Man dies following hunting accident in Nova Scotia: RCMP

sulisa said:
What if you're out for a nature walk, and not wearing orange - would the insurance still weasel out because it was hunting season, and you got shot? Wearing orange should have no difference between whether a person is hunting or not (it's about getting other hunters to see you), but it's kind of hard to legislate that the whole world has to wear orange for the season, so easier to pick on the hunters.
Click to expand...

It is not even close to being the same
It is mandatory here to wear the orange hunting and this guy was hunting so it can easily be classed as reckless endangerment
Cheers
 
So if you ran a stop sign, and were killed, would the company get out of paying because of "reckless endangerment" ? Running a stop sign is also a violation, and you are much more likely to be killed in a traffic accident, than be killed in a hunting accident.
 
stubblejumper said:
So if you ran a stop sign, and were killed, would the company get out of paying because of "reckless endangerment" ? Running a stop sign is also a violation, and you are much more likely to be killed in a traffic accident, than be killed in a hunting accident.
Click to expand...

Again not the same,. I would bet the farm they will try knowing how the insurance companies work down here
I bet there is no where in Alberta that you cannot get house insurance based on what street you live on is there
Welcome to my world
Cheers
 
3macs1 said:
But if they prove you took your own life they will not pay
Hunting here with no orange when it is law could it not be seen as similar
Insurance companies will look for any angle to get out of a claim
Cheers
Click to expand...

Someone I know was killed in a car accident a few years ago and he wasn't wearing a seat belt. It's law here to wear a seat belt. His wife received his insurance payout.

In regard to hunting, they would have to somehow prove in court that he was killed for the sole reason he wasn't wearing orange. Thinking it was a deer because it was something not orange isn't gonna fly. Identify your target, then shoot.
 
3macs1 said:
Again not the same,. I would bet the farm they will try knowing how the insurance companies work down here
I bet there is no where in Alberta that you cannot get house insurance based on what street you live on is there
Welcome to my world
Cheers
Click to expand...

But it is the same, in both cases you knowingly took a risk, while committing a violation, and were killed. If anything, running the stop sign is more of a risk because if the other drivers obey the law, you could still be killed, but in order to be mistaken for a deer and be shot, the shooter would have to demonstrate "careless use of a firearm" by shooting at a target that hadn't been identified.

In regard to hunting, they would have to somehow prove in court that he was killed for the sole reason he wasn't wearing orange. Thinking it was a deer because it was something not orange isn't gonna fly. Identify your target, then shoot.
Click to expand...

Exactly being shot because someone though you were a deer, is the result of the shooter committing a criminal act. The insurance company would pay out, but go after the shooter for compensation.
 
Be interested if one of the members in the industry chimes in and sets this straight
Ours are all just opinions
Could hunting be high risk I don't know
Cheers

You die in a high-risk activity
It seems like a given but in many cases, insurance policies will include a clause that says the insurer won’t cover death by extreme sports or high risk activities .
 
Unfortunately, there are some scary but true stories about hunting accidents in Nova Scotia. This despite a mandatory hunter safety course and the requirement for orange hat and vest/coat. You are also obligated to carry a blade, fire starter and navigation aid in the woods. As with any group of people, it's going to be the bad examples that everyone hears all about.

Most people that really want a deer will scout it out for a couple of months of weekends prior then bag it at legal light on opening day and get the heck out before the idiots arrive.

A class mate of mine in college was walking down a logging road to go deer hunting. At a pile of gravel on the side of the track was a man with a rifle and wearing full camo up to the face paint. He did a quick 180 and never returned.
 
3macs1 said:
Be interested if one of the members in the industry chimes in and sets this straight
Ours are all just opinions
Could hunting be high risk I don't know
Cheers

You die in a high-risk activity
It seems like a given but in many cases, insurance policies will include a clause that says the insurer won’t cover death by extreme sports or high risk activities .
Click to expand...

I am in the industry :)
 
3macs1 said:
Be interested if one of the members in the industry chimes in and sets this straight
Ours are all just opinions
Could hunting be high risk I don't know
Cheers

You die in a high-risk activity
It seems like a given but in many cases, insurance policies will include a clause that says the insurer won’t cover death by extreme sports or high risk activities .
Click to expand...

I do hunting as a profession and my insurer knows this. It wasn't an issue.
If I was a chainsmoking stuntman it might be a different story.....
 
I can't believe some of you otherwise normal and intelligent gentlemen are getting sucked into one of the most ridiculous conversations in CGN history- will life insurance pay out if you don't wear orange? Laugh2
 
Ganderite said:
A friend of mine did a study of hunting accident deaths. He phoned many of the shooters and asked them to tell the story. For most of them there was a common thread.

The hunter saw a deer run into a bush after he had fired at it. Then he saw the deer a bit later, running out of the bush, and fired again - killing his partner.

Each was convinced he had seen a deer for the second shot. We tend to see what we expect to see.
Click to expand...

I'm going to quote this because it needs to be committed to memory so hard it can be recalled in the middle of buck fever.
 
3macs1 said:
Word on the street says the exact same thing happened here . It was a follow up shot on a deer
Cheers
Click to expand...

Has it been proven that a deer was actually present? I have read several accounts where people claim to have shot at a deer, and refuse to admit that there was no deer, even when it coudn't be proven that a deer was actually present. These people just won't admit that they mistook a human for a deer.
 
Last edited:
stubblejumper said:
Has it been proven that a deer was actually present? I have read several accounts where people claim to have shot at a deer, and refuse to admit that there was deer, even when it coudn't be proven that a deer was actually present. These people just won't admit that they mistook a human for a deer.
Click to expand...

Nothing official I have seen so far
Just a post from a member on a hunting site
His post

Got some news through the grape vine on this tragic accident. Apparently it was a father and son getting off work hence the no orange but they had a rifle in the truck, spotted a deer in a field the son got out and took a shot at the deer and it took off. They pulled off the road son told the father to stay in the truck as he would go look for the deer. Some time passed and apparently the father got out of the truck to go help/find his son, the son heard something in the bushes and thought it was the deer and tragically shot his father. Lots of mistakes made and very tragic, couldn't imagine being in the sons shoes right now.
 
Then use your eyes first!! It’s just as thick “out west”, people still identify their target before taking aim with a loaded rifle.
Cranky Pants said:
It isnt like out west here, binoculars are useless, most shots are under 150 feet and if you arent set up you will get busted. Ive shot many under 50 feet.

Different sort of hunting.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom