Bob wrote: “The man was the unfortunate object onto which an already highly aroused rutting bull directed its aggression. Had another person, cyclist, vehicle, or even another bison occupied that same place at that moment, they might well have become the target instead.
“That is one reason wildlife biologists often say that rutting bison are among the most unpredictable large mammals in North America. During the breeding season, their behavior can shift from apparently placid to explosively aggressive with remarkably little obvious provocation.”
We certainly do not disagree with Bob’s analysis, but we need to go further. Especially since the story did not end with the bull leaving the older man alone. As Cowboy State Daily reported: After Flipping 65-Year-Old Man, Angry Bison Went After People In Next Campsite “After an agitated bison flipped a 65-year-old man in Yellowstone last weekend, it charged after another group of campers. The first incident was “only the beginning of the bison’s rage,” said a Colorado man who said the bison targeted a 12-year-old.”
What we don’t see is a discussion of self-defense. Although the NPS has “allowed” firearms in National Parks since 2010, there are restrictions. First, there are the limits due to State and local laws. (In California and other States, forget about it!) Secondly, the law still prohibits people being armed in “federal facilities.” Here starts the problem: is (for example) a campground a “federal facility?” Or is it only the picnic shelters, toilets, and roofed information displays? Ask three different Rangers or staff and we suspect you might get four or five different answers.
But the real key is in that NPS website: “Visitors should not consider firearms as protection from wildlife.” The NPS clearly discourages firearms for self-defense.
Why not? Is our constitutional (and God-given) right to self-defense stamped “null and void” when the wildlife attacking us is located on an NPS-administered piece of federal land? Did not that grandfather have the right to defend himself (and his grandson) against a maddened bull attacking him without him doing anything? Did the other people threatened by that animal have no right to defend themselves?
Of course, bison are “big, fuzzy, cute cows,” right? So would it be okay to use a firearm to defend against a bear attack? An attacking wolf or coyote?” An elk or deer? Mountain lion? A rabid prairie dog? For that matter, consider a rattlesnake!
According to the environists and too many other people, it is bad, even evil, to kill or wound an animal, even in self-defense. Indeed, the NPS has decided to do nothing to this animal: not even relocate him. And we also note that the NPS could improve the protection offered to campers and picnickers by installing bison-proof (or at least, resistant) fencing, cattle guards, and such measures. But though the FedGov and State Departments of Transportation spend hundreds of millions of dollars building tunnels and bridges for wildlife and protect traffic on freeways, such things are not in the NPS budget. And likely opposed by the same tree-huggers.
Keep in mind that the NPS website is not written just to apply to Yellowstone, Wind Cave, or only American bison. Again, we point out, NPS, no matter what the current regime in DC states, is part of the Deep State. Its bureaucrats, its cops, are no less likely to dislike you defending yourself (or others) than any government jackbooted thug.
Lovers of liberty tend to concentrate on human threats which must be countered in self-defense by having and using a firearm. But animals are also threats that must be addressed.
Government should have no power to deny people their right to defend themselves against threats, whether human or animal.
(For readers interested, we suggest visiting the website of a North Dakota bison ranch to learn how to put down a bison bull, hopefully for the dinner table and the robe: https://www.thebisonranch.com/bison). (No endorsement given or implied.)
Follower of Christ Jesus (a christian), Pahasapan (resident of the Black Hills), Westerner, Lover of Liberty, Free-Market Anarchist, Engineer, Army Officer, Husband, Father, Historian, Writer, Evangelist. Successor to Lady Susan (Mama Liberty) at TPOL.
The Price of Liberty 
Our right to defend ourselves – anywhere and against anything
Thanks to Bob Malone (among others) for sharing this video and his thoughts.
The video below is disturbing –
https://www.malone.news/p/sunday-strip-great-balls-of-fire#media-5c9bcab7-1c71-4f36-ad26-1f5ef2a6e203 (Yes, that is a bison bull tossing the man into the air, after chasing him for most of a minute around a clump of trees. The man and his grandson did nothing to create ire in the bull, except be 50-60 feet away (at first, before the bull assaulted them).
Bob wrote: “The man was the unfortunate object onto which an already highly aroused rutting bull directed its aggression. Had another person, cyclist, vehicle, or even another bison occupied that same place at that moment, they might well have become the target instead.
“That is one reason wildlife biologists often say that rutting bison are among the most unpredictable large mammals in North America. During the breeding season, their behavior can shift from apparently placid to explosively aggressive with remarkably little obvious provocation.”
We certainly do not disagree with Bob’s analysis, but we need to go further. Especially since the story did not end with the bull leaving the older man alone. As Cowboy State Daily reported: After Flipping 65-Year-Old Man, Angry Bison Went After People In Next Campsite “After an agitated bison flipped a 65-year-old man in Yellowstone last weekend, it charged after another group of campers. The first incident was “only the beginning of the bison’s rage,” said a Colorado man who said the bison targeted a 12-year-old.”
What we don’t see is a discussion of self-defense. Although the NPS has “allowed” firearms in National Parks since 2010, there are restrictions. First, there are the limits due to State and local laws. (In California and other States, forget about it!) Secondly, the law still prohibits people being armed in “federal facilities.” Here starts the problem: is (for example) a campground a “federal facility?” Or is it only the picnic shelters, toilets, and roofed information displays? Ask three different Rangers or staff and we suspect you might get four or five different answers.
But the real key is in that NPS website: “Visitors should not consider firearms as protection from wildlife.” The NPS clearly discourages firearms for self-defense.
Why not? Is our constitutional (and God-given) right to self-defense stamped “null and void” when the wildlife attacking us is located on an NPS-administered piece of federal land? Did not that grandfather have the right to defend himself (and his grandson) against a maddened bull attacking him without him doing anything? Did the other people threatened by that animal have no right to defend themselves?
Of course, bison are “big, fuzzy, cute cows,” right? So would it be okay to use a firearm to defend against a bear attack? An attacking wolf or coyote?” An elk or deer? Mountain lion? A rabid prairie dog? For that matter, consider a rattlesnake!
According to the environists and too many other people, it is bad, even evil, to kill or wound an animal, even in self-defense. Indeed, the NPS has decided to do nothing to this animal: not even relocate him. And we also note that the NPS could improve the protection offered to campers and picnickers by installing bison-proof (or at least, resistant) fencing, cattle guards, and such measures. But though the FedGov and State Departments of Transportation spend hundreds of millions of dollars building tunnels and bridges for wildlife and protect traffic on freeways, such things are not in the NPS budget. And likely opposed by the same tree-huggers.
Keep in mind that the NPS website is not written just to apply to Yellowstone, Wind Cave, or only American bison. Again, we point out, NPS, no matter what the current regime in DC states, is part of the Deep State. Its bureaucrats, its cops, are no less likely to dislike you defending yourself (or others) than any government jackbooted thug.
Lovers of liberty tend to concentrate on human threats which must be countered in self-defense by having and using a firearm. But animals are also threats that must be addressed.
Government should have no power to deny people their right to defend themselves against threats, whether human or animal.
(For readers interested, we suggest visiting the website of a North Dakota bison ranch to learn how to put down a bison bull, hopefully for the dinner table and the robe: https://www.thebisonranch.com/bison). (No endorsement given or implied.)
Share this:
About TPOL Nathan
Follower of Christ Jesus (a christian), Pahasapan (resident of the Black Hills), Westerner, Lover of Liberty, Free-Market Anarchist, Engineer, Army Officer, Husband, Father, Historian, Writer, Evangelist. Successor to Lady Susan (Mama Liberty) at TPOL.