Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

Search Continues for Masked Gunman Who Fired at WI Hunter

Recent Comments

Categories

Recent Posts

Archives

Syndicate

Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My AOL

Field Notes
in your Inbox

Enter your email address to get our new post everyday.

January 11, 2012

Search Continues for Masked Gunman Who Fired at WI Hunter

By Chad Love

Is a masked gunman targeting hunters in Wisconsin's forests? It's just one incident, but local authorities are taking it seriously...
 
From this story on walworthcountytoday.com:
 
Evidence at the scene confirms the story of a hunter who said a masked man took a shot at him Saturday, Walworth County Sheriff David Graves says. "...Graves called the incident highly unusual. A father and son from Waukesha County were hunting deer and wearing blaze orange when the father saw someone wearing a hunter's facemask and wearing camouflage or similar clothing shoot at him with a handgun. The gunman shot once, and the shot was close enough that the hunter decided to shoot back with his .30 caliber rife, Graves said. "He was pretty sure it was directed at him," Graves said.

"The incident occurred at about 8:25 a.m. near the Walworth-Jefferson county line near Bluff and Tamarack Roads in Walworth County. The hunters were not injured. It's unknown if the person with the handgun was injured, according to a sheriff's office news release. Deputies from Jefferson County started cordoning off parts of the Kettle Moraine State Forest as soon as six-and-a-half minutes after the call came in, Graves said. Walworth County deputies, including the SWAT and K9 teams, were called out. A helicopter and several dog teams later joined the search, but the gunman managed to disappear."

While the incident is creepy and definitely scary, it does bring up an interesting question: are the woods truly getting more dangerous? With the rise in marijuana cultivation on public land, as well as an increasing number of illicit drug manufacturing operations like meth labs being discovered in those same areas, do you now feel more threatened when you hunt public land than you used to? Has anything like this ever happened to you?

 

Comments (23)

Top Rated
All Comments
from HogBlog wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

There are nutcases in every walk of life. I don't think the woods are any different, except during hunting season more people are equipped to return fire.

Are public woods getting more dangerous? The media would sure like to have us think so, and you don't have to dig deep to find hunters who are happy to tell you about their cousin's best friend's uncle's brother-in-law who experienced a run in with meth-head, pot-growing "illegals" on their favorite, secret honey hole. But I'm not sure it's much worse than it ever was.

I hunt in Northern California, home to a pretty heavy pot-growing contingent, and it's true... spend enough time in the backcountry and you'll probably see signs of a grow operation. You may even find an active operation (I have). But deadly snipers and booby-traps are still, largely, the stuff of myth and campfire stories.

I'm not saying none of this stuff happens. I know it does... rarely. It behooves every one of us to maintain situational awareness any time we're in the field, and remember, it's never the one you see that gets you.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from themadflyfisher wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

This past spring a local police officer and his son were turkey hunting when a man came up on them and shot, hitting both of them. Luckily I guess the dad took most of the BB's and the child only had a couple, both ended up being ok! The guy was never caught. The only thing I could think is they must have been in "his" spot or something.. People are nuts!! And yes I think the woods ARE becoming more and more dangerous.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Steward wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

Do you automatically return fire?

I guess for your safety, and for anyone with you, you would have to assume the shooter saw you and shot intentionally. The can't be allowed second shot if it is on their mind.

Crazy stuff.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 2Poppa wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

No words were exchanged?
I think I would have yelled to get his attention, just to see what his response was, then followed at a safe distance to follow up.

"He wore a dark green shirt and white hat. She wore a white vest."
It isn't like they were trying to conceal themselves with the white clothing on.

This story reeks with ineptness and discrepancies:

1.)The gunman shot once, and the shot was close enough that the hunter decided to shoot back with his 30:30 caliber rife.
Just how good of a shot was the deer hunter with the 30:30; If he was hunting?
Sounds as if the older man with the pistol was a better shot.

2.)"He was pretty sure it was directed at him."
Why didn't he respond with a shout, instead of shoot and ask questions later?

Father and son from Waukesha County were hunting deer and wearing blaze orange when the father saw someone wearing a hunter's facemask and wearing camouflage or similar clothing shoot at him with a handgun.

Let's see ... wearing a hunters facemask with a white hat. Hmm
If you can see a hand gun at that distance, a 30:30 is probably going to get the job done, especially returning fire at someone with a white hat on.

3.)They were described as white and 50 to 60 years old. He wore a dark green shirt and white hat. She wore a white vest.

Misleading statement! The hunter said camoflauge. Why would anyone wear a face mask and a white hat and have your wife along wearing a white vest if you were being malicious?

4.)Deputies from Jefferson County started cordoning off parts of the Kettle Moraine State Forest as soon as six-and-a-half minutes after the call came in.

And the perpetrator along with his wife escaped.

5.)Walworth County deputies, including the SWAT and K9 teams, were called out.
A helicopter and several dog teams later joined the search, but the gunman managed to disappear.

I'm glad it wasn't al-Qaeda!

It probably was just an elderly man with a medical condition who had his wife with him, which probably saved his life.

I'll bet the elderly man with the pistol and white hat, came closer to losing his life that day than any deer!

-7 Good Comment? | | Report
from BrandonScarbel wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

The man and women don't seem to be the suspects, they just happened to be seen in the area and are wanted for questioning. If I were with my son in that situation and I felt either of our safety was in danger I would also return fire immediately with no question or warning.

"Investigators specifically asked for information about a man and woman who were seen in the area just before shots were fired and who might have seen something to help the investigation. They were described as white and 50 to 60 years old. He wore a dark green shirt and white hat. She wore a white vest."

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from jbird wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

I'd say that overall, public land is more dangerous today than ever. Still not that dangerous, but more-so than say, 20 years ago.

I don't think the guy hunting with his son was "wrong" to return fire at a masked man shooting a gun toward him and his son.

The only thing I would've done differently is "not miss".

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Walt Smith wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

Shoot at me in the woods you better hit me the first time because I will turn your white hat red! I'm overjoyed he shot back!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from RockySquirrel wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

Seems to me any one dumb enough to take on a modern scoped deer rifle with a handgun has probably watched an hour or two too much of T.V. And If your face mask can be seen when shooting your handgun, your camo probably isn't working too well for you either. Then again, guys hired to protect a meth lab or a dope field probably aren't green beret or Navy Seal material. If the law claims it happened just as the hunter says, then there must be evidence beside foot prints in the mud, that means probably brass that this genius didn't pick up, so that means it was a auto and not a big bore wheel gun, and from the instant reaction of the law, they knew damn well who or what organization is involved, Also my guess is he loaded his magazine without gloves and left fingerprints on the brass too. His freedom clock is ticking. MY POINT: If criminals were smart they would have gone in to a type of stealing that pays better, like wall street finance.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from bruisedsausage wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

Yeah I probably would have plastered that guy. My biggest question is how did the dad manage to miss him with a 30-30? Or was he just trying to scare him? No doubt if my child was with me I would go until he stopped twitching. I'm also betting there is some more evidence that will lead them to their suspect.

There is a saying that goes something like, "better to be judged by twelve than carried by six" And I believe it would hold true for this instance.

possibly the perp was wearing a bullet proof vest of something also, so maybe the hospital should watch for someone with some nasty bruised ribs. Just an idea.

My mother when she was younger was shot in the head while riding her horse. Luckily it only grazed her, but they never did catch that person. This was in the 60's, and she didn't have a firearm with her, she just galloped off on the horse.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

The biggest problems I have seen out hunting have been caused by drinking and guns. It's why I have completely quit hunting big game ths first two weeks of season. Way too many guys get ugly when they've had a few beers and it seems like most of those early hunting camps are all about partying. I almost had to shoot it out with a couple of guys several years ago. I have absolutely no idea what their problem was. They were stopped in the middle of the road and I drove around them. Next thing I know he's trying to run me off the road. I stopped thinking he had trouble. Gets out screaming and waving his gun. Good thing my partner was more level-headed than I was. It was the middle of the day and that idiot was so gassed up he didn't know what planet he was on. His partner was completely passed out in the passenger seat. And there they are with loaded guns!

