Removing the scope decreases aim? Not always. I'd imagine the scope is there so a stationary hunter can closely focus at one slow-moving deer far away, and get a one-shot kill to vital organs. On the other hand, with a semi-automatic weapon at moderate range, a hunting scope provides no benefit, especially to an experienced soldier. You would not crouch/lay prone and take half a minute to zoom in and track your target, especially multiple targets (ie, you can't see what guy #3 is doing when you're zoomed in one guy #1's chest). Especially when hunting armed men who might shoot back, surely the hunters heartrate would increase, hands would be more jerky, and the zoomed sight would bounce all around. When hunting multiple prey at moderate range, the scope would be at best useless and ignored, and at worst, get in the way of clearly lining up quick immobilization shots. Who says half-life and other videogames can't teach you nothing?
I'm still finding it odd that 1. There's a large Laotian (Hmong) community in Minnesota 2. They hunt - a lot. Tragic, tragic story.
St. Paul, where the shooter is from, actually has the largest Hmong population in the country. Minnesota has a large tradition of accepting and sponsoring refugees from various places - Vietnam and Laos previously, but more recently from Somalia, Eritrea, Liberia, etc. A lot of Hmong have began hunting and fishing more in recent years, and there have been some cultural issues with them not understanding bag limits, property rules, etc. It was reported that the shooter in this case, for example, was cited a couple years ago for being something like 75 crappies (small panfish) over his daily limit. Other (white) hunters have complained that many Hmong don't understand and/or respect property boundaries and will hunt on private land where they do not have permission to be. Hmong hunters, on the other hand, have complained of being harrassed by white hunters while hunting on public land. Both Wisconsin and Minnesota have in recent years hired Hmong game wardens and DNR agents to try and reach out to the community and help them get acclimated to the norms of hunting and fishing in this country. All that being said, how a trespassing dispute dissolves into 8 people being shot, regardless of who shot first, what names anyone was called, etc., I will never understand.
I agree. The more I read about this the more it sounds like something along the following lines: Hmong guy is trespassing, whether really "lost" or not who knows. He gets caught and as a small group forms, they feel more empowered to call him names etc. He walks away and one "tough" guy decides to goof around and either aim at him, or just shoot near him to scare him real good. Well this backfires as the guy is trained military and shoots back. Sounds like mob mentality taking on someone who wouldn't be pushed. Not to say the Hmong guy isn't wrong, he was trespassing on private land and in someone else's treestand. Public or private land regardless, sitting in someone else's stand is a hunting no-no. As for the score being pulled, some have quick detach rings and for close in shooting you get much faster sight picture setup without it. Look at it this way, how fast can you find something 20 yards away with binoculars?
a really good book about the Hmong and the differences in culture/inability of the Hmong to intergrate in American society is The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down It's about a family/community in California, but indicitve of the Hmong in general.
Gee, I don't know. When is it not sad when innocent people get shot down by some angry nutjob? Please tell me you had forgotten to take your medication when you posted this. Oh, I don't know. Maybe because comparing murder of people to hunting is one of the most retarded comparisons ever? You really don't see much difference between hunting and an angry psycho murdering innocent people? Or are you assuming the angry pyscho planned to eat his "prey"? Just for discussion, let's assume this "hunter" was not going to eat his "prey". Would you at least feel sad about the waste? Right. Thanks for clarifying.
Is that what it "sounds like", problably just a case of the misunderstood Hmong victim being bullied by a bunch of big, bad, white men? What makes you comfortable assuming what you just described? Yeah, this "mob" brought it on themselves. Or maybe -- just possibly? -- it's a case of this guy getting caught in the wrong, and deciding that slaughtering everyone was the best response. I realize, it's a remote possibility.
IIRC, some time in the 80s, animals in the Golden Gate Park of San Francisco started disappearing, and it was reported that the cause was that some Hmong immigrants thought animals in the park were fair game for hunting.
Hey, half of this was in jest, the other half, well, I think deeply about what hunting is all about. Why do states allow deer hunting? Well, besides the taxpayers that like following their heritage (not a terrible thing)...anyway, many states justify it by saying that deer populations have skyrocketed because their only remaining predator is the car/backyard pool. They got a point - friends of mine have found drowned deer in their backyard pools, and my old car was in the shop for awhile because one stupid deer thought he was faster than a sports coupe. (don't get me started on stupid hunting laws that don't allow you to take home something killed by a CRX. Overgrown rat wrecks my car, I should at least get some jerky, right?) But essentially, because natural predators have been hunted almost to extinction, one species has few remaining predators, their population gets too big and they cause problems, such as overcrowding, and lack of available space. Trained predators cull the herd. Isn't that what happened here? Hey, as a human, I feel for the families of the slain. But on a macro-cosmic scale...they're no different than deer. Hunters especially should have no karmic complaints about acting stupid, running into a better predator, and meeting their maker - right? I mean, heck, the deer aren't armed and can't even shoot back, unlike...
Just because a store sells firearms, doesn't mean that the guy behind the counter has a locked and loaded firearm within arm's reach. In fact, I'd lay better than even money that there wasn't a single loaded gun in the entire store other than the robber's.
The scenario you paint is just as likely as the one I described. We may never know. In either case, stupid things were done by idiots. In some places, tresspassing on private or leased hunting land is a serious issue. With BOTH sides contributing to the problems resolving any of it. Simple case is land was private and he had no right to be there. After that, what happens is anyones guess, but it sounds like its a huge issue in that area.
What's the chances that the next time a Hmong wanders onto someone else's property, they get a bullet in their ass for their "mistake"? Me thinks there's going to be some bumkins with itchy trigger fingers the next time around. If I was a Hmong, I wouldn't go wandering about in someone else's woods for a very long time.
If I remember correctly, I think one of the stores did have a loaded gun on hand, but it's been a few years. Your point is taken, however.
Not if they were so close that the scope would be ineffective. If they were fairly close the scope would just get in the way and you would use the built in sights to aim. Also, if you're running down someone and shooting them in the back the scope would probably get in the way as well.
Wisconsin's gun hunting season is only 9 days. People can still bow hunt. One of the victims had lived in my current house before I moved in. Still get some of her mail. Kinda weird.