5 hunters slain, 3 wounded in a land dispute rampage.

Nolan - I am a gun owner. My father and I hunted when I was younger because it supplemented our food supply. We seriously needed that tag we got once a year and the deer or elk we subsequently got if we were lucky. We also went for ducks and sage hens. We never killed anything that we did not eat.

I don't hunt anymore because I don't need to. However I see many reasons why one might need to still - particularly with the recent spate of bad economics (job losses, etc).

Also, because farmers and ranchers have killed off most of the large predators, it is necessary to issue hunting licenses in order to cull out the herd to keep them from starving or from serious illness due to over population.

On the other hand - I love and respect wildlife and have no use for people who hunt for trophy or the thrill of killing.

The first deer that I ever killed - before I cleaned it, my father made me stop and thank that animal for giving it's life so that we could eat that winter. (I'm seriously not joking here.)

It's about need, respect and balance. Most good hunters understand that.

A human killed other humans. As horrible as that is, we can not let ourselves get distracted from that horribleness. Me must face it and deal with it directly.

If he hadn't've had a gun, it would have been much harder for him to kill.
If he hadn't've had hands, it would have been much harder for him to kill.
If he hadn't've been there, it would have been much harder for him to kill.

Coulda, shoulda, woulda.

I do not own a gun, but I will defend my right to choose to own one. It is one of the founding principles of this country ("this country being the one I am in and in which this horrible act was commited) that we have the right to bear arms to protect ourselves, because the founders started this country with first-hand knowledge of what can happen when that right is not present.

A human killed other humans.
Deal with the why, not the how, or you just aren't helping.


heheh Okay. I need to lighten up today. I'm not quite sure why this is all coming out of me like this, not that I didn't know it was in there already. I don't want to imply that people are stupid for wanting to ban guns outright because of events like this. I just don't agree and for the reasons I sorta stated above. I only post my opinions here in the small hope that someone who would normally think contrary to me thinks twice.

Great points both Rose and Tiger.

By the way the names of victims, the shooter and more details have been released. Says nothing yet about alcohol...

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/11/22/hunters.killed/index.html

I think Chris Rock was onto something when he said let people buy all the guns they want, just up the price on the bullets to 1000 dollars each...

Much funny stuff said - and as with everything funny, it's because there is a bite of truth in it.. Can't remember which show I saw it on, but I remember it was damn funny stuff.

Siggy.

Many gun enthusiasts reload their own and make them even more *hot* (powerful) when doing so. If you then try to take away the ability to reload your own, you create more crime and probably a black market for said materials. Hunting is not usually a source of tragedies such as this. I saw the Rock routine and he was moreso speaking about gang members if I remember correctly. While some morons do murder people with hunting rifles, it's usually handguns or assault weapons involved, items created for the sole purpose of shooting people, not animals. Ironically, in this case, it sounds as though a semi-auto assault rifle was used, not much good when trying to hit a deer at several hundred yards. This asshole was shooting at close range against unprepared people. I am really surprised no one shot back at him, maybe they did and we will hear about that later...

> Deal with the why, not the how, or you just aren't helping.

Y'know, theres a reason why high explosives and nuclear weapons are generally forbidden to anyone except the state.

Azelda

We can only speculate as to why at this point. The only facts we have to help us ascertain why are that he was on private property, was asked to leave, walked about 40 yds. away, turned round and started shooting people. There was also a statement made that there was a language barrier. I too would like to know why Azelda, but the fact is we just don't know yet. I would imagine he was having problems in other parts of his life. I am 40 years old, have hunted most of my life, and only stopped hunting a few years ago, for a variety of reasons which don't matter in this case, and I can never remember anything like this ever happening before. It's bizarre. I can't *help* and that was not my intention for starting this thread. It was more of a journalistic approach and a voicing of exasperation over the incident.

As far as the high explosives and nuclear weapons go, I am unsure as to what point you are trying to make.

> I too would like to know why Azelda

Why do you say "too"? You imply that I would like to know. Personally I find it humorous that some guys out to kill other stuff were killed themselves, and 1 vs 8 at that. "But they werent expecting to be attacked!" Tell that to the deer...

Azelda

When you demand that people not focus on *how* but on *why*, one would naturally assume you are wondering *why* as well.

YOU *tell it to the deer* that will starve to death because farmers have eliminated their natural predators. Tell it to protected species whose protection is paid for by the purchase of hunting licenses. Tell it to the families of the 5 people who were murdered and the 3 who were wounded. It hasn't even been established that all of these folks shot were hunting. Some of them came to help. This was not that man's land. This wasn't a shoot out. He was asked to leave PRIVATE property, not doing so is a crime as is murder, so i guess you condone that, as long as those hunters get what they deserved right?

This will probably fall on deaf ears here because you think it's funny when people are murdered because you don't agree with their past times.

As far as your finding ANY humor in a horrible situation like this, it speaks volumes about you and suggests you put a deer's life above a human life. Tell that to the cows that are herded into a narrow hallway where a pneumatically controlled hammer whacks them in the head. Lotta sport there. What is it with people who think that hunting is so easy? It's not like shooting fish in a barrel. I hunted 20+ years of my life and took TWO deer. I guess I deserve to die because of that and you would think it's funny.

Fire back some more short sighted, self serving, emotional retorts, it will only serve to further illustrate you have no clue what you are talking about.

Next time you eat a hamburger I hope you think about how much of a chance that cow had. NONE. Don't even get me started on veal.

If you hunt animals it should be a requirement to eat your kills.

Same for folks who kill people.

