24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 18 of 23 1 2 16 17 18 19 20 22 23
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Originally Posted by Pahntr760
Originally Posted by smokepole
Originally Posted by smokepole
OK Bob, then put your money where your mouth is.

Do you want to bet on whether they will charge him with any offenses that are strictly related to his poor shot selection?

..........

Let me know. I have $100 that says they won't.



I didn't think so.


Originally Posted by AH64guy
He might by busy with unexpected consequences:

"We have received several complaints about this video and have opened an investigation."

"These long range shooting incidents are generating an increasing number of complaints. Normally this behavior, while unethical in a lot of hunter minds, is not illegal unless there is another violation of law. In this incident, shooting across a roadway."

He may need the money sooner than expected...


Hmmm...Where did you find these quotes?


Those quotes come from e-mails to people that have reported this douche, or to people that have received a forward from such people.


Originally Posted by Mannlicher
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
BP-B2

Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,669
K
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
K
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,669
If you read any of the comments below the video he hit the elk but did not kill it. Not sure why you post a video of shooting at an animal at 900 yards that you wounded and did not recover!

This kind of stupid video makes all hunters look bad!


NRA Lifetime Endowment Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
You do it because it looks like the elk went down, and you hope no one will catch on to the fact that you didn't really kill the elk. Or aim for the head.



A wise man is frequently humbled.

Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Actually, I think he did it for praise on a forum and for a chance to make a little money on YouTube.


Originally Posted by Mannlicher
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 17,185
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 17,185
Maybe in fact he did kill the elk but for some reason he was on the wrong side of the law by doing so. He backtracked on his story.


"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
Thomas Jefferson

GeoW, The "Unwoke" ...Let's go Brandon!

"A Well Regulated Militia" Life Member

IC B2

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
There's no law he would've broken by killing it that he wouldn't have broken by shooting at it.



A wise man is frequently humbled.

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
B
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
B
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Originally Posted by smokepole
Originally Posted by smokepole
OK Bob, then put your money where your mouth is.

Do you want to bet on whether they will charge him with any offenses that are strictly related to his poor shot selection?

..........

Let me know. I have $100 that says they won't.




I didn't think so.



I don't get sucked into stupid bets on internet forums over something as ridiculous as some goon attempting to head shoot elk at 900 yards,and idle speculation over whether I should agree with you as to whether he did something "wrong".

Kids stuff.

If I'm going to bet, it's over something important...especially not with someone who's ego seems wounded because he cited the wrong statute and got called on it.

If you don't get the gist of what I was saying that's your problem.But I can't blame you really because you have no legal training and don't know how to read a statute and apply it to a given set of facts. Others got it right away.

If you need the $100 bucks I'll send it to you. smirk




The 280 Remington is overbore.

The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
Bob, you are as FOS as a Christmas turkey. My first offer for a bet was whether the guy would be convicted of a game law violation, which is not "idle speculation over whether the guy did something wrong." It's a black and white, did he break the law question. Those are decided in court, not on the 24hourcampfire. And don't forget that you're the one who said he broke the law, not me.

But you whined that it was a suckers bet, he might not get convicted, blah blah blah......:

Originally Posted by BobinNH
Disposition could include any number of things short of a conviction. Continued without a finding,nolo contendere,among others, come to mind.

Rolling dice on predicting the outcome of any proceedings in a courtroom is for amateurs. The pro's don't do it.


So I called your bluff and changed the bet to whether he would simply be charged or not, stacking the odds in your favor if you believe what you've been saying. And what did you do?

You still wouldn't take the bet. Apparently "the pros" (whoever they are) don't bet on anything where you come from. Why go through the long-winded amateur attorney bit on why it's a "sucker's bet" when you're not gonna take the bet in any form?

As far as citing the wrong statute, as I said, I cited the only statute that came up when I searched the Utah code for "reckless endangerment." None came up in the sections that pertain to game laws. You're the one that used the term reckless, not me. And what statutes did you cite? Jack and squat.

And you keep talking about my lack of legal training but here's a news flash Bob: I'm not the one making a legal argument here, and I'm not the one saying that this guy broke the law, that would be you. So what's your legal training?

My argument is common sense, and it goes like this: Only an idiot would think that the act of taking a shot (however ill-advised) at a big game animal you're legally attempting to kill would constitute a crime that meets the criteria for being either reckless or endangerment.

You're legally trying to kill the thing for cryin' out loud. By legally shooting bullets at it. What could you possibly do that recklessly endangers it more than that? As a matter of fact, by taking a head shot at 900 yards instead of getting closer or going for the lungs, this guy was apparently doing just the opposite.

As far as me not getting "the gist of what you were saying" or not knowing "how to read a statute and apply it to a given set of facts," nice try. If "others got it right away," who were they and what did they say that gave you the idea they agree that laws were broken? I must've missed the part where others chimed in and agreed with you, can you show it to me?

You didn't take the bet because you're chicken-sh**. You'd love to prove me wrong and you know it. Kid stuff? Running your mouth and being afraid to back it up, now that's kid stuff.

