Posted on 02/12/2006 12:46:46 PM PST by bayourant
Edited on 02/12/2006 2:10:43 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Vice President Dick Cheney accidentally shot and injured a man during a weekend quail hunting trip in Texas, his spokeswoman said Sunday.
Harry Whittington, 78, was "alert and doing fine" after Cheney sprayed him with shotgun pellets on Saturday while the two were hunting at the Armstrong Ranch in south Texas, said property owner Katharine Armstrong.
Armstrong said Whittington was mostly injured on his right side, with the pellets hitting his cheek, neck and chest, and was taken to the hospital by ambulance.
Whittington was in stable condition Sunday, said Yvonne Wheeler, spokeswoman for the Christus Spohn Health System.
Cheney's spokeswoman, Lea Anne McBride, said the vice president was with Whittington, a lawyer from Austin, Texas, and his wife at the hospital on Sunday afternoon.
Armstrong said she was watching from a car while Cheney, Whittington and another hunter got out of the vehicle to shot at a covey of quail late afternoon on Saturday.
Whittington shot a bird and went to look for it in the tall grass, while Cheney and the third hunter walked to another spot and found a second covey.
Whittington "came up from behind the vice president and the other hunter and didn't signal them or indicate to them or announce himself," Armstrong told the Associated Press in an interview.
"The vice president didn't see him," she continued. "The covey flushed and the vice president picked out a bird and was following it and shot. And by god, Harry was in the line of fire and got peppered pretty good."
The shooting was first reported by the Corpus Christi Caller-Times.
She said Whittington was bleeding but not very seriously injured, and Cheney was very apologetic.
"It broke the skin," she said. "It knocked him silly. But he was fine. He was talking. His eyes were open. It didn't get in his eyes or anything like that."
She said emergency personnel traveling with Cheney tended to Whittington, holding his face and cleaning up the blood.
"Fortunately, the vice president has got a lot of medical people around him and so they were right there and probably more cautious than we would have been," she said. "The vice president has got an ambulance on call, so the ambulance came."
Armstrong said Cheney is a longtime friend who comes to the ranch to hunt about once a year. She said Whittington is a regular, too, but she thought it was the first time the two men hunted together.
"This is something that happens from time to time. You now, I've been peppered pretty well myself," said Armstrong.
___
Associated Press writer Paul Weber in Dallas contributed to this report.
I wouldn't want such a misfire on my record, either. I'm not about to trigger an angry response.
"Someone who explodes rice into his own derriere with a hand grenade.."
Blur has got to explain that. It's as dangerous as a loaded weapun.
Oh pshaw.
You just made my point by saying that she was almost hit by a bullet from a careless hunter,but it could have been a safe hunter also.
Oh, please. The shooter was by definition engaging in UNSAFE practices, to-wit, firing UP, over a hill, with NO backstop. Talk about a serial rule-buster!
And strangely, the police don't seem to see it YOUR way. Go figure.
This happens and there is no solution I can see.
Well, in that case, it's a good thing you're not in charge of Hunter Safety curricula, eh?
For one thing, NEVER SHOOT OVER A HILL! For another thing, ALWAYS be SURE of your target! And, make SURE you have a SOLID BACKSTOP.
This is not rocket science. Not even close.
I do not like guns, and I cannot stomach people that do not read the post or understand what is being pointed out.
OK, well now we're getting somewhere! You're doing what's called in the jargon, "talking through your hat", i.e., speaking authoritatively on a subject upon which you have no working knowledge. There are other terms for this practice, which, while more descriptive, are less palatable.
This old man failed to obey the rules and ended up in the line of fire as testified to by those in attendance.
My, how are the mighty fallen!
A respected attorney, a "Friend of the VP", is now contemptuously termed, "this old man"? What a positively telling statement!
VP Cheney does not have eyes in the back of his head,
I can't help but notice the rapid segue to the term of respect for the politician. "In this cornah, This Old Man; and in this cornah, we have The Vice President of The Yoo-knighted States of A-Merica!"
LOL!
But, I digress.
You point out a significant fact -- the politican cannot see what's behind him. This is sort of an awkward moment, because it seems to suggest that he was either shooting "over his shoulder", or, if, somehow he was looking where he was aiming (but then why your "back of his head" comment?), he wasn't paying attention when he pulled the trigger.
This is known as a "negligent discharge", particularly when it results in moving projectiles encountering human flesh.
and as I said before if I was cheney and this man did this to me so that I was not able to react, then it was his fault as the witnesses stated.
"The witnesses", LOL!
Let's go back to my near-fatal "not-my-fault" car wreck for a moment.
Let's say that some... nay, let's say that ALL "of the witnesses" told the police officer that "it was HIS fault that she hit his car!"
Does that mean that I should have been ticketed? (I wasn't!) Does it mean MY insurance rates should have gone up? (They didn't!)
I'll cut to the chase. No, it means nothing of the sort.
If you walk up to me on the corner of 42nd and B'way, and proceed to plant a .45 slug in the back of my head, and ALL of "the witnesses" tell the police "He had it coming -- he really asked for it!" -- does that mean that the police would tell you, "Oh, well, in that case, sorry to bother you, Ma'am; you have yourself a fine day now! Oh, and nice shooting!"
No, LOL! I don't think so!
So, "the witnesses" said that it was the victim's fault that Cheney shot him? LOL, that scene had to be SO bloody intense that I'd love to have owned a "Change of Pants, $250, Cash" trailer to pull up to the scene of the "accident". So, I have a feeling that "The Witnesses" said whatever they were "advised" to say.
Would YOU want to "say the wrong thing" when the VP/USA had just SHOT a man? Would YOU want to piss him off? Would YOU want to have the IRS star-drilling your life into the concrete? Every gov't agency you ever heard of, and a scad more you never heard of, all descending to "make your life 'interesting'"?
I think these are the feelings and thoughts that must have been running through those poor folks minds, even faster than their lunch was running into their pants, as they stood there, not making any sudden moves, waiting for someone to tell them "what to say."
This story ain't gonna go away. I think we'll be hearing a lot more about it in weeks and months and years to come. Make no mistake, it WILL be in all the history books.
You are mixing apples and oranges. I referred to two different things. One that innocent People that live near wooded Hunting areas can be injured and sometimes it is nobody's fault.
An "ND" is always SOMEBODY'S fault!
I don't know why you can't seem to wrap your mind around the concept. It's not very complicated. If you screw up, it's YOUR FAULT!
If you are leaning out the window to get a good look at the Goodyear Blimp, with NO malice in mind, and, you "accidentally" push a large clay flowerpot off the ledge, and it then falls down and kills a bystander on the sidewalk, do you REALLY think you will get a pass on the "accident" because "it wasn't my fault, I wasn't trying to hurt anyone, blah blah blah?"
PLEASE tell me the concept is finally beginning to jell in your mind!
Two that if I am in the same position as VP was and did everything right and the man walked into my firing line it is his fault for not following the rules.
Oh Good Lord you are really stuck in a groove!
Look up "argumentum ad nauseam", will you? No matter HOW many times you repeat that assertion, it will NOT become fact!
Reread the post it is making two points not one altogether. What do you want to do restrict Hunters from hunting, that is left wing stuff and counterproductive.
AIEEEEE!!!!!
I -- a hunter for over thirty years -- am being lectured on my alleged ANTI-hunter tendencies, by a self-admitted "I do not like guns" person!
I feel like I am discussing this with Chuckie Schumer.
That is remarkable, because I feel like I'm debating with Charlie McCarthy!
Argh!
Hey, hey, let's not bird-dog the man. I'm sure he'll let us have it with both barrels if we do.
Same here.
I really didn't want a big dog in my house, so I invested in a really good kennel.
But after the lowlifes starting circling, I made it clear that they were NOT going to get my girl.
She's no longer a dog. And she WOULD get in the car and leave with anybody. There was a REAL (not imagined) effort to steal her. I have kinda turned her into a poodle now, but have people standing in line for a puppy, because of her pedigree, her beauty, and bred talents.
I miss her. I call the breeder every day, in fact he probably thinks I am a nutcase. I want her to produce puppies, more to further the breed than anything else.
Good, close hunting grouse dogs are almost extinct, especially in this country. And the females of her breed are fickle (hard to breed) -- that's why it is so important I pass on her genes.
I want her to get it over with, and come home and be my baby again. I am lost without her, and worried she is grieving for me.
I'll have to ask my friend Art Tillery and see if he can explain the scope of the shooting investigation.
Tort reform, Texas style. ;)
I'm not grousing. One must be at least somewhat clear however, when discussing weapunry.
If you read the article, it reads as if it was the fault of the injured attorney.
As long as he doesn't get loaded while he's shooting the $#!# with the other po-lice, that's a bulls-eye as far as I'm concerned. You might ask our old pal Tommy Gunn to see if he can put his snub nose into things. Speaking of friends and relations, howitzer family? We musket together some time!
Upon hearing that Cheney is shooting back, Murtha and Dean call for retreat.
"One must be at least somewhat clear however, when discussing weapunry."
Yeah, there's probably an ordnance about that somewhere...
We don't want to get too pesky or we might get ejected.
I'm sure it's not the first time a lawyer has been shot, but it could be the only time it's been accidental.
Was the guy wearing a "Hillary for Pres" t-shirt by any chance??
Must have thought that lawyer was a reporter from the NY Times.
He's a lawyer. That's good enough for me.. I love lawyers! If they are properly COOKED!
All shootings of lawyers are ruled accidental. ( Or at least thats the way its supposed to be ;-)
Every Democrat in the house is going to get flooded with emails demanding impeachment hearings immediately...
At least Cheney didn't turn to shoot a giant, vicious, attacking jackrabbit, Remember Jimmy Carter!
I suppose his hunting trip with Senator(D)Harry Reid is cancelled now.
It may help his negotiating power overseas, don't you think?
Afterwards, Cheney said two words: "tort reform."
Clearly, this is further proof that the administration needs to work harder providing adequate body armor.
The difference between VP Cheney and Teddy. At least Teddy has one confirmed kill.
Jesse Jackson claims it was racist, no black lawyers were shot.
Multiple choice question: Would you rather go:
a.) On a drive with Ted Kennedy
b.) Golfing with Gerald Ford
c.) Hunting with Dick Cheney
d.) To a hotel room with Bill Clinton
e.) Canoing with Carter
No, I haven't been field hunting, so that's why I'm asking how it happened.
And don't forget to get permission from the brass for the get together.
Exactly--the last thing we want is to have the mods unload on us. They carry way more firepower than we do.
"I don't have a mind of the caliber necessary to buck up an answer myself. I'd certainly quail before anyone else's response."
"I hope Blur comes back and tries to explain it. I'm sure he'll be a good sport and not try to duck the issue."
WELL...OKAY. I tried not to be too trigger-happy and shoot my mouse off but clearly there is a need for some...howitzer you say... clarity on the topic. So I've rifled my notes so I can aim my remarks well. Ouch! OW! I just had to swat a skeet-er on my fire-arm. I'd be Daff-y to duck any issue when I can unload here just like shooting microfiche in a tiny barrel.
Oh, any meeting wouldn't happen without a shot across everyone's bow. Don't want a get-together to be a flash in the pan.
I'd still vote for him if I had the chance. Hunt with him is
another question.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.