The gun-toting drugsters causing problems for hunters (and Forest Service workers) down in California where I was working a few years back seldom wore anything expensive like camo, and they didn't bother wearing masks either. Most of them were only in this country temporarily "on business" ... if you know what I mean. Those meth lab freaks are the scary ones. Most of em have fried their brains so badly they have no concept of reality or ability to reason. But they usually operate in buildings, not out in the woods.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

My guess is this was another Wisconsin hunting turf dispute. Wasn't it down there that the Vietnamese hunter killed nine guys a few years back in an argument over a tree stand? What did they do to that guy?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jcarlin wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

I gotta admit, my first thought when it was a handgun toting man in a face mask was the possibility of an anti-hunter. Noone else seemed to go that route, maybe I'm paranoid. I do agree that the rest of the story seems odd. I've never been under seemingly intentional fire, so I can't speak to how tough it is for someone not mentally prepared for that situation to accurately return fire.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from OutdoorEnvy wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

Yeah I'd shoot back too if I was with my child. Any idiot wants to shoot towards my kid while I'm holding a gun better make their piece with God very quick. I hate hearing stories like this because you really just don't know who else is out there in the woods with you. I like to think anyone you run into out in the woods is a true and respectable sportsman. Sadly this isn't always the case.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Hil wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

I do think the woods are getting more dangerous, but not necessarily because of criminal activity as this article describes. I think the danger comes from people who are not criminals, but just plain old stupid and careless. Either they didn't grow up with a mentor like Dad who would whip their tail if they ever pointed a gun in an unsafe direction, or they have played too many shoot-em-up video games and think that is somehow an indication of actual skill and experience, or they are a part of the ever-growing segment of our society who feels entitled to do what they want when they want on whoever's land they want.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

I do not feel at all threatened when hunting on public land in S. AZ, despite the border issues. The bad guys aren't interested in a gun fight, and they're not interested in hard targets.

I hope the perp in the WI incident was struck. Every time a druggie eats a bullet the universe is incrementally a better place for it.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from BobGWI wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

To Ontario Hunter, no, not the same part of the state, at least 200 miles apart.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from tacomanusmc wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

Here in S.W. MO it's the meth capital so you never know who's in the woods with you or what they're doing out there. So while I don't feel threatened in the woods, I'm still careful. If someone shot at me and I thought it wasn't an accident, you're darn right I'd shoot back, and it wouldn't be a warning shot.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from tleichty1989 wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

That scares me. If thats the case while I'm hunting I would shoot back for sure. No time to ask questions!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Naia McCoy wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

The sad thing about this post is all of this aggression! What if that man was shooting at a deer? He was in hunting gear? We are talking about guys out in the woods with testosterone blazing and guns afire. That man had no right to shoot back! What does the law say about that? I wonder if this gives me the right to shoot at a crazy, poaching neighbor who has pointed his gun at me and threatened me on the highway? Do you people hear what you are saying? I guess I am entitled to shoot back!? I would like to know what the law is!

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from CoyoteHunter wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

I believe most laws on the matter says something like "If a person puts you or someone else at the risk of bodily harm, then you have the right to use deadly force against them". I think he had enough reason to return fire. In most cases all someone has to do is point a gun at someone, and there is enough reason for someone else to shoot them. Although there is a gray area on how far someone must go before it is morally right to kill them in self defense, it is much more clear from a legal viewpoint. Legally it was okay for him to return fire. However, some people might think that it wasn't morally right to return fire. I personally don't know how I would react. If thought that I was in serious danger I would definitely shoot back, and that comes down to a personal judgement made in a matter of seconds. My opinion is that if the gunman was killed, it would be his own fault for opening fire at someone. He could have just been shooting at something else, but it was his mistake to shoot in the direction of another person. It would be his responsibility to make sure he was shooting in a safe direction. The important thing is that the father and son are okay, since this incident could have very easily turned out a lot worse.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from BrandonScarbel wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

To Naia McCoy,
I'm not sure of the laws where you live but here in NC if someone points a gun and threatens you then according to NC laws you are completely justified in using deadly force for self defense. You are entitled to shoot back as long as you feel there is a risk of serious bodily harm or death.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Otter62 wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

