![]() |
OT Hunting tragedy in Wisconsin
William Claspy wrote in message ...
On 11/23/04 8:46 AM, in article , "George Cleveland" wrote: the shootist was a Hmong refugee there has been an increase in racial tensions in addition to the old fights about assault weapons (the gun was an SKS with a 20 round banana clip) One of the news reports I read/heard said that the rifle used was a type used commonly for deer hunting. Is this true? I know next to nothing about hunting- check that, I know nothing about hunting. Where semi-auto rifles are legal for hunting, the SKS is certainly not uncommon. They're cheap, reliable guns with cheap, widely available ammo--an attractive combination to many hunters. Some states do not permit the use of semi-auto rifles for hunting (like PA). High capacity magazines are not illegal, though I cannot imagine a need for 20 rounds to harvest a single deer. I've read lots of negative stuff about SE Asian 'hunters' lately. I say 'hunters' because the stories are often about patches of woods being completely devoid of life. Apparently some folks believe that SE Asians like to kill everything that moves--chipmunks, bluebirds, everything. I have no experience with SE Asians in the field. Tom G |
OT Hunting tragedy in Wisconsin
William Claspy wrote in message ...
On 11/23/04 8:46 AM, in article , "George Cleveland" wrote: the shootist was a Hmong refugee there has been an increase in racial tensions in addition to the old fights about assault weapons (the gun was an SKS with a 20 round banana clip) One of the news reports I read/heard said that the rifle used was a type used commonly for deer hunting. Is this true? I know next to nothing about hunting- check that, I know nothing about hunting. Where semi-auto rifles are legal for hunting, the SKS is certainly not uncommon. They're cheap, reliable guns with cheap, widely available ammo--an attractive combination to many hunters. Some states do not permit the use of semi-auto rifles for hunting (like PA). High capacity magazines are not illegal, though I cannot imagine a need for 20 rounds to harvest a single deer. I've read lots of negative stuff about SE Asian 'hunters' lately. I say 'hunters' because the stories are often about patches of woods being completely devoid of life. Apparently some folks believe that SE Asians like to kill everything that moves--chipmunks, bluebirds, everything. I have no experience with SE Asians in the field. Tom G |
OT Hunting tragedy in Wisconsin
|
OT Hunting tragedy in Wisconsin
In article ,
Ken Fortenberry wrote: Donut wrote: Ken Fortenberry wrote: Here's the probable cause statement aka Vang's "confession." http://www.madison.com/item/vang_pc_stmt_signed.pdf Interesting (to me at least) that Gary Gillis felt compelled to detail Vangs rifle "....Saiga SKS 7.62x39 caliber, serial number....." While saying only "At the scene there was only one rifle located." I want to know that model/caliber & S/N of that rifle too. The white people had to have had at least three at the scene according to their own accounts to the police. Willers fired at Vang, that's not in dispute only when, Hesebeck stated that he fired at Vang several times and the rifle found at the scene belonged to Roidt who Vang claimed was about to use it. I have a hard time believing that eight hunters had only one gun between them. The three that were returning to the cabin were probably all armed. Repeatedly stating to the press the "only one rifle" between them lie smells like more than just bad police work to me. Ditto. [snip] Remember Vang is 5'4" 140 lbs. He was surrounded by six large armed ****ed off cheeseheads one of whom took a shot at him that had he not crouched down would have hit him. I have a hard time finding fault with him taking out all 6, but having said that it's probably not technically legal, doubtless prudent but not legal, to shoot fleeing cheeseheads even if they did try to shoot him. It will be difficult to determine who at whom shot first. It does seem unlikely that Vang would walk away--to a distance of either 40 yds (victim estimate) or 100ft (Vang's estimate)--and then just start shooting. It seems completely reasonable that he would return fire after being shot at. Like Ken says--prudent but not legal. For this guy to get aything other than a death sentence is going to require some pretty convincing evidence that he was returning fire. If he shot first, he's toast. Tom G -- email:remove tt |
OT Hunting tragedy in Wisconsin
In article ,
Ken Fortenberry wrote: Donut wrote: Ken Fortenberry wrote: Here's the probable cause statement aka Vang's "confession." http://www.madison.com/item/vang_pc_stmt_signed.pdf Interesting (to me at least) that Gary Gillis felt compelled to detail Vangs rifle "....Saiga SKS 7.62x39 caliber, serial number....." While saying only "At the scene there was only one rifle located." I want to know that model/caliber & S/N of that rifle too. The white people had to have had at least three at the scene according to their own accounts to the police. Willers fired at Vang, that's not in dispute only when, Hesebeck stated that he fired at Vang several times and the rifle found at the scene belonged to Roidt who Vang claimed was about to use it. I have a hard time believing that eight hunters had only one gun between them. The three that were returning to the cabin were probably all armed. Repeatedly stating to the press the "only one rifle" between them lie smells like more than just bad police work to me. Ditto. [snip] Remember Vang is 5'4" 140 lbs. He was surrounded by six large armed ****ed off cheeseheads one of whom took a shot at him that had he not crouched down would have hit him. I have a hard time finding fault with him taking out all 6, but having said that it's probably not technically legal, doubtless prudent but not legal, to shoot fleeing cheeseheads even if they did try to shoot him. It will be difficult to determine who at whom shot first. It does seem unlikely that Vang would walk away--to a distance of either 40 yds (victim estimate) or 100ft (Vang's estimate)--and then just start shooting. It seems completely reasonable that he would return fire after being shot at. Like Ken says--prudent but not legal. For this guy to get aything other than a death sentence is going to require some pretty convincing evidence that he was returning fire. If he shot first, he's toast. Tom G -- email:remove tt |
OT Hunting tragedy in Wisconsin
Tom G wrote:
snip For this guy to get aything other than a death sentence ... From: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/ "The last execution in Wisconsin took place in 1851. John McCaffry was executed for drowning his wife in a barrel. The death penalty was formally abolished in 1853." -- Ken Fortenberry |
OT Hunting tragedy in Wisconsin
|
OT Hunting tragedy in Wisconsin
|
OT Hunting tragedy in Wisconsin
In article ,
Scott Seidman wrote: (Tom Gibson) wrote in om: I've read lots of negative stuff about SE Asian 'hunters' lately. I say 'hunters' because the stories are often about patches of woods being completely devoid of life. Apparently some folks believe that SE Asians like to kill everything that moves--chipmunks, bluebirds, everything. I have no experience with SE Asians in the field. Tom G Man, whenever I hear a nasty story about tracking your deer only to find three other hunters gutting it out, and you're afraid to say anything because they're big guys holding guns, the offenders always seem to be white. Not every hunter is a sportsman. No doubt. Many a white 'hunter' has shot another over a tree stand or less. The ranks of poachers in the US are primarily white and often quite proud of their illegal harvests. I've met assholes in the woods (all of them white, btw) though I've never been around when one guy even pointed his rifle at another. Tom G -- email:remove tt |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter