Slashdot Mirror
Texas Lawmaker Wants To Let the Blind Hunt
IHC Navistar writes with a story from Reuters Oddly Enough. A Texas lawmaker has introduced a measure that would allow blind people to hunt any game that sighted people can currently pursue. The article notes that the bill may have clear sailing in the hunting-besotted state of Texas. An education outreach person from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department explained it this way: "A blind person can shoot a rifle by mounting an offset pistol scope on the side of the rifle instead of on top. This allows their companion behind them to peer over their shoulder and help them sight it, but the blind person can pull the trigger."
You think this is funny? I've got some incredible stories for you then. Get this. The other day - I'm in the grocery store and there is this guy walking around with a dog! In the store! Really, no kidding. A dog in the store and this guy is holding onto a harness the dog was wearing and the dog was leading the guy around. Can you believe it? Somebody should write up a funny post about dogs who shop for humans. That's a knee slapper.
But that's not the funniest. A week before that I saw this lady out on the sidewalk waving this big white stick all over the place. Talk about from the "don't hit me dept.", she was wacking all kinds of stuff with that stick. Hide the kids! Oh man, I still laugh until I get tears in my eyes over this one.
Last year my brother took a friend of ours with ALS on the last deer hunt of his life. My brother did everything for this guy but pull the trigger. Took a lot of time to rig things up to make that possible. And someone who is unfortunate enough to be blind should be able to go hunting with some assistance. The only reason anyone would find this funny is if they are willing to completely ignore what the hunting entails and just laugh at another's misfortune. Maybe I'm wrong to be bothered by this - but I think it is sad that I'm seeing it in so many places being presented as a humorous story.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
I've got a good friend who's rapidly becoming a gun-nut... odd for a Canadan, I guess the states are finally seeping in to him.
Anyway, he's legally blind, just invested a very nice new car's worth of money into a Guide Dog, and has better groupings than most of the first-time shooters I've yet met.
This might be a problem for the totally blind, but there are a lot of folks considered blind by the state who are perfectly capable at IDing a target, and moving lead down-range in a manner at least as safe as a sighted person. Probably more-so when you consider the extra carefulness that the average legally blind person puts into doubting their visual input.
Of course, there could be problems, but one thing I've found is most people aren't total dumb-asses. If you're unable to hunt safely, you probably won't actually want to hunt.
(This isn't to discount the hijinks that ensue when you show up to an open range with a nice rifle, nice optics, and a guide dog in tow. That's a `priceless` moment that I hope to see again often in my life)
I assert that my comment is only my opinion, not that of any employer, past, present or future.
I fail to see why a blind person shouldn't be able to hunt when they've got a non-blind person looking through the sights for them. Many of you that don't come from big hunting areas won't understand why a blind person would want to go hunting, but those of us in hunting states (WI here) know that hunting is more about family and friends than just shooting an animal. I don't hunt myself, but if I did, I wouldn't care if there were blind hunters out there observing proper safety techniques. No hunter should shoot without knowing what they're aiming at, and a blind hunter is no exception.
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
(nfm)
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
I think it was Gallagher who was talking about this years ago, and he said, "when you're walking through the forest, how do you make a sound that's NOT like a rabbit?"
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
yeah - blind people should sit at home, in the dark and leave everyone alone. what right have they got to go out and do things in the world around 'normal' people?
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
I'm not a hunter. I think hunting is icky. I distrust anything that tends to celebrate the enjoyment of bloodshed, even animal bloodshed. I don't own a gun. I think the Second Amendment is talking about the state militia. OK?
But I think that hunters have the right to hunt as long as they aren't harming other human beings. I don't care for it but there are lots of things people do that I don't like that fall under the heading of "none of my business."
Now, letting the blind hunt sounds like a joke. But, given the same degree of responsibility and care, I don't see a blind-plus-sighted hunting team would be any more dangerous to human bystanders than a sighted hunter.
I think the main danger is from hunters whose judgement is impaired e.g. because of alcohol, and frankly I think this is less likely to happen in the situation as described, which requires a good deal of cooperation and trust between the parties concerned. I don't think a blind person would want to entrust an intoxicated person to lead him around for long distances on uneven ground. I don't think a sighted person would want to share a loaded firearm with an intoxicated person.
So, I don't see the harm in it. It seems weird to me, but it's none of my business. More power to 'em.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Among hunters, hunting is a lot more than pulling a trigger and killing something. It's more about the very primal action of pursuing an animal for food. (Most hunters I know do in fact eat what they kill). It takes a lot of skill, and years to learn: where and when the animals gather, how to sit quietly and patiently, how to observe. All of those are skills you once had to develop if you wanted to eat.
The ultimate kill with a rifle is only the very end of the process. It's kinder than the older methods, such as a bow and arrow, which often wound an animal without killing it, and you have to track it to put it out of its misery. A rifle can drop an animal immediately.
If you eat meat, you can hardly claim that having somebody else kill your dinner puts you on a higher moral plane, especially if you've seen the way animals are treated in our factory-farms. Hunting puts you directly in touch with what you're eating, guts and blood and all.
So it sounds silly at first blush, but the blind can be active participants in a hunt. They still have ears and even noses; they can still be outside; they still eat what they kill; they still have the camaraderie of a hunting party. If the technology lets them participate even more fully in the process, why not?
There are, by the way, an awful lot of hunters who hunt for other reasons. Some will use a lot of high-tech to make it practically shooting fish in a barrel; they seem to care more about the kill than the hunt. I know they exist, but that does not describe most hunters in my experience.
I myself do not hunt, but I limit my animal products when I can to ones I believed were raised and slaughtered humanely.
Most things they want to do don't put other people at risk of dieing. A gun is a dangerous machine, and a blind person is incapable of using it properly. He could easily kill someone with it. This idea is inane.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Lets say they accidentally shot someone somehow...who is liable? The person who told the blind person to fire or the blind person for pulling the trigger?
I'm sorry if I sound like a dick, but life isn't fair. Being blind means that hunting (as well as driving and a whole host of other things) is just one of those things that you are not going to be able to do.
I'd be really curious as to what their motivation is as well...I mean, not trying to judge...but isn't the point of hunting the skill involved in tracking and bagging your kill? If someone else is doing all of that for you, really the only thing you're doing is pulling a trigger that kills an animal. I'd go so far as to say that the blind person would really just be doing the easy wrap-up of someone elses kill.
But this brings up another point...if all they're doing is pulling the trigger since they can't sight targets...why not just let them loose in a room with some ambient forest noises, some animal noise sound board (complete with death sounds) and a fan or 2 to simulate wind and let them loose with a gun loaded with blanks?
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
Hyperbolize at your leisure. No one is implying blind people should be barred from all activities like you suggest. It is common sense, however, that we limit blind people from activities where they have a clear handicap and there is significant potential for them to injure themselves and other people. Do we allow blind people to drive unsupervised?
is this it?
nope.
is this it?
nope.
is this it?
nope.
NAME THAT MOVIE
Why is this article tagged with "texas, cheney, dick cheney?" May I please moderate the tags?
I know there are blind people who have gone so far as to pass a marksmanship test but that still doesnt give me much of a sense of security (with enough practice, anyone can hit a stationary target with thier eyes closed). I would like to see more of a real world shooting test...two targets, one friendly one enemy, moving back and forth with random motion. It doesnt have to be difficult or high speed, just moving and random with both good and bad targets. Firearms should only be allowed to those who can distinguish between foes and friends and can hit something that has the ability to move. I'm sorry but blind people just cant do this reliably enough that they should be trusted with using deadly force. There are plenty of activities that they can participate in that dont involve deadly weapons and really, how much fun is hunting going to be if someone else is essentially aiming for you and telling you when to pull the trigger. You might as well let them pull the trigger and just come along for the ride.
Bottles.
I really don't think this reduces the dependence of a blind person on sighted persons-- just the opposite. Hunting like this raises the dependence of the blind person to the highest level possible. It makes the blind person, 100%, submit to the judgment of their sighted assistant on whether or not pulling the trigger at a particular moment is safe. If the sighted assistant screws up, the blind person will have to live the rest of their lives knowing they accidentally killed another person. That's the kind of power over me I would never want to give to another person, regardless of how much I trusted them.
I grew up around firearms & hunting, still enjoy shooting when I can. But if, God forbid, I ever became blind, I would never pull a trigger again in my life. If I'm blind, I can't possibly be sure of my target & range, and so I cannot ethically take a shot. But if somebody wants to give that power to another person, they'd better be prepared to deal with the consequences.
1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.
If the blind aren't allowed to drive, why is there Braille on drive-through ATM's?