Doesn't matter, we'll know soon enough if this guy gets charged. The thing is, I'd rather place a bet, be wrong, and lose than run my mouth, chicken out, and be right.

Lastly, yep I could use $100, please send it to me.

I didn't think so. Apparently, it's easier for me to part with $100 than for you.

Last edited by smokepole; 03/03/15.


A wise man is frequently humbled.

Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 215
S
Campfire Member
Offline
Campfire Member
S
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 215
Originally Posted by coldboremiracle
What do you guys think?


http://youtu.be/95NUv1bLJTQ


There has got to be a support group or something for guys like us that feel the need to compensate.

I feel your pain bud.keep hanging in there.

One hint "Asian" things look more proportion.;)

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
B
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
B
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
I was very consistent. IIRC I said that I would "cite" him for it.A "citation" is an accusation by an LEO that you did something in violation of a statute,whether it's speeding with a motor vehicle, soliciting prostitution, whatever.....From there the burden of proof shifts to the government to establish "guilt".

I never said that he was "guilty" of reckless conduct under the applicable statute,but a first year law student could make a plausible argument that his conduct was "reckless" under the statute,sufficient for the issuance of a citation. Cops do it all the time and not all citations result in "convictions". I am not the one who brought "guilt" or "innocence" into the equation;you did,and wanted to bet on it.

I refused to "bet",knowing that there were other steps in the process after the issuance of the citation.A lot of this got lost in your aimless rambling.

Whether his conduct amounted to "reckless" under the statute is a question for a court to decide based on the facts,either through a hearing process, or trial, and the issuance of a citation is the first step in the process. Ever been cited for speeding?If so you are least vaguely familiar with the process.

Again, you are the one who wanted to "bet" on the issue of "guilt" or "innocence",with your "wanna bet wanna bet?" rant,calling me out like you're 10 years old trying to settle some score in a playground,and I might add, getting insulting in the process. I, on the other hand,never offered any opinion on whether he is "guilty" or "innocent";only that he might have violated the statute. This is a subtle distinction that you did not "get" and I think you still don't.

Your nose got out of joint when I simply told you that you had cited the incorrect statute,which 4ager found and posted,and which I had found and reviewed the day before.

You seem to want to continue the rant....whether Utah LEO finds that his conduct violated the "reckless" standard under the statute,or some other violation, is not for me nor you to decide.All I said is that,given the circumstances, I'd cite him and let a court sort it out.

So far all you've shown me is that you are good at taking cheap shots at people over the internet when challenged or when someone disagrees with you.

Don't kid yourself on the $100 bucks. This is just more of your juvenile puff and blow to try to insult me. At some point you have to grow up and develop beyond the"Wanna bet wanna bet wanna bet????" stage....how little kids do things.


PM me an address and I will drop it in the mail for you. If you can't pay it back, don't sweat it.I'll never miss it. smirk I've left bigger tips for people I don't know.

I'll be sure to post on here to let everyone know I sent it out to you. That OK?




The 280 Remington is overbore.

The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
IC B3

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
Originally Posted by BobinNH
I was very consistent. IIRC I said.....


IIRC? That's funny, good one Bob. It's still there, takes about a minute to read what you said. First it was this:

Originally Posted by BobinNH
I think he needs counseling and should have his hunting license yanked for wanton wasting of game.Pathetic.


Then after putting yourself in the place of the judge and jury, you switched gears and said you "didn't think anything," about what the guy did and that was for a judge or jury to decide. Want me to quote that one too?

Then after your "wanton waste" idea fell by the wayside (how do you "waste" something that was never in your possession?? And I'm the one who doesn't understand the law....) you switched to your "reckless" theme. That's consistent all right.

The only thing consistent about it is you can't wrap your head around the fact that someone can do something that offends you and it's not against the law.

And as far as taking cheap shots at you, that's a good one Bob.

Go back and read your previous post, and then mine. You want to write a post that implies I'm not intelligent enough to understand what you're saying, and then whine about cheap shots?

That's rich. Imbedded in those cheap shots is also a point-by-point rebuttal of your BS post, by the way.

You still haven't said who the "others" were who "got it right away." Who were they Bob, and where did they say they agreed that the guy broke the law?

Or was that just more BS?


One more thing Bob, in reference to this:

Originally Posted by BobinNH
Whether his conduct amounted to "reckless" under the statute is a question for a court to decide based on the facts,either through a hearing process, or trial, and the issuance of a citation is the first step in the process. Ever been cited for speeding?If so you are least vaguely familiar with the process.



As a matter of fact, I have been cited for speeding. I've also been qualified and testified in court as an expert witness on some complex issues involving my interpretation of some fairly nebulous legal definitions, and I served on a jury a year or two ago that decided whether a defendant was guilty of attempted murder in the first degree under two different legal standards, one being depraved indifference and the other being "acting after deliberation." Among other charges.

You may derive your legal understanding from speeding tickets Bob, but I've been involved with a few things that were a little more complicated. So I'm more than "vaguely familiar with the process."




