Essays and Musings on Animals and Society

Monday, February 20, 2006

Cheney, Privilege, and Guns 

Columnist Eugene Robinson describes the recent Cheney shooting incident as fitting in perfectly with the administrations "ready, fire, aim" approach:

"He has pushed so hard in his campaign to assert autocratic powers for the White House that even his allies on Capitol Hill have begun pushing back. No wonder, given the way he treats them. On electronic spying, Cheney has essentially told Congress that if any members would like to discuss checks and balances, they're welcome to talk to the hand.

His uncompromising drill-and-guzzle position on energy makes a lot of oil industry executives look like tree-huggers. When the subject turns to measures that actually begin to lead this country toward energy independence, such as conservation and alternative fuels, Cheney begins checking his watch and barely tries to stifle his yawns. But let someone raise the prospect of drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which couldn't even begin to slake America's energy thirst, and it's impossible not to think of Mr. Burns on 'The Simpsons.'

Conservation sounds like one of those sissified foreign ideas. Drilling, now that's what America is all about—at least the America that spends its weekends on a 50,000-acre ranch in south Texas with a bunch of fellow millionaires, shooting at quail.

Typically, Cheney's office didn't bother to tell anyone for more than 18 hours that the vice president of the United States had shot someone. A vice presidential shooting doesn't happen every day, and I, for one, would appreciate being informed whenever the man who's just a heartbeat away from the presidency peppers a 78-year old attorney with birdshot."

The talking heads on Fox complain with indignation that the shooting accident "affects nobody." Excuse me, but aren't these the same people who droned on for months about the Monica Lewinsky affair? And by the way, does "nobody" include the victim and his family?

Columnist Charles Krauthammer argued that Cheney should not be treated differently than any other hunter who accidentally shoots someone.

And how are other hunters treated? Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, offers some insight:

"Mistaking a 37-year old housewife for a white-tailed deer, [Donald] Rogerson shot and killed her...Karen Wood had only been out in her backyard for a minute, leaving her year-old twin girls in her house, when Rogerson shot her in the chest with a .30-06 rifle. Despite a 4X power scope and a distance of only 188 feet, Rogerson insisted that he mistook Wood for a deer he had seen -- though a game warden found no tracks or other evidence...Locals insisted that the victim (who had recently moved from Iowa) was to blame because she was wearing white mittens during deer season. And a Bangor, Maine, jury cleared him of manslaughter.

No one in authority is talking about charging Cheney with a crime. But Cheney and Rogerson share the ignoble distinction of succumbing to what hunters (and lawyers) call 'buck fever.' It is a phenomenon as old as hunting, defined by the Random House dictionary as the 'nervous excitement of an inexperienced hunter upon the approach of game.' Yet experienced hunters have also been known to cut down neighbors they have mistaken for bucks, ducks and other quarry.

Buck fever is a recognized defense for negligent hunters, particularly youths. When a teenager shot a local businessman dressed in orange during deer season, he was excused from civil liability because of buck fever, despite the absence of any known species of orange-colored deer."

"Hundreds of people are shot each year in 'mistaken for game' cases."

"Judy Moilanen was merely walking her dog in Ontonagon, Mich., when she was killed. Debra Kelly of Osseo, Wis., had her eye shot out by her 13-year-old nephew while she stood in front of her house."

Cheney's case reflects a troubling de facto immunity given to negligent hunters. Because of our tradition of hunting, we view people who make lethal use of a firearm as less culpable than those who make lethal use of objects like cars. Texas probably won't require that Cheney take safety classes or suspend his license. The local county sheriff's office has already declared the case closed. For his part, Cheney feels no compulsion to promise that the 'buck (fever) stops here' and give up hunting."

"At least Whittington knows who shot him. Frequently, the culprits in hunting manslaughter cases are never identified. With the expansion of suburbia, it is increasingly common for people to unwittingly enter a line of fire. In 1992, in Leeds, Ala., 22-month-old Ashley Ramage was shot and killed while simply riding between her parents in their truck."

It's hard to find words to describe this lunacy. "Ludicrous?" "Double standard?" "Extreme?" Not only is shooting animals — for the fun of it, mind you — legal and promoted, it also may get you off a manslaughter charge. The vast majority of the country doesn't hunt, and I'll bet most people have some opposition to it. What's with the special status? Follow the money.

