i thought these were banned after previous such encounters?
Posted on 08/23/2018 1:48:38 AM PDT by blueplum
BOISE, Idaho — The U.S. government said an Idaho family is to blame for any injuries it alleges a boy received after he was doused with cyanide by a predator-killing trap that a federal worker mistakenly placed near their home.
Any injuries were caused by the negligence of the parents and child, the U.S. Department of Justice said in documents filed Monday in U.S. District Court, and asked for the family's lawsuit to be dismissed. Mark and Theresa Mansfield of Pocatello sued in June seeking more than $75,000 in damages and more than $75,000 for pain and suffering.
They say their son, Canyon Mansfield, was playing with his dog in March 2017 when the then-14-year-old triggered the trap...
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
I knew it existed because there was an episode of Cannon that revolved around one. An illegal is murdered on a woman’s property and it is staged to look like he was killed by her “coyote getter.” She is held liable until Cannon proves it was murder.
landmines are banned but this is ok?
a smaller child could have died
Just once I’d like these court peoples to act as though it was the other way around, as in—
What would they have done if a policeman had been injured by a poison trap set for a predator animal by a citizen?
I don’t argue that coyotes are a problem but I don’t think these traps are a good idea.
I knew of the trap’s existence, but I didn’t think that the gov. used them anymore. Dang.
No mention of signage or flagging. 150k is reasonable to me. Dang, they killed his dog and I imagine the kid got really sick for a while. The gov. should pony up.
They were used a lot years ago normally they are well signed.
Need more information.
Before laying blame.
This is an old story, 2017. The trap in the picture is an M-44, it’s spring loaded so there would have been no bang. The Older models were replaced by the M-44’s a long time ago. The older model used a primed pistol case to disperse the cyanide. They used to have them on every ranch here in west Texas. Every gate had warning signs and pictures of the device. Never liked them or allowed the state trapper to use them on our ranches. Now we don’t even allow the trapper on the ranch. Varmint calls and a good rifle is all you need, I call early in the morning on the days I feel like it and always have a rifle in the truck for those I just bump into during the days. I’ll average 70 to 90 Yotes a year depending on the weather.
I personally don’t like traps of any kind other than a live trap where an un-targeted critter can be released. I don’t shoot fox or bobcats and traps or snares don’t discriminate. I’ve seen fawns and javalina’s caught and killed by snares.
... 150k is reasonable to me...
Would a cyanide headache ever stop happening? $150k isnt enough.
Using these things anywhere people might go in hiking, etc. is negligence in itself, signs or not.
Sounds like a case of spring gun combined with sovereign immunity.
Spring guns date back to colonial times. They were essentially large bore shotguns attached to trip wires rigged to pivot the gun at an intruder and fire. The intention was to deter property intruders. Their deadly but indiscrimate operation led to them being banned. The ban on such unattended deadly weapons (of all types) continues to this day.
Sovereign immunity protects governments at all levels from private lawsuits over its legitimate operations unless it (the government) agrees to be sued beforehand.
Here you have the federal government saying the injured party cannot sue because the potentially deadly unattended device was placed as a legitimate act by a government actor on federal land. In this case, a citizen coming onto “its” probably unfenced and unmarked land is trespassing.
Essentially, the kid and his dog got what they deserved. Swell bunch of guys, those Feds.
Maybe the manufacturer of the M44 device also should be sued over its indiscriminate nature.
The ones I’ve encountered were flagged, usually they have a 4 flag layout with the device in the middle and were easily identified. Problem is a critter such as a dog doesn’t identify. The fact that the dog died and the boy only suffered headaches raises some red flag. The devices that had the cartridge charge was replaced by the spring loaded M-44 back in the 60’s. The device shoots out a powdered cyanide that travels about a couple of feet into the air. The device is set off by a pulling action such as a animal would do to trying to pull the baited section out of the ground. The powder is shot into the mouth where it mixes with saliva and turns to gas and kills quickly. Usually the animal travels less than 5 yards.
I’ll go out on a limb and say the dog set the charge off and the boy probably found the dog after the incident. Had the boy set the charge off headaches would have been the least of his problems.
I guess the doctrine of strict liability doesn’t apply to the Federal Government. They could probably sue the trap manufacturer though.
The Fox news link tells a different story.
Fox news says the dog set off the device, the AP story says the boy set off the device.
.gov/subgovagency puts out Cyanide Powder “Bouncing Bettie” Device(s) ?
The CPBB EVEN HAS A MILITARY STYLE DEVICE DESIGNATION OF M-44 The CPBB’s are supposed to be PROTECTING Livestock from PREDATOR
U.S. Citizen and U.S. Canine are out and about doing the things that are normal. They find a “sprinkler head” and upon inspection it SPRAYS CYANIDE POWDER on THEM. It KILLS U.S. Canine and U.S Citizen is Injured and has Severe Long-lasting Medical problems that may be Permanent and Disabling
JUST WHAT FRICKIN BOTTLE-ROCKET ENGINEER CAME UP WITH THIS IDEA ?!?!?!?
How is this CPBB supposed to tell the difference between Predators, Prey, Humans and Domestic Canines ?!?!?
Do Prey know what these things are and to Tippy-Toe around and past them ?
Do the Predators know that it’s their responsibility to set these things OFF ?
And .gov*.* Says not our/my fault blame it on U.S. Citizen and Canine!?!?!?
WTF OVER ????
?Do these “M-44’s” get placed in Progress (see Tagline) ?
< /stupid mind boggling incredulous wonder >
i thought these were banned after previous such encounters?
Need to correct myself, the Fox news story doesn’t mention the boy setting off the device.
And what .gov agency/department did or do you still work for ?
If that had been your Child and Dog you would be singing a different tune...
And don’t bother trying to blow smoke up My a$$. you know if it was your family you would have a 180 degree opinion of your BLAME THE KID AND DOG Post.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.