NationStates Jolt Archive

Dick Cheney has been taking a bit of criticism for his hunting accident--and while it was an accident, it was definitely an accident of negligence. But while lots of people have been spinning this as a minor incident, it's easy to forget that Whittington spent the last three days in ICU, and today suffered a minor heart attack (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11340558/) because of a pellet that was lodged close to his heart.
The 78-year-old lawyer who was shot by Vice President Dick Cheney in a hunting accident has some birdshot lodged in his heart and he had a "minor heart attack," a hospital official said Tuesday.

Peter Banko, the hospital administrator at Christus Spohn Hospital Corpus Christi-Memorial, said Harry Whittington had the heart attack early Tuesday while being evaluated.

He said there was an irregularity in the heartbeat caused by a pellet, and doctors performed a cardiac catheterization.
Now no heart attack is minor for a 78 year old man, but even giving the press the benefit of the doubt on this one (even though they're reported this as though Whittington only had minor wounds and have downplayed his time in the ICU), the possibility that Whittington could take a turn for the worse is clear.

And let me be abso-fucking-lutely clear to anyone who would try to cast this question in a hateful light--I want Whittington to recover fully and live a long time from now.

What happens to Cheney if Whittington dies? Does he get charged with anything? Negligence? Involuntary Manslaughter? I mean, it's possible to pass this off as a tragedy if all that happened was that the guy took a few pellets to the face--which was the way it was spun and continues to be spun by some--but this guy apparently took birdshot close to the heart. That's harder to spin.

So what's your take? No poll this time.

Probably just be marked down as an accident....pretty much asit probably would be had it been anybody else.

If he dies, they can charge him. But really, a politician being arrested for anything other than indisputable proof of corruption? Not happening.

Is there a negligent homicide?

If Cheney is a real hunter, he'll eat what he kills. :p

What happens to Cheney if Whittington dies? Does he get charged with anything? Negligence? Involuntary Manslaughter? I mean, it's possible to pass this off as a tragedy if all that happened was that the guy took a few pellets to the face--which was the way it was spun and continues to be spun by some--but this guy apparently took birdshot close to the heart. That's harder to spin.



If it ws anyone else they'd at least be under investigation. It doesn't even look like there will be an investigation on this however, another hunting mishap story involving a man shooting his partners elbow thinking it was a squirrel gets an investigation. and its not because hes repub or a dem, he's the VP.


If Cheney is a real hunter, he'll eat what he kills. :p

who said that wasn't his plan in teh first place

If it ws anyone else they'd at least be under investigation. It doesn't even look like there will be an investigation on this however, another hunting mishap story involving a man shooting his partners elbow thinking it was a squirrel gets an investigation. and its not because hes repub or a dem, he's the VP.




who said that wasn't his plan in teh first place

http://www.pensitoreview.com/images/photo-cheney-burns.jpg

http://www.pensitoreview.com/images/photo-cheney-burns.jpg


excellent!
http://www.woostercollective.com/images/zolt3.jpg

excellent!
http://www.woostercollective.com/images/zolt3.jpg

The one with Burns is hilarious but the EVILDICK one made me shit my pants :eek: .

He's already a mass murderer, yet no one is holding him accountable for that. Why should this incident change anything?

The one with Burns is hilarious but the EVILDICK one made me shit my pants :eek: .


then my job is done.

just found this, thought it was amusing.


PETA takes aim at Dick Cheney

By Jeannette Walls
MSNBC
Updated: 2:53 a.m. ET Feb. 14, 2006
PETA is taking aim at Dick Cheney.

The high-profile animal-rights group has sent a letter to the vice-president, who accidentally shot a lawyer while the two men were quail hunting.

“I hope that the man you mistook for a quail is doing well. I also hope that this brush with tragedy will convince you to rethink your recreational activities,” PETA president Ingrid Newkirk wrote in a letter to Cheney obtained by The Scoop. She went on to suggest that Cheney “put down your guns and pick up a tennis racket” — which, she adds, would be better for his heart.

“Mr. Cheney, there is so much violence in the world that is beyond our control,” Newkirk concluded, “but you can avoid hurting innocent animals (and well-connected lawyers) by putting down your guns and taking up a nonviolent sport.”

Probably just be marked down as an accident....pretty much asit probably would be had it been anybody else.
Right: there certainly wouldn't be any legal consequences for Whittington if the shoe had been on the other foot and he'd winged Cheney, would there?

just found this, thought it was amusing.

Tennis would never satisfy him! Nothing dies playing tennis! :p

Maybe Grand Theft Auto video games could help. :)

Tennis would never satisfy him! Nothing dies playing tennis! :p

Maybe Grand Theft Auto video games could help. :)


or State of Emergency (http://www.rockstargames.com/stateofemergency/)

because you know when Dick Cheney ends a level he likes to hear "Congratulations! You've killed everybody!"


...i miss that game

Whittington will be posthumously declared an Enemy Combatant and Al Qaeda Mastermind, which not only absolves Cheney of murder and involuntary manslaighter charges but makes him eligible for the Medal of Freedom.

just found this, thought it was amusing.
Reminded me of the other part of the story--the description of what they call hunting. Farm raised quail, penned up, then stuck in a bush, and when the "hunters" drive up, the quail is flushed and the "hunters" open fire. Now I've never been a hunter, but that doesn't seem like much of a sport to me.

Is there a negligent homicide?

Involuntary manslaughter is a potential depending on the degree of negligence.

(I know nothing about the Cheney case, so I'm not saying he could be charged with IM.)

I do wonder about the legality of Cheney's delay in reporting the incident. (Slow Leak: How Cheney Stalled News Reports of Hunting Accident (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1159347,00.html?CNN=yes)) I assume this was just a press delay and not a delay in reporting to the authorities?

Whttington was shot in the chest and face with a SHOTGUN, though not one of the more powerful types of shotguns, I'm sure.

It's funny when people say it's not a big deal.

Involuntary manslaughter is a potential depending on the degree of negligence.

(I know nothing about the Cheney case, so I'm not saying he could be charged with IM.)

