Blind hunter bags a deer (with some help)

[Wonk]

The first time was in 1998, when he was using a bow. This time, he used a firearm with a laser sight to shoot a 100-pound doe, aided by his son-in-law and hunting partner, Robert Henrietta.

(snip)

Withey campaigned hard for the right to hunt using a laser sight and a sighted partner. The laser sends a tiny red dot to the target, allowing the sighted partner to line up the blind hunter's shot for him.

Withey was the first blind hunter to get a deer under the new law, which was passed in 1997. The 60-year-old has been hunting since he was 14, with and without sight.

more...
http://www.thenewsherald.com/stories/121403/spo_20031214079.shtml

[alwynsw]

1. Good for him!

And kudos to his son-in-law.

'nuff said.

[MrSandman]

4. Good for MI, (I think it was),

For allowing his participation. I think it is great when the game laws are modified to include hunting with handicaps. Our state does some of this, but I don't think thet go to this length.

ed for clarity--s

[Valarauko]

2. And?

How is this better (or worse) than sighted people hunting?

[CO Liberal]

3. I Have a REAL Problem With This

What next? Driver's licenses for the blind?

[alwynsw]

5. Just for grins would you clarify your position?

I honestly don't see the connection between the activity of hunting from a stand with a laser sight that enables a sighted partner to judge the potential accuracy of a shot and driving an automobile on the streets and highways. However, if someone wants to guide a blind person as he drives on private property in an open field, through the woods, on a deserted tarmac, etc., I have no problem with that.

Is this just another way of saying that those with disabilities should be barred from activities usually enjoyed by those with lesser or no disabilities?

[CO Liberal]

7. It Just Seems Intrinsicly Unsafe To Me

I'm sorry the poor man lost his sight and all, but I see allowing a blind man to have a gun as nothing more than a HUGE safety risk.

[alwynsw]

8. I see your point, but

anyone who handles firearms in an unsafe manner is intrinsicly dangerous. In this case, the hunter is accompanied by a sighted person who, by following the marker provided by the laser, assures that the shot is taken in a safe manner.

As with all activities, it is only as safe as the participants choose to be. Unfortunately, a relative few unsafe hunters succeed in giving the rest of us an undeserved black eye on a regular basis, but we see the same with almost every other activity. Check the Darwin Awards website for illustration of my point.

[MrSandman]

10. Intuitively, yes

but how many accidents have occured since the law was adopted in 97. It appears to have been a succesful law since they are expanding it to crossbows.

If it has been shown not to cause accidents, I have no problems.

[RoeBear]

19. Besides losing their sight...

...do you think blind people have also lost their ability to reason?

[slackmaster]

22. And being blind does not usually mean losing ALL sight

There are people who see 20/20 in both eyes but have severe tunnel vision. The IRS definition of blindness for tax purposes includes a visual field restricted to 20% of less of normal in both eyes.

A person with vision like that could do well shooting at any stationary or slow-moving target.

[MrBenchley]

9. Remember

arming the blind was an idiotic idea the RKBA crowd was pushinng some months ago...

[MrSandman]

11. In what context?

[slackmaster]

12. Big Straw Man there, MrBenchley

Nobody here has ever advocated actively arming blind people. Blind people already have the same rights and responsibilities as sighted people, and that includes the right to keep and bear arms as long as they use those arms responsibly. Nobody is suggesting giving them weapons for free.

The discussion to which MrBenchley is referring concerned issuing concealed-carry permits to people who are LEGALLY (not profoundly) blind - People who are capable of passing all of a state's requirements which included achieving a minimum numeric objective score on a shooting test.

Readers can safely disregard MrBenchley's attempt to derail this discussion. Some other contributors, e.g. CO Liberal IIRC expressed opinions that people who are blind (without specifying exactly what that means) should not even be allowed to own guns. That change in the law, i.e. DISarming blind people would be exactly the opposite of what MrBenchley has wrongly attributed to the pro-RKBA camp.

[alwynsw]

14. Welll stated! Bravo!

[alwynsw]

13. Are the disabled in some way inferior that their rights should be limited?

I'll grant that it is not necessarily wise for blind folks to fire weapons without a "seeing eye rangemaster", but disallowing them ownership and use of firearms with proper assistance smacks of the worst type of "ism" in my book. "Beeping" targets are used for blind archery, as are golf balls, softballs, basketballs and goals - the list goes on. With proper safety precautions, ther is no reason the hunts cannot be safe - and it appears that those safety precautions are in place -training of the hunter and the guide by proper authorities or their designees.

