Jeez,, close call
 

You know, it's kinda crazy!! The bear population has exploded. But still, wildlife and fisheries are still spending money like crazy to promote the bears. I don't know about everyone else but I generally go to my stands or leave my stands with out light or a very dim light.. Kinda getting dangerouse these days to be doing that . Good huntin!!

And how is "being ready to face consequences" consistent with the presumption of innocence promised by the Constitution?

Those sucking from the government teat have made it obvious that the government has abandoned the "presumption of innocence" with respect to their precious black bears.

Personally, I don't think I'll ever have to shoot one unless they threaten a family member, because I'm fairly agile and can wait until the last moment before I need to apply force if avoidance is as all possible.

But it's hard to understand why someone would put themselves in jeopardy of an overzealous prosecution should the need arise for a legitimate use of force.

If one must use force in self-defense against wildlife, it seems to me that the best plan of action would be to quickly leave the area for one's safety because the dangerous animal may not be neutralized and/or may not be alone. Having been diligent to escape and evade after employing deadly force, one probably would only know that the attack was deterred, and may not know if the muzzle blast or hitting the target deterred the attack.

Having an attorney explain these facts to any investigating parties would then be the advisable course of action in the unlikely event that the investigation reaches you. A good attorney will also be essential in declining unscientific investigatory methods (like polygraphs). Investigators are much less likely to threaten you (through an attorney) with prosecution if you exercise your legal rights (through an attorney) to decline a polygraph or intrusive searches.

Let's face it, government employees are not trustworthy with respect to the presumption of innocence, but they are reasonably trustworthy not to be able to find most self-defense shooters who do not deliver their own heads on a platter. It's a sad day when the public can trust their incompetence more than their oath to support the Constitution, but here we are.

When did I say anything about innocence? I didn't. But as I said, its easy to claim self defense in any wildlife shooting. Are they supposed to believe every instance of that? I'm not saying they should or shouldn't, but its easy to justify a killing by saying it was in self defense.

I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to defend yourself. The point I'm making is be smart, don't put yourself in a bad situation. The bears are protected by law, and I don't recall an exception for self defense.

I tend to agree and carry myself as someone said earlier. When you are in the woods, you are in their home. Carry yourself accordingly, and in most cases, you should be fine. I spend a good bit of my time outdoors, whether for work or pleasure, and I do not have very many close encounters with any animal, because I carry myself accordingly.

The ESA has an exception for self-defense, but overzealous prosecutors are often eager to make examples out of people who shoot bears. In the case below, prosecutors moved forward with charges because the shooter could not sufficiently prove how close the grizzlies were to the six children in his yard.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews...fense-shooting

Here's another case that was eventually dismissed as self-defense, but not before an overzealous prosecution cost six figures and many years:

http://www.legalreform-now.org/menu4_1.htm

Things that have a legitimate shot at harming you and you should worry about while hunting:

vehicle trip to the camp
ATV ride to the stand
falling out of stand
t-boys 30-30 brush shot
tree falling on you
yellowjackets/wasps

mosquito borne diseases

walking up on a meth lab

hippies

alien abductions




snakes
bears

Let's try and keep this to Louisiana black bears, no sense going to the grizzlies which are more aggressive. Try to keep it in state. You will not find an attack in Louisiana, just a bunch of corn feeders overturned.




:awaitsalongrantaboutoverzealousgovernmentblahblah blah

LDWF sees the possibility of black bear attacks as sufficiently reasonable that they have seen fit to publish guidance:

Even those hunters that follow all of the proper precautions can
occasionally encounter a bear while hunting. Although bears are
generally shy and for the most part try to avoid humans, hunting
places humans in close proximity to bears. When a surprise encounter
occurs, the best course of action is to detour around where the bear is
feeding or resting. Go back the way you came and access your
intended destination from another direction. If you unintentionally
encounter a bear at close range, raise your hands above your head to
appear larger than you are. Speak in a normal voice to allow the bear
to identify you as human. Back away until it is safe to turn and WALK
(DO NOT RUN) away. Bears have poor vision, but have a keen sense
of smell. They will sometimes stand on their hind legs when faced
with something they can't identify. They are trying to catch your scent
to determine what they are encountering. If an attack occurs, DO NOT
PLAY DEAD. That is a technique used for grizzly bears. Fight back
with anything available. Black bear attacks have often times been
stopped when the person fought back violently.

"Fight back with anything available" certainly includes use of arms, if one has has the foresight to be prepared.

Are you saying that the odds of a black bear attack are so remote that LDWF was wasting taxpayer money by publishing guidance?

Why would they educate hunters not to run, if there was not a real chance of running triggering an attack? Why tell hunters not to play dead if there was not a real chance of playing dead triggering an attack?

times 2. I assume that list is in order of likeliness to happen. I would just put venomous snakes above alien abductions early on in the season.

these are just disclaimers

You have to put disclaimers on coffee nowadays saying that it is hot

you also have to put disclaimers on every toy saying its a choking hazard

its just the times we live in. Most of this is common sense. If you see a bear, leave it alone. If you see an alligator, do not jump on it and try to ride it like Steve Irwin, same thing. If a bear is trying to eat your face off, shoot it.

Spending to much money on the bear population
 

Instead of spending the money to bring back the bears which were in the spillway and felicianas already, why don't we bring back the elk. Rosevelt killed a elk in lousiana and the elk are not a problem!

Ok, for all of you that hope lousiana will open a bear season, let's share the best way to cook them!!

Go to the store and by a case of beer.
Cook the bear and feed the whole block bear while you drink the beer . I've had bear and it's nasty !!!!!

That would be awesome. Then I wouldn't have to take that expensive *** dream trip to Colorado or New Mexico.

I still don't understand why we can't carry a sidearm while bowhunting... with all the coyotes, bobcats, snakes, wild hogs, and bears in the woods.

haha
 

and hippies and aliens:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

No I hunt with a guy named Ronnie he and I are the only ones in there, but there is a tract that someone purchased last year. Trent is a Sutton?

No nugier. He's a salesman for process



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk mmm

I don't know him, he may be in the lease that the bridge crossing Intercoastal is under, it's a pretty big lease ad really close to where i hunt.