Accident: Convinced she was a bear

Haunting last words: Christine Clarridge ("Fatal shooting") reports that Troy Almli's last words to his mother were, "Be careful. There'll be a lot of people with guns out there."

Later that morning, Pamela Almli, 54, was shot to death by a fourteen year-old hunter who decided she was a bear.

Almli is said to have stopped along a trail to put something in her backpack when a single shot from 120 yards struck her down. While the boy, who was hunting with his sixteen year-old brother, was apparently convinced he was shooting at a bear, local hunters are distressed by the conditions. According to Clarridge,

And while the group disdains the prospect of new hunting regulations in the state, that is certainly one possible outcome. Jack Broom reports that,

Presently, first-time hunters must be licensed insofar as they can complete a hunting-education course, pass a written test, and demonstrate that they can safely handle a firearm. There is no minimum age for hunters, though, and adult supervision is not required for teenage hunters.

• • •​

Commentary:

Just yesterday, in a completely unrelated discussion, and having not yet heard of this incident, I had cause to mention to a friend my plank for the gun-control platform. Essentially, own as many guns as you want, but you're accountable for every round fired from those guns. No accidents, no excuses.

By that standard, the fourteen year-old shooter would be held criminally and civilly responsible for Pamela Almli's death. And that is how it should be.

At present, of course, no charges have been filed, and my early prediction is that there will be no justice served in this case. After all, guns may be designed to kill, but you can't hold someone responsible for an accident, right?

Remember that any gun owner is a "responsible gun owner" until they're not. Being anxious to bag a bear is no excuse for killing someone.
_______________________

Notes:

Clarridge, Christine. "Fatal shooting of hiker mystifies her family". Seattle Times. August 5, 2008. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008092032_hikershot05m.html

—————. "'Matter of time' until a hiker got shot". Seattle Times. August 6, 2008. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008094528_hunting06m.html

Broom, Jack. "State eyes new limits on hunters after hiker's fatal shooting". Seattle Times. August 7, 2008. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008097220_hunt07m0.html

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This was her and her friend walking together before she was shot!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

tiassa, the answer is symple. 100% ban on guns across the board, cops and security guards pick up there weapon when they get to work and then they get locked up at night. Target shooters can only use the gun in the facility and if they need to be transported for an event (like the olympics) they are shipped there by the cub who garrentie there safty during trasit, the athleat never touches them until they arive at the event. All millatry weapons remain locked on base unless the squad is deployed

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Asguard that is the complete WRONG answer. I could go into the myriad of ways, but it comes down to just a one fact. Criminals break laws.

Also Tiassa your idea of gun control is completely wrong as well. There are way to many variables to be considered for such a narrowminded simplistic law. Just think of all the things that can happen that are no fault of the gun owner or even gun handler. To hold such a narrow view you would eventually have to rule there is no such thing as a car accident or for that matter any other type of accident.

Now this is a very tragic thing, but it is not the gun's fault, nor really the childs as he was overexcited, young and inexperienced.

 

I was actually planning on saying that having people be supervised because they are teens is discrimination, but then I realized it should probably be that way. I thought you had to get a hunting license to hunt, why doesn't that come a long with some sort of aptitude test?

 

Something about responsibility?

One of the things that disgusts me about gun advocacy is that faction—of which you appear to be a member—that acts as if it is somehow unfair to expect someone who is operating a device designed to kill to do so in a responsible manner. Overexcited? Young and inexperienced? Then the child should not be shooting a gun without adult supervision in such a setting.

To the other, I find it worrisome that this faction also has such difficulty distinguishing between something like a car and a gun.

Make sure you let me know the next time someone uses a '67 Fairlane to take out the burglar in his living room, or a '72 Dino to bag a bear. Let me know the next time you go duck hunting with a Prius. I gotta admit, that will be something to see.

 

tiassa i find it facinating that this kid WASN'T charged, it is textbook manslaughter.

 

Ain't over yet

They might still charge him.

If he's not charged, though, he may face a wrongful death suit. We'll see what comes.

 

the reason i thought about it was in the other thread i posted we have a women convicted of manslaughter because she tied up her husband as he had asked and expected him to escape as he always did only he died in what is a pure acident. yet she got 3 years (2 suspended). Im sure this women didnt ask to be shot

 

This is manslaughter if not murder. The kid should be charged.

 

agreed. At 14 though, I don't know what they can charge him with.
I wanna know what parent lets a 14 and 16 yr old go out bear hunting. And do they actually give 14 yr old bear hunting licenses??

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Wtf.. just outlaw hunting, period.

 

Pfft. If they outlawed hunting in my area, there would be car/deer colisions all the time and more people would get hurt than with the occasional hunting accident.
So, then the Gov would come in and do a mass killing and let all the good meat rot in a huge pile of carnage. (it's happened durring years of overpopulation) . Not cool.

As for the OP, If I were living in area frequented by hunters (which the son's warning infers) I would buy one of those "don't shoot me" orange hats for trail walking. And maybe carry a gun myself in case I do run across that big hungry bear.
As for the shooter, he should be charged with something. Not murder, though.

Random note:
wow. He's a hell of a shot to fatally hit a human sized target at 120 yrds.

 

Fencing and designated wildlife crossovers. Pay up.

Edit: Overpopulation ? You mean like the population growth got out of control ? What were the signs ?
It's funny how we define overpopulation to exclude humans.. and to include any animal group that gets in our way.

 

In this case, it's both.
As for the animals, if there is a period when people don't hunt and shoot as many deer as usual, they can double in numbers within a a year or two.

 

The populations are kept artificially low by hunting, so the deer don't bother us as much.

 

Not sure how accurate that is considering our area was once woods and swamp. Now it's lush farm land and the deer have no natural preditors like they once did.
So tons of food, plus no preditors could be "artificially" inflating the numbers.

Makes for great tasting steak, though.

 

That's true, there are no more predators.. but that is our doing. We could of course reintroduce them..

 

you do realise a fence along the road would be safer than shooting them and just as effective (if not more so) at preventing acidents

 

You're talking to cluster right ? Because I already suggested fencing and designated wildlife crossovers.