The issue that all the media outlets seem to be whining about is the time that elapsed between the accidental gunshot and the time that it was reported to the media.
My opinion is that the media didn't need to even hear about the incident as it was not of any importance to anyone other than Vice President Cheney, the Lawyer who was shot, and his family. The property owner that the hunting party was on was given the choice to releasse the news, and she decided to alert her local newspaper.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME]That guy could be dead right now. Of course the Bush Administration along with the NRA will be more than happy to say that it was an accident, and guns are not dangerous.[/QUOTE]
Was it not an accident? Are you going to say that this is another right-wing conspiracy?
Did anyone say that guns are not dangerous?
<TedNugent> The best safety device for guns is a combination of respect and education</TedNugent>
Was it not an accident? Are you going to say that this is another right-wing conspiracy?
Did anyone say that guns are not dangerous?
<TedNugent> The best safety device for guns is a combination of respect and education</TedNugent>
Sorry, but the last person someone should be taking advice from is Ted Nugent. I don't care how much "education" he wants to put into the hunting issue, but the whole thought of someone shooting a living creature for the sake of leisure or entertainment is just sick.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Sorry, but the last person someone should be taking advice from is Ted Nugent. I don't care how much "education" he wants to put into the hunting issue, but the whole thought of someone shooting a living creature for the sake of leisure or entertainment is just sick.[/QUOTE]
Mr. Jingles, please don't think that I am attacking you in a few of these threads. You actually seem to be one of the good ones regarding honest and friendly debates. Thank you for making QueenZone one of the best places to discuss world/domestic politics.
Ol Teddy always seems to take more from his kills than just giggles. Ted has made it clear the the animals that he hunts are used for food/clothing.
At least where I'm from (Pennsylvania), there is a strict limit on the number of species that you may take at any one time. Taking more than the limit is punishable as poaching. For some species, it is illegal to take even one animal and others only one per hunting season. It may be a surprise to some people, but the laws and regulations regarding hunting are handled on a state by state basis, andare very thorough. If you are interested, here is a link the PA Game Commission ( http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/ ). In the end, there are always going to be those who disagree with the idea of hunting. People should realize, however, that someone is at least giving some chance for the animals. That is what makes hunting a challange. The laws are enforced with fines and even jail time for offenders.
Mr. Jingles, please don't think that I am attacking you in a few of these threads. You actually seem to be one of the good ones regarding honest and friendly debates. Thank you for making QueenZone one of the best places to discuss world/domestic politics.
Ol Teddy always seems to take more from his kills than just giggles. Ted has made it clear the the animals that he hunts are used for food/clothing.
At least where I'm from (Pennsylvania), there is a strict limit on the number of species that you may take at any one time. Taking more than the limit is punishable as poaching. For some species, it is illegal to take even one animal and others only one per hunting season. It may be a surprise to some people, but the laws and regulations regarding hunting are handled on a state by state basis, andare very thorough. If you are interested, here is a link the PA Game Commission ( http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/ ). In the end, there are always going to be those who disagree with the idea of hunting. People should realize, however, that someone is at least giving some chance for the animals. That is what makes hunting a challange. The laws are enforced with fines and even jail time for offenders.
I'm very glad we can have a calm and respectful debate without taking things to extremes. Some people here have already made their choice to take things to a personal level.
Now, the main reason why I'm personally against hunting is because this is a "sport" where there's a countless number of times when an animal is shot and left slowly agonizing to death. To me that's just incredibly cruel and heartless way to stop the life of a creature.
It seems very hypocritical to me that there are laws against animal cruelty, but they only apply to farm animals, pets, and wild animals living in zoos. If it's a matter of population control, the job should be given to professionals who are capable of shooting animals with tranquilizers before being killed. Of course, it's much cheaper for the government and local authorities to let people do the killing themselves.
Now, the main reason why I'm personally against hunting is because this is a "sport" where there's a countless number of times when an animal is shot and left slowly agonizing to death. To me that's just incredibly cruel and heartless way to stop the life of a creature.
It seems very hypocritical to me that there are laws against animal cruelty, but they only apply to farm animals, pets, and wild animals living in zoos. If it's a matter of population control, the job should be given to professionals who are capable of shooting animals with tranquilizers before being killed. Of course, it's much cheaper for the government and local authorities to let people do the killing themselves.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME]That guy could be dead right now. Of course the Bush Administration and the NRA will be more than ready to support each other on this issue, and remind Americans that guns are not dangerous.[/QUOTE]
Accidents happen all the time. Two years ago my friend's sister broke her wrist closing a curtain for drama. That doesn't mean curtains shouldn't be used, it just means that, like everything, people should apply proper caution. Same with firearms.
Accidents happen all the time. Two years ago my friend's sister broke her wrist closing a curtain for drama. That doesn't mean curtains shouldn't be used, it just means that, like everything, people should apply proper caution. Same with firearms.
This is just proof that any idiot can legally own a gun and cause an accident.
Guns are a lot different from curtains in the sense that guns were created with the main purpose of causing harm and death. How often do we see cases of people being killed by the improper use of curtains.
Guns are a lot different from curtains in the sense that guns were created with the main purpose of causing harm and death. How often do we see cases of people being killed by the improper use of curtains.
Well, you think the crime rate would be lower if we werent armed to the teeth?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Bitch</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Well, you think the crime rate would be lower if we werent armed to the teeth?[/QUOTE]
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/weaponstab.htm
Possibly
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/weaponstab.htm
Possibly
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Bitch</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Well, you think the crime rate would be lower if we werent armed to the teeth?[/QUOTE]
I, for one, think so. It's statistically proven that countries and areas with stricter gun control laws have reduced rates of violent and armed (duh) crime.
I, for one, think so. It's statistically proven that countries and areas with stricter gun control laws have reduced rates of violent and armed (duh) crime.
and they better not get that stupid "conceal carry" law passed. Why not just invite someone to shoot you?
Perhaps if there was a yearly registration for guns and knives over a certain length. Something similar to the way that cars are kept track of. It seems to me that if weapons were easily traced to owners, that would promote more responsibility in their use.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Bitch</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]and they better not get that stupid "conceal carry" law passed. Why not just invite someone to shoot you?[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah, so in other words, women shouldn't have any right to protect themselves from being raped, and what about potential gay-bashing victims? (www.pinkpistols.org) If Matthew Shepard had had a gun on his person, that tragedy would NOT have occurred.
It would have been:
McK: We're not gay, and you're gonna get jacked.
Shep: Well, I AM gay, and you're gonna get shot. (pulls .22)
Oh yeah, so in other words, women shouldn't have any right to protect themselves from being raped, and what about potential gay-bashing victims? (www.pinkpistols.org) If Matthew Shepard had had a gun on his person, that tragedy would NOT have occurred.
It would have been:
McK: We're not gay, and you're gonna get jacked.
Shep: Well, I AM gay, and you're gonna get shot. (pulls .22)
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Bitch</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Well, you think the crime rate would be lower if we werent armed to the teeth?[/QUOTE]
I, for one, think so. It's statistically proven that countries and areas with stricter gun control laws have reduced rates of violent and armed (duh) crime.[/QUOTE]
Washington DC has the most strict gun control, and also the highest crime rate.
I, for one, think so. It's statistically proven that countries and areas with stricter gun control laws have reduced rates of violent and armed (duh) crime.[/QUOTE]
Washington DC has the most strict gun control, and also the highest crime rate.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Queen Of Wrestling<h6>Jamie's Bitch</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Well, you think the crime rate would be lower if we werent armed to the teeth?[/QUOTE]
I, for one, think so. It's statistically proven that countries and areas with stricter gun control laws have reduced rates of violent and armed (duh) crime.[/QUOTE]
Washington DC has the most strict gun control, and also the highest crime rate. [/QUOTE]
What about Europe? Almost no shoot accidents. Isn't that because it's illegal to have weapons here?
You give an example, but there are plenty of examples who say the opposite.
I, for one, think so. It's statistically proven that countries and areas with stricter gun control laws have reduced rates of violent and armed (duh) crime.[/QUOTE]
Washington DC has the most strict gun control, and also the highest crime rate. [/QUOTE]
What about Europe? Almost no shoot accidents. Isn't that because it's illegal to have weapons here?
You give an example, but there are plenty of examples who say the opposite.