The "no excuses" line was what first came to my mind. I'm not a hunter, but I've fired on rifle and pistol ranges many times, and I know that you don't fire except at a properly identified target.

However, after reading everything above I find that I can't entirely buy the anti-Cheney line.

Yes, you have to identify your target and know what is behind it before you shoot. That's why there can never be an excuse for shooting your hunting buddy because you thought you were shooting at a moose. From what gnu says, quail shooting is different. There doesn't seem to be any reason to believe that Mr. Cheney did not identify a quail, or that he was shooting outside of his assigned field of fire. The suggestion is that his hunting partner moved into his zone, without announcing himself. If he was screened by brush or tall grass, he might not have been visible even if he was wearing an orange vest. I believe I read in a newspaper today that the victim was actually hidden.

Shooting too low is of more concern. Obviously, if Mr. Cheney had fired at the correct angle the pellets should have gone right over the other man's head. Still, that seems less reprehensible to me than just blasting away without knowing where you are shooting.

I would also be interested in knowing whether Mr. Cheney had been regularly checking the position of the other hunter, and when was the last time he had checked his position before firing the shot. The answers to those questions would make some difference in assessing his degree of culpability. Unlike some of the people who have posted so far, I don't feel confident in opining about Mr. Cheney without knowing the answers.

One more point. In Texas, to the best of my knowledge, the presumption of innocence still applies. It would be for the prosecution to prove him guilty in a court of law, not for him to prove the opposite.

Finally, if I never hear another witless crack about lawyers from some undereducated jerk, that will be just fine, thank you very much. Guest: the next time you get wrongly charged, my guess is that you will be the first one looking for a good defence counsel who will go toe to toe with the prosecution on your behalf. And if you get convicted, I hope you find an appellate lawyer who will sweat blood for you. So all in all: FOAD!

There. I feel ever so much better now.

CET