True, but beside the point. The point is, both those guys (and others) can make shots that an ordinary hunter under ordinary circumstances would not attempt.
Agreed, and you're concentrating on one point when it's a two point issue.
It's not that an ordinary hunter couldn't or wouldn't take or make the shot that's the issue. That would be a deviation from the ordinary "man" (hunter) standard of care. Yet, a deviation alone is not sufficient for reckless or criminally negligent. For those to apply, the deviation must be a "gross deviation". So, for Pat or Burns to take a 900 yard broadside shot at an unwounded elk would be a deviation from the ordinary, but that's not what the statute states as necessary for a violation. A mere deviation is insufficient, and simply extending the range (especially when the shooter is known and can prove that they are quite capable at such ranges) is just a deviation.
So, where Pat or Burns could and would take a 900 yard chest shot at a standing broadside, unwounded, elk and that would be a deviation, they would NOT take such a HEAD shot at such an animal. That would be a gross deviation. Why? Well, we've already said that taking a shot at such a range would be a deviation. So, what would make a deviation a "gross" deviation? To have that deviation compounded by another, perhaps more extreme deviation from the ordinary standard of care.
There are very, very few hunters that would every take a head shot. That shot, a head shot, is a deviation. Those that would, take it at MUCH closer ranges than 900 yards (Rost, for example, limits his to 300 and he's literally world-class with a rifle). To take a head shot, at 900 yards, is a deviation upon deviation; a "gross" deviation. That's the bar for reckless and/or criminally negligent, and it just might stick if it's tried on this douche-bag.
I know if I was a Utah CO, I'd damn sure try to make that charge stick. If I was a Utah prosecutor, I'd try like hell to get that conviction. If I were a Utah defense attorney, I'd certainly not like to try to convince judge or jury that my client's head shot at an unwounded elk at 908 yards wasn't a "gross deviation" from the ordinary standard of hunters. As a hunter, I'd certainly not like to be sitting in that defendant's chair trying to justify the same actions.
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.
