# Handler almost shot at test



## Kelly Greenwood (Dec 18, 2008)

So we almost lost HuntEmUp at a test today. Judges had handler honor in layout blind placed in front of a holding blind. From behind holding blind they threw a duck and shot it. Not sure exactly what happened but there was suddenly a hole in the holding blind and a hole in the ground 2 feet to the side of HuntEmUp. Luckily the dog was on the other side or it would have been shot. Needless to say HuntEmUp was a bit upset and there was much yelling at judges and the gunner. 
Hopefully this will serve as a reminder Irgun safety and safety in planning out gun station placement in relation to handlers and others..
Some setups while great tests are not practical or safe. The first and last question asked of any setup should be is it safe for all the people and for the dogs.
And while the ultimate responsability rests with the gunners and the judges everyone at the test should be looking at safety issues and not be afraid to speak up. Handlers are usually very good about pointing out dog safety issues.

Hopefully HuntEmUp will provide a few more details.

Be safe everyone.


----------



## Pupknuckle (Aug 15, 2008)

Glad no one was injured. Sounds like there might have been an accidental discharge.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Sounds like test was unsafe whether or not there was an accidental discharge. Having a handler and dog in front of s flyer station is pure stupidity. The judges and hunt test committee need to be disciplined. I would have scratched my dogs after seeing such a test setup.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

The setup described in 3 words. Incredible. Irresponsible. Stupid. 
Very fortunate that no one was injured.


----------



## Raymond Little (Aug 2, 2006)

Sounds like the judges were going for 100% real on their imitation hunt.


----------



## Irishwhistler (Sep 8, 2013)

Very thankful that Hunt'EmUp nor the dog were killed / injured. A full analysis of the set up needs to be conducted and posted so that it is not duplicated unknowingly elsewhere. Guns do not usually just spontaneously discharge themselves. Safety was most likely in OFF / FIRE position and gunner's finger within the trigger guard prior to being ready to shoot - a recipe for disaster.

Irishwhistler


----------



## freezeland (Nov 1, 2012)

Pupknuckle said:


> Glad no one was injured. Sounds like there might have been an accidental discharge.


Glad no one was injured too, but I have to disagree with the accidental discharge theory. There is no such thing........


----------



## Jim Danis (Aug 15, 2008)

freezeland said:


> Glad no one was injured too, but I have to disagree with the accidental discharge theory. There is no such thing........


Exactly!! No such thing as an accidental discharge! Negligent Discharge is more like it.


----------



## Terry Marshall (Jan 12, 2011)

My thinking on setting up a HT is to stay away from boats and layout blinds, just too many opportunities for disaster!


----------



## Mike Trible (Oct 23, 2007)

From your description of the Test, the judges should not have set up such a test, the Hunt Test Committee should have NEVER approved it, and as a handler I would have NEVER tried to run it. This is an example of why the Hunt Committee should attend Judges Seminars.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Terry Marshall said:


> My thinking on setting up a HT is to stay away from boats and layout blinds, just too many opportunities for disaster!



My thoughts exactly. Whenever you start involving more equipment into a test you run the chance of accidents or being a disadvantage to those who are unable to get into boats or layouts.

In the latest example of stupidity the gunners should also have refused


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

Positioning the guns - especially live guns - behind the dog and handler is just plain stupid, regardless of the equipment used. The judges, gunners and test committee need some basic safety education. If the situation described occurred at a licensed or member club event - HRC or AKC - I would hope that the national organization would investigate and take some strong action with those involved.


----------



## Dan Tongen (Nov 19, 2005)

I have run many tests where layout blinds where used, if done correctly they are a very realistic test. I get tired of the same boring stand at the line tests. 
Dan


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

Sounds like guy in layout blind just in front of shooter in holding blind was "sweeped" by shooter. I get homicidal whenever someone sweeps me with gun barrel of any kind loaded or not including popper loads. 
. 
Did they make him honor next dog?


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Gunners were most likely behind judges also!


----------



## Bubba (Jan 3, 2003)

Something for those that want to put the "Hunt" back in Hunt tests.

Just throw the chickens where the dogs don't want to go regards.

Bubba


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

Raymond Little said:


> Sounds like the judges were going for 100% real on their imitation hunt.





Let me guess.....this was a HRC hunt test. Just guessing but the HRC crowd are always proud of being more realistic. What ever the case this went waaaay over the line and should not have happened. Simulating a real hunt is fine but not if it's a safety risk. REALLY glad no body was hurt. Lucky for the people responsible I wasn't in that holding blind.


----------



## BrettG (Apr 4, 2005)

Don't forget hrc uses primers only not poppers or live loads.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

BrettG said:


> Don't forget hrc uses primers only not poppers or live loads.


Wrong. HRC can shoot live birds.


----------



## BrettG (Apr 4, 2005)

I've only run 1 where a flyer was used. Whatever the case thank God all are safe and unharmed.


----------



## Terry Marshall (Jan 12, 2011)

Dan Tongen said:


> I have run many tests where layout blinds where used, if done correctly they are a very realistic test. I get tired of the same boring stand at the line tests.
> Dan


Dan there are many people in this game that are in their late 60's to early 70's.... I hope you can still get in and OUT of a wet boat or a layout blind when you reach your golden years.


----------



## Shane Olean (May 5, 2006)

Steve Shaver said:


> Let me guess.....this was a HRC hunt test. Just guessing but the HRC crowd are always proud of being more realistic. What ever the case this went waaaay over the line and should not have happened. Simulating a real hunt is fine but not if it's a safety risk. REALLY glad no body was hurt. Lucky for the people responsible I wasn't in that holding blind.



At what test did this occur?


----------



## swliszka (Apr 17, 2011)

Remedial Hunt Tests for the challenged urban warriors- NO boats, NO decoys, NO run-thru blinds, NO flapping birds which intimidate pups and handlers, NO walk-ups ,NO live birds,only dead..go to Canada, NO realism please, this is a polite game with ribbons for all to put on your dog crates !


----------



## Darin Westphal (Feb 24, 2005)

Curious...what happened post yelling? Did the judges change the test or did handlers refuse to run it?


----------



## Karen Klotthor (Jul 21, 2011)

Terry Marshall said:


> Dan there are many people in this game that are in their late 60's to early 70's.... I hope you can still get in and OUT of a wet boat or a layout blind when you reach your golden years.


I would have to agree 100%, I am over 60 and it is hard for me to get off the ground without help. As far as being an HRC hunt, doubt it, first of all the handlers also has to shoot and doubt they had that much going on at the line.


----------



## NCShooter (Dec 6, 2012)

The number one rule of gun safety is keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction. 
The description of the test does not sound like that was even a consideration. I like a "realistic" test as much as anyone, but I would not put up with this situation in hunting or a hunt test. It is called zones of fire and over me is *never* ok. 
I am a long term sporting clays shooter and have witnessed several "accidental" discharges. However, when safety is in mind and the muzzle pointed downrange, while disconcerting there was no danger. It is the responsibility of everyone present to address these concerns immediately. 
Thank goodness no one was injured.
NCShooter


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

There was a shot fired in an unsafe direction. AKC/HRC/NAHRA doesn't make any difference. It is a sobering lesson that safety should always be the number one consideration.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

I'd be curious to know how many actual hunters were involved in setting up and running this "realistic" test. First rule is never set a person/dog up in front of a shooter. I can't visualize whether she was 90 deg to the shooting and someone screwed up or they were shooting over her head. In either case thank God it was a near miss.


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Kelly Greenwood said:


> So we almost lost HuntEmUp at a test today. Judges had handler honor in layout blind placed in front of a holding blind. From behind holding blind they threw a duck and shot it. Not sure exactly what happened but there was suddenly a hole in the holding blind and a hole in the ground 2 feet to the side of HuntEmUp. Luckily the dog was on the other side or it would have been shot. Needless to say HuntEmUp was a bit upset and there was much yelling at judges and the gunner.
> Hopefully this will serve as a reminder Irgun safety and safety in planning out gun station placement in relation to handlers and others..
> Some setups while great tests are not practical or safe. The first and last question asked of any setup should be is it safe for all the people and for the dogs.
> And while the ultimate responsability rests with the gunners and the judges everyone at the test should be looking at safety issues and not be afraid to speak up. Handlers are usually very good about pointing out dog safety issues.
> ...


Reading this I am reminded of the classic saying " Even Duct Tape can't fix STUPID "

Persons who set this up are idiots.


----------



## freezeland (Nov 1, 2012)

NCShooter said:


> The number one rule of gun safety is keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction.
> The description of the test does not sound like that was even a consideration. I like a "realistic" test as much as anyone, but I would not put up with this situation in hunting or a hunt test. It is called zones of fire and over me is *never* ok.
> I am a long term sporting clays shooter and have witnessed several "accidental" discharges. However, when safety is in mind and the muzzle pointed downrange, while disconcerting there was no danger. It is the responsibility of everyone present to address these concerns immediately.
> Thank goodness no one was injured.
> NCShooter


Please educate me how a accidental discharge occurs. I'm not trying to be a smarta$$ or provoke a confrontational response. I'm just trying to understand how it occurs since a few people have made the statement "accidental discharge" in this thread. IMO there is a conscious decision to set a firearms safety to the fire position and another to place one's finger inside the trigger guard. That is not accidental.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

fishduck said:


> There was a shot fired in an unsafe direction. AKC/HRC/NAHRA doesn't make any difference. It is a sobering lesson that safety should always be the number one consideration.


And it should be everyone's consideration. Flyer gunner, participant, spectator in the gallery--anyone should step up and say something if there is a legitimate safety issue.


----------



## Eric Fryer (May 23, 2006)

I would like to know who the judges were? Not to publically bash them, just so I know where to avoid in the future. Gun safety can not be taken lightly and not enforced enough. I hope that there was action taken.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

freezeland said:


> Please educate me how a accidental discharge occurs.


One way is to shoot trap/skeet/clays all spring/summer where you don't use the safety on your gun because it's only loaded while in the shooting cage. It gets very easy to forget turning the safety on come hunting season. You can get lazy at your overall gun handling also, since the guns are always unloaded with open actions once someone leaves shooting position. 

Just something I've observed over the years.


----------



## bjoiner (Feb 25, 2008)

DarrinGreene said:


> One way is to shoot trap/skeet/clays all spring/summer where you don't use the safety on your gun because it's only loaded while in the shooting cage. It gets very easy to forget turning the safety on come hunting season. You can get lazy at your overall gun handling also, since the guns are always unloaded with open actions once someone leaves shooting position.
> 
> Just something I've observed over the years.


Y'all don't use the safety when shooting trap/skeet/clays? You would be hung down here.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

HuntEmUp, glad you are ok! Wowsers! Judges ought to be banned from judging. Period. Where were the handlers in this, and why weren't they complaining?

As for use of layout blinds, boats, etc... I think they are fun and do add realism, and to some extent DO test the trained abilities of a dog (to work in and out of a boat, to work while their owner/handler is some distance away, etc).


----------



## freezeland (Nov 1, 2012)

DarrinGreene said:


> One way is to shoot trap/skeet/clays all spring/summer where you don't use the safety on your gun because it's only loaded while in the shooting cage. It gets very easy to forget turning the safety on come hunting season. You can get lazy at your overall gun handling also, since the guns are always unloaded with open actions once someone leaves shooting position.
> 
> Just something I've observed over the years.


This explains the possible absence of one of two conscious decisions to discharge a firearm. Thanks.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

fishduck said:


> There was a shot fired in an unsafe direction. AKC/HRC/NAHRA doesn't make any difference. It is a sobering lesson that safety should always be the number one consideration.





When it comes to the bottom line your are absolutely correct but if it's done because one certain venue or judge that wants to be know for realistic test set ups then yes it does make a difference. BUT then again I wouldn't allow someone shooting from behind me when I'm hunting either. I have heard sooo many times from people that prefer one venue over another because it is more realistic. People need to get over that. If you want realistic go hunting. If you don't like the manufactured setup stay home.


----------



## Raymond Little (Aug 2, 2006)

Atleast once i have been asked to throw the flyer from left to right by the judge who then asked me to make sure we didn't shoot toward the gun station positioned directly across from the flyer station Same judge also told me he had thrown hundreds of flyers and it was entirely possible to throw and shoot the flyer as he wanted without any safety issue.


----------



## Raymond Little (Aug 2, 2006)

Bubba said:


> Something for those that want to put the "Hunt" back in Hunt tests.
> 
> Just throw the chickens where the dogs don't want to go regards.
> 
> Bubba


Is it really that simple?;-)


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

Raymond Little said:


> Is it really that simple?;-)


Yes.

And to count to 10. Yes.


----------



## nogie1717 (Sep 15, 2014)

freezeland said:


> Please educate me how a accidental discharge occurs. I'm not trying to be a smarta$$ or provoke a confrontational response. I'm just trying to understand how it occurs since a few people have made the statement "accidental discharge" in this thread. IMO there is a conscious decision to set a firearms safety to the fire position and another to place one's finger inside the trigger guard. That is not accidental.


I'm thinking that it is a matter of semantics, but I get what you're saying. Kind of like you can't "accidentally" get a girl pregnant. Here's what Webster says - an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.

A kid was road hunting here in SD a few years back. Anyway, he knocked a bird down and it landed on private property. So, he sets his gun on the ground, he and dog retrieve bird, and when they get back to the road, dog steps on gun simultaneously releasing safety and firing gun directly into owners groin. Accident? Sure, but probably more negligent as he left a loaded firearm lying on the ground.


----------



## OTIS SANDERS (Apr 21, 2015)

DarrinGreene said:


> One way is to shoot trap/skeet/clays all spring/summer where you don't use the safety on your gun because it's only loaded while in the shooting cage. It gets very easy to forget turning the safety on come hunting season. You can get lazy at your overall gun handling also, since the guns are always unloaded with open actions once someone leaves shooting position.
> 
> Just something I've observed over the years.


never understood the under educated whom say a break gun is safer...


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

OTIS SANDERS said:


> never understood the under educated whom say a break gun is safer...


its because a breaking gun can't go off, if its broke open. and its pretty easy to tell from several yards away.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Doug Main said:


> its because a breaking gun can't go off, if its broke open. and its pretty easy to tell from several yards away.


