[Don Joe]

Fox was just reporting that the victim was "at fault" in the accident. He came up from behind of the VP and didn;t signal. The VP didn't see him.

If that's the spin they're putting on it, W-O-W!

A shooting victim is "at-fault" for getting shot?!?!?

I guess RHIP after all.

I'd hate to get rear-ended by the Cheney motorcade while I was stopped at a red light. I'd not only get hospitalized, but I'd get ticketed too, for "causing the accident!

Anybody wanna lay odds on the chance of any "normal"-class citizen managing to pull off an "it was the other guy's fault" (that you shot him) defense -- and getting away with it?

(My guess is that not only would you lose, but you'd also get sanctioned eleven ways to Sunday for insulting the Court's intelligence and wasting its time with that "novel approach to a shooting defense.")

[AnAmericanMother]

Actually, when you're bird hunting there's lots of potential for fault. The shooter has to keep the muzzle pointed away from his partners, and not swing across the line, BUT everybody has to keep everybody else notified of their whereabouts. If the victim left his station in the line and moved forward or back, he's supposed to let his partners know. Otherwise, it's as though somebody steps out beyond the firing line on a stationary range -- only more dangerous because there's no set firing line, it's moving all the time.

Things can get pretty exciting when you're quail hunting, you can get really focussed following those little rascals, and if somebody's where he's not supposed to be he can catch a pellet or three, and it IS generally considered his fault. Usually somebody's dog gets way up forward or lags back, and since the shooter's watching the dog, he may move out of the line without noticing.

I don't like to hunt in a crowd, because it's too many people to watch. A lot of times I just work my dog.