Rattler]

I never ride a motorcycle without a helmet, nor do I drive a car without wearing a seat belt.  I do have concerns with the govt mandating these things though.  How far are we willing to let them go with mandates?

I understand the idea it keeps insurance rates down.  So wouldn't making automobile passengers wear helmets lower insurance rates too?  It was mandatory to wear a helmet racing my car on the drag strip.  If I chose not to, I was not allowed to race.  It was forced safety.  If the govt mandated it for everyone on the road, would we agree with it or consider it govt overreach?  BTW, govt mandated car airbags add at least $1000 to the price of your new car and they are not an option.  That's one result of govt mandates.  And you don't get a lower insurance rate for having them.

I remember when car seats for children weren't mandated and when seat belts didn't need to be worn.  Today many things are not up to you.  "It's a free country".  In reality, you're free to do whatever they let you do.  And if you don't comply, you pay a fine.  

I would rather the people who cause the accidents be held accountable to a greater extent.