I definitely believe a hunter (or anyone else) is justified in shooting back if fired upon. That's a right we have in this country, at least for now...called self defense. My understanding is that our neighbors to the North in Canada do not. Part of the reason most folks aren't legal to possess a handgun in Canada is they have no right to use deadly force in self defense to begin with, so why does the average person "need" a handgun? (their rationale, definitely not mine). I was deer hunting a few years ago on the edge of the property we've been hunting for almost 20 years, there was apparently some dispute between the "neighbors" and the man who allowed us to hunt his property going back well before my time...I had gotten up around late morning to stretch (in all my large blaze orange glory) and stomp some weeds down that were in my way as I watched a fenceline for deer moving through when I heard a terrifying sound that I'd never heard before, kind of like a supersonic bumblebee whizzing by me in close proximity, followed by the boom of a 12 gauge. I instinctively went flat and crawled to the huge hickory I had been sitting under and peered around it (through my scope), there were no deer to be seen...just a guy in blaze walkin directly away from my position about 100 yds out. I believe that inbred country moron took a shot at me. As terrified as he was, I was ready to shoot him if he turned and pointed his gun in my direction again...as it was had I shot back, I'd have been shooting him in the back, not exactly self defense...The guys I hunt with said they would have yelled at him, I was too busy hugging that big hickory, keeping it between me and him and trying to make sure I stayed alive...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Otter62 wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

Meant to say "as terrified as I was" toward the bottom of that big paragraph.

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

from BrandonScarbel wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

The man and women don't seem to be the suspects, they just happened to be seen in the area and are wanted for questioning. If I were with my son in that situation and I felt either of our safety was in danger I would also return fire immediately with no question or warning.

"Investigators specifically asked for information about a man and woman who were seen in the area just before shots were fired and who might have seen something to help the investigation. They were described as white and 50 to 60 years old. He wore a dark green shirt and white hat. She wore a white vest."

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from RockySquirrel wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

Seems to me any one dumb enough to take on a modern scoped deer rifle with a handgun has probably watched an hour or two too much of T.V. And If your face mask can be seen when shooting your handgun, your camo probably isn't working too well for you either. Then again, guys hired to protect a meth lab or a dope field probably aren't green beret or Navy Seal material. If the law claims it happened just as the hunter says, then there must be evidence beside foot prints in the mud, that means probably brass that this genius didn't pick up, so that means it was a auto and not a big bore wheel gun, and from the instant reaction of the law, they knew damn well who or what organization is involved, Also my guess is he loaded his magazine without gloves and left fingerprints on the brass too. His freedom clock is ticking. MY POINT: If criminals were smart they would have gone in to a type of stealing that pays better, like wall street finance.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from Hil wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

I do think the woods are getting more dangerous, but not necessarily because of criminal activity as this article describes. I think the danger comes from people who are not criminals, but just plain old stupid and careless. Either they didn't grow up with a mentor like Dad who would whip their tail if they ever pointed a gun in an unsafe direction, or they have played too many shoot-em-up video games and think that is somehow an indication of actual skill and experience, or they are a part of the ever-growing segment of our society who feels entitled to do what they want when they want on whoever's land they want.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from HogBlog wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

There are nutcases in every walk of life. I don't think the woods are any different, except during hunting season more people are equipped to return fire.

Are public woods getting more dangerous? The media would sure like to have us think so, and you don't have to dig deep to find hunters who are happy to tell you about their cousin's best friend's uncle's brother-in-law who experienced a run in with meth-head, pot-growing "illegals" on their favorite, secret honey hole. But I'm not sure it's much worse than it ever was.

I hunt in Northern California, home to a pretty heavy pot-growing contingent, and it's true... spend enough time in the backcountry and you'll probably see signs of a grow operation. You may even find an active operation (I have). But deadly snipers and booby-traps are still, largely, the stuff of myth and campfire stories.

I'm not saying none of this stuff happens. I know it does... rarely. It behooves every one of us to maintain situational awareness any time we're in the field, and remember, it's never the one you see that gets you.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Walt Smith wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

Shoot at me in the woods you better hit me the first time because I will turn your white hat red! I'm overjoyed he shot back!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from jcarlin wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

I gotta admit, my first thought when it was a handgun toting man in a face mask was the possibility of an anti-hunter. Noone else seemed to go that route, maybe I'm paranoid. I do agree that the rest of the story seems odd. I've never been under seemingly intentional fire, so I can't speak to how tough it is for someone not mentally prepared for that situation to accurately return fire.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from OutdoorEnvy wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

Yeah I'd shoot back too if I was with my child. Any idiot wants to shoot towards my kid while I'm holding a gun better make their piece with God very quick. I hate hearing stories like this because you really just don't know who else is out there in the woods with you. I like to think anyone you run into out in the woods is a true and respectable sportsman. Sadly this isn't always the case.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Diehl wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

I do not feel at all threatened when hunting on public land in S. AZ, despite the border issues. The bad guys aren't interested in a gun fight, and they're not interested in hard targets.

