Am I the only one who sees something a tad awry here?
AUSTIN — A state lawmaker wants to make sure no Texan is left out when it comes to hunting, even if the hunter is legally blind.
Rep. Edmund Kuempel, a Seguin Republican, has filed a bill for the 2007 legislative session that would allow legally blind hunters to use a laser sight, or lighted pointing instrument. The devices are forbidden for sighted hunters.
Blind hunters would also have to have a sighted hunter along with them, but they could hunt any game that sighted people can hunt in the same seasons and using the same weapons.
“This opens up the fun of hunting to additional people, and I think that’s great,” Kuempel said.
They are talking about guns, with bullets and everything…. right?
Sigh…it’s not easy being a Republican with guys like these on your side. Geesh.
I hate to say this, but: “Only in Texas”! *rolls eyes*
Guess I’m not going to be wandering the Hill Country any more.
Uh, folks, there is a difference between the legal definition of blindness and being blind in the Helen Keller sense. While this may seem a little odd to many folks, I don’t see anything in the Second Amendment that limits the right to keep and bear arms to only those who meet the legal definition of ‘sighted’, and it appears that there are protections in this bill both for the hunter and those around him/her. And, it doesn’t mean these folks will be packing heat while walking around the local shopping mall, either.
Besides, being able to use a “lighted pointing instrument” (read: a spotlight) is only going to be a benefit for some of those who meet the legal definition of ‘blind’ – and right now using spotlights to hunt is totally illegal, in part because deer tend to freeze when they look into a bright light (hence the term “deer in the headlights look”.)
~EdT.
I hear what you’re saying, Ed. DH and I know a number of people who fit the definition of legally blind, but I can’t help finding this entire idea bizarre. For instance (also from the article:)
Do you hunt, Ed?
I did, for several years, with my father-in-law. I haven’t been for some time now, after my FiL lost his hunting lease, and my mobility bacame more impaired than not. However, I hope to go out again, someday.
I also knew a man who took absolutely gorgeous photographs, including some serious award-winning ones – but he also was legally blind, having come down with glaucoma. His wife helped him “aim” the camera in his latter days, but he was in fact the photographer (he did how own darkroom processing, if I recall – without assistance.)
BTW, if you think this is funny – I have a co-worker in CA who has a drivers license with a ‘unique’ restriction on it – he is not legally authorized to drive a car! He is also one of those “legally blind” people, and it is a hoot when the company tries to make him take behind-the-wheel driver safety training!
Oh, and yes, on the surface I do see where some might find the idea of passing a law to allow ‘blind people’ to hunt humorous. OTOH, as one who is an advocate where it comes to accessibility issues for the disabled, I also see the rationale behind removing this barrier to full participation in life activities.
~EdT.
My concern about this proposed law has nothing to do with giving access to people. It has everything to do with me feeling safe around someone who is admitting to having bad enough eyesight that he/she needs someone else to be there. Ultimately, if you are the one pulling the trigger, you are the one that is responsible for damage as a result of your gun firing.
Despite the Second Amendment, I still have to have a license to hunt in Texas. The Amendment has nothing to do with having guns as a source of fun, but as a source of protection and limits placed on having access to fun are certainly allowable when that fun infringes on my right to safety. You have the right to own the gun, not to hunt with it.