I suppose we should just lock all those with disabilities up in padded rooms so that they'll not be a danger to themselves or society. Of course, that would include those of us that have hearing challenges, wear glasses, limp, etc. At least the "normal" folk will have plenty of room to roam about the planet if we do that.

[MrBenchley]

24. Hahahahaha....

"I suppose we should just lock all those with disabilities up in padded rooms"
Well, if that's the only thing that occurs to you....

[alwynsw]

45. So give me options.

You seem to be passing judgement without providing a sound basis for your argument. If it's simply your opinion, I can deal with it.

State your case in a rational manner without the inference about my capacity for reasoning. Feel free to infer insults or directly insult my position, but please try to be a gentleman and avoid personal attacks - if only by inference.

[iverglas]

57. the only problem here

"State your case in a rational manner without the inference
about my capacity for reasoning. Feel free to infer insults or
directly insult my position, but please try to be a gentleman
and avoid personal attacks - if only by inference."


That problem is that YOU are the one who said:

"I suppose we should just lock all those with disabilities
up in padded rooms so that they'll not be a danger to themselves
or society."

Since (despite your implied attribution of the thought to Benchley -- and you do know the difference between "imply" and "infer", right?) YOU are the only one who expressed the thought, Benchley's inference that this might be the only thing YOU could think of was neither irrational nor insulting nor a personal attack.

I find it interesting that you should suggest that what he said is a personal attack by implication. Damned if that isn't exactly what I've been saying for months, every time someone responds to someone else's disagreement with "position A" by purporting to draw the unfounded (and false) conclusion that the someone else must therefore necessarily agree with "position B" ... as if there were no other possible conclusion to be drawn from disagreement with "position A".

In this case, you're the one who purported to draw the unfounded (and false) conclusion that that blind people should be locked up in padded rooms -- and to attribute it by implication to Benchley. You used the usual clever subterfuge of phrasing this false allegation as a mere musing (or question, e.g. "so you think ...?"). It backfired. Hard bananas, eh?

Someone's objection to placing firearms in the hands of the seriously visually impaired does not inevitably lead to the conclusion that the objector believes that the persons in question should be locked up in padded cells -- any more than someone's objection to my using the men's washroom would inevitably lead to the conclusion that the objector believes that women should be denied the use of public washroom facilities. You see?

You created the false dichotomy. You stated the conclusion that resulted from it. It's all yours, so either embrace it or retract it, 'cause you just can't paint it on anybody else.

.

[MrBenchley]

58. It's wonderful to see people

who are pretending that blind people firing guns in public is dan-dan-dandy DEMANDING rationality in others, isn't it?

That splendid RKBA "logic"...every day I get yet another reason to be grateful I ain't got a speck of whatever that is rattling around in those skulls. It's "rational" the way Faux Noise is "fair and balanced."

Praise Jeebus!

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

15. If only he'd had an assault weapon

He could have strafed the woods without needing a sighted companion for this idiotic stunt.....</sarcasm>

What I love about this idiotic bit of news...nobody sane can read it and think read it and think "Oh, yeah, there's those hunters showing good judgement and responsibility again." Be nice to have a house with a yard facing woods after reading that, don't you think?

[slackmaster]

17. Meet MrBenchley, official spokesman for all sane people

:eyes:

[MrSandman]

18. I think you mean an NFA firearm,

Assault Weapons are semi-automatic guns which only look like military weapons. Of course, confusing the terms does make it easier to advocate an expanded AWB. VPC,s website does this effectively:

http://www.vpc.org/studies/hoseone.htm

"Civilian assault weapons are not machine guns ... It is a mistake to call civilian assault weapons "automatic weapons" or "machine guns."


How does one "strafe" with a semi-auto?

[MrBenchley]

26. I said exactly what I mean

[MrSandman]

35. Then, how does one strafe with a semi-auto?

[slackmaster]

39. I believe strafing usually requires an aircraft as well

Like a helicopter or low-flying airplane, in addition to a machine gun.

[MrSandman]

41. Forgot about that...duh huh

[RoeBear]

23. I'll ask you the same question...

...Do you think that blind people have lost the ability to reason?

[MrBenchley]

28. You can ask all you like

It's clear that the RKBA crowd is willing to defend any bit of absurdity, including blind folks firing weapons in public....

[RoeBear]

31. Tell me, exactly, what was...

...absurd about the story posted in this thread?

[MrBenchley]

36. Gee, roe...

You mean you REALLY have to ask?

[RoeBear]

42. Absoluteley, I have to ask...

...I believe you've said that you support hunting with proper regulations. This 60 year old man who apparently loves hunting (it says he's been doing it since he was 14)and has lost his sight manages to get a deer with the help of his son in law.

"I just looked up into the sky and said, 'The spirit of the wild has descended upon me. Thank you, Lord,'" Withey said.

And you would take that away from him? Shame on you!

[MrBenchley]

43. No absurdity too silly for the RKBA crowd....

And shame on you for pretending blind people firing guns is a good idea....

[RoeBear]

44. So you would propose to make that activitiy...

...illegal? Sounds rather heartless to me.

[RoeBear]

46. Shame on you for denying them the right...

...to continue the activities they enjoy.

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10363_10913-31956--,00.html
Laser Sighting Devices for Visually Impaired Hunters
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A legally blind person can use a laser sighting device in taking an animal during the lawful hunting hours for that animal. The person must be assisted by a sighted person who is at least 18 years of age. The sighted person must possess proof of a current or previous hunting license or proof of successful completion of a hunter safety class, and the visually impaired person must possess the appropriate hunting license and proof of impairment in the form of a Secretary of State ID Card.

[MrBenchley]

16. By the way

"It's been a long time coming, but, boy, what a happy person I was. A few days earlier I missed one and hit a tree."
It didn't yell so I guess it was a tree......

"I just looked up into the sky and said, 'The spirit of the wild has descended upon me. Thank you, Lord,'" Withey said.

Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill. "
Joel 2:29 "Be not afraid, ye beasts of the field: for the pastures of the wilderness do spring, for the tree beareth her fruit, the fig tree and the vine do yield their strength."
Matthew 25:31 "And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

[slackmaster]

21. Every missed shot has to go somewhere

Even when fired by a sighted person. Remember, this blind hunter has a sighted person guiding his shots. Anyone can miss an intended target.

A tree is a good choice of backdrop, certainly preferable to a rock.

[MrSandman]

25. I missed once

;-)

[DavidMS]

34. With all respect...

"Murder" is comonly minstanslated as "kill."

If you Grep this you will find one example:

http://shamash3.shamash.org/listarchives/rashi-is-simple/rashi-is-simple.v2.n19

Some further examples are as follows: 2-22-1 says that if you
find a thief digging into your house and kill him you are not
liable for murder (since the presumption is that the thief would
kill you had you not killed him). The same law applies when you
find a thief in any place in the house (eg a roof, not just in a
dugged tunnel). The Torah only chose the dug tunnel because that
is the usual way thiefs rob (Rambam Thefts 9:8).


Similarly it is well known that intentional murder is punished by
death and accidental murder is punished by exile to one of the 48
refuge cities. Again, this example should be generalized so that
ANY capital crime is punished by exile if done by accident. So
for example a child who accidentally wounded his father (a capital
crime if done intentionally) should be exiled. Here too the
attempted generalization is thwarted by the repeated expression HE
is a murderer (& exiled) (But no one else is) (Sifray 4-35:15,17,18)
(Interestingly the Rambam brings the non applicability of the exile
law to people who wound their parents in his code--Murder 7:15--see
the KeSeF MishNeh--The fact that the Rambam brings down this non
applicability is further supportive proof that generalization of
examples is the NORM in Biblical exegesis)

http://www.ottmall.com/mj_ht_arch/v25/mj_v25i93.html#CACF

I am inclined to agree with Aaron Gross that "murder" is a better
translation for what is prohibited by the sixth dibrah (and how is it,
by the way, that the Hebrew "dibrot" (utterances) has metamorphosed into
"commandments"?) than "kill". If we are willing to go beyond one-word
translations, however, I think I would prefer "commit homicide". That
would not be precise either (since homicide includes justifiable
instances like self-defense) but at least it would call attention to the
fact that we are dealing with something other than the usual senses of
"kill" and "murder".

http://www.shemayisrael.co.il/parsha/kornfeld/archives/mishpatim.htm

Another interperattion comes to the same conclusions.

These all refer to the works of the Medieval biblical scholar Rashi or The Rambam (I believe they are them same person). The importance is that generaly all traditional orthodox comentary can be trusted in so far as it generaly is an accurate reflection of premodern thinking within the Jewish Community and sometimes an excelent source for the study of biblical texts once one is aware of the ideological limitations of it. Be carefull of taking quotes out of context.

[MrBenchley]

37. So tell us

how WAS the deer threatening this bozo?

[MrSandman]

38. Murder

to kill a person unlawfully and with premeditated malice.
Webster's Dictinary. 1988.

ed for spelling--s

[RoeBear]

49. And man...

...shall have dominion over the animals of the world.

