I can't believe we have people who call temselves hunters defending the indefensible. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who doesnt understand the concept of taking responsibility for where you bullet goes doesn't deserve tio be in the woods with a gun! This isn't a gray area.

I do not have first hand knowledge of this case but this much should be obvious to anyone. If it was a direct line of fire incident and not a ricohet then she should own his a$$ when this is over. One doesn't need legal training to to recognize that.

Defending him here is more damaging to us than anything any antigun, antihunting wacko can spew out.