Topic category: Other/General
Still too young.
I’d argue for 16 and this, I can assure you, will start a fairly good discussion when a number of my friends read this.
That’s as it should be because from points and counter points, arguments and rebuttals, there might come a responsible and reasonable law that would help in preventing future tragedies
Are there boys and girls younger than 16 who could be trusted to hunt without adult supervision?
No doubt about it because, in any age group, there are individuals who are more mature, capable, cautious and careful than others.
But you never manage to the exception. You manage to the rule. And, in my experience, the rule tends to be that boys and girls under the age of 16 should hunt under adult supervision.
We allow teenagers to drive cars, but not before they’ve reached a certain age. We allow young men and women to vote, but not before they’ve reached a certain age. We allow young men and women to drink but, again, not before they’ve reached a certain age.
We do this because, from hard experience we’ve learned that to do otherwise invites trouble and all of its ugly friends to mingle freely among us.
Note that nowhere am I saying that 14-year-olds are inherently dangerous or that they would knowingly set out to do things that might harm themselves or others.
It’s just that the part of their brain that says: “Whoa there, remember what nearly happened the last time you tried something like this?” hasn’t been turned on yet because this might be the first time they’re trying something that could have deadly consequences.
I would also offer that there’s a similar reason which explains why insurance rates are sky high for young drivers. Same kids. Same ages. Same switch in the brain not quite thrown yet.
Most of you know that I’m a hunter. I’ve been hunting for more than 30 years and you can bet that I still make mistakes.
Mostly, though, my mistakes have been of the ego-bruising variety. However, all of those “bruises” have combined to make me extremely careful because I know what can come of an ill-considered action. Most 14-year-olds haven’t had the time to gather those bruises and need someone who has to watch over them for a while.
For the past nine years, I’ve also been a Hunter Education instructor and I cringe every time I see a seven or eight-year-old signed up for our class.
I cringe because, on the one hand, I know that most will not pass. The subject matter being taught is often beyond them and it’s a lot to ask of a kid that age to sit through 5 nights of instruction (3 hours per night) and pass both a written and a skills test at the end of it all.
Most often, what we end up with is a youngster in tears who is thoroughly embarrassed and who doesn’t want to go through it all again.
What’s troubled me more, though, are the occasions wherein an 8-year-old manages to pass the course. When that happens, under current law, they can legally go off (though most parents would never allow it) and hunt alone.
Scary stuff that and it begs a separate discussion on a minimum age to be allowed to hunt at all. I favor 12, but I have a good friend who’s an extremely cautious and conscientious hunter who argues (with good and valid points) that I’m being too restrictive.
Still, I don’t understand why the legislature didn’t catch the error when the age restriction to hunt alone was dropped back in 1994.
I don’t understand why they didn’t go back and fix it then, but I’m glad that they’re trying to do it now.
As I said, I think that the minimum age when someone can hunt without adult supervision will likely be set at 14 and that’s far better than what we have now which is nothing. That is, it’s better until you remember that it was a 14-year-old who brought this situation to our attention by mistaking a hiker for a bear.
And that one simple fact is what keeps me hoping for those extra two years.
Larry Simoneaux
Biography - Larry Simoneaux
Larry Simoneaux is a regular columnist for The Everett Herald in Washington state. He is a retired ship driver for the US Navy and NOAA.