Cyprus-Forum.com

[cyprusgrump]

Accepting risk - fair enough, cyprusgrump, but since the boy was 14, I don't think he has the life experience to judge whether he accepts the risk or not.

He does now!

This whole rite of passage thing should be re-thought. If it makes the Cypriot teenager more of a man to be recklessly exposed to dangerous weapons badly handled by their own parent, then something is being done wrong.

I know your remark was meant to be funny, and it is, in a dark way, but you didn't address my point. He's underage - his father is responsible for his safety - he shot him. How is it legal that these kids can go hunting in the first place without a license?

I’m glad you liked the joke but you are just overreacting to the scant facts available on the accident.

You don’t know that the father acted ‘recklessly’ or that the gun was badly handled. As I see it so far it was a tragic accident – a million to one, perhaps more. The father fell, the gun went off and his son was in the way. Tragic, but not reckless.

To be reckless this would have to be the only father in Cyprus that ever took his son shooting against perceived wisdom. That clearly isn’t the case, Cypriot fathers have been taking their sons shooting for generations and their sons in turn do the same.

To take your point to its logical conclusion, no child should be exposed to any danger until they are old enough to judge if they would like to take the risk. That would mean that you wouldn’t be able to take a child in car. Being a passenger in a car – anywhere in the world – is significantly more dangerous than going hunting.

To answer your last point, I believe (you have incorrectly assumed that I am a hunter whereas I am not), that you actually require a licence to hunt game in Cyprus. You wouldn’t need a licence whatever your age to be allowed out in the open country, even if you were accompanying other hunters. Therefore I would not think it would be illegal for a non-hunter to accompany a licensed hunter in Cyprus. Perhaps a hunter could confirm if this is the case?

[pantheman]

I am a hunter, it is not illegal to accompany another hunter as long as you don't carry a gun, loaded or otherwise.

You could just be out walking in the same area where there are hunters. Everyone has assumed it was a reckless act, but how many of you were there to see what happened. Accidents can happen even to the most careful.

Here is a an account of an incident in the UK.

A chap is carrying him gun on his shoulder broken. Albeit, it still has shells in it. At this point you may consider him not to be reckless after all the gun is broken cannot shoot anyone. However, he now bends down to tie his laces, the gun falls off hits the floor upside down, barrels close and bang, he just shot off his foot. I would say that was bad luck, Accidents can happen.

So, even though i must agree that many cypriot gun owners are unsafe, at least if we start nto educate the kids it will go a long way to slowly eradicating the bad over time.

Give the hunters a break !! They face enough shit after such incidents anyway.

Enough said

Pantheman

[Kikapu]

Here is a an account of an incident in the UK.

A chap is carrying him gun on his shoulder broken. Albeit, it still has shells in it. At this point you may consider him not to be reckless after all the gun is broken cannot shoot anyone. However, he now bends down to tie his laces, the gun falls off hits the floor upside down, barrels close and bang, he just shot off his foot. I would say that was bad luck, Accidents can happen.

This sounds like something out of Laural & Hardy skip. I'm not a hunter, but even I know, that, unless the "hammers are cocked", there's very little chance the gun will go off, if it fell off the "idiots" shoulder. On top, it was also "broken". Now, the possibility has gone from very little chance to totally no chance.

I believe, most accidents happen, because the barrels are closed, hammers are cocked, and trying to make the kill first, before anyone else, so the hunters get very "trigger happy", so they shoot at the first sound or movement, or they trip on themselves. Opps, that was my son I just shot. Oh what a terrible accident.!! No idiot, it was not an accident, it was your foolishness to be the fastest draw in the pack. The father should serve jail time for :

1.Child endangerment
2.Reckless gun use
3.Lying about the incident
4.Being an idiot.

[pantheman]

Here is a an account of an incident in the UK.

A chap is carrying him gun on his shoulder broken. Albeit, it still has shells in it. At this point you may consider him not to be reckless after all the gun is broken cannot shoot anyone. However, he now bends down to tie his laces, the gun falls off hits the floor upside down, barrels close and bang, he just shot off his foot. I would say that was bad luck, Accidents can happen.

