Repeater
Regular Member
imported post
This letter-to-the-editor appears in the current edition of the Chesterfield Observer.
This mother's attitude is disturbing. I'm reproducing her letter in its entirety.
Because she is so extremely bothered by what she, and her children, might see from the consequences of deer hunting, I'm wondering if she would be similarly offended by the sight of a handgun carried by a person within her proximity at a park, shopping mall, or a restaurant. Note that she repeatedly refers to bows as weapons. I've highlighted that aspect in her letter.
My question is:
Does a person's anti-hunting mentality extend to anti open-carry mentality also?
Here is her letter:
Killing deer in neighborhoods is dangerous
Dear Editor,
Your Nov. 25 article describing Chesterfield’s Board of Supervisors’ decision regarding a change in the bow hunting ordinance poorly addressed the concerns of those of us who support that change. Perhaps you might have also wanted to publish a photo of a hunter in a tree stand hovering over my neighbors’ yard where their children and dog normally play. Another neighbor has arranged for that hunter to be there despite the strong objections of immediate neighbors and despite the objections of the homeowners’ association. Bow hunting in this setting, only a few feet from another’s home, is inappropriate and unsafe.
In many areas of the state, from neighboring Henrico and Hanover counties, to numerous other areas far less populated than ours (like Tazewell, Pulaski and Rocky Mount, just as examples), local laws limit bow hunting near homes, acknowledging that it presents an unacceptable risk. Chesterfield should do likewise.
The state gives clear leeway to the counties to regulate bow hunting in areas “so heavily populated as to make such conduct dangerous to the inhabitants.” (Code of Virginia, § 15.2-1209/1210). Certainly, a neighborhood is one such place.
Let me say that I absolutely support exempting target practice and archery from the proposed ordinance change. There is a world of difference between shooting a practice arrow at a fixed target and a live arrow at a moving animal.
Over and over, those opposed to the ordinance change who spoke at the [public] hearing stated that bow hunting is safe, but everyone has to admit that there are additional variables involved when you take that bow hunting into a densely populated neighborhood. To trot out statistics from the last 30 years of bow hunting in rural areas and the forests of Virginia to prove that hunting on a half-acre lot (or less) in a neighborhood full of unpredictable children and pets is safe is ludicrous. In fact, even the hunter who has been solicited to kill deer in my neighbor’s yard detailed in a slideshow the numerous steps he undertook to ensure safety, acknowledging that such steps are necessary. Can we assume that every backyard hunter will be as careful in exhaustively researching all safety angles and potential dangers? Today’s crossbows and compound bows are incredibly high-powered and deadly, propelling arrows at a high rate of speed for long distances. Despite how dedicated and careful one may be, hunting errors occur. Allowing those kinds of weapons in such close proximity to so many people is an accident waiting to happen.
In addition to the weapons themselves, an injured deer running through a heavily populated neighborhood is also a hazard. After a fatal arrow shot, deer often run 100 yards or more before falling. In most neighborhoods, that means the deer ends up in someone’s yard other than the hunter. I don’t want to see a suffering or dying deer writhing in my yard. I don’t want my kids to have to see that. In a neighborhood, I think it’s reasonable to expect that we shouldn’t have to. Remember that way over 90 percent of Americans don’t hunt, and part of the reason is that we have absolutely no desire to ever witness that – and especially not when looking out our kitchen window.
Also heard repeatedly at the hearing were concerns about deer population growth and the problems associated with that increase. If Chesterfield needs to address those concerns at some point in the future, then that is a different argument altogether. Certainly a neighbor shooting a deer here and there in his yard is not going to solve any perceived deer overpopulation problem.
Perhaps those of us in favor of this ordinance change did not have the numbers of those who oppose the change turn out for the hearing. After all, we are just concerned citizens without a lobbying organization at our disposal. But that doesn’t mean that this issue affects only one neighborhood. Common sense dictates that lethal hunting weapons have no business in close quarters with occupied homes – the risks are not worth it. It’s unthinkable that someone would place the importance of their ornamental plants above the safety of a child.
Jennifer Martin Lemler
Midlothian
This letter-to-the-editor appears in the current edition of the Chesterfield Observer.
