Wrong for hunters to fire near children

Wrong for hunters to fire near children

There are 10 comments on the Baltimore Sun story from Dec 15, 2008, titled Wrong for hunters to fire near children. In it, Baltimore Sun reports that:

What in the world is going on? It's sick enough that it is legal in my own Howard County to slaughter the innocent, peaceful and beautiful gifts of God - the deer, which were here long before the vast majority ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Baltimore Sun.

mike p

United States

#1 Dec 15, 2008
This letter is so far left, it doesn't even deserve a response.
Nick

Baltimore, MD

#2 Dec 15, 2008
I have no problem with deer hunting, but she's right in that the shooting should not be done in any area that is close enough for a bullet to reach a place where people might be hit.

What if that bullet had gone through a window and killed a 3 year old kid? I'm sure the gun nuts and 2nd amendment wackos would say that one measly life is a small price to pay for the right to bear arms, right?
Idiots still with us

Baltimore, MD

#3 Dec 15, 2008
mike p wrote:
This letter is so far left, it doesn't even deserve a response.
Then why did you respond?

In fact, the letter is a beacon of good sense and moral concern.

The Amish abhor guns and won't have them in their homes or on their land. Would you call them "far left"?
mike p

United States

#4 Dec 15, 2008
Idiots still with us wrote:
<quoted text>Then why did you respond?
In fact, the letter is a beacon of good sense and moral concern.
The Amish abhor guns and won't have them in their homes or on their land. Would you call them "far left"?
OK for all those who haven't a clue....

first it wasn't a bullet, it was a rifled slug fired from a shotgun.

second the slug has a range of about 100 yards unless the shooter is arching the gun.

third the hunters followed the law.

To answer the question about the Amish (which has no relevence on this issue). They don't use firearms because of their religion.

This letter was obviously written by a tree hugger given the wacko statements about deer and the they were here first line which is just......out there.
Augustheat

Pasadena, MD

#5 Dec 16, 2008
As a hunter, and a rational person. I believe that the minimum distance should be increased because the effective range for this type of ammunition is about 200 yards. This being said, it is our responsibility to take, or not take a shot and to know our surroundings. Now, accidents do happen, and in this case we can learn from a mistake that only cost a few dollars to fix, and the mistake will also(hopefully) bring an important sense of awareness/responsibility that comes when an unfortunate mistake is made.
Guns guns guns

Baltimore, MD

#6 Dec 16, 2008
mike p wrote:
<quoted text>
OK for all those who haven't a clue....
first it wasn't a bullet, it was a rifled slug fired from a shotgun.
second the slug has a range of about 100 yards unless the shooter is arching the gun.
third the hunters followed the law.
To answer the question about the Amish (which has no relevence on this issue). They don't use firearms because of their religion.
This letter was obviously written by a tree hugger given the wacko statements about deer and the they were here first line which is just......out there.
So what if the letter was written by a "tree-hugger"? That doesn't make it "out there" -- any more than your niggling details about bullets and slugs, as though it makes any difference when a weapon-propelled missile flies through the window of a daycare center.

Listen to yourself. The "rifled slug" has a range of only 100 yards, and, anyway, "the hunters followed the law." Tell that to the parents of the three-year-old who gets killed next time such an "accident" happens.

You gun people are the real nutjobs.
old grunt

Baltimore, MD

#7 Dec 16, 2008
Until there is some realization by the local governments that take smart growth into account and stop the unrestricted intrusion of humans into rural areas, there will always be a conflict between hunters and non-hunters. Humans are already intruding into what has traditionally been rural habitat and therefore,more populated with deer and other wildlife. In spite of the arguments by tree-huggers and anti-hunting wingnuts(see, that term can also be used for you, not just pro-gun folks), hunting helps control excess deer populations. BTW, controlling deer populations helps control deer ticks, which may help control Lyme's Disease.
Guns guns guns

Baltimore, MD

#8 Dec 16, 2008
old grunt wrote:
Until there is some realization by the local governments that take smart growth into account and stop the unrestricted intrusion of humans into rural areas, there will always be a conflict between hunters and non-hunters. Humans are already intruding into what has traditionally been rural habitat and therefore,more populated with deer and other wildlife. In spite of the arguments by tree-huggers and anti-hunting wingnuts(see, that term can also be used for you, not just pro-gun folks), hunting helps control excess deer populations. BTW, controlling deer populations helps control deer ticks, which may help control Lyme's Disease.
Oh, right. We need to preserve rural habitat, not so that animals aren't driven from their natural environments but so that hunters have a place to hunt.

Frankly, I'm in favor of retaining those yardage requirements, or maybe even decreasing them. Then some of you hunting hillbillies might start popping one another.
What garbage

Pasadena, MD

#9 Dec 16, 2008
Clearly the problem here is too much gun control! If those children had weapons of their own to fire back with, we wouldn't have a problem now would we!

Dang gun hating, anti-constitution type leftists!

(Now for the real response. "I wonder how the hunters would feel had it been their children running for cover, fleeing gunfire in an area that is supposed to be safe." Was good, but the LW had to ruin a perfectly intelligent message with the preceeding crap in the letter and rightly deserves to be dismissed as a loon because of it.)

“Trust, but Verify”

Since: Oct 08

Baltimore, MD

#10 Dec 16, 2008
"my own Howard County ..... the population that has strangled this county, devastating and destroying land, clogging roads and overcrowding schools."

aren't you, by your own admission, a member of that "population that has strangled this county, devastating and destroying land, clogging roads and overcrowding schools".

Why don't you move if it's too crowded for the deer. You seem to be part of the problem.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Howard County Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Columbia teen, sentenced in 2008 for shooting S... (Aug '10) Dec '15 His BFF 4
River Hill or Centennial High School? (Nov '14) Sep '15 LadyInMaryland 4
DMV's Finest - Basketball Team Competing for Za... (May '15) May '15 DMVsFinest 1
News Former nonprofit CEO pleads guilty to diverting... (Mar '15) Mar '15 Frances 1
News Senior living caretaker indicted in abuse of el... (Mar '15) Mar '15 Jaden 1
Stepparent Support Group (Nov '14) Nov '14 Wonder Woman 1
howard county homeschooling community (Nov '14) Nov '14 HCHomeschooler 1
More from around the web