I was just coming back to ask if any of these guys have ever tripped and fallen while hunting. If they haven't, they aren't hunting the brutal country that I've come to the conclusion doesn't warrant having a round chambered.
I think it’s foolish to have one in the chamber while hiking around in the mountains. I’ve fallen down and/or ended up with my gun pointing the wrong way too many times. Still hunting, sitting, walking slowly on flat land…of course it makes sense.
Several folks mentioned this being a flat/easy terrain thing, but I still think this takes the emphasis away from the real issue, which imo is whether hunting with a loaded chamber is actually more dangerous than any of the other risks we take AND MANAGE (successfully) while hunting. Is it riskier? Of course. The question is whether its an UNREASONABLE risk. I dont think it is.
The pic below is my literal back yard, its where I rifle hunt by far the most frequently. It’s NOT “brutal”. Its actually pretty typical terrain for most of us along the length of the Appalachians from Alabama to Maine. But, it’s also not flat, and 6” of slick leaves under another 6” of wet snow on a 25-30 degree slope (typical hunting conditions during rifle season for me) will have nearly anyone falling once in a while. For sure I fall occasionally.
It also has pretty low deer density, and tens of thousands of acres of elbow room on public, all of which is completely forested with sub-100-yard visibility, with no concentrated food sources to speak of. Consequently, stand hunting is not the way most people hunt here. Folks put some miles on in order to find deer. Still-hunting, or here in the North tracking in the snow, is the way people hunt because its almost the only option. Neither of those methods tolerates hunting with an empty chamber, because you are always within a very short distance (certainly within 100 yards and often 20-40 yards) before seeing an animal, and shot opportunities are typically a race to make sure its an animal you want to shoot before it spooks, usually lasting only a second or two. The animal is usually aware of your presense, it just hasnt decided if you are a threat yet, so the slightest sound (such as chambering a round) will send the animal running. Hunting with an empty chamber could work here once in a long while, but as a general rule would be nothing short of a waste of time. Therefore, literally no one that Ive ever heard of hunts with an empty chamber here. I would go so far as to say that it really isnt possible to hunt effectively with an empty chamber here. It wasnt until Id been hunting for multiple decades that I even heard of anyone hunting with an empty chamber, and those folks all lived and hunted in the west, and this type of hunting simply wasn't within their experience.
Where Im going is, I do not believe there is any higher incidence of hunting ND’s here than there is in areas where hunting with an empty chamber would be possible. I understand at least a few people have strong opinions on the subject, and Id agree that where its realistically possible it could make sense to simply eliminate an entire source of risk. BUT, in essence those folks drawing such a hard line would have me give up rifle hunting entirely, without data to show that the risk is more than hypothetical. Sure, there is more inherent risk in a loaded gun than an unloaded one, but if it was actually meaningfully riskier there would be data to show it, and I dont think there is. This is in large part because guns also have multiple layers of backups between gun safties, as well as safe handling practices that are drilled into young hunters from before they are allowed to carry a gun at all. In order for an accident to happen its still necessary for multiple things to go wrong at once, AND have the timing be wrong—the odds of all those things happening at the same time is so slim that I think its not nearly the risk as some would like to think. With multiple millions of hunters on the east coast and upper midwest—many of whom hunt forested brushy areas where a loaded chamber is either common or +\- a requirement—there is plenty of data out there…so where is the DATA to show that there is a higher rate of gun-related hunting accidents in ME, NH, VT, NY, PA, WV, VA, TN, GA, NC, MN, WI, AL, etc….than there is in MT, CO, WY, ID, UT, NM, AZ, CA, etc?
My take: Dont be complacent, hunt how it makes sense to you, be aware and manage the risks you take how it makes sense to you, but perhaps walk a day or three in someone else’s shoes and find some data to back up any “lines drawn in the sand”. We take and manage all sorts of risks, this is simply one of them, and we have the tools and training available to manage it…and I believe the data shows we ARE successful in managing it.
Its also worth noting that this style of hunting isnt generally conducive to groups—two is a crowd in this sort of hunting. That certainly doesnt hurt from a safety perspective.