[CO Liberal]

50. As PROTECTOR ... Not Executioner

IMHO.

[slackmaster]

54. We have disrupted the normal food chain by killing off predators

Deer and other game animals are not living in their natural state, thanks to our suppression of wolves, coyotes, mountain lions, jaguars, etc. If we don't want to restore the natural world to its natural state, we have to take on the responsibilities of the animals we have chosen to kill off.

Our choices are:

A. Hunt deer responsibly,

B. Isolate ourselves completely from the animal world so predators can regain their natural position, or

C. Ingore it and allow deer populations to go uncontrolled.

[MrSandman]

77. Remember that the predators have largely

been killed off not because of hunters, but because of the encroachment of the human ecology into the natural state.

Pastures, farmlands, and multiple-age timberlands are much more friendly to deer than mature old-growth forests. BTW, so is suburbia.

[RoeBear]

65. So by that reply I can assume...

...that you are a vegan?

[CO Liberal]

66. No, I'm Not

But I also do not go traipsing through the woods, blowing away innocent animals.

[RoeBear]

71. You consider hunters murderers...

...they say that we employ 'hit men' to bring our meat to the table.
Same result, a dead animal.

BTW- Do you have friends or family that hunt?

[CO Liberal]

78. Yes

My late father hunted deer with bow and arrow. My brother-in-law used to hunt small game.

I choose not to hunt because I really don't like using guns - tried them in teh Boy Scouts and didn't like it. Also, I cannot stay outdoors for long periods in cold weather, becauee I had frostbite in both hands and both feet - the result of a survival campout with my scout troop when I was 12.

[MrBenchley]

52. So let's blow some holes in 'em! Yee-HAHH!

Let's close our eyes and start banging away! Maybe we can feel the spirit of the wilderness descending!

And if we don't hit anything, we can go to a friend's house and tip over his tropical fish tank!

Praise Jeebus!!

[slackmaster]

55. That's just plain silly

Everyone knows that the proper way to take out a friend's fish tank is with a shotgun.

:eyes:

[alwynsw]

72. I prefer a balll pein hammer

less noise and ytou don't accidentally kill the fish quickly. You get to watch 'em flop.

[slackmaster]

73. I know a guy who lost his 120 gallon tank in the Northridge, CA earthquake

In 1994. Lost a nice collection of cichlids (sp?) and a bunch of other tropical fish. The whole tank and stand fell over.

His house was so badly damaged by the shaking and settling that it got condemned as well. He called his insurance agent, told her "Please come and pick up what's left of YOUR house," and promptly moved back to San Diego.

[Township75]

20. They pretty much already do give DL's to the blind...

try driving in FL or near Pittsburgh, you will likely be in danger of at least one person driving that is blind for all practical purposes

[demsrule4life]

30. In Alabama

they give DL's to people who lack any common sense. I would bet a blind person could be a better driver here then some of the sighted ones I've seen.

[slackmaster]

40. In California there are quadriplegics with driver's licenses

That seems a lot more over the top to me than a blind person shooting a deer under guidance of a sighted person.

[alwynsw]

6. It is no different

Those with disabilities should be granted the same opportunities as those without disabilities.

Hats off to both the lawmakers who have shown their vison for the disabled by allowing this activity and to those who volunteer their time to help those with disabilities to take advantage of the opportunity.

[Paladin]

27. What Sort Of Opportunities?

Should blind people be allowed to be air traffic controllers? Drive school buses? Do root canal work? I'm as humane as anybody posting here, but that doesn't rob me of my common sense.

Last time this subject came up, you RKBA'ers put up not one, not two, but three separate threads in favor of the sight-impaired having access to firearms. Feel free to do it again.....

[MrBenchley]

29. No gun-related nonsense too absurd

for the RKBA crowd...

[RoeBear]

32. Go ahead and recommend to your favorite politician...

...that he should introduce a bill that would deny blind people their rights.

[RoeBear]

47. I didn't think..

...that you would.

[RoeBear]

33. delete duplicate

dupe

[alwynsw]

48. Allow ne to be more precise.

Since hunting is, for most, a recreational activity; I ssumed we were talkabout recreation.

That being said, the absurdity of your counter is quite clear. You left out quadriplegic weightlifters and deaf music critics for example. On the realistic side, many "normally" abled folk are not suitable for cerain vocations because of physical or mental (read intelligence) requirements.

Instead of grasping at impossible and imponderables, let's try to stick to substantiive points.

[MrBenchley]

51. Praise Jeebus!!

What a shame he didn't just wound that deer, so that he could have had the thrill of stumbling through the underbrush after it tapping his white cane...

"I just looked up into the sky and said, 'The spirit of the wild has descended upon me. Thank you, Lord,'" Withey said. "I snapped off a shot at it, too, but I guess I missed."

Going to be difficult to choose between Old Deadeye and Bwana Dick Cheney for Sportsman of the Year...

[slackmaster]

56. Or not

It's just possible that the plan for a followup shot might include the option of having the sighted shooter pursue the deer, if necessary.

That seems like what responsible hunters would do.

[Superfly]

53. This is great!

1) He engaged in a legal activity under the supervision of a sighted partner.
2) He successfuly brought down a deer, ending his hunt and playing an important part in the conservation of wildlife.
3) Despite the gnashing of teeth and de facto pleas that somebody should have died (from some members, notably two, who post here), nobody was killed or injured in this hunt.

[demsrule4life]

60. Esp since one of them claims

he only wants to keep guns out of the wrong hands.

[demsrule4life]

61. Us progunners are in trouble now

http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak15.html

:)

[MrBenchley]

62. Anybody trying to depend on Bob Novak

is in more trouble than he knows....

Doesn't the RKBA crowd ever read ANYTHING sane people read? What's next? Ann Coulter? Rush Limbaugh?

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

64. I have an excellent sense of humor

which is why I find the RKBA crowd trying to trot out "Traitor Bob" Novak in such a lame fashion so damn funny.

Wow, another right wing nutcase source dredged up by our "enthusiasts"....who would have thunk it?

[iverglas]

67. I confess to not getting the joke

Not really clued-in to who this Bob Novak is ... but I sure did recognize the periodical that publishes him.

The Chicago Sun-Times -- one of the remaining shards of Lord Black of Whatsits's media empire. Familiarly known to his ex-fellow Canadians and subjects as Conrad, also of the London Telegraph and the Jerusalem Post, and Hollinger in all its manifestations (and current spots of bother).

I see him doing the disingenuous dance (although what any of it has to do with this thread, I dunno):

The council's official report asserts ''the initial product'' of somatic cell nuclear transfer is ''a living (one-celled) cloned human embryo.'' The process intends ''to produce such an entity: one that is alive (rather than non-living), one that is human (rather than non-human or animal).''

Yup, alive and human, but not born, thus not a human being. Just like, oh, the blood I might donate (if I hadn't eaten beef in Britain since 1984 and thus be ineligible to donate); it sure ain't non-human, and those cells sure are alive. And just as my deceased grandmother is human and born, but not alive and thus not a human being ... and my cat is alive and born, but not human, and thus not a human being ...

Like I say, none of which has anything to do with anything here, so far as I can see -- but hey, congratulations to New Jersey on its efforts in that regard anyhow.

.

[MrBenchley]

68. Novakula, Prince of Darkness

is a far right wing loony who used to regularly get walloped by Carville and Begala on CNN's Crossfire...he's been around forever.

He was most lately in the news for outing Valerie Plame, the CIA agent, at the behest of certain scummy folk in the White House....his column violated at least one Federal law and could be considered, generally speaking, treason. Plame was the wife of ambassador Joseph Wilson, career diplomat who discovered that the Niger yellowcake claim was fraud (not hard to do, the documents didn't have the name of the country written corrrectly) and told the newspapers so when his advice was ignored. Here's a brief account.

http://www.talkleft.com/archives/003755.html

Koresh only knows what the lame duck anti-clone bill has to do with anything...it's not like the streets of Bayonne are likely to be filled with clones anytime soon...

I suspect it's dems trying to say "New Jersey sucks" but instead blurting out "I read only right wing crap."

[iverglas]

69. aha

Seeing the pic on his columns linked from there, with your description -- yup, recognize the name/face from CNN after all. Grating little person, I always thought.

.

[MrBenchley]

70. I'm old enough to remember him

when he would assure us almost every day that Watergate would blow over and really didn't amount to much... Many people feared he would have some sort of on-air seizure back when the impeachment turned out to be a debacle and America laughed out loud at Ken Starr....

[demsrule4life]

74. And you are accusing me for being what?

I suspect it's dems trying to say "New Jersey sucks" but instead blurting out "I read only right wing crap."

[MrBenchley]

76. Don't need to accuse you of anything, dems....

You trotting out this right wing numbnutz seriously says it all....

[demsrule4life]

75. Very simple really

All we need here is MRB-2, MrB-3, MrB-4..........

[Moderator]

79. locking

I'm tired and I can't think of anything more cute to say