RE: At a very MINIMUM............
So if I'm reading this correctly..........
It was an accident because he did not intend to shoot the lawyer.
Did the lawyer not get shot because Mr. Cheney did not observe basic shooting rules? (clearly & positively identify your intended target - have nothing in line of fire you do not wish to have destroyed)
I do believe Mr. Cheney was neligent.
From Websters New World College Dictionary (4th Edition)........
accident (ak'se dent) n. definition #2. an unpleasant and unintended happening, sometimes resulting from negligence, that results in injury, loss, damage, etc.
Meaning to me that althoughit might be refered to as an "accident", there indeed was negligence as a factor - a major factor.
If the party was line hunting, and the lawyer was approaching from the rear (because the line had moved on as the lawyer searched for a bird).....How exactly did Mr. Cheney get his shotgun pointing to the rear of the line; where the lawyer was in the line of fire?
Asa certified hunting safety instructor I can tell you that 99% of the times you read about shooting or hunting accidents, these accidents are avoidable by following your basic safety rules. So therefore, these accidents are actually acts of negligence or recklessness.
Look at it this way, if you are driving down a highway with no stop signs or stop lights for you, andI pull my vehicle out in front of you and you strike my vehicle, is that just an "accident". No it's not. We are just so accustomed to refering to it that way that we do call it an accident. But in actuality, the collision is the result of my negligent act - negligence is the key factor to the collision. I did notmake sure that there was room and time to enter your traffic lane.
I for one would not want to be around him if any sort of firearms are present.
Atleast no one was killed or seriously injured.