I hope the perp in the WI incident was struck. Every time a druggie eats a bullet the universe is incrementally a better place for it.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from themadflyfisher wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

This past spring a local police officer and his son were turkey hunting when a man came up on them and shot, hitting both of them. Luckily I guess the dad took most of the BB's and the child only had a couple, both ended up being ok! The guy was never caught. The only thing I could think is they must have been in "his" spot or something.. People are nuts!! And yes I think the woods ARE becoming more and more dangerous.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Steward wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

Do you automatically return fire?

I guess for your safety, and for anyone with you, you would have to assume the shooter saw you and shot intentionally. The can't be allowed second shot if it is on their mind.

Crazy stuff.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from jbird wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

I'd say that overall, public land is more dangerous today than ever. Still not that dangerous, but more-so than say, 20 years ago.

I don't think the guy hunting with his son was "wrong" to return fire at a masked man shooting a gun toward him and his son.

The only thing I would've done differently is "not miss".

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from bruisedsausage wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

Yeah I probably would have plastered that guy. My biggest question is how did the dad manage to miss him with a 30-30? Or was he just trying to scare him? No doubt if my child was with me I would go until he stopped twitching. I'm also betting there is some more evidence that will lead them to their suspect.

There is a saying that goes something like, "better to be judged by twelve than carried by six" And I believe it would hold true for this instance.

possibly the perp was wearing a bullet proof vest of something also, so maybe the hospital should watch for someone with some nasty bruised ribs. Just an idea.

My mother when she was younger was shot in the head while riding her horse. Luckily it only grazed her, but they never did catch that person. This was in the 60's, and she didn't have a firearm with her, she just galloped off on the horse.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

The biggest problems I have seen out hunting have been caused by drinking and guns. It's why I have completely quit hunting big game ths first two weeks of season. Way too many guys get ugly when they've had a few beers and it seems like most of those early hunting camps are all about partying. I almost had to shoot it out with a couple of guys several years ago. I have absolutely no idea what their problem was. They were stopped in the middle of the road and I drove around them. Next thing I know he's trying to run me off the road. I stopped thinking he had trouble. Gets out screaming and waving his gun. Good thing my partner was more level-headed than I was. It was the middle of the day and that idiot was so gassed up he didn't know what planet he was on. His partner was completely passed out in the passenger seat. And there they are with loaded guns!

The gun-toting drugsters causing problems for hunters (and Forest Service workers) down in California where I was working a few years back seldom wore anything expensive like camo, and they didn't bother wearing masks either. Most of them were only in this country temporarily "on business" ... if you know what I mean. Those meth lab freaks are the scary ones. Most of em have fried their brains so badly they have no concept of reality or ability to reason. But they usually operate in buildings, not out in the woods.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

My guess is this was another Wisconsin hunting turf dispute. Wasn't it down there that the Vietnamese hunter killed nine guys a few years back in an argument over a tree stand? What did they do to that guy?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from BobGWI wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

To Ontario Hunter, no, not the same part of the state, at least 200 miles apart.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from tacomanusmc wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

Here in S.W. MO it's the meth capital so you never know who's in the woods with you or what they're doing out there. So while I don't feel threatened in the woods, I'm still careful. If someone shot at me and I thought it wasn't an accident, you're darn right I'd shoot back, and it wouldn't be a warning shot.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from tleichty1989 wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

That scares me. If thats the case while I'm hunting I would shoot back for sure. No time to ask questions!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from CoyoteHunter wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

I believe most laws on the matter says something like "If a person puts you or someone else at the risk of bodily harm, then you have the right to use deadly force against them". I think he had enough reason to return fire. In most cases all someone has to do is point a gun at someone, and there is enough reason for someone else to shoot them. Although there is a gray area on how far someone must go before it is morally right to kill them in self defense, it is much more clear from a legal viewpoint. Legally it was okay for him to return fire. However, some people might think that it wasn't morally right to return fire. I personally don't know how I would react. If thought that I was in serious danger I would definitely shoot back, and that comes down to a personal judgement made in a matter of seconds. My opinion is that if the gunman was killed, it would be his own fault for opening fire at someone. He could have just been shooting at something else, but it was his mistake to shoot in the direction of another person. It would be his responsibility to make sure he was shooting in a safe direction. The important thing is that the father and son are okay, since this incident could have very easily turned out a lot worse.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from BrandonScarbel wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

