• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Take your best shot!

Bjorn said:
This one required treatment (even more so now), and it was, according to the news, reported 14 hours after the accident.
Click to expand...

I posted the statute earlier in the thread. The attending physician is required to make the report when the wound comes to his or her attention. From all reports, Mr. Whittington received immediate care.

Texas Parks & Wildlife Statutes;Title II; §161.041

§161.041. MANDATORY REPORTING OF GUNSHOT WOUNDS.
A physician who attends or treats, or who is requested to attend or treat, a bullet or gunshot wound, or the administrator, superintendent, or other person in charge of a hospital, sanitorium, or other institution in which a bullet or gunshot wound is attended or treated or in which the attention or treatment is requested, shall report the case at once to the law enforcement authority of the municipality or county in which the physician practices or in which the institution is located.
Click to expand...
 
WildCat said:
Which proves he was so drunk it took 2 days to sober up! ;)
Click to expand...
Evidence? Show me anywhere that indicates alcohol was involved.
Petty backstabbing is useless, and small-minded.

Anybody wanna bet whether there were Secret Service Agents and local Law Enforcement officials real close by when it happened?
And I don't know about other states, but in Texas, offices and court houses are pretty much closed on Sunday.
The "accident" happened Saturday evening. The hospitalization happened immediately. Law enforcement knew--the SS and Doctor made sure of that, I surmise.
DOW reports can't be "filed" until the office is open. Thus, the report was filed Monday.

That said, the whole thing was stupid. I have hunted quail, phesant, and dove since I was 15 (when I got my Driver license--mom and dad didn't hunt). I taught Hunter Education (includes safety) for years, and was an NRA Firearms instructor.
I NEVER allow anyone to fall behind me, or allow anyone to get ahead when we are walking line abreast. That is an invitation to disaster. Your shooting lane is a 45 degree cone in front of you You never turn more than 45 degrees. Any bird that gets that far to the side got lucky (or perhaps has evolved ahead of its former peers)
 
Cylinder said:
Unless I am very much mistaken, WildCat was employing sarcasm with that comment. Just a heads-up. :)
Click to expand...

I am fully aware of that--but things are getting really petty here. Bash the guy for (rule8) ing up, but there is no need to embellish the facts known...
He!!--I'm a registered Republicann, and I don't like the guy!
 
rwguinn said:
Evidence? Show me anywhere that indicates alcohol was involved.
Petty backstabbing is useless, and small-minded.
Click to expand...
It was a joke...

Anybody wanna bet whether there were Secret Service Agents and local Law Enforcement officials real close by when it happened?
Click to expand...
One of my old college roomates was probably one of those Secret Service agents. I don't know for certain he was there, but he is on Cheney's detail. And he's a do-the-right-thing kind of guy, FWIW.
 
Bjorn said:
Chappaquiddick again, I already told you so. ;)
Click to expand...
That's not fair! Mary Jo was safe and sitting on the bridge when Ted went to get help. She must have dove back in the car to get her purse or something. :D
 
WildCat said:
The report is dated Monday at 3pm...
Click to expand...

Texas Report said:
{skip}

VIII. Summary: Whittingdon downed a bird and went to retrieve it. While he was out of the hunting line another covey was flushed and Cheney swung on a bird and fired striking Whittington in the face, neck and chest at approximately 30 yards. Cheney was using a 28 gauge shotgun loaded with 71/2 shot. Immediate medical attention was rendered from Cheney's staff.

{skip}
Click to expand...

I never hunted and I know very little about it, but based on this summary it seems that both Cheney and Whittingdon were at fault. Cheney for shooting outside of the hunting line and Whittingdon for not letting his hunting partners know that he was going to walk in front of them (albeit to the side) and retrieve his bird. For people who have hunted, is this a reasonable conclusion?