I do wonder about the legality of Cheney's delay in reporting the incident. (Slow Leak: How Cheney Stalled News Reports of Hunting Accident (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1159347,00.html?CNN=yes)) I assume this was just a press delay and not a delay in reporting to the authorities?From what I read from AP, Cheney had an Ambulance near by for himself, so Medical help was quick. The delay in reporting it to the news was out of respect for the land owner. Chaney let them decide if and when the news should be released.

I'll find the article and edit this post.

EDITED The Article (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/12/national/main1307942.shtml)

My Mistake, they had an Ambulance on call but medical personell was accompanying the Vice President, and no mention of why the delay.

There was no intent plus these cats were pals werent they? It seems like a tragic accident and nothing more. Even for those who hate Cheney....its a bit pointless to try and pin this on him as a criminal act isnt it?

I sure hope the man recovers.

Whttington was shot in the chest and face with a SHOTGUN, though not one of the more powerful types of shotguns, I'm sure.

It's funny when people say it's not a big deal.

Birdshot is not as lethal to human beings depending on the distance from target unlike buckshot or bigger.

But at point blank, shot is shot and tears through a human body all the same.

It's not involuntary manslaughter or negligence.

IM is killing someone while doing something reckless. If Cheny knew he was there while he was aiming at the quails and shot anyway, then it would be IM(if he dies.)

Negligence, a tort not a crime, can only happen when someone with a duty ignores it and causes someone else injury. Also, there's assumption of risk with hunting accidents. If you don't want to get shot by accident, then you shouldn't have been hunting in the first place.

There was no intent plus these cats were pals werent they? It seems like a tragic accident and nothing more. Even for those who hate Cheney....its a bit pointless to try and pin this on him as a criminal act isnt it?

I sure hope the man recovers.

I certainly haven't read anything that suggests to me that this was a criminal act.

Plus intent has jack to do with court besides making a list of suspects. Cheny doesn't seem to have a hard time saying he did it.

I certainly haven't read anything that suggests to me that this was a criminal act.

I think maybe someone insinuated it was in another thread is why I said that....I must have posted in the wrong Cheney thread. Silly me.

It's not involuntary manslaughter or negligence.

IM is killing someone while doing something reckless. If Cheny knew he was there while he was aiming at the quails and shot anyway, then it would be IM(if he dies.)

Negligence, a tort not a crime, can only happen when someone with a duty ignores it and causes someone else injury. Also, there's assumption of risk with hunting accidents. If you don't want to get shot by accident, then you shouldn't have been hunting in the first place.

Depending on the jurisdiction, gross negligence can result in manslaughter.

Battery is a tort. You violate your duty by shooting someone without their consent. Merely going hunting with someone is not consent to be shot.

You are making a lot of assumptions about the law of Texas and the facts of the case.

You can have criminal charges arising out of a hunting-related shooting. Obviously, one could commit murder while hunting. But even an accidental shooting could involve a wide range of crimes and torts.

I think you are right that there is neither a crime nor a tort here, however.

I think maybe someone insinuated it was in another thread is why I said that....I must have posted in the wrong Cheney thread. Silly me.

I didn't mean that no one had insinuated it.

I meant that nothing in the facts I've read so far suggest a crime.

I should have been more clear in my wording. I'm a bit off-kilter at the moment.

Plus intent has jack to do with court besides making a list of suspects. Cheny doesn't seem to have a hard time saying he did it.

Um. I think you have intent and motive confused.

Motive is not an element of a crime. But TV shows and mysteries make a big deal of motive because it helps solve the crime. (And actually showing a motive or lack thereof may well be relevant in court as to proof of guilt.)

Intent almost always is.

Well why don't we treat this how it should be: What would happen to you if you accidentally shot and ultimately killed someone? What if you went hunting and didn't even have the right stamp?

If Whittington dies then the result will be that we won't hear anything about it from the White House for two or three days.

I didn't mean that no one had insinuated it.

I meant that nothing in the facts I've read so far suggest a crime.

I should have been more clear in my wording. I'm a bit off-kilter at the moment.


As am I......but good to see you again anyway Cat-lol.

If Cheny wanted to hurt him, then this would battery as a felony. This has to be proven first, and Cheny didn't control the pellets in him to attack his heart like Magneto or something.

You're right, it's not a consent to be shot. However, if you do hunt, you have to be aware that the chance of being shot is always there. Assumption of risk has ground here.

If Cheny wanted to commit murder, why would he bring an ambulance along with him? It's possible that Cheny planned on shooting him later on so that even if they got him to a doctor he would die, but that doesn't matter now. Trying to kill someone from thirty yards, with a 28-guage loaded with bird pellets is foolish.

Um. I think you have intent and motive confused.

Motive is not an element of a crime. But TV shows and mysteries make a big deal of motive because it helps solve the crime. (And actually showing a motive or lack thereof may well be relevant in court as to proof of guilt.)

Intent almost always is.

Ah, I did yes.

If Cheny wanted to hurt him, then this would battery as a felony. This has to be proven first, and Cheny didn't control the pellets in him to attack his heart like Magneto or something.

You're right, it's not a consent to be shot. However, if you do hunt, you have to be aware that the chance of being shot is always there. Assumption of risk has ground here.

If Cheny wanted to commit murder, why would he bring an ambulance along with him? It's possible that Cheny planned on shooting him later on so that even if they got him to a doctor he would die, but that doesn't matter now. Trying to kill someone from thirty yards, with a 28-guage loaded with bird pellets is foolish.

I'm just clarifying the relevant law. You are arguing the facts.

I'm not claiming Cheney committed either a crime or a tort.

Whittington will be posthumously declared an Enemy Combatant and Al Qaeda Mastermind, which not only absolves Cheney of murder and involuntary manslaighter charges but makes him eligible for the Medal of Freedom.

I thought all you had to do to get the medal of freedom was be really bad at your job? That's why Colon Powell got fired. He was kinda good at his job. The CIA guy however...

If Cheny wanted to commit murder, why would he bring an ambulance along with him? It's possible that Cheny planned on shooting him later on so that even if they got him to a doctor he would die, but that doesn't matter now. Trying to kill someone from thirty yards, with a 28-guage loaded with bird pellets is foolish.

I'm pretty sure that the Veep brings an ambulance everywhere in case he suddenly keels over. He's not in good shape. He's in only slightly better shape than the actual Darth Vader. Though he is, of course, a far less cool cyborg.

There was no intent plus these cats were pals werent they? It seems like a tragic accident and nothing more. Even for those who hate Cheney....its a bit pointless to try and pin this on him as a criminal act isnt it?

I sure hope the man recovers.

That's right. It was done with no particular malice towards Whittington. He would have been happy to shoot anyone in order to distract from whatever else is going on.

Any ideas on what it is? Did the Enron people get a walk? Did Larry Flynt suddenly aquire a copy of the actual contract that Satan signed with the Exxon board of directors? Did someone start to pay attention to Bill Frist's pharmeceutical fellatio?

That's right. It was done with no particular malice towards Whittington. He would have been happy to shoot anyone in order to distract from whatever else is going on.

Any ideas on what it is? Did the Enron people get a walk? Did Larry Flynt suddenly aquire a copy of the actual contract that Satan signed with the Exxon board of directors? Did someone start to pay attention to Bill Frist's pharmeceutical fellatio?

:eek: :D

That's right. It was done with no particular malice towards Whittington. He would have been happy to shoot anyone in order to distract from whatever else is going on.

Any ideas on what it is? Did the Enron people get a walk? Did Larry Flynt suddenly aquire a copy of the actual contract that Satan signed with the Exxon board of directors? Did someone start to pay attention to Bill Frist's pharmeceutical fellatio?

Speaking as someone who has handled firearms far more than most, there is no such thing as an

"accidental discharge"

The current term in legal circles is

"negligent discharge"

To prove it was an "accident" lab tests have to show that the weapon has a propensity to discharge with no interference on the part of the wielder.

Negligent discharge means you were not in sufficient control of the weapon (pointing it, putting your finger in the trigger when there are people in front of you, etc).

And that brings you to negligent homicide.

Really, since Cheney is rich, I think it's far more likely that even if Whittington doesn't die, that Cheney will get sued.

Speaking as someone who has handled firearms far more than most, there is no such thing as an

"accidental discharge"

The current term in legal circles is

"negligent discharge"

To prove it was an "accident" lab tests have to show that the weapon has a propensity to discharge with no interference on the part of the wielder.

Negligent discharge means you were not in sufficient control of the weapon (pointing it, putting your finger in the trigger when there are people in front of you, etc).

And that brings you to negligent homicide.

Really, since Cheney is rich, I think it's far more likely that even if Whittington doesn't die, that Cheney will get sued.

I have a question for you. Was Dick proper in discharging his weapon when he didn't know the location of one of his hunting party members, which would most likely be approaching him from the back (where he fired his gun)?

I have a question for you. Was Dick proper in discharging his weapon when he didn't know the location of one of his hunting party members, which would most likely be approaching him from the back (where he fired his gun)?

Read this and ask yourself the same question. I believe that he was negligent, as I do with most unintentional shootings.

From Pages 8-10 of

The Modern Technique of the Pistol,

by Greg Morrison, Gunsite Press, Paulden, Arizona, ISBN 0-9621342-3-6, Library of Congress Number 91-72644, $40

RULE I: ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED

There are no exceptions. Do not pretend that this is true. Some people and organizations take this rule and weaken it; e.g. "Treat all guns as if they were loaded." Unfortunately, the "as if" compromises the directness of the statement by implying that they are unloaded, but we will treat them as though they are loaded. No good! Safety rules must be worded forcefully so that they are never treated lightly or reduced to partial compliance.

All guns are always loaded - period!

This must be your mind-set. If someone hands you a firearm and says, "Don't worry, it's not loaded," you do not dare believe him. You need not be impolite, but check it yourself. Remember, there are no accidents, only negligent acts. Check it. Do not let yourself fall prey to a situation where you might feel compelled to squeal, "I didn't know it was loaded!"

RULE II: NEVER LET THE MUZZLE COVER ANYTHING YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO DESTROY

Conspicuously and continuously violated, especially with pistols, Rule II applies whether you are involved in range practice, daily carry, or examination. If the weapon is assembled and in someone's hands, it is capable of being discharged. A firearm holstered properly, lying on a table, or placed in a scabbard is of no danger to anyone. Only when handled is there a need for concern. This rule applies to fighting as well as to daily handling. If you are not willing to take a human life, do not cover a person with the muzzle. This rule also applies to your own person. Do not allow the muzzle to cover your extremities, e.g. using both hands to reholster the pistol. This practice is unsound, both procedurally and tactically. You may need a free hand for something important. Proper holster design should provide for one-handed holstering, so avoid holsters which collapse after withdrawing the pistol. (Note: It is dangerous to push the muzzle against the inside edge of the holster nearest the body to "open" it since this results in your pointing the pistol at your midsection.) Dry-practice in the home is a worthwhile habit and it will result in more deeply programmed reflexes. Most of the reflexes involved in the Modern Technique do not require that a shot be fired. Particular procedures for dry-firing in the home will be covered later. Let it suffice for now that you do not dry-fire using a "target" that you wish not to see destroyed. (Recall RULE I as well.)

RULE III: KEEP YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER UNTIL YOUR SIGHTS ARE ON THE TARGET

Rule III is violated most anytime the uneducated person handles a firearm. Whether on TV, in the theaters, or at the range, people seem fascinated with having their finger on the trigger. Never stand or walk around with your finger on the trigger. It is unprofessional, dangerous, and, perhaps most damaging to the psyche, it is klutzy looking. Never fire a shot unless the sights are superimposed on the target and you have made a conscious decision to fire. Firing an unaligned pistol in a fight gains nothing. If you believe that the defensive pistol is only an intimidation tool - not something to be used - carry blanks, or better yet, reevaluate having one around. If you are going to launch a projectile, it had best be directed purposely. Danger abounds if you allow your finger to dawdle inside the trigger guard. As soon as the sights leave the target, the trigger-finger leaves the trigger and straightens alongside the frame. Since the hand normally prefers to work as a unit - as in grasping - separating the function of the trigger-finger from the rest of the hand takes effort. The five-finger grasp is a deeply programmed reflex. Under sufficient stress, and with the finger already placed on the trigger, an unexpected movement, misstep or surprise could result in a negligent discharge. Speed cannot be gained from such a premature placement of the trigger-finger. Bringing the sights to bear on the target, whether from the holster or the Guard Position, takes more time than that required for moving the trigger finger an inch or so to the trigger.

RULE IV: BE SURE OF YOUR TARGET

Know what it is, what is in line with it, and what is behind it. Never shoot at anything you have not positively identified. Be aware of your surroundings, whether on the range or in a fight. Do not assume anything. Know what you are doing.

SUMMARY

Make these rules a part of your character. Never compromise them. Improper gunhandling results from ignorance and improper role modeling, such as handling your gun like your favorite actor does. Education can cure this. You can make a difference by following these gunhandling rules and insisting that those around you do the same. Set the example. Who knows what tragedies you, or someone you influence, may prevent?

What the heck is a 'silent' heart attack. The AP reporter described it as an irregular heart beat, rather than pain and pressure. Would one even know that this was occuring, except for the monitoring equipment that this fellow was hooked up to?

Um. I think you have intent and motive confused.

Motive is not an element of a crime. But TV shows and mysteries make a big deal of motive because it helps solve the crime. (And actually showing a motive or lack thereof may well be relevant in court as to proof of guilt.)

Intent almost always is.

In Texas, murder requires intent. Manslaughter and ciminally negligent homicide do not. Motive goes to evidence; it is not an element of the crime.

-A person commits criminal homicide if he intentionally, knowingly,
recklessly, or with criminal negligence causes the death of an
individual.

The types of Criminal homicide are murder, capital murder, manslaughter, or criminally negligent homicide.

-A person commits manslaughter if he recklessly causes the death of an individual.

-A person commits criminally negligent homicide if he causes the death of an individual by criminal negligence.

I think that the incident should be investigated district attorney just as any other shooting incident would be. It is not required that the victim press charges. The state can investigate on its own.

I went to the Ted Nugent hunting forum (which is largely Republican) and the overwhelming majority opinion appears to be that Cheney acted like an idiot.

At the same time, this is TEXAS. About as red as you can get. The (elected) courts here refused to even consider whether or not Bush and Cheney violated the Constitution when they both were residents of Texas when they ran for office (in my opinion they did). It's not likely they will do the right thing.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b283/jtkwon/morecheney.jpg

If Cheny wanted to hurt him, then this would battery as a felony. This has to be proven first, and Cheny didn't control the pellets in him to attack his heart like Magneto or something.

You're right, it's not a consent to be shot. However, if you do hunt, you have to be aware that the chance of being shot is always there. Assumption of risk has ground here.

If Cheny wanted to commit murder, why would he bring an ambulance along with him? It's possible that Cheny planned on shooting him later on so that even if they got him to a doctor he would die, but that doesn't matter now. Trying to kill someone from thirty yards, with a 28-guage loaded with bird pellets is foolish.

The last I knew there was no battery in Texas. This falls less into the tort category than the criminal.

Really, since Cheney is rich, I think it's far more likely that even if Whittington doesn't die, that Cheney will get sued.you really think so? i mean, sure, you can never have enough money, but the guy is a 78 yearold billionaire, he has more money than he could spend in his lifetime, i dont think he will sue his friend.

[QUOTE=Charlsie Island]In Texas, murder requires intent. Manslaughter and ciminally negligent homicide do not. Motive goes to evidence; it is not an element of the crime.

-A person commits criminal homicide if he intentionally, knowingly,
recklessly, or with criminal negligence causes the death of an
individual.

The types of Criminal homicide are murder, capital murder, manslaughter, or criminally negligent homicide.

-A person commits manslaughter if he recklessly causes the death of an individual.

-A person commits criminally negligent homicide if he causes the death of an individual by criminal negligence.

...QUOTE]

Let me clarify a couple points.. all of these phrases are defined specifically in the penal code... Webster's and Black's Law Dictionary do not define legal terms. Also, intent can be implied if a person is killed during commission of a felony.

Let me clarify a couple points.. all of these phrases are defined specifically in the penal code... Webster's and Black's Law Dictionary do not define legal terms. Also, intent can be implied if a person is killed during commission of a felony.

Thank you with your help on local law. DK and I are both attorneys, but not in Texas.

One thing, from what I see on the web, battery is both a misdemeanor and a tort in Texas. Is this (http://www.weblocator.com/attorney/tx/law/c19.html#txc191300) (second paragraph) wrong?

EDIT: Nevermind. Under Texas Penal Code § 22.01(a)(1), the traditional tort of battery is one type of the crime of assault.

EDIT2: Here is a link to the Texas Penal Code (http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/petoc.html)for those wanting to look at the definitions of homicide, particularly criminally negligent homicide. They are under CHAPTER 19. CRIMINAL HOMICIDE.

you really think so? i mean, sure, you can never have enough money, but the guy is a 78 yearold billionaire, he has more money than he could spend in his lifetime, i dont think he will sue his friend.

He should get a free shot at Cheney.

There are some things money just can't buy.

Somebody at work mentioned Whittington's a liberal.

If it's true; it makes for good dark humor.

Somebody at work mentioned Whittington's a liberal.

If it's true; it makes for good dark humor.

Well, I've read that he's a conservative.

If he contradicts the White House's version of the story, he'll likely be called a liberal.

He should get a free shot at Cheney.

There are some things money just can't buy.the two are friends.
if a friend accidentally injures you and you take the opportunity to intentionally injure him back, you must be a bad person and cant have too many friends.

Whttington was shot in the chest and face with a SHOTGUN, though not one of the more powerful types of shotguns, I'm sure.

It's funny when people say it's not a big deal.

Twas a 28 gauge shotgun loaded with birdshot at thirty yards. You'd be hardpressed to kill a squirrel with that.

the two are friends.
if a friend accidentally injures you and you take the opportunity to intentionally injure him back, you must be a bad person and cant have too many friends.

No, the true definition of a friend is someone OFFERING to let you take a free one if he accidentally hurts you.

Twas a 28 gauge shotgun loaded with birdshot at thirty yards. You'd be hardpressed to kill a squirrel with that.

And yet shot has reached his heart. It penetrated his skin, moved past his ribcage and on to his heart. There's a tough membrane even between the ribs.

What happens to Cheney if Whittington dies? Does he get charged with anything? Negligence? Involuntary Manslaughter? I mean, it's possible to pass this off as a tragedy if all that happened was that the guy took a few pellets to the face--which was the way it was spun and continues to be spun by some--but this guy apparently took birdshot close to the heart. That's harder to spin.
Was Congress in Session? If they were, I think it would have to be a murder in Central Park at noon.

Thank you with your help on local law. DK and I are both attorneys, but not in Texas.

One thing, from what I see on the web, battery is both a misdemeanor and a tort in Texas. Is this (http://www.weblocator.com/attorney/tx/law/c19.html#txc191300) (second paragraph) wrong?

EDIT: Nevermind. Under Texas Penal Code § 22.01(a)(1), the traditional tort of battery is one type of the crime of assault.

EDIT2: Here is a link to the Texas Penal Code (http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/petoc.html)for those wanting to look at the definitions of homicide, particularly criminally negligent homicide. They are under CHAPTER 19. CRIMINAL HOMICIDE.

;) BTW, Whittington is not a liberal.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b283/jtkwon/morecheney.jpg
That's really freaking funny.

I'm leary of making too much of this. It was an accident. I do hope that Whittington recovers and this remains an amusing sidenote about a man who has been anything but amusing. The press seems to have hurt feelings about not being told immediately, but even that-even if I'm the Vice President, right after I shoot my friend in the face my first thought isn't going to be "Well, we better tell the press..." I didn't need to know about this immediately, I don't know that 12 hours of time lost not knowing about it is all that big a deal (unless, of course, it turns out that there was some crazy conspiracy that was concocted in the 12 hours, but that really doesn't seem likely).

I'm not willing to go with the "Al Capone" route with this, that anything that brings down Cheney is good. This was an accident, there are things the man has done on purpose that I would want him to answer for.

Whittington will be posthumously declared an Enemy Combatant and Al Qaeda Mastermind, which not only absolves Cheney of murder and involuntary manslaighter charges but makes him eligible for the Medal of Freedom.http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20060215/sbs060214.gif

knowing the US voters this will probably get Cheney elected President.

knowing the US voters this will probably get Cheney elected President.
I wonder if this is habitual? You know, like maybe the Iraq War was originally supposed to be an attack on Australia, and he just missed badly, and shot his old pal Saddam in the face?

knowing the US voters this will probably get Cheney elected President.

Well, he did shoot a lawyer...

:p

heh thats kinda what I was thinking too.

another thought came to my mind as well, if they were such good buddies, maybe Cheney was in the will and was hoping for some of that money of the lawyers to help him get a new yacht (sp?)... but if the lawyer really knew Cheney he prolly had some sort of condition that Cheney gets the money only if he doesn't kill him.

Or another thought, maybe that lawyer being such good buddies with Cheney was involved in Halliburton and helped make board decisions, and he wasn't going to do something the way Cheney had asked him too so - BAM - shotgun to the heart.

you really think so? i mean, sure, you can never have enough money, but the guy is a 78 yearold billionaire, he has more money than he could spend in his lifetime, i dont think he will sue his friend.

Rich people know better than most that you can never have enough money.

That's really freaking funny.
I thought so, too.

What's up, are you getting some of my sick sense of humor about death and politics?

knowing the US voters this will probably get Cheney elected President.well, they elected ted kennedy to the senate after chappaquiddick.

I thought so, too.

What's up, are you getting some of my sick sense of humor about death and politics?
Some days my mood is better than others.

Dick Cheney has been taking a bit of criticism for his hunting accident--and while it was an accident, it was definitely an accident of negligence. But while lots of people have been spinning this as a minor incident, it's easy to forget that Whittington spent the last three days in ICU, and today suffered a minor heart attack (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11340558/) because of a pellet that was lodged close to his heart.

Now no heart attack is minor for a 78 year old man, but even giving the press the benefit of the doubt on this one (even though they're reported this as though Whittington only had minor wounds and have downplayed his time in the ICU), the possibility that Whittington could take a turn for the worse is clear.

And let me be abso-fucking-lutely clear to anyone who would try to cast this question in a hateful light--I want Whittington to recover fully and live a long time from now.

What happens to Cheney if Whittington dies? Does he get charged with anything? Negligence? Involuntary Manslaughter? I mean, it's possible to pass this off as a tragedy if all that happened was that the guy took a few pellets to the face--which was the way it was spun and continues to be spun by some--but this guy apparently took birdshot close to the heart. That's harder to spin.

So what's your take? No poll this time.

well clinton was able to get out of whitewater and leaking arms secrets to the chinese, so i would imagine Cheney would be able to get out of an accidental death (should the poor guy die).

well clinton was able to get out of whitewater and leaking arms secrets to the chinese, so i would imagine Cheney would be able to get out of an accidental death (should the poor guy die).
Actually, Clinton was cleared by the Republican special prosecutor in all things Whitewater, but by all means, continue believing your delusions that he "got out of something."

well, they elected ted kennedy to the senate after chappaquiddick.
The part I love is that Hillary says that the White House was covering something up.

This, from the woman who kicked the FBI out of Vince Foster's office and cleaned it out before allowing them in.

Let's just face facts, if you're rich in America, if you're powerful in America, you can shoot your friends by accident, cut your wife's throat, rape children, and kick the FBI out of your dead lawyer's office...

if you're not rich, you can't do any of that, as Scott Petersen found out.

This has been done to death, but I feel the obligation to repeat it.

It's safer to hunt with Cheney that it is to drive with Teddy Kennedy.

Shooting someone by accident is not crime. There was an investigation and the only negligence was from the person who was shot. End of story. Nothing happens if Whittington dies, same as if this had been any random hunting party. Accidents happen. Of course, had this been any regular hunting party there would be talk of law suits, and the shooter could conceivably lose money in a civil court, but seeing as this hunting party was composed of wealthy people, the story ends here and nothing else happens.

I dislike the Bush administration as much as everyone else (and more than many). But, there just isnt anything to criticize them for about this. This was a personal matter having nothing to do with policy decisions or the administration in its official capacity. To top it off, it was an accident that has already been investigated and nothing points to anything more than an accident. It's not a major story as far as Im concerned. Id rather the media cause a big stir about why the US is spending literally billions of dollars constructing permanent military installations in Iraq if it intends to pull out as soon as possible. But no one reports on this, they would rather bicker about a personal accident Cheney has with no significance to the country.

Manslaughter would probably be the fairest charge, considering that they *were* hunting and there is the inherent risk of being shot. You can't just say this was an intentional attempt to kill a man.

well clinton was able to get out of whitewater and leaking arms secrets to the chinese, so i would imagine Cheney would be able to get out of an accidental death (should the poor guy die).

And we have a winner! Ok check your tickets. Who had post #70 for when Clinton would be raised?

Ahhh the Daily show!

http://www.canofun.com/blog/videos/2006/TheDailyShowCheneySHOT.asx

The part I love is that Hillary says that the White House was covering something up.

This, from the woman who kicked the FBI out of Vince Foster's office and cleaned it out before allowing them in.

Wow, I wish I could make shit up too. Kimchi, if you believe the Foster conp. theory, then the only word for you is "idiot."

For god's sake, just read up on it on snopes.

Dick Cheney has been taking a bit of criticism for his hunting accident--and while it was an accident, it was definitely an accident of negligence. But while lots of people have been spinning this as a minor incident, it's easy to forget that Whittington spent the last three days in ICU, and today suffered a minor heart attack (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11340558/) because of a pellet that was lodged close to his heart.

Now no heart attack is minor for a 78 year old man, but even giving the press the benefit of the doubt on this one (even though they're reported this as though Whittington only had minor wounds and have downplayed his time in the ICU), the possibility that Whittington could take a turn for the worse is clear.

And let me be abso-fucking-lutely clear to anyone who would try to cast this question in a hateful light--I want Whittington to recover fully and live a long time from now.

What happens to Cheney if Whittington dies? Does he get charged with anything? Negligence? Involuntary Manslaughter? I mean, it's possible to pass this off as a tragedy if all that happened was that the guy took a few pellets to the face--which was the way it was spun and continues to be spun by some--but this guy apparently took birdshot close to the heart. That's harder to spin.

So what's your take? No poll this time.

Probably nothing. I know hunting accidents here in PA don't result in criminal prosecution.

He's already a mass murderer, yet no one is holding him accountable for that. Why should this incident change anything?

:confused:

Manslaughter would probably be the fairest charge, considering that they *were* hunting and there is the inherent risk of being shot. You can't just say this was an intentional attempt to kill a man.

Over an accident? :confused:

I'm getting tired of the local news harping on this as well as other programs.

Ahhh the Daily show!

http://www.canofun.com/blog/videos/2006/TheDailyShowCheneySHOT.asx


lol! i miss cable tv

Over an accident? :confused:

I'm getting tired of the local news harping on this as well as other programs.

Search deep inside yourself:

If Howard Dean, AL Gore, Ted Kennedy, Al Franken or Hillary Clinton shot someone in a hunting accident and that person died eventually due to the injuries, what would you feel and what would you say?

Search deep inside yourself:

If Howard Dean, AL Gore, Ted Kennedy, Al Franken or Hillary Clinton shot someone in a hunting accident and that person died eventually due to the injuries, what would you feel and what would you say?


That's not fair, everyone knows that Democrats are deserving of constant ridicule when they make mistakes.

Search deep inside yourself:

If Howard Dean, AL Gore, Ted Kennedy, Al Franken or Hillary Clinton shot someone in a hunting accident and that person died eventually due to the injuries, what would you feel and what would you say?

The exact samething. Accidents happen though I do not know who Howard Dean or Al Fanken are.

I can empathize with Cheney.

Although I didn't actually wound anybody, I did come close to blowing my best friend's little brother's head off with a hunting rifle. I was 16 and he was around 9 or 10. It was getting close to sunset and when I got back to the truck he was screwing around with his rifle because a round was lodged in the firing chamber. He gave it to me to try and so I was locking and unlocking the bolt to try and draw the round out. He was looking for a tool that would dislodge it in the bed toolbox. I was sitting on the tailgate.
When he found it he came over and stood in front of the muzzle to hand it to me. I swung the muzzle away from his HEAD(!) and began to lock the bolt, and saying something to the effect of,"What the hell are you doing standing in front of the muzzle, dumbass?".
Out of frustration (from the stuck round and from that little knucklehead standing in front of the muzzle) I did it a little too hard and the round fired. This whole incident took about as long as it has taken you to read this.

I felt like I wanted to die and I started crying. The kid came unglued and was shaking so bad I had to put him in the truck and treat him so he wouldn't go into shock. I wasn't doing too much better. To this day, and as I write this, the memory makes my heart race and I can't help but think about how drastically my whole life would have changed had the minutiae of the event been slightly different. I begged him and his parents for forgiveness which they graciously gave me and I wasn't invited to hunt their lease ever again.

I also witnessed an incident wherein a loaded and stored shotgun went off and blew a closet door off (somebody slammed the front door of the lodge too hard).

I also had a friend shoot himself with a .22 pistol because he was twirling it on his index finger (colostomy bag). Naturally, we used to walk up to him and act like we were going to punch him there to remind him of what a jackass he was. Everyone told him to stop. Same guy got tossed out the Army for wrecking a tank.

As for what happens to Cheney if Whittington dies, I think any charges would be based upon intent and Cheney would probably not be charged. Either way, it doesn't mean he won't be punished.

I also witnessed an incident wherein a loaded and stored shotgun went off and blew a closet door off (somebody slammed the front door of the lodge too hard).

And thus we see why storing loaded firearms is unsafe. ;)

I think the arrogance of the white house is showing with this incident. The fact that it took 21 hours for it to be reported, and only then because the Armstrong woman whose farm it was told the local press. Even after that, no-one from the WH has made any comment on it. Hell, it was only after Dick had a heart attack did Cheney finally bother to ring him and see how he's doing. Doubt he apoligised either.
Sheer arrogance if you ask me. They think they can do whatever the hell they like and don't have to answer to the press or the public over it.

If Cheny wanted to hurt him, then this would battery as a felony. This has to be proven first, and Cheny didn't control the pellets in him to attack his heart like Magneto or something.

You're right, it's not a consent to be shot. However, if you do hunt, you have to be aware that the chance of being shot is always there. Assumption of risk has ground here.

If Cheny wanted to commit murder, why would he bring an ambulance along with him? It's possible that Cheny planned on shooting him later on so that even if they got him to a doctor he would die, but that doesn't matter now. Trying to kill someone from thirty yards, with a 28-guage loaded with bird pellets is foolish.


28 gauge? I've never frickin heard of that. I've heard of 12, 20, and .410 but never 28 gauge. (i know there are others, but that sounds like a really obscure caliber)

I can empathize with Cheney.

Although I didn't actually wound anybody, I did come close to blowing my best friend's little brother's head off with a hunting rifle. I was 16 and he was around 9 or 10. It was getting close to sunset and when I got back to the truck he was screwing around with his rifle because a round was lodged in the firing chamber. He gave it to me to try and so I was locking and unlocking the bolt to try and draw the round out. He was looking for a tool that would dislodge it in the bed toolbox. I was sitting on the tailgate.
When he found it he came over and stood in front of the muzzle to hand it to me. I swung the muzzle away from his HEAD(!) and began to lock the bolt, and saying something to the effect of,"What the hell are you doing standing in front of the muzzle, dumbass?".
Out of frustration (from the stuck round and from that little knucklehead standing in front of the muzzle) I did it a little too hard and the round fired. This whole incident took about as long as it has taken you to read this.

I felt like I wanted to die and I started crying. The kid came unglued and was shaking so bad I had to put him in the truck and treat him so he wouldn't go into shock. I wasn't doing too much better. To this day, and as I write this, the memory makes my heart race and I can't help but think about how drastically my whole life would have changed had the minutiae of the event been slightly different. I begged him and his parents for forgiveness which they graciously gave me and I wasn't invited to hunt their lease ever again.

I also witnessed an incident wherein a loaded and stored shotgun went off and blew a closet door off (somebody slammed the front door of the lodge too hard).

I also had a friend shoot himself with a .22 pistol because he was twirling it on his index finger (colostomy bag). Naturally, we used to walk up to him and act like we were going to punch him there to remind him of what a jackass he was. Everyone told him to stop. Same guy got tossed out the Army for wrecking a tank.

As for what happens to Cheney if Whittington dies, I think any charges would be based upon intent and Cheney would probably not be charged. Either way, it doesn't mean he won't be punished.


and this whole incident is why you have to be mature to use firearms. And thoroughly understand firearms safety.

That is one thing i've learned in the army, is safety, safety, safety.

I get seriously fucking pissed if someone is swinging a gun around, even if there is no magazine in it and the bolts locked back. thats just beyond not cool. When I was younger I'd go up to visit my uncles hous and we'd shoot trap, and my other uncle doesn't like standing on line while we shoot. I haven't been up there in a while, but I swear to fucking god if my uncle does anything remotely unsafe I'm going to tear him a new asshole, right in front of everyone.(not approriate, but it'll be the only way to get the point across)

Search deep inside yourself:

If Howard Dean, AL Gore, Ted Kennedy, Al Franken or Hillary Clinton shot someone in a hunting accident and that person died eventually due to the injuries, what would you feel and what would you say?
honestly? the same. it was an accident.

I think the arrogance of the white house is showing with this incident. The fact that it took 21 hours for it to be reported, and only then because the Armstrong woman whose farm it was told the local press. Even after that, no-one from the WH has made any comment on it. Hell, it was only after Dick had a heart attack did Cheney finally bother to ring him and see how he's doing. Doubt he apoligised either.
Sheer arrogance if you ask me. They think they can do whatever the hell they like and don't have to answer to the press or the public over it.
He did Apologise to his friend. repeatedly.

Considering that this was VP Cheny's friend, I think people had other things on their mind than notifying the media...
Spokesman Scott McClellan said the vice president's staff was focused on making sure that the shooting victim, Austin attorney Harry Whittington, 78, was receiving adequate medical care after the shooting on the private Armstrong Ranch in south Texas.

...

Ranch owner Katharine Armstrong said no one discussed notifying the public of the accident Saturday because they were so consumed with making sure Whittington was OK. She said the family realized in the morning that it would be a story and decided to call the local newspaper, the Corpus Christi Caller-Times. She said that is when she discussed the news coverage with Cheney for the first time.

"I said, 'Mr. Vice President, this is going to be public, and I'm comfortable going to the hometown newspaper,'" she told The Associated Press in a telephone interview. "And he said, 'You go ahead and do whatever you are comfortable doing.'"

McClellan said, "The vice president thought that Mrs. Armstrong should be the first one to go out there and provide that information to the public, which she did. She reached out early Sunday morning to do so."

Hunting parties are not required to report accidents, Harvey said. The state penal code requires people to report fatalities, and law-enforcement would investigate those.

as for not calling him untill after the Heart Attack?

Cheney's spokeswoman, Lea Anne McBride, said the vice president met with Whittington at the hospital on Sunday. Cheney "was pleased to see that he's doing fine and in good spirits," she said.
...
Armstrong, owner of the Armstrong Ranch where the accident occurred, said Whittington was bleeding after he was shot and Cheney was very apologetic.

Mr Cheney spent much of the day at the hospital bedside of his victim.

So you're right. VP Cheney didn't call before the heart attack, because he spent most of Sunday next to the man's bed. Really arrogant of him.

