Blaze orange vest question

[greatwhite]

And the uneducated guy you can't see and he can't see you and is about to shoot in your direction your fine with that. Even if the bullet hits you in the head?

Has anybody on her been accidentally shot at because the other fella didn't see you?? I have and to be honest it's not fun.

I wear my blaze all the time, even at lunch when it's hot and I'm in a t-shirt, not because I feel safer, because it's a requirement.
I rather hunt with 20 well educated hunters without orange then 20 trigger happy hunters all decked out.

[welsh]

Got those numbers?

Why yes, as a matter of fact, I do.

After making blaze orange mandatory, Utah saw a 47% decrease in overall hunting accidents and a 38% decline in fatalities; Washington, a 37% decline in accidents and a 47% decline in fatalities; North Dakota, an 82% decline in fatalities but only a 4% decline in overall incidents. The aggregate result in states that require blaze orange and have reported their results is a 22% decline in overall incidents, and a 40% decline in fatalities.

After introducing mandatory blaze orange in York Co., Maine, the county's contribution to hunting accidents where the victim was mistaken for game or not seen by the shooter declined from 41% to 23%.

In the four years prior to blaze orange being made mandatory in North Carolina, there were 12 fatal hunting accidents in which the victim was unseen or mistaken for game; in the four years following, there were only two.

In New York, between 1989 and 1995, 94% of killed and injured hunters who were unseen or mistaken for game were not wearing blaze orange.

I think that'll do for now.

However, if it's that obvious. Why isn't it across all of North America and why are blaze orange hunters still being shot in Ontario?

It isn't across all of North America because making laws is a political activity. Some people don't want blaze orange to be law, and so it is a political fight.

As to why people are still shot in Ontario, let's keep those goal posts right where they are, shall we? I didn't say blaze orange would magically prevent all accidents. I said it reduced them. And the fact is, it does.

[MikePal]

You might recall, that until Mossy Oak...Hunters didn't need Blaze Orange...Hunters wore Red Plaid...

I like the idea I can see trespassers better when they wear Blaze Orange

[onelessarrow]

And the uneducated guy you can't see and he can't see you and is about to shoot in your direction your fine with that. Even if the bullet hits you in the head?

Has anybody on her been accidentally shot at because the other fella didn't see you?? I have and to be honest it's not fun.

Yeah, I have, by a trespasser while turkey hunting. No it's not fun.
This guy took the extra turkey course and did exactly what he was told not to do. He saw birds from the road and walked up the hill and shot at them while they were walking towards me on the ridge.
He ran to me white as a ghost, thought for sure that he hit me. Maybe I should have called a CO that day I don't know, I liked to think that he educated himself real good with that free warning.
Responsibility will always be on the guy who pulls the trigger. As it should be.
Keep an eye out for them ground blinds.

[greatwhite]

Not often we agree on something.

Why yes, as a matter of fact, I do.

After making blaze orange mandatory, Utah saw a 47% decrease in overall hunting accidents and a 38% decline in fatalities; Washington, a 37% decline in accidents and a 47% decline in fatalities; North Dakota, an 82% decline in fatalities but only a 4% decline in overall incidents. The aggregate result in states that require blaze orange and have reported their results is a 22% decline in overall incidents, and a 40% decline in fatalities.

After introducing mandatory blaze orange in York Co., Maine, the county's contribution to hunting accidents where the victim was mistaken for game or not seen by the shooter declined from 41% to 23%.

In the four years prior to blaze orange being made mandatory in North Carolina, there were 12 fatal hunting accidents in which the victim was unseen or mistaken for game; in the four years following, there were only two.

In New York, between 1989 and 1995, 94% of killed and injured hunters who were unseen or mistaken for game were not wearing blaze orange.

I think that'll do for now.



It isn't across all of North America because making laws is a political activity. Some people don't want blaze orange to be law, and so it is a political fight.

As to why people are still shot in Ontario, let's keep those goal posts right where they are, shall we? I didn't say blaze orange would magically prevent all accidents. I said it reduced them. And the fact is, it does.

[MikePal]

In the old days, prior to the mandatory 'orange' requirements , how many 'homicides' were blamed on accidental shooting because they mistook the 'victim' for a bear, deer etc....

Once the new rules were enacted, that defence became more improbable, so death rates dropped, at least the ones attributed to 'accidental' shootings.

[400bigbear]

You might recall, that until Mossy Oak...Hunters didn't need Blaze Orange...Hunters wore Red Plaid...

I like the idea I can see trespassers better when they wear Blaze Orange

I often wore this jacket and still do . Yes Mike blaze orange trespassers are now at a disadvantage since they are so easily seen but since I usually catch trespassers while hunting the dang government made it an even playing field for trespassers . They see us a coming . LOL

TD

[trimmer21]

The only danger I can see with being required to wear blaze orange is that hunters have now educated themselves and become accustomed to looking for the blaze. If they don't see it,they think it's OK to take the shot rather than take the extra couple of seconds to really LOOK,FIRST.
Remember the old adage...."Familiarity breeds contempt."

[redd foxx]

Why isn't it across all of North America and why are blaze orange hunters still being shot in Ontario?

Blaze orange hunters are getting shot in Ontario because of outright carelessness by the people who pull the trigger and I think you'll find that those trigger pullers (because I won't call them hunters) are being charged for hunting carelessly and losing their hunting privileges as a result.

[redd foxx]

If they don't see it,they think it's OK to take the shot rather than take the extra couple of seconds to really LOOK,FIRST.

Unfortunately you may be right. Those that don't take the extra seconds should not be hunting in the first place. Is harvesting game really more important than safety? I hope not!!