Ok, I Give UP! I'll Talk About Cheney's Hunting Accident!

This is a response I left on another blog today. It got so detailed and time-consuming that I decided to bring it over here at the same time.

It goes like this.........

Wow.

Please don't get too upset. I love Liberals and am myself left of Liberal, but I have to address your rather haughtily expressed errors.

Yours is a perfect example of the multitude of well-meaning, outraged and totally misinformed attacks on Cheney that I have seen over the last few days.

Have you ever hunted upland game birds?

Ever patterned a shotgun?

While some of what you wrote may make SOME sense.....your statement that the distance between Cheney and Whittington was "ten feet" marks you as being in total darkness about shotgun ballistics.

At ten feet the pattern of a shotgun will have a diameter of four or five inches (yes, that includes the 28 Gauge shotgun).

The premier quail hunting load for the 28 gauge is the Winchester Super-X that carries a full ounce of size 7.5 lead shot pellets. That's about 350 round lead pellets moving at over 1200 feet per second. And at ten feet they are bunched tightly together in a round mass with a diameter of about four inches.

This is a deadly and densely packed cluster of fast-moving lead.....almost like a huge bullet.

That means that at ten feet it is so concentrated and powerful that it would either have missed or done traumatic damage (like almost entirely severing a limb or killing the victim immediately with a direct hit in the torso).

I haven't heard an official statement as to exactly how many pellets actually HIT Whittington, but I'd guess from the estimates I've seen (and from looking at his face and neck) that he was caught by the crescent-shaped edge of that round shot pattern of pellets in excess of three feet in diameter.....meaning 60 to 90 feet is a perfectly reasonable distance estimate depending on the choke of that particular barrel of that particular shotgun.

I'd also guess he was hit with fewer than 50 pellets (one doctor's puzzling and bizarre estimate was "5 to less than 150,") and it appears that mine is as good a guess as any.

Generally in a high quality 28 gauge under/over designed for hunting, the lower barrel (which is usually fired first) is a fairly open choke (between improved cylinder and modified). This makes for a larger pattern for closer birds.

Remember, we are talking about a high quality hunting gun.....not a skeet gun. There is a significant difference in the chokes.....skeet is wide open (which could account for results on that goofy film that has been going around the internet).

The upper barrel (which is usually fired second) is choked a bit tighter (between modified and full). This makes for a smaller pattern to more effectively kill birds that are a little farther away. Maximum range for sure kills on quail is about 40 yards.

These barrels can be selected to fire either barrel first by choice. Penetration, of course, is the same with either barrel--only the diameter of the pattern changes.

At 20 to 30 yards (60 to 90 feet) this load and the more open choke would be consistent with Whittington's wounds if the crescent-shaped edge of that large round pattern hit him coming from the side and slightly to his front (he was turned almost so his right side was toward Cheney).

As for penetration, the Winchester Super-X mentioned earlier will penetrate feathers and tissue to get to the vital areas of quail at up to about 40 yards.

There is a bogus video being circulated on the internet where they used ammunition that would not penetrate a plucked chicken (no, I'm not kidding, these clowns were actually shooting at a plucked chicken) at 30 yards.....and that means bad (old or non-hunting) ammunition or sloppy measurement of distance.

You are also misinformed about hunting safety routines. Hunters are not all "Bubbas," as you seem to think. Maybe you should check with some that are better informed.

Whittington was at fault when he rejoined the hunting party without communicating that he was doing so.....and thus he bears a large portion of the blame for this accident.

He was right to apologize, because IF he had simply called out to Cheney that he was coming back....this unfortunate accident probably would never have happened.

He was certainly "first cause" and he has rightly apologized.

It's all over.....case closed.

Cheney has come out of a firestorm of thousands of ill-informed and far-fetched moonbat attacks and is now vindicated.

How screechy, stupid, unattractive and crazy does that make Liberals look?

Meanwhile, many other critically important issues have been forgotten in the rush to join the mob to lynch Cheney.

As to your other points....

Yes, those good old boys may have had a couple of beers.

But we don't know that.

Yes, they may cheat on their wives.

But we don't know that either....and, it's really none of our business.

Somehow, trying to damn a war criminal for having a minor hunting accident strikes me as being very close to the ultimate silliness.

And Liberals really can't afford to indulge themselves in the silliness area.

Let's get back to important issues.