Posted: 8/12/2008 11:29:28 AM EDT
|
As you may be aware, here in Washington we recently had a minor try to fill his bear tag with a hiker. His shot placement, sadly, was good; a head shot with a .270 at 120 yards. The hiker, obviously, did not survive. The hunting groups up here keep being quoted with statements like "he should have used binoculars before he took the shot". I'm aware of the rules of gun safety, but I'm thinking, at 120 yards if you can't tell a bear from a human, you need to not be taking the shot. Binoculars at such a short range seem, to me, not to grant you a large advantage. The question is, is it standard practice to glass everything with binoculars, no matter the range? A follow up question: is this what's taught in hunter safety programs? I freely admit my complete ignorance when it comes to hunter safety training and the like. |
|
Hunters safety says to never use a scope to glass*, always use binoculars or a spotting scope if you are unsure as to what the object is, or if you are trying to decide if the "game" is worth taking (ie, if you're trophy hunting, you don't want to "accidentally" shoot an animal you don't want because you decided to use your scope as binoculars). *What are the 4 rules of firearm safety? 1. Pointed in a safe direction/never point a gun at something you aren't willing to destroy. 2. Finger off trigger until you're ready to shoot. 3. Know your target, and whats beyond it. 4. All guns are always loaded. He really screwed up #3, and if he was spotting using his mounted scope, then #1 as well. |
|
99% of folks use binoculars incorrectly for hunting. You use them to find game and judge trophy size. Most use them just to get a closer look at something they have seen with the naked eye. if you are going to the trouble to carry binoculars, buy good glass and use it constantly. You will see 4X more game. I know I did. Headshot hiker at 120yds has nothing to do with the use or non-use of binoculars when hunting. |
|
Just to be clear, using your scope to glass is clearly in violation of "don't point the gun at anything you aren't willing to kill or destroy", so that isn't the question I'm asking. It hasn't been stated if the rifle had irons or a scope; either way, I don't think it matters. He didn't know what he was shooting, and he shot it. Thanks for the input on always using binoculars. |
|
That was just another failure to abide by the rule of "Positively identify your target (and what's behind it) before you shoot." If you need to use binoculars to do it, then you need to use binoculars to do it. People break that rule even at 20 yards, let alone 120. Happens all the time. People call it "buck fever." |
|
I have 12 power Steiner binos. I think most people would consider them "good glass" I have been known to use my scope on my 25-06 to study a deer's antlers when I couldn't tell for sure using the binos. I have no problem with it. It is a Ziess 20X. I wouldn't attempt a shot at that distance, but it certainly makes a difference if I decided to go attempt a 1000 yard stalk. YMMV |
This....1-4 folks. Learn it, love it, live it. |
you should not use your scope to look around people get upset when they see a guy aiming a hunting rifle at them they're funny that way |
I think he's saying that after he IDs an animal, he may use his scope to get more detail. I see this as fundamentally different than using your scope to figure out if you're looking at an animal or a hiker. |
|
No and no. Simple fact is many hunters do not have binoculars. I only bought mine last year. If he shot someone at 120 with a rifle and thought it was a bear, I'd say it's a clear case of " I would guess the headshot was just an accident. He saw something large moving, shot at it and happened to hit the hiker in the head. Minor needed supervision while hunting. Hikers should wear orange during hunting season.
|
|
What is the difference between glassing with binoculars and glassing with the optic on your rifle??? Edit: Saw your response to this point. Obviously the guy thought the hiker was a bear, so it would make sense he was aiming with the rifle/glass. It would be at that point one should double check what the hell the target is. I mean come on, 120 yards??? In general I don't thinking using binocs to confirm is required unless we are talking long range shots (hundreds and hundreds of yards). |
| All hunters should have binos to study their target until they figure out exactly what it is and if it's safe to shoot it. My father in law was a very good hunter until some jackass who didn't have a set of binos used his scope to figure out my father in law wasn't a whitetail. The fact the guy sat there & had to rely on pointing a gun at him has kept my father in law out of the woods since then. |
You should be able to tell that even without looking through a scope. There is no way he couldn't see a human through the scope unless he blindly shot into bushes and the woman was behind them. I'd say he knew his target and hit it.  
