I very highly doubt the rancher was killed "over a wounded bull".
More likely than not, a person pointed a rifle at the Deputies.
What led up to the altercation is what is the question.
Understandably a livestock owner does not want to lose a large investment.
Also understandably, a Deputy does not want to have another collision, or someone get gored, or trampled by an injured/mad bull, and views public safety issues as more important than property loss.
Neither view point is wrong, but sometimes (especially when in the heat of the moment) people cannot come to an agreement, and bad things occur.
Remember,this happened in rural Idaho.
99% of the rural deputies I know don't even raise an eyebrow when a rancher shows up with a hunting rifle to put a vehicle struck animal down.
Heck, I have witnessed a couple times where a cattleman has asked an LEO to borrow their rifle to put the animal down.
While it was a HUGE policy violation, the cattleman was handed a rifle, the animal was dispatched, and the gun went back in the rack.
Condolences for all involved.
Mackay,
Thanks for a good post and presenting as clear a picture as any of us are likely to have. Bad deal all around. It doesn't even have to be all that rural of Idaho for LEs to expect folks to be showing up with or possessing firearms of one sort or another. Some might consider this akin to stepping back in time when guns were on school busses or in the gun racks of pickups in school parking lots, but it's still a way of life around here.
I'd not even conjecture who was right or wrong in this scenario, I'd just guess things got heated and out of hand. I know there are many on here who have this type of direct experience. I've only come real close one time, and that's enough for me.
PS - for those who don't know Idaho and other places in the West are still open range and it's common to encounter livestock on rural roads.
Last edited by Akbob5; 11/02/15.
Bob Enjoy life now -- it has an expiration date. ~Molɔ̀ːn Labé Skýla~