LOL! yummy, zombie food!


Dev, most hunters do, at least where I hail from (eat the animals they take) and I do not like trophy hunting anymore than I like trophy fishing. It's a wasteful, egotistical, and sadistic practice in my mind and if I still hunted I wouldn't hunt with anyone who did so soley for sport.

I'm pro-gun safety. I think, in theory, this is a great statement.

Unfortunately, in practice, more people die of accidental gun shootings than there are burglaries / break-ins stopped with a gun. =)

A little update and an addendum:

A sixth victim has died after being shot by this maniac.

I would also like to point out that my suspicion that not all the of the folks who were shot were armed; from the St. Paul Pioneer Press:

"Willers' daughter and Laski climbed aboard all-terrain vehicles and drove to the spot; neither brought a weapon. As they neared, the gunman opened fire on them, killing both."

Tough guy, shooting unarmed women. Gah. What makes me more sick is that he is a veteran of the US Army.

High explosives aren't forbidden at all. For a fee (depending on the quantities I plan to be storing) I can get a license to own all the high explosives I want. I could keep 10,000 pounds of TNT in my toolshed with a $500 application fee to the State Fire Marshal. Now, there are a TON of safety regulations that must be followed in transport and storage of anything like this. In my home state, even black poweder for guns is limited to 5 pounds without a permit, and multi-family residences or public locations are not allowed to store even that without specific permission. (Having looked all that up now, I'm going to make sure a friend of mine doesn't have more than that 5 lbs on hand at a time. )

As for nuclear weapons... Well, I tried to find out what the lower limit of radioactivity is in my state before a license of some sort is requred. Haven't had much luck. I guess there isn't that much call for private citizens to own much of that sort of thing. I did find an application(pdf) for one to own radioactive materials. I wonder what would happen if I submitted one.

Many things that people assume are forbidden may just be hidden by red tape, but still doable. Of course, certain activities are likely to bring you to the attention of certain legal and government agencies. After dumping all those "explosive" "radioactive" etc search terms in Google, I'm getting that leery feeling that I may be putting myself in a spotlight. I really HATE that about the current state of my home, my homeLAND. I don't feel secure from my own government. (Maybe I should get a gun...)

I am not too far from the incident either. I live in the Illinois-Wisconsin state line. I have many friends and family members who hunt for white-tail, pheasant, quail, and wild turkey around here, and not all, but many do bring brews or a flask while hunting, especially if they are staying in a cabin out in the boonies. Point was that many incidents where firearm violence is involved, alcohol is a factor, not that all hunters are drunks.

I don't believe that a would be out with an automatic weapon and just shoot other hunters at a drop of a hat. What is your explanation to what he did? Was he insane? Drunk? On drugs? or maybe he was being harrassed? That is what I was trying to question. It will come out eventually, I guess.


Also, I don't think your stereotype of hunters from non-liberal, non-progressive, non-Democrat states being is valid. What specifically makes Minnesota hunters better or holier than those in other states? Whether they are liberal or conservative? The shooter was in fact from Minnesota, right?

And by the way, I never stated I was against hunting...

- T -

Ack!

Tito there was only one point I made concerning your post; this one:

"Tito, it was just one guy who was asked to leave, the same guy who got pissed and came back and opened fire. he was apparently hunting there without permission, i.e., trespassing."

Which was in response to this:

"So sorry for those guys that got shot, but they themselves had guns, were out looking to kill something, and obviously were jerks since they refused to leave when asked."

I was just correcting the facts, that's all. It was one *jerk*, the others were simply coming to aid their buddy, the owner of the land who initially asked the idiot to get out of his stand. The rest of my post was in reference to those who were making some blanket statements about hunters, one of which conveniently disappeared. Other than that misinterpretation i fully agree with what you had to say.

In retrospect, the part about being a liberal state was wrong and I should know better, I lived in TX for 8 years and I do know better, Sorry if you felt slighted by that. I got defensive at some of the statements that were made, and that doesn't make it right.

Ohhh, this gets better and better.

Apparently, among the group of hunters, there was only one gun. And now the suspect is claiming that they fired first. Uh... yeah. According to the police on the scene, the suspect basically ran them all down and shot them. Lovely people out there, ugh.

And no, I don't for a second believe this is even remotely representative of gun owners or hunters in general. This guy was a total nutjob. Eek.

Edit: And by the way, it wasn't an 'assault rifle', it was a SKS 7.62-mm semiautomatic rifle. What the hell is an assault rifle, anyway, besides a nicely loaded word the media likes to throw around?

Hmm, it was an SKS Chinese carbine, not really an assault rifle, but not much of a deer rifle either.

He, I shouldn't even have opened my mouth.

Peace, brother.

BTW. I was just shopping with a friend and she took me to her favorite furniture store. I saw who was the designer and I cracked up thinking about the forum postings. Nice work! We bought a few of your pieces.

- T -

> What the hell is an assault rifle

Well, I dont know if there is an official term for it, but I feel that if you were going to go into Close Quarter Battle, ie attacking buildings, clearing trenches and stuff, you'd want something with:
- minimal accuracy (so short barrel)
- lightweight (short barrel again...)
- lightweight ammo (so you can carry more of it)
- capable of firing bursts of at least 3 rounds at a time
- which basically implies full automatic capability
- easy to change magazines
- really low failure/ jam rate

Seburo is probably a reasonable example of an assault weapon. AK-47 has a decent reputation for not jamming, and has automatic capability etc.

Probably the media defines an assault rifle as anything with full auto capability.

Azelda