|
This. The only explanation I would offer is that the kid got waaay too excited and just pulled the trigger as soon as he saw something. |
here's the article. Two kids were hunting and apparently agreed that they saw a bear. Of course, this may be the story they came up with after the fact. |
I tend to agree. If the shot was so obstructed with brush that he couldn't make the call easily, why did he take the shot? Regardless, I don't want to turn this into an argument over what the kid did; I'm more interested in the idea that is being spread right now that if you don't carry binoculars, you're an irresponsible hunter. I think that position is nuts. |
Didn't even read what I wrote did ya? |
|
I actually responded to that thread. It's the hunters' responsibility to identify his target and make a killing shot. You don't mistake a hiker for a bear and properly place a shot. I don't always carry binoculars. Many places that I hunt it's to thick for them to be really useful. I don't aim my rifle at anything but game. I might study antlers throught the scope (we need 3 points on one side or better here), but if I can see antlers is see no thing wrong with looking through the scope. Often, seconds can't be wasted after spotting a buck. That doesn't forgive recklessness. |
I'm sure it wasn't intended. Did they say in the article what time of day it was? |
I'm not sure that it is nuts all the time. If the conditions are such that binoculars help you identify game and if it is up to your desired requirements, then having a tool like binoculars or a spotting scope is of great help and not having them is a woeful failure on the hunters part to adequately equip himself. A good pair of binoculars are neither too heavy or too expensive. Under prepared is not equal to irresponsible.I think we can all agree that in this case, a good pair of binoculars properly used by a good hunter would have prevented a tragedy. I think also we can all pretty much agree that this was NOT a good hunter, probably would not have used the binoculars to confirm his target. The very few times I have been out hunting, binoculars would not have made any difference. Not in a wooded area, etc. |
I wasn't sure what you meant, obviously it would be OK to study the actual target with the scope |
|
looks like they're pushing to increase the minimum hunting age. Too bad, one kid ruined it for all the others. I know a guy here in Washington that has all his kids hunting by the time they're 10 or so; these kids are totally squared away at 14. I suspect this kid didn't get the supervision or whatever required early on. One damn fool ruins it for everyone. |
|
The hunter safety course I went to in PA 30 years ago stressed this point over and over again. Identify your target and know what is beyond it. I doubt that the head shot was intentional. The kid was probably shooting into the bushes and didn't know if he was going to hit a bear, a deer, an elk or a sasquatch. Sadly, he ended up with a head shot on a person. |
|
The situation was low light and foggy- visibility supposedly sucked and the kid didn't properly ID the target, he just assumed it was a bear. Just watching a little longer would probably have saved her (she was bent over tying a shoe or something). But yes, good binoculars are a must when big game hunting, and in many cases they are several times more powerful than rifle scopes. "Glassing" people with a rifle is practiced widely, by douchebags. Use binocs. |
|
My opinion, you are carrying a tag that has a Specific Species listed on it. You need to know what the hell you are shooting, before you shoot it, simple as that. You can't go hunting for Deer and shoot an Elk to fill your Deer tag. You have to know what your shooting. General safety, know your target and what's beyond it. People shooting at the first thing that moves, accidents are what happens. |
| I think that newbies need to hunt with a seasoned hunter because I have seen people absolutely loose it the first time they see a hog, deer or even turkey. The excitement clouds their judgement, shoot huridly and forget about gun safety. I have made people just sit and watch until they regain their composure. |
That's what I wonder when I hear about these things. If people just blast at anything that moves, how do they know if they are harvesting the proper species, sex, age or anything, let alone shooting a human? I don't hunt. I have been hunting with others, however and seen animals in the wild, including a black bear. How one mistakes a human for a wild animal, I don't know. As far as requiring non hunters to wear orange, I'm not for further regulation. I've been in the woods in Washington during deer season (did'nt realize it was deer season  ). I'll never do that again.More rules and regulations regarding binoculars, wearing orange, etc. don't mean a damn thing if some dipshit with a .270 starts aiming his rifle at and shooting at unidentified targets. |