BS: Killing things for fun

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Aug 15 - 04:26 AM

In the UK back in the 19070's dentistry was a common second choice for people who didn't get into medical school, but a first choice for many of course.

In the UK dentists (dental surgeons) and vetinary surgeona are not 'Dr'. In the UK hospital surgeons all have the tile 'Mr'.

It's just a word. It's the letters after the name that carry the information on qualifications, but not much else other than an income well above the median .

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Aug 15 - 03:00 AM

sheesh, Guest/Patsy. A dentist IS a doctor.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 06:17 PM

According to the Daily Telegraph, a 68-year-old gynaecological oncologist and surgeon from Pennsylvania killed an unidentifed lion in an illegal hunt in April this year, close to where Cecil was killed.

It would seem that both dentists and doctors are capable of being wannabe warriors. I'm sure that this can be said for any trade or profession. All you need is enough money to pay/bribe your way onto the killing grounds.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 05:39 PM

There is a train of thought that many dentists are wannabe doctors who never quite made it. If that is the case maybe it made him feel good and important when he killed Cecil. Just a thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 03:52 PM

At certain times of the year, great humongous clouds of starlings roost on the girders and struts of two high bridges in Seattle, one the Interstate 5 bridge, and the other, the Aurora Avenue (Highway 99) bridge, both going over the Lake Washington Ship Canal.

Starlet droppings (tons thereof!) are very corrosive and, in time, could seriously damage the supporting structures of the bridges. Setting off loud fireworks worked to the extent that the birds would take to the air and scatter, but after a bit, they would come right back.

Finally, without fanfare, knowing the animal rights folks and bird fanciers would howl their heads off, the powers that be began supplying the starlings with poisoned food. That seemed to get rid of the problem.

That wasn't "killing for fun." Drastic, perhaps, but preferable to finding yourself suddenly looking past your hood ornament as you and dozens of other cars find yourselves heading for Lake Union far below….

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Aug 15 - 07:54 AM

and 1.1 million European starlings

And a good thing, too!

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 11:44 PM

As horrid as those stats are is it's not killing things for 'fun'.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST,sweet pea
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 11:32 PM

http://www.newsweek.com/us-government-killed-600-monkeys-450-ottearlings-and-lot-other-323528released its animal "kill list."

Over the last fiscal year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture euthanized or otherwise killed 2.7 million animals from 319 species. Some it dispatched intentionally, others were accidentally killed—perhaps caught in traps meant for other species.

Included on the list are 601 monkeys (209 patas monkeys and 392 rhesus, both considered invasive species), 454 river otters (64 were killed intentionally, 390 were killed by accident), 580 black bears, 2,960 foxes from five species and 1.1 million European starlings

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 07:46 PM

Things don't "move on". The way people in general look at the world changes, for good or evil. It's very much swings and roundabout. Or as Bob Dylan put it, "the wheel's still in spin". It's always in spin, always has been, always will be.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 04:23 PM

didn't one of our previous Presidents ... Teddy Roosevelt ... give us the example that he wished us to emulate to become a "real man".

Yeah - a hundred and twenty five years ago. Things have moved on in the interim.....

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 05:57 AM

I think you are mistaken that people are conflating two things. One thing they have in common is having respect and compassion for animals, or lacking it, or knowingly or unknowingly making compromises over it. Another is that some hunting is for food.

It is not just the hunters' attitudes to animals that are relevant, but our own. To have a debate those things are going to come into it unless we are just going to agree or disagree that people like the man who killed Cecil are bad people.

I think, the main irrelevances that creeps into this discussions like this are other aspects of the hunter. We think the man who killed Cecil is a 'bad person' because we give some thought to Cecil. That he is rich and/or American and/or a gun owner and/or a dentist should be irrelevant.

But the people he has to hide from include people who think it relevant that the deer hunters who disgust them are rich Dutch or German people, the UK foxhunting objectors who are really fighting a class war against the toffs and vegetarians who don't think animals should be killed at all.

If these aspects are to be excluded then it is mainly posts like the one from "Musket not smiling" that are on topic. Though that is needlessly obscure - even to people in the UK mention of Retford won't mean much straight off.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 04:37 AM

No Ake, I was questioning why people conflate killing for food with killing for 'fun'. And you've just done it again.

There is shame in much of what goes on in our world, but it's impossible to consider and deal with every issue at the same time. 'Whataboutery' of the kind you and others are indulging in here does nothing to address the issue under discussion on this thread which, as I pointed out earlier, is 'Killing things for fun'.

That's 'Fun', not 'Food'. If you wish to discuss the rights and wrongs of killing for food, please feel free to start a new thread.

I made no 'suggestion' that you're a TC - I asked a general, rhetorical question, and you assumed it referred directly to you. Personally, I don't necessarily believe you're a TC (although your apparent inability to differentiate between 'fun' and 'food' does raise questions in my mind) - I do believe you to be devious and disingenuous, yes - but if the TC cap appeals, who am I to try to prevent you from wearing it? Be my guest.

I have no intention of becoming part of the 'Akenaton, Jim 'n' Keith Revue', so this is my final word.

Carry on.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 04:05 AM

In answer to BWM who charmingly suggests that I am a "TC".

I am totally against "killing for fun", these people disgust me. We see many in Scotland hunting deer.....mostly Dutch and German who pay a lot of cash for hunting trips and of course contributing to the economy.   They have an argument that the deer are being "culled" to improve the strength of the herds and that they mainly take older beasts or those with infirmities.
That being said many animals themselves kill for fun.....have you ever seen the inside of a chicken coop after Mr Fox has visited....they kill everything that moves, its like a slaughter house, heads, legs feathers everywhere.....yet in many cases they eat nothing, or carry away one carcase.

The point I was making Mr BWM.....(look, no TC), is that if you are really worried about animal cruelty start looking at the way our chicken and meat is produced and processed. Our righteous anger over what we see as a privileged minority "enjoying themselves(fox hunting), tends to obscure the real shame in how we treat animals.

Another smokescreen!.....just like "equality" really.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST,Musket not smiling
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 03:14 AM

Problem is, BWM.. I think I do understand the mentality to a degree.

You see, I used to be involved in the forensic end of mental health and met many people who hunt and retain trophies.

Most of those I met, mainly down the road in Rampton but elsewhere in my work, have the honesty of a mental block where they just don't understand it to be wrong. Those doing it to animals have the same mindset, it's just that we don't give them accompanied shopping trips in Retford or get galleries to display their art.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Ebbie
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 03:02 AM

Tonight I channel-surfed past a hunting channel- but I saw the blurb below: Hunters compete for drawing 'first-blood'.

Such fun.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Deckman
Date: 05 Aug 15 - 01:22 AM

Let's give credit to where credit is due. After all ... it's just the "AMERICAN WAY." As I recall, didn't one of our previous Presidents ... Teddy Roosevelt ... give us the example that he wished us to emulate to become a "real man". bob(deckman)nelson

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Aug 15 - 09:23 PM

A fair number of apologists for this type of trophy hunting have cropped up in the media arguing that the money these serial killers pay to the local authorities gets used for conservation projects, so on balance it's worth it.

I haven't seen the same kind of idea in the case of childsex tourists in places like Thailand, where licensing could help pay for child refuges.

I suspect we'll see the suggestion sooner or later...

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 04 Aug 15 - 03:38 PM

killing for fun and profit - the George Joseph Smith way

https://soundcloud.com/denise_whittle/george-joseph-smith

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Aug 15 - 02:23 PM

Don, I'm with you - I have no problem with the principle of killing for food - I'm a carnivore, after all! But I completely fail to understand the kind of mentality that gets enjoyment from the act of killing.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Aug 15 - 02:09 PM

The problem, Backwoodsman, is that some of the more hard-charging animal rights advocates don't know the difference, and equate the two.

My friend's friend with the record moose head, wasn't hunting for food, he was hunting for trophies. A sort of "head-hunter." Did he eat the rest of the moose? That never came up in the conversation.

I see nothing wrong with hunting or fishing if it's purpose is to put food on the table. A bit more effort involved than buying meat at the supermarket and letting others do the killing for you.

By the way, Barbara and I eat very little meat, but do consume eggs, milk, other animal products. We have a couple of friends who are proudly vegan (no animal products at all). At one holiday dinner, they brought a chocolate cake they were very proud of, made with no eggs, milk, or other animal products at all. We all sat around shoveling it in and politely going "Yum yum!!"

But it was really gag-worthy!!

-----

Another dimension to the "animal rights" aspect: dangerous animals.

I was born and spent my early years (up until age nine) in Pasadena, California. There are black widow spiders there: quite poisonous! Whenever anyone spotted a black widow spider in the house, it called for an all-out hunt armed with fly swatters until we found it and dispatched it!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Aug 15 - 10:22 AM

The thread title is "Killing Things For Fun", not "Killing Things For Food".

Are those who appear to confuse those two issue being deliberately obtuse, or are they just TCs?

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Aug 15 - 05:03 AM

During the foxhunting debate 10 years ago (or whenever it was) I always wondered how many of the "urban left against the toffs" demonstrators went back to the cities and tucked into ham and eggs without thinking about animal welfare.

The smaller numbers in the campaign for the long haul probably are more consistant.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Aug 15 - 04:27 AM

No we don't, we just put the wholesale slaughter of farm animals out of our minds.....because we want cheap food.

One of my sons and his wife, stopped eating meat completely years ago.
now they are disgusted by the sight of packaged supermarket meat.

Many people have no idea what the bloody red lump really is.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Aug 15 - 11:47 PM

I suppose no matter what our own views, some people will always get the thrill of the chase, or the thrill of the kill. Chasing something that moves, dominating it - and then despatching their catch and keeping a trophy. Some anglers sometimes avoid the kill part. Others might want to show their prowess at hitting or catching moving targets with firearms/bows etc.   Isn't it really like the high some get with computer games, but in real life for the few who enjoy that type of thing? We are all primeval animal killers underneath, just the majority of us channel it elsewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: frogprince
Date: 03 Aug 15 - 11:04 PM

Don Firth; ROFLMAO

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Aug 15 - 07:52 PM

I have to agree with Ebbie, back at 01 Aug 15 - 01:46 AM.

When I was a teenager, I used to go fishing in Puget Sound for salmon with my Dad. Dad was born and raised on San Juan Island in the north Puget Sound area, and that was a standard activity up there to put food on the table. We always ate the fish we caught. My Dad was a wizard at broiling salmon steaks in the oven. De-e-e-elicous!! Few things more toothsome than freshly caught salmon.

I had occasion to spend some time in Denver in the mid-Fifties and a friend took me to meet a friend of his. When I walked into the guy's living room, I was astounded at the number and variety of trophy heads he had mounted on the walls. Several heads over the fireplace, but pride of place was across from the fireplace. A huge moose head, complete with a rack that spanned five-and-a half or six feet!

He'd shot it, of course, as he had all the other animals festooning the walls. He proudly announced that it was a record Wyoming moose.

It looked like a locomotive with antlers had crashed through his wall! I would much preferred to have seen a magnificent animal like that roaming free in the wild.

I had another friend who had a Crosman CO2 pellet pistol. One day, there was a plague of flies in his house (someone had left a screen door open, and it was a warm, summer day). He was tired of chasing them with a fly-swatter, but he discovered that the Crosman, loaded with a CO2 cartridge—minus pellets—fired a jet of gas strong enough that, if it would have put a pellet within an inch or two of a fly—at about ten feet—it was strong enough to kill the fly.

He was having a helluvalot of fun sitting in his recliner and taking pot shots at flies.

His wife drew the line when she caught him holding the screen door open to let in more targets….

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 03 Aug 15 - 02:22 PM

I cannot see a justification for killing for fun.

Where killing is necessary (for food or in war) it should be done as humanely as possible.

I cannot accept that killing for religious purposes (some belief systems still do this) as such is justifiable but I am told that every part of the animal (I don't know about whether human sacrifices are still going on for religious purposes) is used. So are such killings as justified (if at all) as if they were for food as such?

I have seen some suggestions that kosher and halal slaughter actually result in the loss of consciousness faster than western stunning and so engender less suffering. I do not know whether that is true but some countries disagree in that they have banned both kosher and halal slaughter.

I am told that animals (for example dogs) slaughtered in African animist belief systems are executed as cleanly as if by the guillotine - the head is off completely in one stroke (usually of a very sharp knife wielded by a very old woman). I am not sure that I believe that.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Aug 15 - 02:18 PM

no me Tarzan! She chitah! umph ! umph!

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Aug 15 - 01:59 PM

You're comparing apples and bananas.

Agreed. But they are responses to GUEST,Camojohn's post above that brought Halal slaughter into it. I am not sure what point Raparree was making but following his suggestion brought me to the phrase The animal must be killed "with respect and compassion"

Respect and compassion is what the sheep I described being killed quickly while grazing received. The personal satisfation of a hunter led to the lion being wounded then trailed for hours before being killed.

I don't know what Camojohn's mention of Cecil having a human name is about. To me it suggests respect on the part of those who enjoyed watching him in life and compassion from those angered by the way of his death.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 03 Aug 15 - 01:08 PM

But those two, whilst they are methods of killing animals, don't involve 'fun'.
The thread, IIUC, is about why some sub-humans get 'fun' out of killing - in particular, killing at a distance with little risk to their own safety.
You're comparing apples and bananas.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Rapparee
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 08:55 PM

I do think that you folks ought to take a look at shechitah, or for that matter the various rituals of "Christian" animal slaughter.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 06:08 PM

if so humanity enjoys myriad disgusting and demeaning things without censure

I see - so that excuses it? Not.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 06:08 PM

The thread title could logically be shortened to 'Killing for Fun' but not 'Killing is Fun'.

The opening post asked the question as to why on earth some people, such as the dentist, think that killing IS fun. As I said then, I am at a loss to understand why. Though it has provoked some interesting discussion, nothing in this thread to date has made it any clearer.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 05:45 PM

No. I think 'things' excludes humans. Regarding animals as 'things' was discussed above.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 05:36 PM

It just occurred to me that the title of this thread can logically be shortened: 'Killing is Fun'.

Yikes.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 04:19 PM

I have seen a sheep killed by having its throat cut. It was calmly eating grass while ceremonial words were said by the men of the community and very dead seconds later. I think it got a better deal than Cecil and was shown more respect by its killers, who then ate it. It may have got a better deal than being loaded onto a trailer and driven for to a modern non-halal slaughterhouse. I am certain it got the quickest death that the community were able to provide.

It was not a particularly nice experience as an observer, but it tasted good.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 02:00 PM

Why Greg, factory farming is practiced on a much larger scale and causes much more stress and cruel treatment.

Is it the "enjoyment" that you object to, if so humanity enjoys myriad disgusting and demeaning things without censure.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 01:23 PM

isn't this just as bad as "enjoying" the killing of animals?

No.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 12:17 PM

The factory farming of animals is disgraceful, but we do it because we can and because we get our food more cheaply by using these methods.

Most people don't even think about how our food is produced, isn't this just as bad as "enjoying" the killing of animals?

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: DMcG
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 07:18 AM

Well, the problem with that stance, Camjojohn (and indeed Eddie1 earlier) is that it ties together things that are not related. One can be in favour or opposed to hunting for fun completely independently to whether one is pro or anti halal methods of killing for food. The only interpretation I can make of the all the opinions about what some horrible unethical hunter has or has not done, are devoid of any moral justification phrase is that you do not think people can object to killing Cecil for fun unless they first object to halal for food, and I see no reason that should be so. Why not, for example, might some people get worked up about Cecil first and only then begin to think about halal?

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 06:37 AM

putting animals through more distress than some 'human-named' animal in Africa More ? How long was Cecil wounded for before being killed. ?

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 05:58 AM

i agree Camojohn - that's shameful way to slaughter animals.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST,Camojohn
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 05:13 AM

We, as a country, have become very civilised over the last half-decade. as such, it is easy to become divorced from any interaction with animals yet retain or culture strong opinions on how other people should interact with them.
Go and look at any discussion about Halal slaughter and you will find vegetarians and lefty-liberals actually defending the practice, simply because the opponents appear to be those who are politically-opposed to them. As far as I am concerned, as long as we allow beef to be killed in this country by having their throats slit whilst still conscious and not stunned before or during the process, all the opinions about what some horrible unethical hunter has or has not done, are devoid of any moral justification. We should all be ashamed that such slaughter is happening 7 days a week here, putting animals through more distress than some 'human-named' animal in Africa, which we couldn't do anything about if we wanted to.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: michaelr
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 04:26 AM

Better than throwing lions to dentists.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 03:34 AM

I imagine that bear baiting and cock fighting generated jobs and money for the local economy but I don't hear much call for their return.

The same goes for throwing Christians to lions, though I suspect that there are some here on Mudcat who would welcome that. ;-)

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Aug 15 - 02:01 AM

Would killing people for another country's 'national interests' (like making more money) count, in this category??

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST,#
Date: 01 Aug 15 - 11:06 PM

The NRA would agree completely, Guest. We do similar in Canada, so you're not alone.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Aug 15 - 10:18 PM

What about us Brits, our shooting and hunting party tradition which the Royals and snobs have always been a part of. Stag/deer Grouse fox. fishing etc. But it generates jobs and money for the local and national economy, so people get up in arms if you suggest banning it altogether. Tourism, jobs and economics always goes further than morals and principles!

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: Greg F.
Date: 01 Aug 15 - 06:53 PM

Ah yes, "The unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible".

Been banned, Bruce, but there's a current move to bring it back.

Subject: RE: BS: Killing things for fun
From: GUEST,#
Date: 01 Aug 15 - 06:42 PM

The still have fox hunts in the UK?