To Naia McCoy,
I'm not sure of the laws where you live but here in NC if someone points a gun and threatens you then according to NC laws you are completely justified in using deadly force for self defense. You are entitled to shoot back as long as you feel there is a risk of serious bodily harm or death.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Otter62 wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

I definitely believe a hunter (or anyone else) is justified in shooting back if fired upon. That's a right we have in this country, at least for now...called self defense. My understanding is that our neighbors to the North in Canada do not. Part of the reason most folks aren't legal to possess a handgun in Canada is they have no right to use deadly force in self defense to begin with, so why does the average person "need" a handgun? (their rationale, definitely not mine). I was deer hunting a few years ago on the edge of the property we've been hunting for almost 20 years, there was apparently some dispute between the "neighbors" and the man who allowed us to hunt his property going back well before my time...I had gotten up around late morning to stretch (in all my large blaze orange glory) and stomp some weeds down that were in my way as I watched a fenceline for deer moving through when I heard a terrifying sound that I'd never heard before, kind of like a supersonic bumblebee whizzing by me in close proximity, followed by the boom of a 12 gauge. I instinctively went flat and crawled to the huge hickory I had been sitting under and peered around it (through my scope), there were no deer to be seen...just a guy in blaze walkin directly away from my position about 100 yds out. I believe that inbred country moron took a shot at me. As terrified as he was, I was ready to shoot him if he turned and pointed his gun in my direction again...as it was had I shot back, I'd have been shooting him in the back, not exactly self defense...The guys I hunt with said they would have yelled at him, I was too busy hugging that big hickory, keeping it between me and him and trying to make sure I stayed alive...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Otter62 wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

Meant to say "as terrified as I was" toward the bottom of that big paragraph.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Naia McCoy wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

The sad thing about this post is all of this aggression! What if that man was shooting at a deer? He was in hunting gear? We are talking about guys out in the woods with testosterone blazing and guns afire. That man had no right to shoot back! What does the law say about that? I wonder if this gives me the right to shoot at a crazy, poaching neighbor who has pointed his gun at me and threatened me on the highway? Do you people hear what you are saying? I guess I am entitled to shoot back!? I would like to know what the law is!

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 2Poppa wrote 2 years 14 weeks ago

No words were exchanged?
I think I would have yelled to get his attention, just to see what his response was, then followed at a safe distance to follow up.

"He wore a dark green shirt and white hat. She wore a white vest."
It isn't like they were trying to conceal themselves with the white clothing on.

This story reeks with ineptness and discrepancies:

1.)The gunman shot once, and the shot was close enough that the hunter decided to shoot back with his 30:30 caliber rife.
Just how good of a shot was the deer hunter with the 30:30; If he was hunting?
Sounds as if the older man with the pistol was a better shot.

2.)"He was pretty sure it was directed at him."
Why didn't he respond with a shout, instead of shoot and ask questions later?

Father and son from Waukesha County were hunting deer and wearing blaze orange when the father saw someone wearing a hunter's facemask and wearing camouflage or similar clothing shoot at him with a handgun.

Let's see ... wearing a hunters facemask with a white hat. Hmm
If you can see a hand gun at that distance, a 30:30 is probably going to get the job done, especially returning fire at someone with a white hat on.

3.)They were described as white and 50 to 60 years old. He wore a dark green shirt and white hat. She wore a white vest.

Misleading statement! The hunter said camoflauge. Why would anyone wear a face mask and a white hat and have your wife along wearing a white vest if you were being malicious?

4.)Deputies from Jefferson County started cordoning off parts of the Kettle Moraine State Forest as soon as six-and-a-half minutes after the call came in.

And the perpetrator along with his wife escaped.

5.)Walworth County deputies, including the SWAT and K9 teams, were called out.
A helicopter and several dog teams later joined the search, but the gunman managed to disappear.

I'm glad it wasn't al-Qaeda!

It probably was just an elderly man with a medical condition who had his wife with him, which probably saved his life.

I'll bet the elderly man with the pistol and white hat, came closer to losing his life that day than any deer!

-7 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment