Blaze orange law tweak!

[elfiii]

Ah haaaa that’s why I get shot at so much.

I wear mine! Even to Walmart. ?

Heck, you even wear it in your aviator. I bet you sleep in it sometimes.

 

[Jim Thompson]

So have the people wearing the orange in the ground blind. How did the Orange vest save them then?

The orange didnt help. I think it's an idot law to have to wear it in a blind, but because it is the law I wear it. But again the deer standing in front of the blind dont care either way

 

[Browning Slayer]

Ah haaaa that’s why I get shot at so much.

 

[Miguel Cervantes]

I believe the reason is so you can see the hunter, not the stand! Also you may be on your land, but you are hunting state owned deer. So you are required by law to wear that orange. One other thing: people who do accidentally get shot did not expect it! Accidents happen because we get careless!

Failure to positively identify your target is not an accident. It is criminal negligence.

 

[shdw633]

I know there have been people fined for not wearing their hunters orange in a ladder stand or climber but has anyone on this board been fined for not wearing it in a ground blind or box stand? Just curious as to whether game wardens have cited anyone for that or if it's treated like the the police treat 5 miles an hour over the speed limit, yes it's against the law but you most likely won't get a ticket for it.

 

[kmckinnie]

Heck, you even wear it in your aviator. I bet you sleep in it sometimes.

I have slept wearing it. Eerrrrr well passed out wearing it. ?

 

[Jranger]

If I'm shot while in the stand orange or not someone was aiming for me...

 

[Throwback]

Failure to positively identify your target is not an accident. It is criminal negligence.

http://forum.gon.com/threads/man-co...set-free-by-the-georgia-supreme-court.552829/


https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-supreme-court/1531105.html

However, as the habeas court explained, a hunter's aiming and shooting a firearm without clearly identifying the target amounts to “a substantial and unjustifiable risk” of harm to other persons only if other persons are likely are in the area, and only if the shooter cannot see the target clearly enough to determine that it is not a human being. Furthermore, to establish “conscious disregard,” the State would also have to show that the shooter was conscious, or aware, of that risk, i.e., that he actually knew that a person was likely in the area in the area toward which he was shooting. Even then, the necessary mens rea would be absent if the shooter thought that he had clearly identified a non-human target-say, for instance, the large, predatory cat that Hames says he believed he was shooting at when he tragically shot and killed his brother.

 

[Browning Slayer]

If I'm shot while in the stand orange or not someone was aiming for me...

And an even better reason to not wear it! You stick out like a sore thumb wearing Orange and if someone is shooting at me it's hard to hide..

 

[Miguel Cervantes]

http://forum.gon.com/threads/man-co...set-free-by-the-georgia-supreme-court.552829/


https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-supreme-court/1531105.html

How did that work out for the DNR agent that was shot at night time. The shooters thought he was a hog???

 

[Throwback]

How did that work out for the DNR agent that was shot at night time. The shooters thought he was a hog???

He was shot in a parking lot

 

[ALB]

You may be on your land????

Yeah, which means no one else should be! The Trespasser should be the one shot.

You cannot shot someone for trespassing!

 

[Browning Slayer]

You cannot shot someone for trespassing!

You can if they don't find a body..

 

[shdw633]

Stuff like this happens when you don't have hunters orange on....and in her case, she wasn't required to wear it. Too bad she wasn't, she would probably still be alive today if she would have wore some. I don't even ride the property without it on during the season. I am going to Illinois to hunt public land during bow season and will wear an orange hat to and from the stand because you can shoot crossbows out so far now and I don't need someone mistaking me for a deer like this guy did, while I'm coming in or out of the woods.

https://www.kron4.com/news/authorities-woman-killed-by-hunter-while-walking-her-dogs/1012914149

 

[Miguel Cervantes]

Stuff like this happens when you don't have hunters orange on....and in her case, she wasn't required to wear it. Too bad she wasn't, she would probably still be alive today if she would have wore some. I don't even ride the property without it on during the season. I am going to Illinois to hunt public land during bow season and will wear an orange hat to and from the stand because you can shoot crossbows out so far now and I don't need someone mistaking me for a deer like this guy did, while I'm coming in or out of the woods.

https://www.kron4.com/news/authorities-woman-killed-by-hunter-while-walking-her-dogs/1012914149

HOGWASH!!!! Because cute brunette deer often walk their dogs on a leash.
This guy should be doing life behind bars.

 

[shdw633]

HOGWASH!!!! Because cute brunette deer often walk their dogs on a leash.
This guy should be doing life behind bars.

You wondered why the laws are made. Granted this is an exceptional case but imagine how many their would be if deer hunters were not required to wear it. All you have to look at is the number of turkey hunters shot every year across the country to find that answer, and at least they are only shot with a shotgun, better chance of survival versus a .270 or 30.06

 

[Miguel Cervantes]

You wondered why the laws are made. Granted this is an exceptional case but imagine how many their would be if deer hunters were not required to wear it. All you have to look at is the number of turkey hunters shot every year across the country to find that answer, and at least they are only shot with a shotgun, better chance of survival versus a .270 or 30.06

That wasn't an extreme case. That was flat out homicide by an ignorant negligent human being. To expect regular non-hunting citizens to wear orange while going about their daily duties or leisure's for fear of getting shot by some wingnut that doesn't deserve to own a gun is just begging an invite for the anti-hunting / anti-gun crowd to get involved. This case has absolutely nothing to do with wearing blaze orange and to insist it does is flat out irresponsible behavior by a hunter / sportsman.

 

[shdw633]

That wasn't an extreme case. That was flat out homicide by an ignorant negligent human being. To expect regular non-hunting citizens to wear orange while going about their daily duties or leisure's for fear of getting shot by some wingnut that doesn't deserve to own a gun is just begging an invite for the anti-hunting / anti-gun crowd to get involved. This case has absolutely nothing to do with wearing blaze orange and to insist it does is flat out irresponsible behavior by a hunter / sportsman.

You think he's the only hunter out in the woods that's like that???? Seriously?? I have been shot at several times by individuals just like him who were shooting at running deer, as well as hunters not knowing what was behind what they were shooting at. To just put your head in the sand like it doesn't exist is flat out irresponsible if you ask me.

 

[Miguel Cervantes]

You think he's the only hunter out in the woods that's like that???? Seriously?? I have been shot at several times by individuals just like him who were shooting at running deer, as well as hunters not knowing what was behind what they were shooting at. To just put your head in the sand like it doesn't exist is flat out irresponsible if you ask me.

These are two entirely different topics and you completely missed my point.

 

[shdw633]

These are two entirely different topics and you completely missed my point.

And you seem to be missing mine. The reason for the hunters orange in a blind, climber or ground blind is not for the purposes of being seen by other hunters, it's because of those that would go beyond the law and NOT wear them to the stand/ground blind or climber and then get shot walking to or from their spot. They are already doing that now as you can read on this thread, and that's with a law on the books that says you can't!! Change that law and you are just opening it up for more people to do that and push the law even more. Speed limit is 55 what do people do, go 65, move the speed to 65 what to people do, go 70, move the speed limit to 70 what do people do they do 75, you see it's just human nature to push the limits. The way the law reads is safer and easier to enforce as you have to put it on and leave it on at all times while hunting, see no loopholes, you either have it on at all times or you don't, easy to enforce and less we have to worry about other hunters being shot.