Still, dont'ca think we should dig a giant moat around Texas, then fill it with crocodiles and laser beam sharks, or something? I mean, to hell with a fence across the Mexico border... We need to address the bigger problem here!
Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
The parent was modded funny, but really this is pretty insightful, and is almost exactly what I was thinking. Hunting is a great passtime, I've been hunting regularly (> 50 days a year) for most of my life, I've introduced many people to it, and without fail they've all loved it. It teaches you a respect for nature that you can't get buying chicken at KFC or burgers at McDonalds, and gives you the kind of thrill that can only come from doing something that man was built to do. Once you've got to get out into the elements, find, kill, and clean your own game, you'd probably feel the same way (unless you are a PETA nutjob).
However, with blind people, a lot of that respect and a lot of that work is lost. Being led into the woods, told to shoot at a target you can't even see, and then letting someone else do the rest of the work for you...that's just not the same. It becomes too focused on the kill. For that matter, a blind person can't even appreciate a trophy. Something about it just turns me off.
That said, while I may have appeared to state the opposite, I think that blind people should have every right to hunt, as I think that they should have every right to do anything (safely) that sighted people can. As long as the hunter they are with is experienced enough to keep it safe, there shouldn't be any cause for concern. Well, at least insofar as safety is concerned.
and was there enough left of him to have a funeral??
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
Speaking of asinine, Hi, Pot. Ever RTFA? Try it, you might become more educated than us kettles in Texas.
Just for fun, let's look at a couple of possible results of this proposal, not that you would learn anything or see the point.
In one case, the blind has an offset sight for someone else to sight the weapon. So, there would be TWO people trying to sneak through the environment to find game, making it more difficult to actually find the game. Once found, the sighted person would ensure the target is game and not another hunter.
In another case, laser sighting is allowed. This enables those who can barely see, (but are still legally blind,) to sight and shoot. The legally blind person would still need to be able to see good enough out of at least a portion of his field of vision to discern that the laser is hitting the target.
To put legally blind in perspective, I had a roomate who was legally blind. Most of his retina was detached in one eye, and he couldn't really focus the other. Consequently, he had a spot of clear vision, and a large area of really blurry vision. He could play video games if he looked at the TV just right from a close distance. Reading was a chore. Driving wasn't going to happen in a safe manner. On one night out, he made a pass at a cross dresser, not noticing the five-o'clock shadow. Would I trust him to hunt alone? No. Would I trust him to hunt with someone else sighting? Yes. Do I think he would get any game? Not really. Would he enjoy it? Probably. Would he take an unsafe shot? No, he knew his limitations, and I would expect the blind hunters in this case to know their limitations as well.
Your position is a bit hard to support unless you also oppose eating meat in general.
As long as the animal being shot (even recreationally) is eaten, then it represnts one less animal that lives its life in an unnatural and often vigorously inhumane environment, only to meet a very, very stressful and quite occasionally painful end.
On the balance, the deer that lived free and was shot had a *far* better quality of life -- and, yes, quality of death -- than 99% of the animals that you find laid out nice and neat in your grocery store. Eating a hunted wild deer is going to reduce demand for the drugged-up, tortured cattle you can buy at the store, which is a clear net win for animal suffering overall.
Now, killing a healthy non-nuisance creature and failing to eat it is, yes, morally repugnant -- and illegal in many parts of the US. But your comments elsewhere made it clear that you were referring to all sport hunting, even when the game is eaten.
I know you meant to be serious, but I'm pretty sure it has everything to do with saving money by using the same machine everywhere, and nothing to do with consideration for blind taxi riders.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
If one pays attention, they stand a superb chance of correctly identifying an object by sight when they're hearing fails them. The chance of correctly finding an object by sound when sight fails is much slimmer. Also, audio cues are far more easily swamped and rendered deffective, not to mention their short range. This is all pretty quantifiable.
We're members of a species that has comparably lousy hearing and pretty solid eyesight. It's no surprise that losing sight is a much more signifcant handicap than losing hearing, and that one loses access to more activities.
Besides, come on, this is hunting we're talking about. Nobody hunts their way to work. Nobody reputable, anyway.
It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
I'm glad I don't live anywhere that you're allowed guns at all.
J1M.
or, you forgot the part where the sighted companion steers the blind person towards a human being, or someone's car.
who's fault is it if you tell a blind person to kill someone?