In my experience, the younger one starts shooting the better. Many of the
best and skilled marksman that I came across when I had to do military
service were farmers who had been shooting since they were youngsters. In
addition, most armies have a recruiting age of 17/18 when they are trained
to kill and not think about it.
-----Original Message-----
From:
On Behalf Of Bill Stent
Sent: Tuesday, 7 February 2012 8:14 AM
To: Peter Shute
Cc: Birding Australia
Subject: Duck shooting season- There's an identification
test?
I understand that psychological studies show that males are incapable of
rational judgement until they're about 23, females younger. This is one
reason why young males kill themselves in cars so often.
But a ten year old with a shotgun sounds like a script for a horror movie.
This is less than half the age of reliable rationality.
Are these people serious?
Bill
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Peter Shute <> wrote:
> Yes, the younger the better as always. The page you referred to earlier
says 12 is the minimum, so perhaps there's some confusion between states, or
perhaps it's changed recently.
>
> Peter Shute
>
> ________________________________
> From: Alistair McKeough
> Sent: Tuesday, 7 February 2012 7:29 AM
> To: Peter Shute
> Cc: Dave Torr; Dimitris Bertzeletos; Birding Australia
> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] Duck shooting season- There's an identification
test?
>
> Field & Game is encouraging those over 10 to gear up now by passing the
test:
>
> " If you are over the age of 10 years and you have an interest in
[killing] waterfowl, you may obtain your waterfowl identification
certificate right now. Once you have the certificate, keep it safe and
record your registration number where it can be found quite easily. In
recent years changes to the way WIT's are recorded have created some
problems for hunters seeking a current duck hunting license in some areas."
>
> Nothing like encouraging people to gear up as early as 10 for when they
can start shooting live animals for sport.
>
>
> On 7 February 2012 07:24, Peter Shute
<<>> wrote:
> When the test first came in, people I know who had been duck shooting for
years had to buy the training video in order to be good enough to pass the
test. I would imagine therefore that they're a lot better at id in flight
than they were before, which is a good thing.
>
> The video is called "Ducks in Sight". I've got a vague memory of seeing it
for sale at the BOCA shop, so I get the impression it's useful for learning
id.
>
> I don't think they're required to ever sit the test again, so just like a
drivers' licence, there's nothing stopping people who've forgotten
everything they learned from shooting/driving regardless. But the tests do
stop those who can't be bothered learning id from ever getting a licence, so
I imagine there are far less illegal species shot by mistake than there were
before.
>
> How many are shot anyway, I don't know. Those collected by volunteers are
probably a small percentage of the total, given how many shooters use
private wetlands. I'm guessing enforcement is the problem now, not id
skills.
>
> Peter Shute
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:
>> <
>> sts.vicnet.net.au>
>> <mailto:birding-aus-bo
>> >] On Behalf Of Dave Torr
>> Sent: Tuesday, 7 February 2012 6:34 AM
>> To: Dimitris Bertzeletos
>> Cc: Birding Australia
>> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] Duck shooting season- There's an
>> identification test?
>>
>> Anyone who wants to drive a car has to pass a test, but the evidence
>> is that it doesn't help some people drive safely. I assume the duck
>> shooting test is likely to be even less of a success!
>>
>> On 7 February 2012 02:35, Dimitris Bertzeletos
>> <<>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Hello all,
>> >
>> > I've just learned that there's an identification test that
>> waterfowlers
>> > need to pass before they can shoot in the field. Anyone
>> have any idea how
>> > stringent this is? Evidence suggests not stringent enough...
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > D.
>> >
>> >
>> > ===============================
>> >
>> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message:
>> > unsubscribe
>> > (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
>> > to:
>> > <
>> > .net.au>
>> >
>> > http://birding-aus.org
>> > ===============================
>> >
>> ===============================
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message:
>> unsubscribe
>> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
>> to:
>> <
>> et.au>
>>
>> http://birding-aus.org
>> ===============================
>>
> ===============================
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
> <
> t.au>
>
> http://birding-aus.org
> ===============================
>
> ===============================
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
>
> http://birding-aus.org
> ===============================
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
http://birding-aus.org
===============================
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
http://birding-aus.org
===============================
|
