But I do have to wonder about the situation here. Did the poster put himself in a bad situation in the first place? Once he got to that point, was there any way of evading without killing? I'm not sure if he's blameless, put himself in a bad situation and got out of it the best he could, or if it was all bad from start to finish.

The moose was attacking. The moose was defending his turf. If the animal were serious, the dude would be dead. This is some asshole poacher who should lose the gun and the snowmobile.

If there is a next time.

I'm on mother nature's side in instances like these.

Maybe the law will catch up with this asshole.

Another Zimmeman of the Tundra.

Yup

If you were to compare this with self defense law, at least be intellectually honest or half way informed. Under California's SYG, the guy could claim the moose posed a potential threat even though he backed off, and it would probably fly (yet California has a duty to retreat within the home, how fucked up is that?). That Florida law, or any other SYG state besides California, it would not be ruled justifiable because the moose backed off and no longer posed an imminent threat.
I would argue that the snowmobile was the aggressor, not the moose. In that case, neither would apply. Like I said before, the moose was more than capable of destroying man and machine if he wanted to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moose#Aggression

Since the guy wasn't screaming for help for 40 seconds before firing while moose pounded his head against a tree, your comparison with Zimmerman is pretty asinine.
BTW, tundras have neither trees or moose.

FWIW I like snowmobiles, ATVs, and wave runners about as much as you do guns. Or is it some of the assholes that drive them?

Some snowmobiles don't have a reverse, so backing up may not have been an option.

The snow off the trail was deep, so you may not have been able to steer the snow mobile off the trail.

I guess he could have jumped off the snow mobile, and then I wonder if the moose would have went for him or the snowmobile, I'm not sure, and its not like he had a bunch of time to plan out his next move.

I find it quite odd that you value the life of a moose more than a human.

That is how it is normally done in moose country. He was also dumb, or arrogant, enough to invade the animal's space after being rebuffed. That could be harassing wildlife. Shooting it while it was retreating was poaching and being an asshole, not defending himself.
From looking at the You Tube comments and the comments in this article,
http://outthere.bangordailynews.com/2014/02/28/outdoor-recreation/moose-attack-or-needless-slaughter-video-raises-ethical-questions/

the guy has very few supporters anywhere. I can't picture a pistol actually killing the moose, so he left it wounded.

Probably no more than a year or so old.

Moose can be territorial, and the last thing I want to do with an animal that big is get closer to it. He may have thought that by going towards the moose he could scare it off, and he was obviously wrong, but I don't think he set out that day to kill the moose. If so, he could have justify shot the moose much sooner.

and the moose was in his home, and just wanted to be left alone. Snowmobile guy was totally out of line. I hope he gets jail time, and gets prohibited from owning or carrying guns as well.

he would lose that specific gun and the snowmobile, but poaching isn't a felony.

You can loose the gun, snowmobile and the truck and trailer used to move the snowmobile, all defaulted to the TP&W. You can, and will, be charged in civil court for the value of the next two generations of the animal killed. Texas is serious about catching, and punishing, asses like this.

In Wyoming it becomes a felony after his third offense.
http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/worland-man-the-first-charged-under-new-wyoming-felony-poaching/article_daad591d-e8e3-5dcd-bcd2-f5c1efe837d8.html

I do also agree that the wisest approach was to wait.

Dude was in a hurry and could have waited. He could have headed back in other direction, too.

and the moose was blinded by the low sun.

If the Holy Gunner (who had his holy gun in a shoulder holster under his coat) was not intent on making a video of his use of the Holy Gun - he should have waited 5 minutes for the moose to move away.

yup

...then the assholes leave it there?

FUCK THAT GUY.

or grizzly. In which case, search and rescue would find a disturbing site, and the local coyote and wolf population would get a free meal.
I think it is more of a castle doctrine case, the moose being in his home, and the snowmobiler was doing a home invasion.

looks like a case of harassing wildlife and poaching.

The moose bluffs initially, and then turns away. At this point, the guy advances on his snowmobile toward the clearly irritated animal. The rest is unfortunately predictable.

This obviously belongs in the outdoors area, not here.

I hope the video and a little investigation finds out who this guy is so he can be charged.

Whether it be black kids with hoodies walking in their own neighborhoods.

Or moose in their own woods.

If there was not a gun available, Trayvon Martin and this moose would still be alive.

Guntoters have to face up to this fact.

yup

but I do know how this site works while you apparently do not.

I would like to go moose hunting in Maine someday, but I suppose the non-resident permit is spendy and the odds of getting a permit are long.

Before I take action, I am going to start a discussion on whether discussion of self-defense against animals should fall into the Gun Control & RKBA Group's SoP, or be the dominion of Outdoor Life Group.


The Statement of Purpose of this Group is:

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE: Gun Control & RKBA

Discuss gun politics, gun control laws, the Second Amendment, the use of firearms for self-defense, and the use of firearms to commit crime and violence.

