Hunter goes Beserk and kills five.
- Thread starter thumbtack
- Start date
hummelsander
New member
Sounds like there is more to this story than is being let out. Could he have been reacting is self defense. No-one knows of his relationship to the victims or what actually lead to his actions.
And, an SKS is hardly a common hunting rifle, let alone an ideal sniping rifle. So, something smells kind-o' funny here.
Oh, and another thing. If he was found without ammo, I truly doubt if this was a planned incident. I will submit that he must have felt some sort of a threat, he emptied his ammo in self defense, ran to escape the threat. There is more to this story.
And, an SKS is hardly a common hunting rifle, let alone an ideal sniping rifle. So, something smells kind-o' funny here.
Oh, and another thing. If he was found without ammo, I truly doubt if this was a planned incident. I will submit that he must have felt some sort of a threat, he emptied his ammo in self defense, ran to escape the threat. There is more to this story.
According to the St. Paul paper, http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/ someone else in the victim's party heard when the guy called back on his radio, and he just said "I need help, I've been shot". What he didnt' say is that the shooting was intentional. It was a fatal mistake.
Now I'm guessing here, as a Minnesota deer hunter, but an accidental shooting would have been the first thing on the rescuer's mine. If they thought it was accidental, they would have left the rifles behind so it wouldn't slow them down getting in or out.
There's usually 3 or 4 accidental shootings during deer season every year in MN & WI, but I've never heard of an intentional shooting around here.
Now I'm guessing here, as a Minnesota deer hunter, but an accidental shooting would have been the first thing on the rescuer's mine. If they thought it was accidental, they would have left the rifles behind so it wouldn't slow them down getting in or out.
There's usually 3 or 4 accidental shootings during deer season every year in MN & WI, but I've never heard of an intentional shooting around here.
CobrayCommando
Moderator
True, very true. It just seems highly unlikely that it was self defense, although the man may have thought it was.
hummelsander, the sheriff who held the press conference said that the SKS is not all that uncommon for deer hunting around there and that two people is his own (the sheriff's) deer hunting party uses SKS's because they're cheap and the ammo is cheap.
They're saying the shooting happened over a 15 minute period and that Vang stalked some of the victims.
I think it's safe to say that Vang didnt plan on this when he headed out deer hunting, but to say that it must have been in self defense when only ONE of the eight casualties had a rifle is quite stretch.
The judge and jury need to presume innocence until provent guilty but we can speculate all we want.
They're saying the shooting happened over a 15 minute period and that Vang stalked some of the victims.
I think it's safe to say that Vang didnt plan on this when he headed out deer hunting, but to say that it must have been in self defense when only ONE of the eight casualties had a rifle is quite stretch.
The judge and jury need to presume innocence until provent guilty but we can speculate all we want.
hummelsander
New member
It is tragic nevertheless. My prayers are with the families and those in charge for sure.
MeekAndMild
New member
That still makes him a poacher. Our war of words with the antis was nearly lost when the Disney airheads changed 'poacher' to 'hunter' when they made the Bambi book into a cartoon.
CobrayCommando
Moderator
But in his mind he may have been fighting the Khmer Rouge or something, I mean no sane person could argue self defense, but judging from his actions he does not appear to be sane. Or he could just hate white people... alot...
Arizona Fusilier
New member
.
Good grief!
What y'all doin'!?!?! We have an accident every other year or so!I can understand that first instinct of an accidental shooting, put in this context, so leaving the longarms behind might be understandable. But how come nobody was wearing a sidearm? Some return fire from a couple of .357, hunting-legal revolvers could have made some difference. Given the dearth of ammo he was apparently carrying, I doubt he'd stick around.
OK, I hear that enough from anti-gun people. Why from the pro-gunners, too, I have no idea. Around here, long shots are the exception, not the rule. I have hunted exactly one spot in the last six years where I would have a shot of over 100 yards. An SKS is on par with a .30-30 in terms of performance. I don't know of anyone that would use a .30-30 in excess of 100 yards.
So what we have is limited ranges, a rifle that is commonly accepted in those ranges, and another rifle with approximately the same range. What is the difference? One is traditional looking, one is 'scary'. One is economical, one is about the cheapest quality centerfire rifle you'll ever get.
A fixed magazine SKS is a damn relic. It serves as an inexpensive hunting rifle and fits that role well. The sad part is that the press will play the "assault weapon" angle to the hilt. Damn media rarely gets their facts straight and this time will be no different. Mark my words!
Sir William
New member
One more dead, 6 total. Two wounded and two with psych trauma. The self defense angle is gone. The shooter stripped his blaze orange and started shooting. The theory is that he then shot some victims again and then ran out of ammunition. Vang is only 36, I doubt he ever saw a Khmer Rouge. It strikes me as odd that he had legally obtained a license and deer tags. It seems he obtained the SKS and ammunition in a legal manner.
Briansammo
New member
SKS rifles are popular in my area for short range hunting, but the 30/30 and 44mag lever action guns still rule the roost.
Is it true that only one of the victims was actually armed and the rest were chased and shot down like dogs with many shot twice or more?
I just got back in from a business trip and was not able to follow the story closely while I was gone.
Is it true that only one of the victims was actually armed and the rest were chased and shot down like dogs with many shot twice or more?
I just got back in from a business trip and was not able to follow the story closely while I was gone.
paratrooper
New member
I remember 60 Minutes doing a story on the Hmong in Wausau WI a few years back . They were scouts in 'Nam and the church thought it was the "right thing" to do . Well after a few years most of the folks in that church knew they had screwed up . The Hmong managed to get themselves on welfare and then sponsor other Hmongs to come here . If I remember "sponsoring" correctly they had to be financially responsible for the "immigrant". Welfare hardly sounds like a "financially responsible" person . It seems that one of them had gone to law school and was trying to get all the stuff the Mexicans get in CA . Bi-lingual education for starters . I guess the "good" folks in that church have learned a hard lesson . No good deed goes unpunished .
Ohio Annie
New member
Hmong presence in upper Midwest
Actually there are many thousands of Hmong in the upper Midwest. I guess they chose to ignore the climate there in favor of the low population density. The Hmong are mountain people and were invited to move here by our government for helping us in the war and we recognized that they would be slaughtered by the communists if they had stayed. They do not have the American concept of personal land and poaching is considered an honorable profession in their culture.
In addition, in this case, this man had previous complaints for domestic abuse against his common-law wife ("cultural wife" in their terminology). So this guy wasn't somebody you want to have in the woods with a gun.
There are conflicting reports as to whether he was wearing hunter orange. No matter, he is now a murderer.
formerly a resident of Wausau, WI, and Minneapolis, MN,
Actually there are many thousands of Hmong in the upper Midwest. I guess they chose to ignore the climate there in favor of the low population density. The Hmong are mountain people and were invited to move here by our government for helping us in the war and we recognized that they would be slaughtered by the communists if they had stayed. They do not have the American concept of personal land and poaching is considered an honorable profession in their culture.
In addition, in this case, this man had previous complaints for domestic abuse against his common-law wife ("cultural wife" in their terminology). So this guy wasn't somebody you want to have in the woods with a gun.
There are conflicting reports as to whether he was wearing hunter orange. No matter, he is now a murderer.
formerly a resident of Wausau, WI, and Minneapolis, MN,
hummelsander
New member
Since I'm new, I must say as an introduction, that I am not an anti-gun person. I owned an SKS, and deer hunted with it in Idaho. I also vote pro-gun and have been incouraging others to purchase and carry (legally of course ). I even ordered an after market stock for it. I have guns (cheap ones) and plan to purchase more (better quality).
As for this guy in question, I'm asking these questions
1.What would make a guy strip the orange, and the scope, and start shooting all those guys?
2.Where are all the other guns?
3.Was the tree stand his?
4.How close to the property line was he?
5.Why was he "off-sides"
6.What type of fence did he cross, if in fact, he had to cross one?
7.How well was the property line marked?
8.Finally, where were all the other guns?
9.And one more, did one of the hunters actually fire a shot?
These are logical questions I'm sure that are already being asked.
Oh, yes, I realize he was trespassing and if the tree stand hardware was his, it was in a privately owned tree. I there on that one.
). I even ordered an after market stock for it. I have guns (cheap ones) and plan to purchase more (better quality). As for this guy in question, I'm asking these questions
1.What would make a guy strip the orange, and the scope, and start shooting all those guys?
2.Where are all the other guns?
3.Was the tree stand his?
4.How close to the property line was he?
5.Why was he "off-sides"
6.What type of fence did he cross, if in fact, he had to cross one?
7.How well was the property line marked?
8.Finally, where were all the other guns?
9.And one more, did one of the hunters actually fire a shot?
These are logical questions I'm sure that are already being asked.
Oh, yes, I realize he was trespassing and if the tree stand hardware was his, it was in a privately owned tree. I there on that one.