Cheney shoots someone (I'm not kidding)

On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 14:39:46 -0500, Dave LaCourse
wrote:

On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 15:56:45 GMT, rw
wrote:

Wayne Knight wrote:
William Claspy wrote:


(hmmm..... hey Wayne, you still planning on bird hunting during the Yoop
clave this fall? Just want to know if I should pack the body armor :-)


What's a little spraying with bird shot? You can go back to work and
tell everyone how bad the mosquitos were.

Yeah, he can do that after he gets out of intensive care.

I believe he went to intensive care because of his age, not the
wounds. I was sprayed with birdshot (abouot 200 yards away) when I
was a kid. I had a split second to duck my head when I heard the shot
hitting the tobacco barn. I had several shot hit my hat, and two his
my hand. Left a welt - didn't even break the skin.

This is yet another of the ridiculous "discussions" here on ROFF. From
what I've heard, Cheney ****ed up, pure and simple - it involved hunting
with guns and Cheney's finger was on the trigger. Barring someone
literally setting up their own "self-shooting," if one is hunting and
accidentally shoots someone, it's mostly on the shooter - you don't
shoot unless you _know_ what's down-range. And Whittington's injuries
are not material to Cheney's actions, whether Whittington went to
intensive care or had a PA put some Neosporin and one of those useless
"blood donation dot" bandages on his boo-boo.

But this type of accident happens with hunting; hunting is not a
perfectly safe sport because humans are involved. Yes, Whittington
would share some of the blame _IF_ he didn't practice reasonable hunting
safety by coming up unannounced and "popped" up out of a
gully/depression.

The real shame is that none of it is worthy of much more than a minor
notice, and such an event wouldn't even make the DFW papers if it had
occurred in Granbury (30 miles away) and involved a couple of DFW
business exec-types. In fishing terms, it appears that Whittington
walked up behind Cheney as he was casting and got hooked.

As to the type of shot, I'd rather not have someone shooting toward me,
but I'd much rather have someone shoot toward me with one slug than a
pattern of 7 1/2's at 20 yards. In fact, at such ranges, small shot is
much more likely to cause damage than a bullet fired from a typical
hunting rifle.

And Louie, at 200 yards, you weren't "sprayed," it just landed all
around your general area, which is so common as to be considered typical
in things like dove hunting - that's why sensible folks wear hunting
hats and shooting glasses.

TC,
R

wrote in message
...

...As to the type of shot, I'd rather not have someone shooting toward me,
but I'd much rather have someone shoot toward me with one slug than a
pattern of 7 1/2's at 20 yards. In fact, at such ranges, small shot is
much more likely to cause damage than a bullet fired from a typical
hunting rifle....

Well, not to appear boastful or anything, but OUR typical hunting rifles are
bigger than YOURS.

I have, on several occasions, in actual field tests, demonstrated to the
most scornful of skeptics that mine is fully capable of inflicting
significant damage even out to the fantastic range of FORTY yards! Believe
it or not.

Wolfgang
who had no idea that the daisy corporation still maintained such an iron
monopoly on firearms in the gulf region.

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 07:00:55 -0600, "Wolfgang" wrote:


wrote in message
.. .

...As to the type of shot, I'd rather not have someone shooting toward me,
but I'd much rather have someone shoot toward me with one slug than a
pattern of 7 1/2's at 20 yards. In fact, at such ranges, small shot is
much more likely to cause damage than a bullet fired from a typical
hunting rifle....

Well, not to appear boastful or anything, but OUR typical hunting rifles are
bigger than YOURS.

Not sure who "OUR" might include, but if they are associates of YOURS, I
have no problem believing that y'all are both too stupid to match quarry
to rifle and that using the biggest rifle you can find helps you girls
feel more like men...

I have, on several occasions, in actual field tests, demonstrated to the
most scornful of skeptics that mine is fully capable of inflicting
significant damage even out to the fantastic range of FORTY yards! Believe
it or not.

Again, I've no trouble believing that your rifle is capable...it's when
the owner is brought into the question that I'd become, um,
skeptical...but hey, that'd be true if you take the rifle completely out
of the question...

If the Medical College of Wisconsin has, like, actual doctors and stuff
around, especially those who have actually worked on real people, find a
trauma guy and ask him what the differences would be between two sample
sets of hunting accident wounds (i.e., accidental hits rather than aimed
fire), with 10 incidents each, with one set consisting of single 25-30
caliber wounds versus the other set consisting of the wounds caused by a
full (even nearly full) pattern of 7 1/2's, both at 20-30 yards. Then
take into consideration the probability of an accidental hit with an
object approximately 1/4 inch in diameter versus a hit with a pattern of
about 2-3 feet.

And for those following at home, basically, the "gauge" of the shotgun
doesn't effect the energy of each pellet or the size of the pattern,
just the number of pellets in the shot string/pattern, and the choke
determines the pattern size at a given distance. At 20-30 yards,
assuming the typical US dove/quail choke(s) of modified or improved
cylinder, it's going to be a 20 (mod at 20) to about 40 (IC at 30) inch
pattern.

Now go play with your lil' Red Ryder...

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 07:00:55 -0600, "Wolfgang" wrote:


wrote in message
. ..

...As to the type of shot, I'd rather not have someone shooting toward
me,
but I'd much rather have someone shoot toward me with one slug than a
pattern of 7 1/2's at 20 yards. In fact, at such ranges, small shot is
much more likely to cause damage than a bullet fired from a typical
hunting rifle....

Well, not to appear boastful or anything, but OUR typical hunting rifles
are
bigger than YOURS.

Not sure who "OUR" might include, but if they are associates of YOURS, I
have no problem believing that y'all are both too stupid to match quarry
to rifle and that using the biggest rifle you can find helps you girls
feel more like men...

I have, on several occasions, in actual field tests, demonstrated to the
most scornful of skeptics that mine is fully capable of inflicting
significant damage even out to the fantastic range of FORTY yards!
Believe
it or not.

Again, I've no trouble believing that your rifle is capable...it's when
the owner is brought into the question that I'd become, um,
skeptical...but hey, that'd be true if you take the rifle completely out
of the question...

If the Medical College of Wisconsin has, like, actual doctors and stuff
around, especially those who have actually worked on real people, find a
trauma guy and ask him what the differences would be between two sample
sets of hunting accident wounds (i.e., accidental hits rather than aimed
fire), with 10 incidents each, with one set consisting of single 25-30
caliber wounds versus the other set consisting of the wounds caused by a
full (even nearly full) pattern of 7 1/2's, both at 20-30 yards. Then
take into consideration the probability of an accidental hit with an
object approximately 1/4 inch in diameter versus a hit with a pattern of
about 2-3 feet.

And for those following at home, basically, the "gauge" of the shotgun
doesn't effect the energy of each pellet or the size of the pattern,
just the number of pellets in the shot string/pattern, and the choke
determines the pattern size at a given distance. At 20-30 yards,
assuming the typical US dove/quail choke(s) of modified or improved
cylinder, it's going to be a 20 (mod at 20) to about 40 (IC at 30) inch
pattern.

Now go play with your lil' Red Ryder...

Come on......dicklet......fess up. You've never actually seen a gun, have
you?

Wolfgang

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 08:32:31 -0600, "Wolfgang" wrote:



Come on......dicklet......fess up. You've never actually seen a gun, have
you?

Let's just say that I'd bet a lot more than some paltry nickel, however
shiny, that I know as much about firearms and weapons as do you (and
probably quite a bit more), and as to something objectively
determinable, that I'd outshoot at least 99.9% of those reading this,
including you, in anything from .22 pistol to high-power competition,
any standard shotgun sport, or hunting whatever game...heck, I'd even
toss in those who might potentially or accidentally ever read this...or
have it shown to them...and yeah, I remember your claims about being the
weapons guy on some tugboat or something...


15 late-season doves with less than a box of .410 shells......dick

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 08:32:31 -0600, "Wolfgang" wrote:



Come on......dicklet......fess up. You've never actually seen a gun, have
you?

Let's just say that I'd bet a lot more than some paltry nickel, however
shiny, that I know as much about firearms and weapons as do you (and
probably quite a bit more), and as to something objectively
determinable, that I'd outshoot at least 99.9% of those reading this,
including you, in anything from .22 pistol to high-power competition,
any standard shotgun sport, or hunting whatever game...heck, I'd even
toss in those who might potentially or accidentally ever read this...or
have it shown to them...and yeah, I remember your claims about being the
weapons guy on some tugboat or something...

Well. Gosh.

15 late-season doves with less than a box of .410 shells......dick

He said "dick"........hee, hee, hee.

Wolfgang