You know, really, this has nothing to do with Cheney's contriteness. Really, I don't consider him to be a monster and not have serious regret. Let me make that very, very clear.

No, what I am concerned about in this "media-hype madness" is the fact that when the incident happened they delayed for as long as they practically could before a formal interview with the police, and when they did release a statement, they fudged some appearances and skewed some circumstances. No, mostly I'm pissed they followed form and once again shifted blame to the victim.

At least, that was their first and knee-jerk response. And that's undeniable. They told a fib, a fib that hunters. . .Real hunters. . .knew was a slight misrepresentation, as it were, of the of the responsibilities involved.

Pure and simple and as black and white and as utterly embarrassing as can be. The business-as-usual PR response, maybe before any specific instructions were given, was to shift primary blame to the Vice-President's buddy.

The shooting, while funny before the implications become somewhat more serious, was an accident. It was. It really does suck to be Cheney right now.

And the thing is. . .I'm sure of it. I'm sure somebody said it here on NS before any of these events happened, and I'm sure they said it at least partially in jest. But I'm pretty sure someone here said something like:

"Wow, these guys could shoot someone and blame the guy who got shot!"

Whoever said that, step up and take your prize!

You know, really, this has nothing to do with Cheney's contriteness. Really, I don't consider him to be a monster and not have serious regret. Let me make that very, very clear.

No, what I am concerned about in this "media-hype madness" is the fact that when the incident happened they delayed for as long as they practically could before a formal interview with the police, and when they did release a statement, they fudged some appearances and skewed some circumstances. No, mostly I'm pissed they followed form and once again shifted blame to the victim.

At least, that was their first and knee-jerk response. And that's undeniable. They told a fib, a fib that hunters. . .Real hunters. . .knew was a slight misrepresentation, as it were, of the of the responsibilities involved.

Pure and simple and as black and white and as utterly embarrassing as can be. The business-as-usual PR response, maybe before any specific instructions were given, was to shift primary blame to the Vice-President's buddy.

The shooting, while funny before the implications become somewhat more serious, was an accident. It was. It really does suck to be Cheney right now.

And the thing is. . .I'm sure of it. I'm sure somebody said it here on NS before any of these events happened, and I'm sure they said it at least partially in jest. But I'm pretty sure someone here said something like:

"Wow, these guys could shoot someone and blame the guy who got shot!"

Whoever said that, step up and take your prize!How are they blaming Whittington? some say that the VP is taking full responsibility. others say it was a simple accident.

knowing how the Bush Admin is publically recieved. if they didn't say that Whittington did not announce his presence, do you honestly think that the media would be plastering "Mad Max Cheney gunning down fellow Republicans" all over the place?

what did they fudge and what did they Skewer?

How are they blaming Whittington? some say that the VP is taking full responsibility. others say it was a simple accident.

knowing how the Bush Admin is publically recieved. if they didn't say that Whittington did not announce his presence, do you honestly think that the media would be plastering "Mad Max Cheney gunning down fellow Republicans" all over the place?

what did they fudge and what did they Skewer?

Ooooh, when we screw up, we have to paint it pretty or the liberals will call us names! You know he screwed up. I know he screwed up. Why sugarcoat it?

Oh, and the word is skewed, not skewered.

Ooooh, when we screw up, we have to paint it pretty or the liberals will call us names!
well, look at all the comments and cartoons out about "Rambo Cheney"

tho, seriously, as a non-hunter, I assumed that gun safety was everyone's business. the orange jackets help but they are not 100% in keeping friendly fire accidents down... I also know that when someone is aiming, they tend to form "tunnel vision" so I'm kinda wondering about what did you see as shifting blame as well as the fib that Real Hunters would know as a Misrepresentation of Responsibilities?

I didn't see them blaming Whittington, but explaining why Cheney didn't see Whittington while aiming for the Qayle... err... Quail.

Everyone has blown this way out of proportion. It's liberals that are just grabbing at air. Shit happens. The police in the area said that they would not investigate becuase it happens so often. It was an accident, Cheney didn't talk for three days, look at the man, he's feeling guilty. Finally he spoke and guess what, it was an accident! Liberals are comparing this to the Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamiltonl. There is a big difference. That was a duel, fought over honor. Hamilton shot, in the general direction but not to kill Burr, as was a common result of the time. But Burr shot Hamilton to kill him and he did. Cheney accidentally peppered a friend from a distance. If the man dies, which he probably won't since he is recovering and it was only a small heart attack, then there is no charges that should apply to Cheney, maybe manslaughter, but not intentional murder. This is really a no brainer.

Everyone has blown this way out of proportion. It's liberals that are just grabbing at air. Shit happens. The police in the area said that they would not investigate becuase it happens so often. It was an accident, Cheney didn't talk for three days, look at the man, he's feeling guilty. Finally he spoke and guess what, it was an accident! Liberals are comparing this to the Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamiltonl. There is a big difference. That was a duel, fought over honor. Hamilton shot, in the general direction but not to kill Burr, as was a common result of the time. But Burr shot Hamilton to kill him and he did. Cheney accidentally peppered a friend from a distance. If the man dies, which he probably won't since he is recovering and it was only a small heart attack, then there is no charges that should apply to Cheney, maybe manslaughter, but not intentional murder. This is really a no brainer.
I'm only going to reply to this because I started the thread. I was only indulging in some speculation personally--what happens if you accidentally kill someone in a hunting accident? What happens if you do it and you're the VP of the USA?

Now, you're accusing liberals of claiming this is analgous to Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton--the only place I've heard that, it was done very tongue in cheek and with the caveat that it was similar only in that it's the first time since Burr that a sitting VP has shot and wounded a man. No one I know of has claimed Cheney was trying to take the guy out. There have been questions raised about the story (not by me--I have no way of knowing if bird shot from 30 yards is likely to penetrate three layers of clothes and heart muscle) but no one is seriously speculating that this was anything other than an accident. If you can show a place outside a conspiracy theory website where people are claiming otherwise, then bring it, and I'll retract this statement. Until then, I'm calling straw man bullshit on you.