WildCat said:
The national press has their undies in a knot because the local paper reported it before they did. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree with Cylinder (post #60) that the press has gone overboard with this. It does seem reasonable that Whittingdon's family should be notified before the press. But perhaps these guys are old enough to still think that it makes a difference and would minimize the effect of the breaking news if they missed the Sunday newspaper deadline? But still the press has a rep for going overboard on the "easy" topics that aren't difficult to understand, esp. if the topics are a late night TV show's joke writers dream -- so I'm surprised that after all these years in politics that Cheney (or Cheney's head of staff) didn't handle it better. I would think after all these years one of them would have an influential press contact who would have been willing to help cushion the bad PR. {Shrug}
 
Shera said:
I never hunted and I know very little about it, but based on this summary it seems that both Cheney and Whittingdon were at fault. Cheney for shooting outside of the hunting line and Whittingdon for not letting his hunting partners know that he was going to walk in front of them (albeit to the side) and retrieve his bird. For people who have hunted, is this a reasonable conclusion?
Click to expand...

Quite reasonable. As a shooter, one bears the ultimate responsibility for what happens downrange. As a member of a hunting party, one has the responsibility not to create unsafe conditions. Three contributing factors that have not been discussed are end-of-hunt fatigue, poor lighting conditions and (as I understand it) uneven terrain.

I peppered a man who was most probably shooting rabbits off our dogs (that tends to piss me off anyway) because he was standing on the other side of an embankment. Because his outline was just that little bit obscured and the fact that I had been spinning the little bastards for several hours already, I was never aware of his proximity to me - even though I was aware of other hunters in his general direction. Luckily, I was shooting a 20 gauge with very light rabbit loads, so no real damage was done.
 
Shera said:
I never hunted and I know very little about it, but based on this summary it seems that both Cheney and Whittingdon were at fault. Cheney for shooting outside of the hunting line and Whittingdon for not letting his hunting partners know that he was going to walk in front of them (albeit to the side) and retrieve his bird. For people who have hunted, is this a reasonable conclusion?
Click to expand...
Cheney would be at fault if he shot inside the hunting line. Outside the line is where the shooting happens and that's where Whittington wandered. The sheriff cleared cheney of any wrongdoing.


That being said, In my opinion, the shooter always has the responsibility to check beyond the target before pulling the trigger. Always.

I've done plenty of quail hunting in my day and I can see how easy it would be for something like this to happen. The more people in the hunt the greater the odds it happens. You walk up to a brush pile or other cover as quail are almost never out in the open. The quail flush at the last second and you have about 2 1/2 seconds to get on target and fire slightly ahead of the bird, so it runs into the shot. Quail flush fast and fly low, you would be aiming at a close, fast moving target with your barrel almost parallel to the ground, objects in the distance would be more blurred than usual because of the speed of following the bird with your eye and that you are focused on a near object.

Yeah, I agree with Cylinder (post #60) that the press has gone overboard with this. It does seem reasonable that Whittingdon's family should be notified before the press. But perhaps these guys are old enough to still think that it makes a difference and would minimize the effect of the breaking news if they missed the Sunday newspaper deadline? But still the press has a rep for going overboard on the "easy" topics that aren't difficult to understand, esp. if the topics are a late night TV show's joke writers dream -- so I'm surprised that after all these years in politics that Cheney (or Cheney's head of staff) didn't handle it better. I would think after all these years one of them would have an influential press contact who would have been willing to help cushion the bad PR. {Shrug}
Click to expand...

As polarized as the country has become and as hated as Cheney is by his opponents... It just goes with the territory. If you are a huge political target, expect any incident to be blown out of proportion. I don't have any sympathy for Cheney on this one.

In the latest development, it seems Whittington has taken a turn for the worse.
The Texas lawyer accidentally shot by US vice president Dick Cheney during a weekend quail hunt suffered a minor heart attack today when some of the birdshot migrated close to his heart, a hospital spokesman said.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=2&ObjectID=10368391
Click to expand...

The lesson here is that if you shoot a lawyer, make it a clean kill.
:duck:
 
Last edited:
It seems highly reasonable to suspect that something is not quite right here.

The delay in reporting, the strange way the president was notified, the unusual approach to notifying the press by the lobbyist and host of the event all make it reasonable to contemplate something is not quite as we are being led to believe.

The idea that Cheney was drunk is not a far out notion. It explains the delay and some of the confusion surrounding a relatively simple event. It is made more plausible by the report that Cheney has had two DUI convictions.