^^^^ this ^^^^^^^


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

Hope we hear from HuntEmUp. Probably if it were me, my hands would still be so unsteady I'd still be unable to type a couple of days later. [email protected] That sounded terrible.


----------



## Tom. P. (Oct 20, 2010)

Did I read that right? Gunners with LIVE rounds shooting OVER handler and Dog??!!
How does that even begin to come about? Surely I'm missing some info here. If not one word LUNACY !


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

freezeland said:


> Please educate me how a accidental discharge occurs. I'm not trying to be a smarta$$ or provoke a confrontational response. I'm just trying to understand how it occurs since a few people have made the statement "accidental discharge" in this thread. IMO there is a conscious decision to set a firearms safety to the fire position and another to place one's finger inside the trigger guard. That is not accidental.


I had an old O/U that I used as a truck gun. It had a rough life and was shot a LOT.
It eventually got to, the point where sometimes the upper barrel would discharge when you closed it.. Had it fixed and it lasted about a year and the same problem sporadically occurred.
That IMHO was an accidental discharge Also had a friend thatrt had an old Rem Sportsman 58, that the firing pin would sometimes release when the action was closed. Accidental discharge IMHO. 

Both guns went into a bonfire


----------



## Raymond Little (Aug 2, 2006)

While we are spinning wheels on the judges, my next question is where was the Hunt Test Committee??????????
They have the final say in any test set up so had this become a fatality, criminal and civil awards/penalties would surely apply to them to a greater extent than the judges IMO.
Where's Barrister Ted when we need him?


----------



## OTIS SANDERS (Apr 21, 2015)

Doug Main said:


> its because a breaking gun can't go off, if its broke open. and its pretty easy to tell from several yards away.


I can see from a long ways away when a pump gun is pulled back and the handle partially covers the breach. it does require you look at it. You can also keep the barrel more easily pointed in a safe direction when closing the chamber. Often, the safety on a pump gun is not as easily moved into the firing position as many break guns.


----------



## freezeland (Nov 1, 2012)

mjh345 said:


> I had an old O/U that I used as a truck gun. It had a rough life and was shot a LOT.
> It eventually got to, the point where sometimes the upper barrel would discharge when you closed it.. Had it fixed and it lasted about a year and the same problem sporadically occurred.
> That IMHO was an accidental discharge Also had a friend thatrt had an old Rem Sportsman 58, that the firing pin would sometimes release when the action was closed. Accidental discharge IMHO.
> 
> Both guns went into a bonfire


I would chalk up both of those firearms discharging without purposely pulling the trigger to mechanical failure. They should not have been used again until repaired, or they should have been destroyed as you did.


----------



## freezeland (Nov 1, 2012)

nogie1717 said:


> I'm thinking that it is a matter of semantics, but I get what you're saying. Kind of like you can't "accidentally" get a girl pregnant. Here's what Webster says - an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.
> 
> A kid was road hunting here in SD a few years back. Anyway, he knocked a bird down and it landed on private property. So, he sets his gun on the ground, he and dog retrieve bird, and when they get back to the road, dog steps on gun simultaneously releasing safety and firing gun directly into owners groin. Accident? Sure, but probably more negligent as he left a loaded firearm lying on the ground.


Neither. Stupidity is a better description.


----------



## gdgnyc (May 4, 2009)

Kelly Greenwood said:


> So we almost lost HuntEmUp at a test today. Judges had handler honor in layout blind placed in front of a holding blind. From behind holding blind they threw a duck and shot it. Not sure exactly what happened but there was suddenly a hole in the holding blind and a hole in the ground 2 feet to the side of HuntEmUp. Luckily the dog was on the other side or it would have been shot. Needless to say HuntEmUp was a bit upset and there was much yelling at judges and the gunner.
> Hopefully this will serve as a reminder Irgun safety and safety in planning out gun station placement in relation to handlers and others..
> Some setups while great tests are not practical or safe. The first and last question asked of any setup should be is it safe for all the people and for the dogs.
> And while the ultimate responsability rests with the gunners and the judges everyone at the test should be looking at safety issues and not be afraid to speak up. Handlers are usually very good about pointing out dog safety issues.
> ...


Sorry to say this but I believe a truly experienced hunter would probably not set this up. Someone in front of the gun? How do you know what that handler will do? BTW, relevant to this, there are no hunting accidents anymore in NY. After all, hunters have taken a hunter safety course which covers preventing something like this from happening.


----------



## Mike Sale (Feb 1, 2011)

I haven't been doing this nearly as long as some of you have, But I have never seen the hunt test committee come out to every series of every stake for the whole weekend and approve every setup. Is this something that is supposed to be done at every test ? I mean there is usually a member of the committee working at every stake but as far as them approving every setup, Is this in the rules somewhere ? Not trying to be argumentative at all, just trying to get educated.


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

Mike Sale said:


> I haven't been doing this nearly as long as some of you have, But I have never seen the hunt test committee come out to every series of every stake for the whole weekend and approve every setup. Is this something that is supposed to be done at every test ? I mean there is usually a member of the committee working at every stake but as far as them approving every setup, Is this in the rules somewhere ? Not trying to be argumentative at all, just trying to get educated.


HRC tests by rule must be approved by the hunt test committee.


----------



## Rose's Mom (May 31, 2013)

Raymond Little said:


> While we are spinning wheels on the judges, my next question is where was the Hunt Test Committee??????????
> They have the final say in any test set up so had this become a fatality, criminal and civil awards/penalties would surely apply to them to a greater extent than the judges IMO.
> Where's Barrister Ted when we need him?


The gunners would see themselves dragged into this at a much higher extent than anyone. And they also have the most to lose. They should have refused to shoot in the setup.


----------



## Brad B (Apr 29, 2004)

Mike Sale said:


> I haven't been doing this nearly as long as some of you have, But I have never seen the hunt test committee come out to every series of every stake for the whole weekend and approve every setup. Is this something that is supposed to be done at every test ? I mean there is usually a member of the committee working at every stake but as far as them approving every setup, Is this in the rules somewhere ? Not trying to be argumentative at all, just trying to get educated.


All clubs are different of course but at our events there's at least one committee member at each stake. Not by brilliant design but because there's barely enough of us to work the test and we all wear different hats.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

HRC and AKC committee authority is different.


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Thomas D said:


> HRC and AKC committee authority is different.


True Tom, but they committee in an AKC test can step in if conditions are deemed unsafe. They cannot inpact the test set up unless safety is an issue.


----------



## Raymond Little (Aug 2, 2006)

Thomas D said:


> HRC and AKC committee authority is different.


Guess so Tom since I cannot find it anywhere in the hunt test committees obligations that the safety and welfare of the contestants and participants should be of utmost importance.
Maybe I'm in the slow reading group but planning the judges supper should be way down the list of jobs the hunt test committee is charged with.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

I have seen a handler challenge the safety of a setup. The akc committee was called out, they reviewed the setup and told the judges to do something else.

I would like to hear from someone that was at the test. If the events are described accurately, akc committee and everyone involved needs to be admonished strongly and some remedial action taken.


----------



## Karen Klotthor (Jul 21, 2011)

Wayne Nutt said:


> I have seen a handler challenge the safety of a setup. The akc committee was called out, they reviewed the setup and told the judges to do something else.


This is what should have happened before the test dog ran. AKC does want the committee to approve but they do not have much say other than safety. Clubs need to educate their hunt committee on how to look at a test. If clubs have a lot of newer members, and they volunteer to be on the committee, someone needs to work with them. All handlers should go to a judges/handler seminar at least once.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Most likely I shouldn't touch this thread. Still as I believe a bunch of handlers-friends got really upset and had to vent... which is fine. Already got that out of my system  I am OK, a little unsteady getting up, from the layout blind but fine. It was actually a very fun test, the scenario could've been done completely safely. But for one thing, which I definitely wasn't aware of, The popper gun was not in a stand and being hand-held, so the guy who had never worked a hunt test before the weekend; was loading, quacking, throwing, and shooting. All the time juggling a gun, shells, a duck call and a (hand thrown) bird. Thus he ended up grabbing the gun by the stock, bumped the trigger, and the blast cone expanded in the dust beside me, deafening sound got to love those loud blanks, sure got some powder behind them. It was a blank load, but at 10-15ft. that can still kill yah. Most likely wouldn't be corresponding,with you nice people, today if I had been 6inches to the right Glad the dog wasn't on that side. So very Unacceptable but a lesson to be learned, popper guns need to be in stands, workers need to be trained that even if we are firing blanks they can still do a lot of damage. Still it is most likely if you have a few more experienced workers, which i know everyone is short on these days; then you don't have one new guy trying to do everything; because this is when accidents can occur. The long and short of it is please judges, workers, etc. pay attention to where those gun even popper guns are pointing and that they are secured at all times. Be careful out there people.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

A long time ago an experienced akc judge, Bill Medcalf, when doing a safety lecture would take a field trial popper and shoot a piece of sheetrock to demonstrate the damage a popper would do. A sizeable hole as I recall.

This sure sounds like an akc test in CA.


----------



## NCShooter (Dec 6, 2012)

The "accidental" discharges that I have witnessed involved a new shooter shooting the ground on a skeet field and an "unloaded' gun going off. We can argue the "accidental" part, but the fact is that due to good muzzle control there was no damage. 
I shoot sporting clays with a gun that has the safety locked off. As long as you practice muzzle direction safety, it is not an issue. It is also not loaded until in the box ready to shoot.
As we teach in hunter safety, a safety is a mechanical device and as with all mechanical devices can fail. The muzzle pointed in a safe direction always works.
NCShooter


----------



## Billie (Sep 19, 2004)

NEVER NEVER NEVER put a live or popper gun behind anyone. Thats rule of hunting too- you dont have someone walk in front of your shotgun! Wow--- So glad nobody was killed... unbelievable story.


