Quote:
Originally Posted by Smalls
I guess there are some unreasonable men in the world, MG, cause I've seen more than a couple videos of guys not hauling off and shooting bears because they thought they were a "threat to human life".
Act with reasonable respect to wildlife, and there is a good chance you will be just fine. On the off chance that you do have a potentially dangerous encounter, act accordingly. Just be ready to face consequences.
I don't think anyone is going to blame someone for defending themselves, but the government isn't "anyone", and the bear is a protecting species. I'm not saying a bear's life should be valued over a man's life, but I think its very easy to claim self defense with no witnesses. And the way people shoot without identifying their target, its a great excuse when you kill one on accident.
|
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.