What People are Reading
- What a very sad and shocking
2 years 29 weeks ago
- Smart Meters
2 years 32 weeks ago
- 100 year old house burns
2 years 32 weeks ago
- Column 2-10 re Treason
2 years 41 weeks ago
- Radical Difference
2 years 42 weeks ago
- This activity is such a
2 years 50 weeks ago
- Okay Great we got a sign!
2 years 50 weeks ago
- Hate Crime a Sad Moment Indeed
3 years 2 days ago
More in Crime
Not-so-good old days
Although there was no formal relationship, the Bridgton News and the Norway Advertiser often ran editorial items that had appeared in the other — especially when the issues were of concern to readers of both publications. One such example follows. From the Bridgton News, as cited in the Norway Advertiser, September 23, 1932.
Thoughtless, Criminal Carelessness
From Bridgton News
The unfortunate accidents which have occurred in this locality recently calls attention to the fact that there is altogether too much promiscuous shooting in the woods and fields at this season of the year when so many people are scattered about on the lake shores and in the nearby woods. Our friends who come from the more thickly settled places are apt to get the idea, with so much "out of doors" in this locality, that there is no danger involved in target practice.
Those not familiar with firearms have little conception of the distance which a bullet, even from a small bore-rifle or pistol, will carry. Reports have reached us of bullets whizzing past, the occupants of boats on some of the lakes, these bullets coming from the adjacent shores. It is dangerous practice and one which should be discouraged.
There are enough places in this locality where one may indulge in target practice with comparatively little danger to the general public, but these places should be selected with care and with due regard to other people who may be wandering about the woods or who may be on the lakes. We were under the impression that there was a state law which forbade the discharge of firearms within a certain distance of a public highway, but we are not able to locate it.
The only statute which seems to bear on this subject is that relative to the possession of firearms by a non-resident in the fields and forests of the state. This statute reads:
"The possession of any firearms in the fields and forests or on the waters or ice of the state by any person who is not a bona fide resident of the state and actually domiciled therein, unless the person having such firearm in possession has in his possession a license duly issued to him and covering the period such firearm is found in his possession, shall be prima facie evidence of hunting in violation of law."
While this statute does not quite core the point in question, it is well for our out of state friends to familiarize themselves with its provisions, as they might find themselves in rather an embarrassing situation, sometimes. But regardless of any law which may or may not bear on this subject directly, there is sufficient statute law, in all probability, to cope with this situation and insofar as possible promiscuous shooting should be curbed before other accidents occur.
Although the particular problems still exist, the incidence of accidental shootings seems to have declined a great deal in the 81 years since that was written. In many ways, this has been due to the strenuous and unceasing efforts of sportsmen's clubs, local police, wardens, selectmen and legislatures as well as unaffiliated but concerned people who reported incidents and demanded official reactions. But as many people who live adjacent to wooded areas can attest, it has not gone away. The sound of gunfire can still be heard, especially on pleasant days and during deer hunting season. And, it's still not unusual to hear of accidental shootings of people, animals of all descriptions - wild, domestic or household pets - as well as road signs, sometimes windows, cars, car windows, sheds, barns, houses and, yes, people.
So all these years later, the headline still stands, as relevant as ever.
As is our custom, we try to exactly reproduce the grammar, spelling, punctuation and style of the original. Commas might appear where least expected and remain absent where we’d expect them if the item was written nowadays. On the other hand, consistency was not considered of utmost importance, so variations of a spelling might appear within one story. In addition, some words were abbreviated differently than today. Where brief explanations of terms are considered necessary, they are presented in brackets  within the quote. Otherwise, explanations appear at the beginning or at the conclusion, without quotes. Parenthesis () used in a quoted passage appeared in the original.