Speculating along these lines is a long way from deciding that Cheney was drunk. I realize, based on what has been discussed in other threads, that there are some that disagree, but I think the evidence is overwhelming that the Bush administration has engaged in significant efforts to misrepresent the situation on important issues. It is way within the realm of possibility that they would do something like that in this case. I think to completely reject the possibility of a Cheney coverup of significant facts is just naive or based on deeply rooted partisan biases that make an objective evaluation of this situation impossible.

Even more likely than the possibility that Cheney was drunk to me was the possibility that Cheney had been drinking and had the reporting of the events slowed down to eliminate all possibilities of a BAC test that would have indicated some degree of alcohol consumption but not to the point of drunkeness.

Arguing against the alcohol angle was that these were wealthy people and there were probably lots of workers around to serve them food and drink and any sort of a coverup of alcohol consumption would require their silence, together with the silence of the guests and the silence of the close by secret service agents.

I think the most likely scenario is that Cheney or his minions correctly surmised that releasing the information before the status of the victim could be known reliably would generate even more interest in the case as people watched their TV's for news of the patient's status and for that reason decided to release the information about the shooting after the patient's status was known. The delay also gave Cheney some time to compose himself and to work out strategies for dealing with the situation if there was a serious injury involved.

And I suppose there is also the possibility that the delay was done because people were considering various scenarios where they would attempt to hide the event altogether. This seems remote, but I'll bet it was considered.

As to comparisons with Chappaquidick: It seems at least possible that they were morally identical situations.
 
I am counting the "coverup" (if it is ever found to be such) or rather the delay in reporting to just plain embarrassment. "Oh crap, how are we going to explain this?"

If he was drunk and quail hunting with a group, he truly is crazy.
 
This article did a nice job of spinning the few available facts into an anti-Cheney scenario.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/cheneys-chappaquiddick-i_b_15711.html

quick summary:
Cheney and Whittington were hanging with their non-wife babes, getting blasted, while they popped away at farm bred quail a few feet from their cars. After Cheney shoots Whittington, Cheney goes into major cover up mode to deal with the problematic issues.
 
Cheney to Break Silence in Fox Interview

CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas - Vice President Dick Cheney planned to break his silence Wednesday in his first televised interview about the Texas hunting accident in which he shot a 78-year-old lawyer.

Cheney was to appear on Fox News Channel at 6 p.m. EST, the network and the White House announced. He hasn't spoken publicly about the accident Saturday that hospitalized Harry Whittington of Austin.
Click to expand...
 
The story last night on Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto:

"Cheney Hunting Accident Controversy: How is VP Cheney Feeling?"

No joke.
 
rwguinn said:
Anybody wanna bet whether there were Secret Service Agents and local Law Enforcement officials real close by when it happened)
Click to expand...

Local law officials were not allowed to interview Cheney until 14 hours after the incident.

Apparently a deputy was not aware of the agreement made between the sheriff's office and the Secret Service and walked up to the gate. He got into trouble.

So in fact _local_ law officials (you know, the ones with jurisdiction) were kept away from it.

Speculation about some problem, including drunkeness, is NOT that far-fetched for this type of trip.
 
I was thinking maybe he did it on purpose, to manufacture a small scandal that would draw attention away from more serious matters.
 
davefoc said:
This article did a nice job of spinning the few available facts into an anti-Cheney scenario.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/cheneys-chappaquiddick-i_b_15711.html

quick summary:
Cheney and Whittington were hanging with their non-wife babes, getting blasted, while they popped away at farm bred quail a few feet from their cars. After Cheney shoots Whittington, Cheney goes into major cover up mode to deal with the problematic issues.
Click to expand...

Cheney shot a friend in the face with a shotgun.

Damn the liberal media for putting a negative spin on that!!!!!!!!
 
Cheney's Chappaquiddick?

The real story is already emerging, if you're willing to do a little digging. Cheney and Whittington went hunting with two women (not their wives), there was some drinking, and Whittington wound up shot. Armstrong didn't see the incident but claimed she had, Cheney refused to be questioned by the Sheriff until the next morning, and a born-again evangelical physician has been downplaying Whittington's injuries since they occurrred. Neither the press nor law enforcement seems inclined to investigate.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom