Before I address anything about this 'debate', I wish to put it out there that this event in every was is a tragedy, one that I hope never occurs again. I am sad for the family of the lady that died, and sad for the young man that accidentally killed her, and his family. What a sad burden to carry. I genuinely feel bad for him.
That being said, I do not know this young fella, but it appears his parents thought he was responsible enough to hunt alone. I read the article written by the national writer on (msnbc I think it was) and many of the blog-type replies to the article. Many replies were stating that ‘one should be at least 16 to hunt alone’, some of them referenced the standard driving age of 16. From my point of view, this is where it gets muddy. More people die every year from unsafe auto driving than from firearms, (especially 'hunting specific' firearms accidents) so, to me, this clearly displays a flaw in their argument. I believe a car is far more dangerous than a firearm. On a regular basis, I see up-close and first hand what car accidents can do. But I don't believe there is an age where you automatically become responsible enough for any particular activity. To me this concept applies to consuming alcohol, driving, shooting, hunting, camping, serving in the military, getting married, or having a child. The key is our maturity level, which is heavily determined by parenting.
In this country, the age of legal accountability is 18 years old. We have chosen to draw a line at that point. That date can be debated for many pages, but that is for another time. So we've set this 'line' at 18 years, not 17 yrs, 364 days, but 18. Are variances made? Yes. (why, I have no idea, I'm not a lawyer) But ultimately, until a child reaches that 'date', the parents of said child are responsible for the actions of the child. (my argument in support of corporal punishment) Do I want the parents to be sued? No. It doesn't fix anything. Do I want the kid put in prison? No. I don't think he belongs there, not for this. It has been accepted from the beginning his act was not malicious, certainly strong in effect, but not malicious. I'm not a believer that a 'group hug' fixes things, but in this case it appears that in this kid's darkest time (now) is when he really needs mentorship and guidance (not cell-mates) if he's to learn from this and lead a healthy, productive life. I suspect he would benefit from counseling.
I know kids that were driving $250K combines when they were 10, (it would have been sooner if they could reach the pedals) and they were plenty mature to be issued a drivers license by 14. Because of my job, I also regularly see grown adults that should not be allowed outside without a safety harness and a helmet because they have no idea of personal responsibility or accountability for their actions. (My dad and I joke that there should be a test one must pass before being allowed to have a child!)
When I was a kid, I was raised around firearms. Safety was always paramount. I took a hunter safety course as soon as I was old enough. ..still have the card somewhere. I would have taken it sooner if the rules were different then. I did better on the exam than my dad did, and we still laugh about that. But in the household I was raised in, responsibility was a serious issue. Sadly, many homes now joke about it, and want the Gov't to legislate more rules to keep them safe.
I live not too far from where this happened. I too, grew up hunting in the Washington Cascades, albeit, most of my hunting was on the Eastern side, not Western, but our home was exactly in the foothills on the West side.
By the way, have we defined "alone" in this particular case? Was an adult 10 miles away, still at home, 100 yards on the next ridge, or 20 yards away in the draw? The terrain on the Western foothills of the Cascade range could mean that a supervising adult could be only 30 feet away around a couple bushes, and not be able to assist the shooter in identification or safe procedures. I went for several years with my dad, carrying nothing but a backpack.
Now, I feel bad for the family of the "hiker". (notice the quotes?
) I really do! There's no way to know for sure since she is no longer able to field questions, but her actions indicated she was not aware of hunting season or area, or perhaps she was but did not RESPECT what that meant. You want to go "hiking" during the hunting seasons? Then maybe it’s a smart idea to stay on well-marked trails, (she did not) and most importantly, wear something that clearly displays you are a human being (she was not). Should the hunter have been sure of his target? Yes. I suspect he thought he was, and he clearly was not.
Folks, freedom does not equal safety. The more rules we put in place, (or allow the gov't to put into place) the less freedom we have. And I firmly believe in this. That being said, part of me wants to support a mandatory rigorous hunter education and safety course ANYONE must pass before being issued a public-land hunting license/tag. (But I also firmly believe a much more comprehensive and demanding drivers’ education program should be mandatory before being allowed to acquire a public street drivers license.) As much as I hate to say it, I’m still not sure that hunting is a right, (certainly firearm ownership is), and driving is absolutely a privilege, not a right.
....just my thoughts on the matter,
Again, my thoughts and sympathies go out to the survivors of the lady, and the lad who will carry this burden around forever.
-PE