Hunter found dead in Quakertown

[GunLawyer001]

There is no "any deer" season. There is antlered and antlerless, generally referred to as buck and doe. To legally harvest a doe, a separate tag is required. The buck tag comes with the hunting license. Mind you, not just any buck is legal to harvest. In this part of the state, a buck must have three or more points on one side of the rack to be legal. Not only must a hunter take the time to count the number of points on at least one side of the rack before taking the shot, he/she needs to be sure a point is one inch in length or more. Anything less than one inch is not considered a point by the PGC. There are several details to check before even considering taking a shot.

That's consistent with what I've believed about hunting, at least in the last hundred years or so.

I could believe that early settlers would take a shot at anything brown, on the theory that it would be edible and keep the family alive for another week. But that hasn't been the case for generations, not in Pennsylvania.

I still can't believe that someone could nearly kill an innocent stranger while pursuing a recreational activity, and not be so turned off that he takes up some other sport that's less likely to kill strangers. Further, he not only continued the sport, but he flagrantly disregarded a handful of laws. Of course, I have a conscience and a soul, and killing someone would bother me.

I hope the US attorney prosecutes this callous POS for each and every gun he possessed, for 50 or 60 separate felony counts.

As a side note, I feel particular venom for this lawyer, because a big part of my practice is helping "little people" with firearms prohibitors, to overcome those prohibitors and get their rights legitimately restored. It's expensive, it's time-consuming, it's embarassing for these folks to publicly admit their prior errors and seek the legal restoration of their rights, through pardons, through the various Common Pleas options, through correcting errors in records.

These "little people" don't see themselves as above the law, and the vast majority of them are non-violent people who never hurt anyone. They paid a price at the time of the original prohibitor, and now they step up like adults to jump through the hoops to do things right. Plumbers and bookkeepers and housewives and salesmen, they all display more respect for the law than a member of the PA Bar and his former DA uncle.

So when this jackass, who sadly attended the same law school from which I graduated, simply flaunts the law, while being AN OFFICER OF THE COURT, and is accompanied during his illegal conduct by a former DA, former County Commissioner, it just pisses me off to no end.

Perhaps it shows.

[YosemiteSam]

That's consistent with what I've believed about hunting, at least in the last hundred years or so.

I could believe that early settlers would take a shot at anything brown, on the theory that it would be edible and keep the family alive for another week. But that hasn't been the case for generations, not in Pennsylvania.

I still can't believe that someone could nearly kill an innocent stranger while pursuing a recreational activity, and not be so turned off that he takes up some other sport that's less likely to kill strangers. Further, he not only continued the sport, but he flagrantly disregarded a handful of laws. Of course, I have a conscience and a soul, and killing someone would bother me.

I hope the US attorney prosecutes this callous POS for each and every gun he possessed, for 50 or 60 separate felony counts.

As a side note, I feel particular venom for this lawyer, because a big part of my practice is helping "little people" with firearms prohibitors, to overcome those prohibitors and get their rights legitimately restored. It's expensive, it's time-consuming, it's embarassing for these folks to publicly admit their prior errors and seek the legal restoration of their rights, through pardons, through the various Common Pleas options, through correcting errors in records.

These "little people" don't see themselves as above the law, and the vast majority of them are non-violent people who never hurt anyone. They paid a price at the time of the original prohibitor, and now they step up like adults to jump through the hoops to do things right. Plumbers and bookkeepers and housewives and salesmen, they all display more respect for the law than a member of the PA Bar and his former DA uncle.

So when this jackass, who sadly attended the same law school from which I graduated, simply flaunts the law, while being AN OFFICER OF THE COURT, and is accompanied during his illegal conduct by a former DA, former County Commissioner, it just pisses me off to no end.

Perhaps it shows.

Just a smidgen.

[Capt Quahog]

Recall in the State of Maine awhile ago that a "hunter" shot a man out of a tree claiming that he thought the guy was a deer.

Stumbling over bullet riddled corpses in the woods right around hunting season is a long standing tradition in New England.

[freesoul]

Refused to render aid.

This is what separates the men from the scumbags

[Dredly]

Fuck that.

The newspaper said he was wearing an orange hat at the time of death.

That DA needs to go to jail, how many gun owners did he send up the river?

How many other times did he poach deer and endanger the public?

Why wasn't he picked up weeks ago??

He lied to the police.

Refused to render aid.

Fuck that.

No they said it was near him, as was the orange vest which was not on him and wasn't on him at the time of being shot... his kid said his dad never took it off... but the orange vest he took off often I guess?

I just want to be clear - I'm not in any way defending what this piece of shit did (although I don't see how it was right seizing guns which were in possession of his girlfriend at her house, in her attic? Regardless of who they were "registered" too)

The fact that he shot a man while hunting will make this yet another "see 30.06 is dangerous" and "hunters are irresponsible"... I just wanted to point out that the truth was the hunter who got shot broke the rules, the one who shot him broke the rules... this wasn't a simple "I saw a guy on my property so I shot him"

[Dredly]

That's consistent with what I've believed about hunting, at least in the last hundred years or so.

I could believe that early settlers would take a shot at anything brown, on the theory that it would be edible and keep the family alive for another week. But that hasn't been the case for generations, not in Pennsylvania.

I still can't believe that someone could nearly kill an innocent stranger while pursuing a recreational activity, and not be so turned off that he takes up some other sport that's less likely to kill strangers. Further, he not only continued the sport, but he flagrantly disregarded a handful of laws. Of course, I have a conscience and a soul, and killing someone would bother me.

I hope the US attorney prosecutes this callous POS for each and every gun he possessed, for 50 or 60 separate felony counts.

As a side note, I feel particular venom for this lawyer, because a big part of my practice is helping "little people" with firearms prohibitors, to overcome those prohibitors and get their rights legitimately restored. It's expensive, it's time-consuming, it's embarassing for these folks to publicly admit their prior errors and seek the legal restoration of their rights, through pardons, through the various Common Pleas options, through correcting errors in records.

These "little people" don't see themselves as above the law, and the vast majority of them are non-violent people who never hurt anyone. They paid a price at the time of the original prohibitor, and now they step up like adults to jump through the hoops to do things right. Plumbers and bookkeepers and housewives and salesmen, they all display more respect for the law than a member of the PA Bar and his former DA uncle.

So when this jackass, who sadly attended the same law school from which I graduated, simply flaunts the law, while being AN OFFICER OF THE COURT, and is accompanied during his illegal conduct by a former DA, former County Commissioner, it just pisses me off to no end.

Perhaps it shows.

I don't understand how they were legally allowed to go seize all the guns at his girlfriends house? The incident occurred at the farm, there is no "gun registry" and even then only 20 were " in his name". Even if he purchased them if they weren't at the place of the crime or one of his properties how were they able to go take them?

[GunLawyer001]

I don't understand how they were legally allowed to go seize all the guns at his girlfriends house? The incident occurred at the farm, there is no "gun registry" and even then only 20 were " in his name". Even if he purchased them if they weren't at the place of the crime or one of his properties how were they able to go take them?

I would hope that they had a warrant or permission from a resident.

As to relevance, if they have the rifle used in the killing, then the other guns aren't relevant to that shooting, but they are clearly relevant to him being a felon in possession of firearms; they already had him for that with the rifle and shotgun he was hunting with, so that part of the multi-faceted scumbag investigation would allow them to look for additional guns.

If the rifle was forward-traced back to his girlfriend, then that would make her house fair game, as part of the straw purchase investigation.

[Bravo Whiskey]

I would hope that they had a warrant or permission from a resident.

As to relevance, if they have the rifle used in the killing, then the other guns aren't relevant to that shooting, but they are clearly relevant to him being a felon in possession of firearms; they already had him for that with the rifle and shotgun he was hunting with, so that part of the multi-faceted scumbag investigation would allow them to look for additional guns.

If the rifle was forward-traced back to his girlfriend, then that would make her house fair game, as part of the straw purchase investigation.

Thank you GL as this is common sense to me.

[Bravo Whiskey]

I don't understand how they were legally allowed to go seize all the guns at his girlfriends house? The incident occurred at the farm, there is no "gun registry" and even then only 20 were " in his name". Even if he purchased them if they weren't at the place of the crime or one of his properties how were they able to go take them?

I am a firm advocate of the 2nd.
I do not understand why you are not connecting the dots.
The girl friend lawyered up 2 weeks ago.
The target of the investigastion is a known public felon.
The target has multiple pics and recorded Public docs confirming him using a firearm.
The target shot and killed a man (maybe an accident, only the powers that be know)
The target's hunting partner knows all the above.
The target's hunting partner knows or should know that you can not use a rifle or hunt from a moving platform in this situation.
The target appears to have broken many common sense firearm related laws that folks who wish to preserve our right would take offense.
It appears that the target was well coached and represented as if I or any other common man would be facing a lot harsher charges

Why are you worrried about someone connected with this getting the "hairy" eyeball?
I want these kind of folks off the streets as much as the crack dealers who get their girls to buy guns for them.

[glocke12]

I just wanted to point out that the truth was the hunter who got shot broke the rules, the one who shot him broke the rules... this wasn't a simple "I saw a guy on my property so I shot him"

Not only that, but anyone who was in this guys hunting party were enablers (could they be charged as accomplices?) by:

1) Not stepping up when they saw the guy was hunting with a rifle
2) Taking him hunting with a gun if they knew he was a convicted felon

This is whole thing is validation for me of strict personal policies I have when it comes to firearms, firearm safety and playing by the rules. If I see someone being unsafe with a gun, I try and correct them. If they don't want to listen I leave the premises or property, if they are on my property I make them stop shooting and ask them to leave. I've also got a very close friend (best buddy from high school) who is a convicted felon (was stupidly caught with THREE marijuana plants in his backyard one summer) and is/was into guns. Other friends of mine let him shoot and handle their guns, I don't, and I make sure I am not around when my other friends let him shoot.

Ive been trying to keep up with this thread and news story, but work does not allow it...two things Im confused about:

1) Ive seen mention in this thread of a moving platform? Was he hunting from a 4wheeler or something?


2) Does he not now face more serious charges because he tried to cover up his involvement ?