A letter to the editor in the Washington Post countered Mr. Krauthammer's assertion (excerpt follows):

"An average person, not traveling with extensive medical personnel, would have had to call 911, drawing the police immediately. The police would certainly have searched for alcohol or drugs. [Cheney, who said he had "a beer" at lunch, waited a day before submitting to an alcohol test.] Additionally, without medical personnel on the scene and far away from any hospital, Harry Whittington might have died, making the situation that much more serious."

Then there's the forced and scripted and rather meaningless "apology," given after half the country had complained that Cheney hadn't apologized. The apology that wasn't an apology. After merely stating the obvious, that he was "the guy who pulled the trigger," he proceeds to let himself off the hook with a series of excuses. Never does he admit to any negligence.

Dana Milbank writes in the Washington Post's "Washington Sketch" column on how Cheney and the administration talk big about accountability yet consistently try to avoid it:

"President Bush in 2000 ushered in the Era of Personal Responsibility. Yesterday ushered in the Era of Qualified Personal Responsibility.

In hours-long testimony before a Senate committee, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said he took the blame for the department's failures responding to Hurricane Katrina. "I am responsible for the Department of Homeland Security," came the inevitable claim. 'I'm accountable and accept responsibility for the performance of the entire department.'

At the same time, Vice President Cheney, breaking four days of silence since accidentally shooting a man on Saturday, was scheduling a confessional on Fox News. 'You can't blame anybody else,' Cheney told Brit Hume. 'I'm the guy who pulled the trigger and shot my friend.'

But, try though they might, neither Chertoff nor Cheney could come up with much in the way of what he had done wrong.

'I have to say that the idea that this department and this administration and the president were somehow detached from Katrina is simply not correct,' Chertoff testified, contradicting a House committee report released yesterday that found the secretary exercised his responsibilities 'late, ineffectively, or not at all.'

Cheney, similarly, said the way he handled disclosure of the shooting -- leaving a private citizen to announce it to a local newspaper the next day -- was spot-on. 'I thought that was the right call,' he said. 'I still do.'

Since Bush won the presidency in 2000 with a promise to usher in a 'new era of personal responsibility,' a public acceptance of culpability is de rigueur when something goes wrong.

But admitting mistakes is an entirely different matter. That could convey weakness and, as such, is to be avoided entirely. Hours after branding the federal response to Katrina 'unacceptable,' for example, Bush qualified that by saying, 'I am satisfied with the response. I'm not satisfied with all the results.'

Cheney, speaking to Fox News yesterday, performed a similar routine. He offered a stark claim of responsibility. 'Well, ultimately, I'm the guy who pulled the trigger that fired the round that hit Harry.'

But in the same interview, Cheney pointed out that 'there was a little bit of a gully there, so he was down a little ways before land level. . . . And the sun was directly behind him. That affected the vision, too, I'm sure.'

Milbank goes on to explain how Chertoff blamed the weather, FEMA, the FEMA director, and subordinates.

You gotta love our vice president's excuses about the gully and the angle of the sun. If that's all it takes to produce a misfire, maybe he should give the animals and close-by humans some relief and shoot trap instead. Or leave the guns behind and take a quiet walk in the woods, where maybe he could enjoy the birds' singing without the sound of guns firing.

Three days after Cheney presumably had to cut short his bird-killing spree because of the mishap, the $500-a-head pheasant hunt for Wisconsin republican gubernatorial candidate Scott Walker commenced. It took place at a private gun club.

So hubris and lack of empathy mix at the GOP fundraiser hunt. The rich and powerful hobnob and shoot at innocent, defenseless birds, raised especially for them. Turning serial killing of small creatures into a game is indicative of mental illness. Glorifying what is essentially a psychosis and exploiting it for financial gain is contemptible.

The last word goes to comedy writer Peter Mehlman:

"After all those deferments, he finally shot someone."
Posted by: Gary / 10:23 PM
Comments:
I know you probably have nothing to do with Professor Turley but I just thought I'd point out that his example of Judy Moilanen being killed because of "mistaken game" isn't true, and used out of context. She was killed during hunting season, yes, but by her husband. It wasn't an accident or a case of mistaken identity. The book The Sweater Letter is about it if you're interested!
# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 1:45 PM
 
Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?