Does this give you a reason to like Cheney?

[scaeagles]

In the Scalia thread.

[Not Afraid]

What in the hell was I doing there?

[scaeagles]

Put the wine on the table and back away, NA.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Letterman's Top Ten Dick Cheney Excuses

10. Heart palpitation caused trigger finger to spasm
9. Wanted to get the Iraq mess of the front page
8. Not enough Jim Beam
7. Trying to stop the spread of bird flu
6. I love to shoot people
5. Guy was making cracks about my lesbian daughter
4. I thought the guy was trying to go 'gay cowboy' on me
3. Excuse? I hit him didn't I?
2. Until Democrats approve Medicare reform, we have to make some tough choices for the elderly
1. Made bet with Gretzgy's wife

[wendybeth]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

I just watched the rerun of this on Comedy Central. It is hysterical.

Spoiler:

Jon Stewart: "I'm joined now by our own vice-presidential firearms mishap analyst, Rob Corddry. Rob, obviously a very unfortunate situation. How is the vice president handling it?

Rob Corddry: "Jon, tonight the vice president is standing by his decision to shoot Harry Wittington. According to the best intelligence available, there were quail hidden in the brush. Everyone believed at the time there were quail in the brush.

"And while the quail turned out to be a 78-year-old man, even knowing that today, Mr. Cheney insists he still would have shot Mr. Whittington in the face. He believes the world is a better place for his spreading buckshot throughout the entire region of Mr. Whittington's face."

Jon Stewart: "But why, Rob? If he had known Mr. Whittington was not a bird, why would he still have shot him?"

Rob Corddry: "Jon, in a post-9-11 world, the American people expect their leaders to be decisive. To not have shot his friend in the face would have sent a message to the quail that America is weak."

Jon Stewart: "That's horrible."

Rob Corddry: "Look, the mere fact that we're even talking about how the vice president drives up with his rich friends in cars to shoot farm-raised wingless quail-tards is letting the quail know 'how' we're hunting them. I'm sure right now those birds are laughing at us in that little 'covey' of theirs.

Jon Stewart: "I'm not sure birds can laugh, Rob."

Rob Corddry: "Well, whatever it is they do … coo .. they're cooing at us right now, Jon, because here we are talking openly about our plans to hunt them. Jig is up. Quails one, America zero.

Jon Stewart: "Okay, well, on a purely human level, is the vice president at least sorry?"

Rob Corddry: "Jon, what difference does it make? The bullets are already in this man's face. Let's move forward across party lines as a people … to get him some sort of mask."

One of the funniest Daily Shows ever.

Lol! I loved the Nintendo Duck Hunt segment, showing how this could have happened. Great stuff, and it was fun seeing Jon so very, very happy.

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

4. I thought the guy was trying to go 'gay cowboy' on me

Hee hee hee.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

No crime here. Accident.

Manslaughter: the unlawful killing of a human being without express or implied malice

It's a good thing that that heart attack didn't kill him, or it would have been crime, since the attack was caused by the birdshot in his heart.

I do think that the VP has responsibility to report things as significant as this, if just as a pre-emptive strike against the media reaction to follow. I do find it questionable that they prolonged releasing the news. I do find his callous refusal to publicly apologize a little distasteful. If you're a public figure, your private birdshot accidents aren't "private."

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by LSPoorEeyorick

Manslaughter: the unlawful killing of a human being without express or implied malice

That's only part of the definition. If someone jumps in front of my car while I'm driving and dies, I am not guilty of manslaughter. Or if I'm firing down a firing range and someone runs out onto the range, I'm not responsible. That seems to be the likely case here. The victim did something stupid, he approached a hunting party without announcing himself. It's terribly distressing for all involved, but nothing illegal was done.

[Prudence]

In fairness, that definition says "unlawful killing." The "without express or implied malice" part is to distinguish it from other unlawful killings, like the various degrees of murder. The precise definitions vary between jurisdictions, but accidents are usually "unlawful." At best you'd get negligent homicide, and given the implied risk of being in a hunting party in the first place, that would have to be a mighty shocking accident.

[Ghoulish Delight]

As I read a more detailed definition, one thing does stick out...

The cases of manslaughter may be classed as follows those which take place in consequence of: 1. Provocation. 2. Mutual combat. 3. Resistance to public officers, etc. 4. Killing in the prosecution of an unlawful or wanton act. 5. Killing in the prosecution of a lawful act, improperly performed, or performed without lawful authority.

One might make the argument that his lack of hunting license might tread into the "without lawful authority" territory, but it seems unlikely that a proceduraly mistake will translate to criminal prosocution. The rest of that definition ("improperly performed" being key) certainly keeps him safely on the side of the law.