doughboysigep

what about the guy in brown who is 100 yards beyond your target that you couldn't possibly see (say here's hunkered down in some light brush). if he had orange on, he'd be much easier to see. again, I know thet we are supposed to know what the target is AND what is beyond. how can someone be blamed for not spotting someone in all camo 100 yrds. away that doesn't want to be seen??The shooterwould be held responsible in this situation, which is not his fault. This probably is a rare occurance, but I see the bill protecting the shooter (in this case) , as well as, the hunter in brown.

Sylvan

I highly doubt, given the situation you describe, that this fellow would even be charged and if he were to be, I can't believe any jury would convict him of anything. If I were a juror I certainly wouldn't. Would you? Besides all the places I hunt, if a guy was "hunkered down" 100 yards past where my target was I wouldn't be able to see him if he were wearing blinking lights much less bo.

Sylvan

Here's another thought regarding this matter. Government didn't initiate the idea for blaze orange any more than they initiated the idea for seat belts in cars or helmets for riding motorcycles. As always, they are late comers merely come to legislate a good idea that had already been created and grown popular in the free market place. The creativity of that market along with the desire of each individual hunter to be safe in his sport did it. NOT GOVERNMENT. How many lives were saved? Now by law, that creativity and individual choice of each hunter would be locked in place. No longer would we have the freedom to experiment with new reflective colors or even ideas that haven't even been thought of yet. No longer will the free market be alowed to give us even safer ideas than blaze orange because it can't. Government has taken on the responsibility of our safety choices regarding what we wear. Now tell me. Who has done a better job creating these ideas in the past and who would be better in the future. The free market of choice and ideas or government beuracracy?

You know some studies have already shown that blaze orange isn't the best color anyway. They say fluorescent green is. That's why many highway departments and construction companieshave decided on it rather than bo for their workers. I'm sure you've noticed. Anyway, choices like those go out the window once the nanny state decides it's their responsibility to make those kind of decisions for us.

BuckAlley

Sylva ,I'm not going to turn this into a argument that you seem to be looking for. The darn story is as simple as seeing, if that guy had Blaze Orange on that very day the identification of the target would obvious had been alot easier, and the incident wouldn't have ever gotten as close as it did. You cannot see that for some reason. You only wanted to see what I did wrong, and then tell me I'm a dangerous man. I fully understand I made a move towards a possible bad situation before fully identifying my target. I shared that story with you to make you, and others aware that this very thing happens, and exists in our woods. All I'm trying to say is 1 camo guy in the woods is one too many during gun season. The risk of injury to anyone wearing camo is by far greater. And any one who doesn't understand that would have to be ignorant. Ignorant means: Lackingeducation, and knowledge, not aware, lacking comprehension.
I do wear orange, and I understand your not against anyone wearing it. Orange has been advocated for many yrs now, and is highly stressed in hunter education, tv shows, magazines. But yet hunters still insist on not wearing it, they insist on putting themselves at higher risk. Every year I run into 1 or two wearing strictly camo. This year I saw two. Both in the Northern tier during rifle season. I walked upon 1 while entering the woods, and he was coming out. The 2nd walked up to me to let me know he was in the woods as well. I told him if he was that concerned, then put on some orange. I'm sorry but I feel it needs to become a law for those that still insist they don't need to wear it, or want too. I don't see the harm for the rest of us that alreadly do. If you wear it now you have no fear of breaking the law. So where is the major concern to those that are wearing it, and why are we defending those that don't, by being against the Bill? Someone mentioned vehicle seatbelts. How often did people not wear selt belts until that became a law. Now most people wear them, just becasue it became a law. Sometimes it takes a law for people to wakeup, and think ya know I was pretty dumb for not wearing one in the first place, this isn't so bad after all!!! I'd feel safer knowing everyone in the woods is required to wear orange now. Obviously we'd still have a few law breakers, unfortunately there willalways be law breakers for everything. Laws are designedto help protect us. If everybody wore Orange we wouldn't need the law to begin with, but they don't.

Sylvan

The purpose of threads like this is to debate the issue. I have been stating my opinion regarding this matter just like you have. I don't happen to agree with you. If you want to callthat arguing then fine but you're arguing too.
Not only am I not against it but I wear it myself and urge others to do so as well.
So you don't believe they have a right to make that decision for themselves. You want the state to make that decision for them and force it on them. I understand completely what you advocate, I simply don't agree with you. If I ask myself what it means to live in a free society, my answer is at least in part that it means I have a right to make my own decisions regarding my own safety. It means that I am responsible not the state. I won't abdicate that responsibility willingly and I resent the state and people like you who are trying to take it from me. Like I said before in this thread. For me, there is a much larger issue here than whether or not it's a good idea to wear blaze orange while hunting.

I think the fundamental difference between a lot of us in this debate is that some put safety above liberty, others hold liberty much higher.

BigJohn H

I would suggest a prevission, that it be worn by everyone hunting on the ground and by anyone going to or from their treestand, I have never heard of anyone being shot out of their treestand.

Sylvan

Why does it have to be a collective decision. Why not just let everyone make that decision for themselves?

Deleted User

[Deleted by Admins]

SteveBNy

I wear BO in gun season and encourage everyone to do the same. BUT I am against making it law!

Why - because NYS has a higher rate of compliance with BO than the states requiring it. So how will making it a law increase the rate of compliance if the overwhelming majority already use it? It will have the same effect as the hands free cell phone "feel good" law. If you drive a car, you know see how this has stopped all hand held use.

We do not need the government to pass another regulation that the foolish will continue to ignore.

Steve

farm hunter

Sylvan makes some good points...............One can think up many examples of things most of us do everyday - that aren't law. To make them law - might make sense at first glance - but really do nothing more than limit your rights and freedoms.

Though I don't have an opinion on Blaze orange - I tend to agree with Sylvan on the bigger picture.

FH