This sounds like something out of Laural & Hardy skip. I'm not a hunter, but even I know, that, unless the "hammers are cocked", there's very little chance the gun will go off, if it fell off the "idiots" shoulder. On top, it was also "broken". Now, the possibility has gone from very little chance to totally no chance.

I believe, most accidents happen, because the barrels are closed, hammers are cocked, and trying to make the kill first, before anyone else, so the hunters get very "trigger happy", so they shoot at the first sound or movement, or they trip on themselves. Opps, that was my son I just shot. Oh what a terrible accident.!! No idiot, it was not an accident, it was your foolishness to be the fastest draw in the pack. The father should serve jail time for :

1.Child endangerment
2.Reckless gun use
3.Lying about the incident
4.Being an idiot.

Kikapu,

iNo offence like, but it shows you are no hunter, Hammers are always cocked (unless it is a hammer gun) , but there is a safety catch. However, if a gun falls and hits a hard enough surface, even with the safety on the hammer mechanism can still become released and strike the firing pins
due to the impact. After all the only thing holding the hammers back (which at this point are sprung loaded) is a mechanical catch.

Your beginning to sound like a bigot, because you do not like it, so no one else should.

So please spare us all the clever dicky harry bit and at least know something about the subject matter before you starting firing bullets (ha ha i though that was quite appropriate).

Pantheman

[Kikapu]

[ Kikapu,

iNo offence like, but it shows you are no hunter, Hammers are always cocked (unless it is a hammer gun) , but there is a safety catch. However, if a gun falls and hits a hard enough surface, even with the safety on the hammer mechanism can still become released and strike the firing pins
due to the impact. After all the only thing holding the hammers back (which at this point are sprung loaded) is a mechanical catch.

Your beginning to sound like a bigot, because you do not like it, so no one else should.

I have already confessed that I'm not a hunter. I don't care if a hunter blows off his own head through his own stupidity, but I do care when they injure or kill others.

Thank you for confirming my suspicions, that the hunters walk around, barrels locked, and hammers cocked. The only thing that's preventing an "accidental firing" is the safety lock, which by definition sounds pretty lousy, because it does not seem to work when the idiot hunter drops his gun, or trips on himself. At the very least, if he has to have the barrels locked, he could not have the hammers cocked, until when he is in a position to shoot. But no, that is not macho enough. Lets not let the others see him being too careful.

As for hunting, I'm not too crazy about it, but I do own a .357 Smith & Wesson Magnum, 28-2 Highway Patrol Revolver, Double action, six shooter, which I go to the range once every couple of years, and fire 100 rounds. I don't campaign against hunting to be banned, even though I would never call it "sports", but when morons take their "hunting right" carelessly, then they should end up in jail, for endangering others. Do you think I'm being too harsh.? Why, just because you're a hunter, it gives you the right to kill another person, and just because they all know the risks, that makes it OK. Well, that will be fine by me. For all I care, you can all form a circle and fire inwards, but leave the kids at home. They do not need to become "blood hungry" to kill animals at their age. They can pick it up if they want to when they grow up.

[pantheman]

Kik,

I didn't say they walk barrels locked. I was commenting on the hammers. On a shot gun, when you break it , it automatically cocks the hammers. Nothing you can do, thats the way they work.

The safety catch, is a trigger pulling preventative mechanism. It avoids you accitentally pulling the trigger should it becomed snagged on clothing, fencing etc.

I have no interest in your choice of weapon, although the way you describe it, you try to make your self sound really macho. To own a gun of that nature i would guess you are in the states right ?? That would be rich coming from someone out there, they are all f#cking gun crazy, at least in cyprus they don't go to schools and shoot a shit load of students first.

Blasted hypocite. You are becoming pathethic on this matter Kik, usually your posts are quite good, but you are obviously out of your league on this one. So please do us all a favour and wrap .

I have no intention of continuing this thread as it is now getting to the point of shear stupidity. Say anthing anti hunt/hunter.

have a nice day.

Pantheman

[Kikapu]

Kik,

I didn't say they walk barrels locked. I was commenting on the hammers. On a shot gun, when you break it , it automatically cocks the hammers. Nothing you can do, thats the way they work.

The safety catch, is a trigger pulling preventative mechanism. It avoids you accitentally pulling the trigger should it becomed snagged on clothing, fencing etc.

I have no interest in your choice of weapon, although the way you describe it, you try to make your self sound really macho. To own a gun of that nature i would guess you are in the states right ?? That would be rich coming from someone out there, they are all f#cking gun crazy, at least in cyprus they don't go to schools and shoot a shit load of students first.

Blasted hypocite. You are becoming pathethic on this matter Kik, usually your posts are quite good, but you are obviously out of your league on this one. So please do us all a favour and wrap .

I have no intention of continuing this thread as it is now getting to the point of shear stupidity. Say anthing anti hunt/hunter.

have a nice day.

Pantheman

Look, I'm not picking on you, I'm just pissed off you defending idiot hunters that end up shooting their kids and others through their stupidity. And no, the hunters are not alone when it comes to "league of stupidity" in harming others, while they are having fun doing what they do. Being "reckless is no accident", also "safety is no accident". It requires conscience effort to be safe. I know men with a gun in their hands. They feel mighty powerful. And yes, Americans are just as bad as the rest, and I would give hell to any idiot who is reckless with a gun. You did not hear me saying to ban guns or hunting, I'm just picking on idiots, so don't take it personally.

[reportfromcyprus]

So, even though i must agree that many cypriot gun owners are unsafe, at least if we start nto educate the kids it will go a long way to slowly eradicating the bad over time.

Give the hunters a break !! They face enough shit after such incidents anyway.

Enough said

Pantheman

Well, there's a start. If the kids are educated, maybe things will improve. I'm not attacking hunters in general, just the unsafe, trigger-happy ones.

[reportfromcyprus]

Accepting risk - fair enough, cyprusgrump, but since the boy was 14, I don't think he has the life experience to judge whether he accepts the risk or not.

He does now!

This whole rite of passage thing should be re-thought. If it makes the Cypriot teenager more of a man to be recklessly exposed to dangerous weapons badly handled by their own parent, then something is being done wrong.

I know your remark was meant to be funny, and it is, in a dark way, but you didn't address my point. He's underage - his father is responsible for his safety - he shot him. How is it legal that these kids can go hunting in the first place without a license?

I’m glad you liked the joke but you are just overreacting to the scant facts available on the accident.

You don’t know that the father acted ‘recklessly’ or that the gun was badly handled. As I see it so far it was a tragic accident – a million to one, perhaps more. The father fell, the gun went off and his son was in the way. Tragic, but not reckless.

To be reckless this would have to be the only father in Cyprus that ever took his son shooting against perceived wisdom. That clearly isn’t the case, Cypriot fathers have been taking their sons shooting for generations and their sons in turn do the same.

To take your point to its logical conclusion, no child should be exposed to any danger until they are old enough to judge if they would like to take the risk. That would mean that you wouldn’t be able to take a child in car. Being a passenger in a car – anywhere in the world – is significantly more dangerous than going hunting.

To answer your last point, I believe (you have incorrectly assumed that I am a hunter whereas I am not), that you actually require a licence to hunt game in Cyprus. You wouldn’t need a licence whatever your age to be allowed out in the open country, even if you were accompanying other hunters. Therefore I would not think it would be illegal for a non-hunter to accompany a licensed hunter in Cyprus. Perhaps a hunter could confirm if this is the case?

My mistake in assuming that you were a hunter, sorry

It's not necessarily my argument's logical conclusion that you wouldn't be able to take a kid in a car. Taking my point to its logical conclusion would be as follows:

If you take a child in a car without safety measures and speed on a regular basis whilst driving a badly-maintained car - then you are reckless and endangering the kid's life. As the child's legal guardian, you are responsible for its health and safety, no?

[cyprusgrump]

It's not necessarily my argument's logical conclusion that you wouldn't be able to take a kid in a car. Taking my point to its logical conclusion would be as follows:

If you take a child in a car without safety measures and speed on a regular basis whilst driving a badly-maintained car - then you are reckless and endangering the kid's life. As the child's legal guardian, you are responsible for its health and safety, no?

That covers about every driver in Cyprus!

Most of them never even strap their children in yet (with many more casualties) you aren’t calling for children to be banned from cars until they are able to understand the risk. Why?

And you have yet to prove that this hunter was behaving in a reckless manner or was badly handling his weapon.