Anyone catch the story of the hunter who accidently shot a women who was walking her dogs?

He used a handgun, probably a T/C, chamber with a rifle cartridge. She was mistaken for a deer.

I cant see the logic in a person hunting and not being able to understand the danger of what they are doing. Not only did he not properly ID his target, but he launched a bullet pretty far without knowing where it would go or end up.

He will pay the price, even if he does not get prison time.

Is this just what is often called "buck-fever"?

I seen the article. It is sad what happened. At the time I read it, there was no arrest or charges filed, yet I assume.

quote Is this just what is often called "buck-fever"?

No, it's what is called stupidity and illegal to boot.

He was 'after hours' 'hunting' as well.
He isn't a hunter, he's just a shooter.

200 hundred yards with a handgun, to kill a deer, not sure I'd try that. Not that that part isnt legal though.
Sure wouldn't try it "after sunset", and wouldn't try shooting to property I didn't own. On top of not identifying a target and what's behind it.

"Jadlowski was using a high-powered pistol when he spotted the deer some 40 minutes after sunset. He fired and hit Rosemary Billquist, 43, in the hip as she was walking her two Labrador Retrievers in the field behind her home in Sherman. "
https://jonathanturley.org/...an-walking-her-dogs/

[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 11-27-2017).]

I was introduced to firearms very early in life and always knew their potential.

I remember I was shooting with a friend from the city and he just seemed oblivious to how far a bullet could travel and how fatal it could be.

It was like he thought, "bullets only go a hundred yards or so and then fall to the ground".

Even the miniscule .22 can travel a mile.

I know they do hunter safety courses and perhaps this should be this person punishment. If I was the judge I would have him become a Hunter Safety Course Instructor.

Hunting on property where you don't have permission to hunt is called "poaching". And killing another person due to your own stupidity is called "negligent homicide". Why hasn't this guy been charged with anything?

Not only did an innocent person get killed for no good reason, but now the leftists are going to use this as a talking point in their anti-gun arguments. Everybody loses. This really pisses me off.

Might be because he is in emergency care, a psychiatric unit. He truly was upset. From the newspaper article he immediately responded and admitted he was the shooter.

This man is not a killer, but made a huge mistake.

That does not mean he is not at fault and should not be responsible. He is an adult and they are maybe waiting till he is discharged to charge him.

Even so, I don't believe jail would do any good.

As some one who shoots for sport, I understand that once that bullet leaves my barrel I am responsible for what ever it hits and will be held accountable for it.

The article said he was the one who called 911 and he held pressure on the wound till help arrived. She was hit in the hip.

[This message has been edited by LitebulbwithaFiero (edited 11-27-2017).]

Mistake? No..gross negligence.

Target recognition and acquisition are at the head of the list in any firearm use. If you don't know what your target really is for sure, don't pull the trigger. Period.
I hope the surviving family members clean his financial clock.
At minimum, he has that coming.

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 11-27-2017).]

I agree with Don. All the regret in the world isn't going to bring back a dead person. Actions have consequences, and his actions killed someone.

This story sux.
I truly feel for the families of both sides.
And no "justice" will be enough.
True stupidity, the definition of irresponsibility on the shooters part.

Target recognition is important, but I do believe he believed he was shooting at a deer. At least that is what he is saying, and his behavior dictates that.

I don't believe he was trying to hurt or murder anyone.

I think there is a mentality to this --- when you have a hammer you are looking for a nail.

He made two big mistakes. Shooting after sunset, and also shooting at a distance that he could not properly assess his target.

There are no excuses, but the courts (specifically) the judge will look at intent. That does not release him from culpability, but will impact his sentencing.


There was a incident here in the city years ago. A man had not properly secured his trailer to the back of his truck. The trailer broke loose and killed a family. There was nothing special about him, he was a working guy just like anyone else, but because of a simple error he impacted the lives of many. I am not sure how he was sentenced.

I think there is a term for killing someone, but not in murder- manslaughter. Right?

You are right.

My take in this matter is that justice is necessary but justice should not entail revenge. Revenge is not the same as Justice. As mentioned there can be no justice here.

If his intent was murder than justice would, and could, easily match the crime. That would entail a life for a life.

We live in a world of accidents, and some are very unfortunate. These are the matters judges and juries struggle with.

Ethics is a tough field.

quote Originally posted by LitebulbwithaFiero: I think there is a term for killing someone, but not in murder- manslaughter. Right?

Criminally negligent homicide/involuntary manslaughter in my state.

PENAL CODE

TITLE 5. OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON

CHAPTER 19. CRIMINAL HOMICIDE

Sec. 19.01. TYPES OF CRIMINAL HOMICIDE. (a) A person commits criminal homicide if he intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence causes the death of an individual.
(b) Criminal homicide is murder, capital murder, manslaughter, or criminally negligent homicide.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 1123, ch. 426, art. 2, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.

Sec. 19.04. MANSLAUGHTER. (a) A person commits an offense if he recklessly causes the death of an individual.
(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the second degree.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Renumbered from Penal Code Sec. 19.04 by Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 1123, ch. 426, art. 2, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 307, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Renumbered from Penal Code Sec. 19.05 and amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.


Sec. 19.05. CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE. (a) A person commits an offense if he causes the death of an individual by criminal negligence.
(b) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Renumbered from Penal Code Sec. 19.06 by Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 1123, ch. 426, art. 2, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Renumbered from Penal Code Sec. 19.07 and amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.

But.....the head DA (State Attorney General) in Texas has in the past, pushed for a more serious charge if the death was caused while in the process of committing a crime, and evidently, this guy was committing a crime by 'hunting' after the hours prescribed by statute in his state.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Mistake? No..gross negligence. Target recognition and acquisition are at the head of the list in any firearm use. If you don't know what your target really is for sure, don't pull the trigger. Period. I hope the surviving family members clean his financial clock. At minimum, he has that coming.

To bad his name isn't "cheney"
eh?

being charged with manslaughter

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bonaduce:

being charged with manslaughter
He might very well be a decent man who will suffer because of this but there has to be some punishment as a way of showing that what he did was wong.

[This message has been edited by dratts (edited 12-01-2017).]

Manchester by the Sea

quote Originally posted by dratts: Manslaughter?

NOUN
the crime of killing a human being without malice aforethought, or otherwise in circumstances not amounting to murder:

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Mistake? No..gross negligence. Target recognition and acquisition are at the head of the list in any firearm use. If you don't know what your target really is for sure, don't pull the trigger. Period. I hope the surviving family members clean his financial clock. At minimum, he has that coming.

Goes to making good decisions and being responsible for the consequences of those decisions, both good and bad. His terrible decision to fire at something that wasn't what he intended to kill should haunt him.

------------------
Ron

Isn't it strange that after a bombing, everyone blames the bomber, his upbringing, his environment, his culture, his mental state but …
after a shooting, the problem is the gun....
Open your frigg'n minds, think about all the other tools that can be made into WMDs.

My wife told me to grow up. I told her to get out of my fort!

This whole thing is why we only use shotguns, bows or crossbows in Southern Ontario. We are just too densley populated for bullets to be anywhere besides the range.

If you want to use a rifle (or heavy pistol) then we go north of the French River. Aint nothing up there to hit.

And ya cant hit a woman, we dont let those into hunt camps <OK, I think I'll run for my life now >