Statement of Purpose

Discuss all aspects of hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, rock climbing, mountain biking, skiing and other outdoor sports.

This is what guns are carried and used for...

yup

If you want to compare this guy with someone in Florida, my I suggest Mike Dunn?

I don't understand why this would be alerted. (well I do - someone thinks this makes gunners look bad)

The guy certainly wasn't hunting. So why is this and Outdoor life issue? Because he was on a snowmobile when he acted like an ass with his gun? If some asshole gets busted shooting out tires of parked cars are we going to send that to Automobile Enthusiasts group?

Guns in national parks is/was a BIG issue with the RKBA people, No? I seem to remember tooth and nail arguments over THIS very issue right HERE in this group. Now that someone did something stupid and embarrassing they want it locked?

To say the discussion of this legal or illegal use of a (presumably) legally carried fire arm belongs in outdoor group just because the victim was a moose is ludicrous. Wasn't animal attacks a one of the big reasons carry proponents used when they argued for guns in parks?

And your assumed reasons for an alert are presumptuous.

There were no alerts, there were only members expressing an opinion without using the alert system.

It's a fair topic for this forum if posted for the purposes of discussion.

My position is that it was not posted for discussion, simply based on the behavior of the posting member, which makes it flamebait and subject to a lock.

Clearly there's nobody on the gun rights side of this board that has anything but contempt for this idiot, it's a matter upon which both sides can agree.

Unfortunately, one side continues to use insult and innuendo to make a point.

Pretty sad, actually. It is a sad crime that I think all of us could have discussed productively.

"This thread has been alerted on."

wildlife or unfenced dogs while out walking.

Several years ago a neighbor two houses from mine let her small dog out in the yard and it was attacked by a large Rottweiler who was running loose. She managed to get her dog back inside her home but the Rottweiler tried to follow and forced the door open. My neighbor who is in her sixties solved the problem with a handy broom and managed to chase the Rottweiler back outside. Unfortunately the attack caused her tiny dog to spend a long time at the vet recovering and he had to be castrated because of his injuries. Needless to say this pet suffered a lot and had doggie PTSD.

At the time my daughter and I took turns walking her Boston Terrier. We both had concealed carry permits and we contacted the local police chief to see if it was legal to shoot this dog in the city limits if it decided to attack our Boston Terrier while out walking. He told us that he saw no problems if we did.

Fortunately the Rottweiler did not attack any other dogs or people that I know of. The police were never able to determine who the owner was.

I suggest that using a firearm for self defense is a topic that should be allowed in this group. It's not a sport but can be legitimate self defense.

If it had been a real emergency he'd be dead now.

What a waste of a good animal, which he just left to die, apparently.

Of course he could have just waited out the moose or turned the sled around, which requires getting off but it's not that hard to do.

He was just an asshole. I hope they prosecute and restrict his 2A rights for what he did.

My son in law prefers to carry with the chamber empty. He sometimes carries a Glock and there have been a number of accidents with this pistol caused by the fact that the safety is on the trigger. Obviously a quality holster, practicing safe gun handling techniques and not installing lighter target trigger assembly on the pistol should eliminate the possibility of most such accidental discharges with the Glock.

Recently my son in law has decided to mainly carry a Ruger LCP because it is so light. I have tried to assure him that the long and fairly heavy trigger pull of this pistol should allow him to carry it with a round in the chamber as long as it is in a good holster. I also pointed out that it may be difficult to chamber a round if he is attacked at close range and only has the use of his gun hand. He told me that he has mastered using his belt or a pants pocket to chamber a round. He can be stubborn so I gave up. Chances are that he will never have to use his weapon for self defense anyway.

I solve the problem by carrying a S&W model 642 double action revolver in a good pocket holster. I'm mainly a wheel gunner and somewhat of a dinosaur in the modern gun culture. I don't believe that it is necessary to have the ability to fill the air with lead if you are attacked but instead to hit what you aim at. I practice double action shooting and am reasonably proficient at close range.

In my opinion a well maintained revolver is extremely reliable and will function with ammunition that might cause a misfeed or malfunction in a pistol. It also no safety lever to remember to disengage in an emergency. The long heavy trigger pull makes an accidental discharge less likely. It's also called a "belly gun" for good reason. You can shove a revolver into a person's stomach and it will fire while a pistol will fail as it is out of battery as the slide will be forced slightly back.

Of course the snubbie I carry only has five rounds. Obviously this might be a disadvantage if I were attacked by several people. I do carry a backup speed loader but it definitely takes more time to use a speed loader than a magazine to reload a handgun. Still I really do not expect that I will ever be attacked nor do I go looking for trouble. I also practice situational awareness which should enable me to avoid most violent encounters. Of course if I were in law enforcement, I would carry a pistol with a much higher capacity.

I have carried a pistol in the past but it was a double action only .40 Beretta Centurion. That was in different time and a more dangerous place than where I currently live. This pistol is quite similar to a revolver as it has a long heavy trigger pull and no safety lever to forget. I carried it with a round in the chamber.