This mother's attitude is disturbing. I'm reproducing her letter in its entirety.
Because she is so extremely bothered by what she, and her children, might see from the consequences of deer hunting, I'm wondering if she would be similarly offended by the sight of a handgun carried by a person within her proximity at a park, shopping mall, or a restaurant. Note that she repeatedly refers to bows as weapons. I've highlighted that aspect in her letter.
My question is:
Does a person's anti-hunting mentality extend to anti open-carry mentality also?
Here is her letter:
Killing deer in neighborhoods is dangerous
Dear Editor,
Your Nov. 25 article describing Chesterfield’s Board of Supervisors’ decision regarding a change in the bow hunting ordinance poorly addressed the concerns of those of us who support that change. Perhaps you might have also wanted to publish a photo of a hunter in a tree stand hovering over my neighbors’ yard where their children and dog normally play. Another neighbor has arranged for that hunter to be there despite the strong objections of immediate neighbors and despite the objections of the homeowners’ association. Bow hunting in this setting, only a few feet from another’s home, is inappropriate and unsafe.
In many areas of the state, from neighboring Henrico and Hanover counties, to numerous other areas far less populated than ours (like Tazewell, Pulaski and Rocky Mount, just as examples), local laws limit bow hunting near homes, acknowledging that it presents an unacceptable risk. Chesterfield should do likewise.
The state gives clear leeway to the counties to regulate bow hunting in areas “so heavily populated as to make such conduct dangerous to the inhabitants.” (Code of Virginia, § 15.2-1209/1210). Certainly, a neighborhood is one such place.
Let me say that I absolutely support exempting target practice and archery from the proposed ordinance change. There is a world of difference between shooting a practice arrow at a fixed target and a live arrow at a moving animal.
Over and over, those opposed to the ordinance change who spoke at the [public] hearing stated that bow hunting is safe, but everyone has to admit that there are additional variables involved when you take that bow hunting into a densely populated neighborhood. To trot out statistics from the last 30 years of bow hunting in rural areas and the forests of Virginia to prove that hunting on a half-acre lot (or less) in a neighborhood full of unpredictable children and pets is safe is ludicrous. In fact, even the hunter who has been solicited to kill deer in my neighbor’s yard detailed in a slideshow the numerous steps he undertook to ensure safety, acknowledging that such steps are necessary. Can we assume that every backyard hunter will be as careful in exhaustively researching all safety angles and potential dangers? Today’s crossbows and compound bows are incredibly high-powered and deadly, propelling arrows at a high rate of speed for long distances. Despite how dedicated and careful one may be, hunting errors occur. Allowing those kinds of weapons in such close proximity to so many people is an accident waiting to happen.
In addition to the weapons themselves, an injured deer running through a heavily populated neighborhood is also a hazard. After a fatal arrow shot, deer often run 100 yards or more before falling. In most neighborhoods, that means the deer ends up in someone’s yard other than the hunter. I don’t want to see a suffering or dying deer writhing in my yard. I don’t want my kids to have to see that. In a neighborhood, I think it’s reasonable to expect that we shouldn’t have to. Remember that way over 90 percent of Americans don’t hunt, and part of the reason is that we have absolutely no desire to ever witness that – and especially not when looking out our kitchen window.
Also heard repeatedly at the hearing were concerns about deer population growth and the problems associated with that increase. If Chesterfield needs to address those concerns at some point in the future, then that is a different argument altogether. Certainly a neighbor shooting a deer here and there in his yard is not going to solve any perceived deer overpopulation problem.
Perhaps those of us in favor of this ordinance change did not have the numbers of those who oppose the change turn out for the hearing. After all, we are just concerned citizens without a lobbying organization at our disposal. But that doesn’t mean that this issue affects only one neighborhood. Common sense dictates that lethal hunting weapons have no business in close quarters with occupied homes – the risks are not worth it. It’s unthinkable that someone would place the importance of their ornamental plants above the safety of a child.
Jennifer Martin Lemler
Midlothian
) and I've brought the kids and critters inside because the gunfire sounded a tad too close. So, yeah, I do see her point.