----------



## Karen Klotthor (Jul 21, 2011)

Hunt'Emup, so glad you are ok. The OP make it sound like the flyer station , All guns that are not at a flyer station should be in a stand and pointed away from everyone. Test would not have been that unsafe other than way too loud from the popper.


----------



## canadahunter61 (Mar 19, 2013)

An accidental discharge means the gun just went off all by its self for no reason at all. It was just setting there loaded and went bang. I have been hunting and training in Law Enforcement for about 35 years now. Have over 1000 hours training people and supervised around a million rounds down range. I have never seen a accidental discharge. Now I have seen many negligent discharges. Analyzed them all and guess what. They were all related to the operator. Be it dropping a weapon, putting the booger picker on the trigger to early or what ever. something made it go bang. That is negligence. Just wanted to clarify that there really is no such a thing as accidental discharge. It just makes the negligent person feel better.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

AKC and HRC committees both look at safety. AKC safety and legal. HRC takes it further regarding the test itself.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> ..... Be careful out there people.


x2!! And another happy you are not hurt.
SO.. did your dog stay?


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Mike Sale said:


> I haven't been doing this nearly as long as some of you have, But I have never seen the hunt test committee come out to every series of every stake for the whole weekend and approve every setup. Is this something that is supposed to be done at every test ? I mean there is usually a member of the committee working at every stake but as far as them approving every setup, Is this in the rules somewhere ? Not trying to be argumentative at all, just trying to get educated.


on the afternoon of the day before the test when the committee shows the judges the grounds they will use the set up is looked at by all, or should be. the niftyer judges even come up with a couple options for each location to help expect the unexpected.


----------



## Kelly Greenwood (Dec 18, 2008)

Ken Bora said:


> x2!! And another happy you are not hurt.
> SO.. did your dog stay?


The dog was steady and did get a pass. And HuntEmUp titled 2 other dogs that day. Of course the dog being run was 6 and has MH,HRCH,GMHR and more importantly gets 175-200 ducks each season..


----------



## Pat Puwal (Dec 22, 2004)

We lived in CA for 35 yrs. and we ran a lot of field trials there. This was in the days before hunt tests. The "almost" shot handler story really gave me the chills. Thank goodness no one was injured. If anyone is ever seriously injured or killed at a hunt test in a state like California, it will be the beginning of the end for all field trials and hunt tests. Safety should be key in setting up and placement of any and all guns and I hope that word gets out loud and clear.


----------



## Centerfield Retrievers (Jan 28, 2007)

I'd like Kelly or Hunt 'Em Up to clarify where the event was? I was at the only AKC Hunt Test in CA that I'm aware of, all weekend, and never heard a word of this happening there, nor did the HT Chair, because I just asked.


----------



## duk4me (Feb 20, 2008)

Well there is a question that begs to be answered.


----------



## Kelly Greenwood (Dec 18, 2008)

It was in AZ and it wasn't an AKC test


----------



## Centerfield Retrievers (Jan 28, 2007)

Thank you for clarifying that it was not the club and judges in CA before more assumptions were made.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

So it was a NAHRA test.


----------



## gdgnyc (May 4, 2009)

canadahunter61 said:


> An accidental discharge means the gun just went off all by its self for no reason at all. It was just setting there loaded and went bang. I have been hunting and training in Law Enforcement for about 35 years now. Have over 1000 hours training people and supervised around a million rounds down range. I have never seen a accidental discharge. Now I have seen many negligent discharges. Analyzed them all and guess what. They were all related to the operator. Be it dropping a weapon, putting the booger picker on the trigger to early or what ever. something made it go bang. That is negligence. Just wanted to clarify that there really is no such a thing as accidental discharge. It just makes the negligent person feel better.


I taught a hunter safety class and among the students was an NYPD detective. He said exactly what you are saying.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

You guys are going off the deep end with this "accidental" bs.

Ever spill a glass of milk? Was it an accident? Or did you do it on purpose?

Give it a rest. Everyone knows that there are no true accidents. Glasses of milk don't just spontaneously turn over. Somebody wasn't paying attention, was careless, etc. in every accident of any kind and all accidents are preventable. This, like most accidents, took several people being careless and irresponsible. The judges out the handler in danger and the gunner in position to fail. The gunner was careless, and the handlers were stupid for sitting down in front of a gunner. Only innocent person here was the poor dog.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

Most "accidents" are the result of a chain of mistakes. Stuff happens and it is the judges' responsibility to make sure that one error does not result in injury. That's why I opined that it was stupid, and an invitation for disaster, to position the handler if front of a gun station - popper or live. The next error was in not making sure that the gun was always in the gun holder and pointed in a safe direction. The next error was with the poor kid in the blind who apparently did not know better. But, if the judges' had not made the primary and secondary errors, the handler would not have been in danger. Other than his hearing. 

As to guns in gun stands - I was at a test years past when two young boys were working a popper gun station. They had a properly working gun stand but for whatever reason - boys being boys - did not use it. One of the boys, in a split second of carelessness, blew off his friend's kneecap. At another test I made a stupid mistake in a setup when we positioned a "bubba gunner" to the right of the handler - 15 feet or so. Bubba was supposed to fire to the right, away from the handler, and was supposed to only have primer loads. Yes. On one run he aimed towards the thrown bird, not directly at the handler but close enough, and somehow, and only in that instant, had pulled a full popper load out of the bag of shells. Rang handler's bell and scared the s*** out of me. Changed the setup, found a gun stand and apologized profusely to the bell-rung handler. So, yes, I'm anal about gun safety. And always talk to the workers myself to make sure they know to keep guns in stands. Always make sure the live gunners have a specifically defined safe field of fire. Always make sure other workers know to stay down and not look towards the live gun station when fliers are shot. Earplugs, hats, safety glasses for gun stations. Etc., etc. 
I'm very happy the handler and dog were not injured. And thank the OP for posting the incident. It's a sobering reminder that safety is everyone's responsibility. 
Stuff happens. Be careful. 
End of rant. 

Bob Swift


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

Well... here's the distinction. I learned it when I was driving my dad's car and hit another car in a parking lot. When I came home and told him what happened, I said... "Dad... I didn't mean to do it!" And he told me... "Yes, but you didn't mean NOT to do it." 

Hospitalized patients get killed with medication errors too often. I taught nursing students for many years and used my dad's adage when supervising them giving meds.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

Wayne Nutt said:


> A long time ago an experienced akc judge, Bill Medcalf, when doing a safety lecture would take a field trial popper and shoot a piece of sheetrock to demonstrate the damage a popper would do. A sizeable hole as I recall.
> 
> This sure sounds like an akc test in CA.


Wayne... that's what our gun captain does with our teen workers before each of our HT's. He uses an apple and a popper blows it to pieces.


----------



## HuntinDawg (Jul 2, 2006)

I'm glad that neither HuntEmUp nor any dogs nor anyone else was injured.

If it turns out that it wasn't an HRC test after all, will there be any apologies from those who jumped to that conclusion? I doubt it.




Wayne Nutt said:


> A long time ago an experienced akc judge, Bill Medcalf, when doing a safety lecture would take a field trial popper and shoot a piece of sheetrock to demonstrate the damage a popper would do. A sizeable hole as I recall.
> 
> This sure sounds like an akc test in CA.


I have seen this demonstrated a number of times over the years, primarily at Old South HRC training days or events except they used an aluminum can. The damage was impressive. I don't know about the lethality at any particular distance but those things, although they have their place, should be treated just like regular ammo.


----------



## Swack (Nov 23, 2011)

In my early years of HRC hunt tests they used popper loads, but in recent years area HRC clubs have gone to primer loads. I think it was a great change. Popper loads are designed so a dog can hear them at the line when the gunner in a field trial is up to hundreds of yards distant in the field. They are LOUD for a reason! But when they're used at the line, often with multiple gunners and dogs in the immediate vicinity they are TOO LOUD! Primer loads are easier on the ears (both human and canine) and less likely to cause lethal injury. Maybe other organizations should consider the change.

Realistic to a point regards,

Swack


----------



## Labs (Jun 18, 2008)

Kelly Greenwood said:


> So we almost lost HuntEmUp at a test today. Judges had handler honor in layout blind placed in front of a holding blind. From behind holding blind they threw a duck and shot it. Not sure exactly what happened but there was suddenly a hole in the holding blind and a hole in the ground 2 feet to the side of HuntEmUp. Luckily the dog was on the other side or it would have been shot. Needless to say HuntEmUp was a bit upset and there was much yelling at judges and the gunner.
> Hopefully this will serve as a reminder Irgun safety and safety in planning out gun station placement in relation to handlers and others..
> Some setups while great tests are not practical or safe. The first and last question asked of any setup should be is it safe for all the people and for the dogs.
> And while the ultimate responsability rests with the gunners and the judges everyone at the test should be looking at safety issues and not be afraid to speak up. Handlers are usually very good about pointing out dog safety issues.
> ...


Easily corrected by placing the gun in a gun stand for operation.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

Labs said:


> Easily corrected by placing the gun in a gun stand for operation.


Nope. I disagree. Apparently there was a gun stand in the blind, but the bird boy was, for whatever or no reason, not using it. More important, the gun station was placed behind the working dog and handler. 
Like only depending on the safety to prevent negligent discharge of a firearm, solely relying on a gun stand to prevent a debilitating injury or death is gross negligence. Move the gun station to a safe distance. Instruct the bird boy/gunner on the proper use of the gun stand. Instruct and insist on proper field of fire management. Monitor the situation constantly. The gun stand is only one piece of the puzzle.


----------



## Troy Tilleraas (Sep 24, 2010)

2 people in a station where marks are produced, should be a minimum, then assuring the gun stand is used. To expect a duck call, a bird thrown, a shot fired and then retire? IMO that is asking a lot of some since most cant get up and down out of a layout blind anymore... Yes the gun should not come directly behind the working dog, that can easily be moved off to the side and get the same effect.


----------



## Labs (Jun 18, 2008)

Good Dogs said:


> Nope. I disagree. Apparently there was a gun stand in the blind, but the bird boy was, for whatever or no reason, not using it. More important, the gun station was placed behind the working dog and handler.
> Like only depending on the safety to prevent negligent discharge of a firearm, solely relying on a gun stand to prevent a debilitating injury or death is gross negligence. Move the gun station to a safe distance. Instruct the bird boy/gunner on the proper use of the gun stand. Instruct and insist on proper field of fire management. Monitor the situation constantly. The gun stand is only one piece of the puzzle.


Well, not having one and having one and not using it is the same damn thing. Like I said, easily corrected by placing the gun in a gun stand for operation. What's to disagree with? The test is just safe gun handling and common sense, but I'm don't gonna sit here and spell out every detail for you. If a judge can't set up a safe test, he has no business judging. 

This ain't rocket science regards


----------



## rookie (Sep 22, 2003)

Bubba said:


> Something for those that want to put the "Hunt" back in Hunt tests.
> 
> Just throw the chickens where the dogs don't want to go regards.
> 
> Bubba


Bubba Why do you have to have to inject common sense into this thread!


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Good Dogs said:


> Nope. I disagree. Apparently there was a gun stand in the blind, but the bird boy was, for whatever or no reason, not using it. More important, the gun station was placed behind the working dog and handler.
> Like only depending on the safety to prevent negligent discharge of a firearm, solely relying on a gun stand to prevent a debilitating injury or death is gross negligence. Move the gun station to a safe distance. Instruct the bird boy/gunner on the proper use of the gun stand. Instruct and insist on proper field of fire management. Monitor the situation constantly. The gun stand is only one piece of the puzzle.


Agree 100%, Bob. In 30 years I have seen birds come from behind the WD or HD but never a gunshot.
As a group we need to refuse to run unsafe tests either for handler or dog. Contact the committee and get them involved also. Seems this is happening more and more. Wonder why?


----------



## Joe Kuczynski (Jul 10, 2008)

Quote Originally Posted by Wayne Nutt View Post 

A long time ago an experienced akc judge, Bill Medcalf, when doing a safety lecture would take a field trial popper and shoot a piece of sheetrock to demonstrate the damage a popper would do. A sizeable hole as I recall.

Bob Larsen used a small watermelon the size of someone's head. He also would shoot a water bottle at point blank range with a starter pistol to show how much damage they can do. I understand that Dave Moser has the sock from a bird boy who shot himself in the foot displayed as a graphic reminder to everyone.


----------



## DEDEYE (Oct 27, 2005)

Joe Kuczynski said:


> Quote Originally Posted by Wayne Nutt View Post
> 
> A long time ago an experienced akc judge, Bill Medcalf, when doing a safety lecture would take a field trial popper and shoot a piece of sheetrock to demonstrate the damage a popper would do. A sizeable hole as I recall.
> 
> Bob Larsen used a small watermelon the size of someone's head. He also would shoot a water bottle at point blank range with a starter pistol to show how much damage they can do. I understand that Dave Moser has the sock from a bird boy who shot himself in the foot displayed as a graphic reminder to everyone.


Our clubs do a demonstration also of what can happen with a popper fun. This story is nuts, and I can't believe the people putting on the test set guns up behind the handler. I am quite sure the judges will live with the shame of what almost happened for a long time. All I could think of when I saw this post was WTF!


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

Joe Kuczynski said:


> Quote Originally Posted by Wayne Nutt View Post
> 
> Bob Larsen used a small watermelon the size of someone's head. He also would shoot a water bottle at point blank range with a starter pistol to show how much damage they can do. I understand that Dave Moser has the sock from a bird boy who shot himself in the foot displayed as a graphic reminder to everyone.


Many, many years ago, I attended an HRC event in central Georgia. I met several folks I knew from all over the country that were in Atlanta at a business conference. Our group was running about 5 dogs in Started though we had about 15 visitors ... big crowd for a Started test. While we were standing and chatting, a judge, first time judging, decided to put on the popper load and Coke can demo for the whole crowd. He talked a good bit, more than was needed in fact, and then turned to the Coke can about 10 feet away sitting on a log. He shot once and the can responded as it should. Then, holding the gun pointed in front of him, he turned and swept the entire crowd. The 15 of us hit the ground. As he finished the sweep, he paused and asked what we were doing. A friend politely (hint, hint, clue, clue) pointed out what he'd done.


----------