A wise man is frequently humbled.

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 794
m77 Offline
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 794
The thing that I cannot really make out on the video is the 'secondary' movement when the animal goes down. The reason why it looks funny is that we cull plenty of animals with head shots for meat processing purposes and when an animal goes down after a good head shot the head does not move ever again. There will be absolutely no movement of the head after a brain shot and the body will drop directly to the ground (Not pretending to be a neurological expert, just what we noticed over the past few years). Sometimes up to 600 animals can be culled in about 4 days (just to give you an idea of the sampling size) and when a bullet hits the brain the head stays on the ground.

I believe the animal's rear could have slipped over a little overhang and pulled the rest of the body backwards but the head not staying on the ground is a little odd. The other scenario could be that the animal fell oddly and somehow thrown it's head upwards but that is just guessing.

Just a final though: What is faster than a regular Elk?


a wounded Elk grin

Pieter

Last edited by m77; 03/06/15.
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
m77, you may have missed it, but that elk was not recovered. It must've been faster than even a wounded elk.



A wise man is frequently humbled.

Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
smoke,

Bob is quite a bit more than vaguely familiar with the legal process.

Originally Posted by smokepole
Originally Posted by BobinNH
I was very consistent. IIRC I said.....


IIRC? That's funny, good one Bob. It's still there, takes about a minute to read what you said. First it was this:

Originally Posted by BobinNH
I think he needs counseling and should have his hunting license yanked for wanton wasting of game.Pathetic.


Then after putting yourself in the place of the judge and jury, you switched gears and said you "didn't think anything," about what the guy did and that was for a judge or jury to decide. Want me to quote that one too?

Then after your "wanton waste" idea fell by the wayside (how do you "waste" something that was never in your possession?? And I'm the one who doesn't understand the law....) you switched to your "reckless" theme. That's consistent all right.

The only thing consistent about it is you can't wrap your head around the fact that someone can do something that offends you and it's not against the law.

And as far as taking cheap shots at you, that's a good one Bob.

Go back and read your previous post, and then mine. You want to write a post that implies I'm not intelligent enough to understand what you're saying, and then whine about cheap shots?

That's rich. Imbedded in those cheap shots is also a point-by-point rebuttal of your BS post, by the way.

You still haven't said who the "others" were who "got it right away." Who were they Bob, and where did they say they agreed that the guy broke the law?

Or was that just more BS?


One more thing Bob, in reference to this:

Originally Posted by BobinNH
Whether his conduct amounted to "reckless" under the statute is a question for a court to decide based on the facts,either through a hearing process, or trial, and the issuance of a citation is the first step in the process. Ever been cited for speeding?If so you are least vaguely familiar with the process.



As a matter of fact, I have been cited for speeding. I've also been qualified and testified in court as an expert witness on some complex issues involving my interpretation of some fairly nebulous legal definitions, and I served on a jury a year or two ago that decided whether a defendant was guilty of attempted murder in the first degree under two different legal standards, one being depraved indifference and the other being "acting after deliberation." Among other charges.

You may derive your legal understanding from speeding tickets Bob, but I've been involved with a few things that were a little more complicated. So I'm more than "vaguely familiar with the process."



Originally Posted by Mannlicher
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
That may be, I have no idea. Good for him.

Given his vast legal knowledge it's surprising he could be so wrong about whether this guy broke the law, and which laws he broke.

The thing is, he threw off an insulting one liner indicating I'm not familiar with the legal process, and I responded.

At this point, I really don't care, I just want to hear the outcome with this particular Utah hunter.



A wise man is frequently humbled.

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,787
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,787
Originally Posted by smokepole
[...]I just want to hear the outcome with this particular Utah hunter.


And I.


Member of the Merry Band of turdlike People.



Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,601
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,601
Originally Posted by coldboremiracle
What do you guys think?


http://youtu.be/95NUv1bLJTQ


I think it SUCKS.


Nut


Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.

Thomas Jefferson

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812
Originally Posted by smokepole
That may be, I have no idea. Good for him.

Given his vast legal knowledge it's surprising he could be so wrong about whether this guy broke the law, and which laws he broke. Is H

The thing is, he threw off an insulting one liner indicating I'm not familiar with the legal process, and I responded.

At this point, I really don't care, I just want to hear the outcome with this particular Utah hunter.


I'd wager heavily that BobinNH is more familar with the legal system than you and by a long shot.



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 45,730
Did I say otherwise?



A wise man is frequently humbled.

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 4,592
A
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
A
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 4,592
deleted

Last edited by AH64guy; 03/12/15.
Page 18 of 23 1 2 16 17 18 19 20 22 23

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
YB23

Who's Online Now
285 members (1minute, 204guy, 257_X_50, 10gaugemag, 280shooter, 29aholic, 40 invisible), 2,167 guests, and 993 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,187,726
Posts18,400,627
Members73,822
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 







Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.077s Queries: 16 (0.007s) Memory: 0.9268 MB (Peak: 1.1081 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-29 05:27:31 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS