|
09 Mar 09 - 06:23 AM (#2584478) Subject: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Jim Carroll If any proof were needed of the perverted nature of the 'killing for pleasure' mob, surely it is to be found in this piece of obscenity in yesterdays' Sunday Times Jim Carroll BIDDING WAR TO KILL RARE ROE DEER Daniel Foggo AN exceptionally rare white deer nicknamed "Pearl" has been discovered in the Scottish lowlands by a professional hunter, who is now taking bids from people who want to kill it. The white-coated roe-buck, which experts say is not an albino, is so unusual only a handful have been seen in Britain since the end of the second world war. That the deer has now been given what amounts to a death sentence has infuriated animal lovers, who are campaigning to save its life. Kevin Stuart, who has the stalking rights to the 3,000-acre estate in Dumfries and Galloway where the wild deer lives, says he hopes to secure a four-figure sum from a trophy-seeking client to shoot it when the hunting season opens in three weeks. He has already been contacted by people keen to stalk the deer, which could fetch up to £6,000 — four times the price of a normal specimen. The idea 6f having such a rare trophy is exciting the interest of field-sports enthusiasts across Britain and even further afield, and threatening to start a bidding war for the right to shoot it Sporting Rifle magazine is planning to publish a "white roebuck diary", which will count down to its death by detailing sightings and bids by those wishing to kill it. Animal welfare groups have reacted with horror to the prospect of hunters shooting the deer. "It needs a symbolic name — Pearl — because it is rare and beautiful," said Ross Minett of Advocates for Animals. "Most people will be disgusted by the thought that the appearance of such a rare and beautiful animal has prompted a bloodthirsty race to kill it" |
|
09 Mar 09 - 06:28 AM (#2584482) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,Rapaire I hunt and I have no objection to legal, ethical hunting (as defined in the US, I can't speak for other countries). I find this disgusting and obscene. Hunting should be done for food -- and only for food. You should eat what you kill and kill only to eat, not for some 'trophy' or to enlarge your ego or you idea of your phallus. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 06:35 AM (#2584489) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Leadfingers The Poor say " Its a nice day . lets go out and Vandalise something" The Rich say "Its a nice day lets go out and kill something" |
|
09 Mar 09 - 06:42 AM (#2584495) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,Shimrod I recall reading in Dony's Flora of Bedfordshire that a plant called Grass of Parnassus grew only in a single site in the county. Some (so-called) 'botanist' picked them all so that he could claim that he was the "last person to see Grass of Parnassus in Bedfordshire". Some people are such arseholes! |
|
09 Mar 09 - 06:48 AM (#2584498) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: KEVINOAF I agree with rapaire hunting should only be done for food, anything else is totally perveted, where i live ido not permit hunting on my land , this has caused a few problems with the hunting fraternity, when the fing their fire returned. Most of the local gunshops wont sell me ammo now! Isolved this problem by going over to muzzle loading black powder arms and making my own ammo hunting the hunters is much more entertaining than pursuing wild life! |
|
09 Mar 09 - 07:01 AM (#2584510) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: gnu I agree with Rapaire, and, in addition to... "You should eat what you kill and kill only to eat, not for some 'trophy'...", I was taught to return anything not eaten or used to the place it was taken. "Used" does not include antlers and such. They go back too. Only thing I ever kept was some hair that a fisherman friend wanted for tying flies. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 07:30 AM (#2584526) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Sleepy Rosie Jaw droppingly revolting. This story sounds like an impossibly surreal real-world enactment of a fairytale fantasy involving the magical appearance of a rare mythical Unicorn ...and the sadistic lust of a horde of Satanic goblins bent on it's ritual blood sacrifice. All we need is a plastic horn stuck on with sellotape and it's a real life version of Ridley Scotts' Labyrinth |
|
09 Mar 09 - 07:34 AM (#2584527) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Jack Blandiver I find this disgusting and obscene. Hunting should be done for food -- and only for food. So it's all right if they eat it then??? |
|
09 Mar 09 - 07:56 AM (#2584538) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,Green Wellies What if this animal was butt-ugly and dangerous, but still the only one, or one of a small number. I think we're in danger of 'bamby syndrome' creeping in here. Pity the same consideration will not be given to the cute spring lambs some of you will be consuming in few weeks time. ................ and no I do not hunt, I'm vegetarian. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 08:23 AM (#2584554) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Sleepy Rosie "What if this animal was butt-ugly and dangerous, but still the only one, or one of a small number." Same thing IMO, still a revolting lust for a rare 'trophy'. But the 'white' pure image, certainly adds a surreal fairytale quality to the entire story. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 08:27 AM (#2584556) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Richard Bridge If the animal is so rare it should be protected. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 08:29 AM (#2584558) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Catherine Jayne I agree with Rapire and Richard Bridge. We have the hunting rights to the land we own but have not exercised those rights. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 08:35 AM (#2584566) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Dave Hanson I do not hunt but I have no objections to hunting something to eat, I fish and have killed many many fish all of which have been eaten, auctioning the life of a living creature is disgusting. Is this what we have become, where the life of a rare animal is reduced to what it's carcass is worth in pound shillings and pence ? Dave H |
|
09 Mar 09 - 08:42 AM (#2584572) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,Green Wellies ''Auctioning the life of a living creature is disgusting'' And what about all those animals which were auctioned at the livestock markets this morning, and will be on your plate later. Just because its not rare, does it make it less important ? |
|
09 Mar 09 - 09:33 AM (#2584607) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Jack Blandiver Further to my earlier post: if by eating what we kill, does that make it right? Both seem like pointlessly pleasurable sporting indulgences to my mind, and although I might have sympathy for Inuit hunting rights (and suchlike) I could well sympathise with Billy Connolly in a recent episode of his new ITV series where having shot a seal dead in the water, the hunter's family proceeded to eat it raw. Culturally disposition, I guess, even though there have been times when I've cooked & eaten fresh (i.e. witnessed) road-kill (to boot: several rabbits, a hare, a nice fat pheasant and a muntjack deer) and great bloody fun & feasting it was too, but generally speaking I like my meat fresh from the butchers. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 09:53 AM (#2584621) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: bubblyrat There are people in Northern Ireland who like to kill unarmed soldiers and pizza delivery men.Perhaps we should try and put a stop to that before worrying about the blood-lust of specimen-crazed "sporting" shooters ,however distasteful we might find the latter ?? |
|
09 Mar 09 - 10:10 AM (#2584631) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Ebbie Some years back - maybe 10 - in Juneau, Alaska, a local wildlife photographer took pictures of a rare white black bear and posted the photo on his website. It was immediately dubbed a 'Spirit Bear'. He let us know that he would not be telling anyone where he came across it and then he went to the city council and got them to pass an ordinance to prohibit shooting any white bear in southeast Alaska (We don't have polar bears here). Since then, there have been several sightings of more than one Spirit Bear. So far as I know, no one has attempted to kill one. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 12:05 PM (#2584719) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: meself "although I might have sympathy for Inuit hunting rights (and suchlike) I could well sympathise with Billy Connolly in a recent episode of his new ITV series where having shot a seal dead in the water, the hunter's family proceeded to eat it raw." So ... there's something wrong with that? This is how the Inuit have survived in an extremely harsh environment for centuries, if not millenia. Anyone not having "sympathy for Inuit hunting rights" is a ... oksy, I'd better stop ... |
|
09 Mar 09 - 12:31 PM (#2584739) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Teribus "Hunting should be done for food -- and only for food. You should eat what you kill and kill only to eat, not for some 'trophy'" - Rapaire. I agree wholeheartedly with that. But has anyone had a good look at the photographs of "Pearl", I've linked to the one published in the Daily Mail as it showed the best "close-up": http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1160395/Rare-beautiful-white-deer-just-trophy-hunters.html Now compare it to this shot of a Roe Deer: http://www.deer-pictures.com/roe-deer-winter.jpg I have hunted Roebuck in Poland and in Wiltshire. Pearl's head looks all wrong, shape of head, shape and size of eyes. Looks like a mixture between a sheep, a Wallaby or a Kangaroo. The body doesn't look "right" something about the line of the hind quarters. It wouldn't surprise me if this was a hoax but its a bit too early for April 1st. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 12:35 PM (#2584741) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Jim Carroll "There are people in Northern Ireland who like to kill unarmed soldiers and pizza delivery men." What a strange piece of logic - why can't we be conerned about both? Jim Carroll |
|
09 Mar 09 - 12:40 PM (#2584751) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Teribus PS I forgot - Sinister Supporter: "So it's all right if they eat it then???" I think it is fairly obvious that this particular animal is subject to auction as a "trophy". I will not go on trophy hunts anything I shoot goes in the freezer. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 01:37 PM (#2584810) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Jack Blandiver So ... there's something wrong with that? Nothing wrong with it at all; neither is there anything wrong with my quite natural revulsion to the scene. I might eat the occasional hen, but I'm sure I'd feel just as repulsed seeing it killed. I will not go on trophy hunts anything I shoot goes in the freezer. I don't see the difference between sport for trophy or sport for freezer; either way it's an indulgence, a lifestyle choice if you will, to go out and kill a wild animal which might have been happier to be alive. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 01:53 PM (#2584826) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: gnu SS... there is a world of difference. You said you might eat the occasional hen. Adding up the rest of your logic, I assume that hen must be one of the ones factory raised, never saw daylight, never mated... one of the unhappy fowl? glad to be your fare? Okay... terrible joke. I'll leave now. Have fun kids. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 01:58 PM (#2584830) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: frogprince Isn't that beautiful! I never saw anything like it! I'd pay almost anything for the chance to kill it, and hang part of the cadaver on my wall! I just can't make that combination of dots connect. I'm nowhere near ready to paint everyone who likes game meat to eat with the sewage mop I find myself wanting to use for someone whose mind works like that. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 02:39 PM (#2584851) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Mrrzy We have a family of deer that play in our backyard, and have a white one. I like thinking of it as the White Hart of fairy tales, and as such wouldn't harm a hair on its little head... isn't it the one who will lead the Prince to the sleeping damsel, or something? |
|
09 Mar 09 - 02:47 PM (#2584857) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Skivee I wouldn't be surprised to hear that this is a hoax. Sumthin' don't look right about that deer. The proportions and such don't seem to agree with photos of regular roebucks; also the eyes and ears seem odd. Could this be a lawn ornament? That being said, I've never seen one on the hoof, so I'm no expert. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 03:06 PM (#2584877) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Sleepy Rosie Kevinoaf: "hunting the hunters is much more entertaining than pursuing wild life!" Gotta say, that's very funny! How about auctioning up the hunter, rather than just the hunted? |
|
09 Mar 09 - 04:56 PM (#2584984) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,heric Am I losing my marbles? Did the Daily Mail article change? Now it says: Mr Stuart, however, says he will not allow anyone to hunt Pearl. He said: 'This is quite a rare deer and we want to protect it. We would prefer people to come and shoot it with their cameras. 'At the moment it is a yearling and doesn't even have antlers. It is a beautiful animal and we are worried about poachers and people coming to shoot it. 'While it is on this estate it will be safe. I don't care how much anybody offers to kill it, I want to preserve it and make sure it has a long life.' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1160395/Rare-beautiful-white-deer-just-trophy-hunters.html |
|
09 Mar 09 - 05:01 PM (#2584990) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,heric No, I guess it didn't change. Just very different versions between Daily Mail and Sunday Times (and Telegraph.) |
|
09 Mar 09 - 05:39 PM (#2585050) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,d-bartz For your information its not a hoax, if you go to riflephoto.com you will see all the photos taken over 45 minutes, my rifle was on the ground next to me but didn't want to shoot it. Don't beleive all you read in the papers. I agree that it shouldn't be shot. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 06:17 PM (#2585082) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Teribus "there have been times when I've cooked & eaten fresh (i.e. witnessed) road-kill (to boot: several rabbits, a hare, a nice fat pheasant and a muntjack deer) and great bloody fun & feasting it was too, but generally speaking I like my meat fresh from the butchers." - SS As opposed to: "I will not go on trophy hunts anything I shoot goes in the freezer." - T "I don't see the difference between sport for trophy or sport for freezer; either way it's an indulgence, a lifestyle choice if you will, to go out and kill a wild animal which might have been happier to be alive." - SS Your road-kill might have been happier to have been alive no doubt - but what I have shot is killed instantly and does not suffer - a heart/lung shot and the animal is dead by the time it drops. If you can't guarantee that you do not shoot. Bit better than to have been hit by a car/truck or whatever wouldn't you say. If you eat meat "fresh from the butchers" and are not prepared to go out and kill it, clean it and butcher it yourself please do not hypocritically criticise those that can and do. Unlike you I have no delusions about what has happened to the animal who supplied the meat you buy "fresh from the butchers". Better to live as a wild animal for 18 months than exist three years as a domestic animal on a farm that's bred for slaughter. Life style choice? Certainly wild game is far healthier to eat than domestically reared animals - alot less fat and far tastier. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 06:43 PM (#2585103) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: gnu All good arguements. But.... I was 12 years old when I put food on my family's table from hunting and fishing. I made money selling rabbits, and put that money in the bank alongside my paper delivery money, and my lawn mowing money, and... I continued that "tradition" of hunting after I became Master Of Engineering and made a good living. I still enjoyed going to the woods and taking game. I was first a Master at that. It's a skill. Yes, it's harsh, but is it a skill. Yes, I enjoyed it. I actually enjoyed the hunt. It's not so easy as many would think. But, therein lies the thoughts I ponder now.... why did I enjoy it? Even after I could pay someone else to kill, clean and deliver? Some say "sport" and are disgusted. I am torn. I just don't know anymore. I haven't hunted for a long while. But, I will never deny anyone the right to hunt. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 06:57 PM (#2585126) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Teribus Gun laws in the UK are such now that our largest wild animal, the Red Deer, is just about to be classified in some areas as vermin because of their numbers, the damage that they do to the countryside and due to the accidents they cause. In the UK deer have no natural predators outside of man and the motor vehicle. In Scotland there is talk of reintroducing the Wolf and the Lynx in an attempt to keep numbers down. The reintroduced wolves and lynx of course will go for sheep and cattle as they will be far easier prey. The most humane way to control the populations is to cull them by shooting, but in the UK you do not have a sufficient number of hunters who are profficient enough with a rifle, and the end result is that the deer suffer, wild life habitat suffers and the land is permanently damaged. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 07:32 PM (#2585156) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Ebbie My first thought when I saw the photo was that the picture of the head of a hare was photoshopped onto a roe's body, but I guess not. Is the strangeness due to its youth, perhaps? While I was at the site I checked other photos. It struck me how different the stuffed wolf (Red Wolf?) looks from the stereotypical wolf in the US. Take a look: Wolf in Scotland Grey Wolf |
|
09 Mar 09 - 07:32 PM (#2585157) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Ed T Try this quiz http://www.quizilla.com/tests/8754630/how-well-do-you-know-endangered-animals |
|
09 Mar 09 - 07:48 PM (#2585172) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,heric That's one funky specimen of some European subsepecies you got there, Ebbie. Maybe a Canis lupus italicus. I doubt that's all the taxidermist's fault. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 07:54 PM (#2585182) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Ebbie It's just labeled 'Stuffed Wolf', heric. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 07:57 PM (#2585185) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,Slag If the only source of your reality is from the one-eyed god then I suggest you get out and take a close look at the "nature" you so dearly love. It is a kill-or-be-killed world. Most all of life depends on the death of some other life-form. Having said that, killing for the pleasure of killing is just sick. It's wrong. The pleasure of hunting is not in the killing. The pleasure is the camaraderie of your companions and your dedication to the hunt as well as the satisfaction which comes from the actual hunting and stalking of the creature. We are programmed by nature to be hunters and hunting fulfills this need. We have the utmost respect for nature and the creature we hunt. We never take more than we are limited to by law and conscience, which ever comes first. We clean and prepare the take ourselves. We bury the immediate offal (guts) at the point of the take and do NOT return the unusable or unused portion to the site. Since this was not another predator's take it may sit for longer than an ordinary kill or death. Most animals that sense they are dying go to a hidden place to die. Offal above ground has the possibility of spreading disease, including anthrax, to the living. I include in my personal ethic, never using alcohol while in the field and leaving the land as I found it. Proper game management insures that those animals will always be on hand for future generations to enjoy, whether just observing or hunting. Never eat what you aren't willing to kill and prepare yourself. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 08:04 PM (#2585190) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,heric Plug Canis lupus italicus into google images and look at the second picture. I'll bet that's yer man. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 08:04 PM (#2585191) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Bobert Killing for food, IMO, is *not* the only reason to kill certain animals... We kill deer because they are destructive to our gardens and crops... But we don't let them go to waste and have several folks who are very willing to come get them and eat them... BTW, we had a part albino deer here before last hunting season and I never would have shot it but I think someone did becasue we haven't seen it in several months now... B~ |
|
09 Mar 09 - 08:23 PM (#2585202) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: gnu Well, Slag. I disagree. I always left everything for the ravens and the weasels among many others. Burying, unless it's six feet deep, makes no sense to me. And, burying at six feet deep makes no sense to me. Nature takes care of it... We always returned the hide, antlers, whatever, back to where it was taken... said another prayer of thanks. Anthrax? From offal above the ground? When it sits for longer than an ordinary kill or death? But, you said... "Most animals that sense they are dying go to a hidden place to die." Do these particular animals bury each other? Sorry, but, it don't add up, bud. I think it's time for me to leave again. gnightgnu |
|
09 Mar 09 - 08:35 PM (#2585206) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,heric Jesus, Slag. (He "enjoyed" the hunt and you "need" the kill. . . . , but that makes him a dick?) |
|
09 Mar 09 - 10:21 PM (#2585249) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Ebbie heric, I don't make out the 'Stuffed Wolf' to be anything like 'Canis Lupus Italicus.' That entity is wolfish- its head is wolfish and even though the pelt is different from our Grey Wolf, the conformation is wolfish. The Stuffed Wolf, on the other hand, lacks all of that. The 'bite' of the muzzle is the only part that looks wolfish at all; the cheek is more pitbull than wolf and the body appears all wrong. Just a minute- I'm going to see if I can find a photo of the 'Red Wolf'. Nope. It too looks wolfish: The Red Wolf (Canis Rufus) Any ideas? Maybe just a bad taxidermist? |
|
09 Mar 09 - 10:35 PM (#2585255) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,heric No ideas but I see what you're saying (and it's relationship to the dimwit look on the deer.) |
|
10 Mar 09 - 01:28 AM (#2585308) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,Slag Who were you responding too??? Doesn't look anything like what I wrote. I said we are hunters by nature. That's a pretty broad assessment. Hunting for our supper is the most primitive form. Include in that, hunting for a mate, hunting for the best buy, hunting for your keys...name your hunt; it's what we do. |
|
10 Mar 09 - 03:17 AM (#2585328) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,LTS not even bothering to pretend to work I have a list of names of people I would like to tender in place of this roe deer (yes, I haven't bothered to read all the thread). I disapprove of hunting except to eat, most definately disapprove of it as a "sport" but would be quite happy if we could substitute the deer with some of my alleged 'colleagues' who have totally screwed up my day already by leaving my desk inside out (I'm left handed and 5'2", they are righthanded and 6'5"), the Techies who have removed all my personal settings leaving me with a migraine-inducing teal screen - and all before it was even 7.00am! LTS |
|
10 Mar 09 - 03:28 AM (#2585331) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Gurney I can't see how the life of this animal is more valuable than any other roebuck. In a wild where there were wolves it would be one of the first to be taken, because nature abhors a 'sport' and that is what off-coloured animals are. Taking it into a game-park is different, but in the wild it is likely to be low in the pecking-order, as many odd-coloured animals are, and perhaps not live a happy life. I'm no longer a hunter, but I was, and I fish. It has been 50 years since I killed for anything but food. Never was a trophy hunter, why kill the best there is? |
|
10 Mar 09 - 06:25 AM (#2585403) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Jim Carroll An issue like this certainly sorts out the thugs and morons from the boys, doesn't it? Jim Carroll |
|
10 Mar 09 - 06:56 AM (#2585429) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Jack Blandiver Bit better than to have been hit by a car/truck or whatever wouldn't you say. The deaths were accidental - road-kill, as I say; in no way was I advocating motor vehicles as a means to humane animal slaughter. If you eat meat "fresh from the butchers" and are not prepared to go out and kill it, clean it and butcher it yourself please do not hypocritically criticise those that can and do. I wasn't criticising, hypocritically or otherwise, simply pointing out that, from a UK perspective, killing for trophy or freezer are both sporting indulgences - choices of lifestyle if you will, rather than the sort of noble survival necessity people seem to be implying here. |
|
10 Mar 09 - 09:30 AM (#2585535) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Spleen Cringe You've got to hand it to the old redcoats, though, there are some bloody marvellous hunting songs out there... Must admit I'm quite pleased I live in a modern western economy where someone else can rear, kill, prepare and sell me my organic free range meat. What with full-time work, picking the kids up, housework and all the rest there simply isn't the time to kill my own tea. I disbelieve anyone living in a modern western economy who says they hunt for any reason other than sport or extreme poverty. Have the courage of your convictions! If you're going to do it, at least make it look like you're enjoying it, rather than turning it into some grim, manly chore! |
|
10 Mar 09 - 10:05 AM (#2585570) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Sleepy Rosie Spleen Cringe: "I disbelieve anyone living in a modern western economy who says they hunt for any reason other than sport or extreme poverty." In which case I suspect you have not moved in the kinds of circles, where it actually does happen. Never heard of Freeganism or Self-Sufficiency? There are those who choose, neither for sporting reasons nor poverty but often as a reaction aginst Capitalist society, to 'drop-out' of the modern Western consumerist system, and persue an alternative self-sufficient lifestyle, which means they will hunt and gather whatever there is to be found in the world around them. A choice that is made to consume and waste less, and be far more personally responsible for what they do consume. I can think of one friend of mine who, as an anarchist, has never paid tax, doesn't live in a house, is self-employed and is otherwise as self-sufficient as he can reasonably manage. The reason his case is especially pertinant to this thread, is that he was vegetarian for twenty years. But took to shooting the odd pheasant or rabbit, or indeed fishing the odd trout to improve his diet - he was getting bloody underwieght at the time. He doesn't hunt for sport, anymore than he collects the dead wood with which he builds the musical instruments he barters or sells, for 'sport'. His occasional hunting is completely purposive, and ethically congruent with his anti-consumerist and anarchist way of life. There are more people out there living on the 'fringes' of our consumerist culture, than you might at first imagine. But they don't usually make headlines for living their alternative lifestyles, unless they turn up in The Daily Mail as 'undesirables'. |
|
10 Mar 09 - 10:51 AM (#2585610) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Spleen Cringe The freegans round my way tend to be bin pickers rather than sharpshooters. Can't imagine any of them would know one end of a gun from another, nor would want to. However that maybe comes from living near the middle of a big city where guns tend to be associated with gangsters, traps would catch small children and the only 'game' is rats, grey squirrels, the odd fox and domestic moggies. No, my comment was really aimed at those who clearly enjoy hunting but for some strange reason seem to feel it necessary to pretend they don't. |
|
10 Mar 09 - 10:57 AM (#2585615) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Spleen Cringe PS I was always more impressed with the collectivist anarchism than the rugged individualist variety, btw ;-) |
|
10 Mar 09 - 02:10 PM (#2585788) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: gnu I said I was leaving, but, earlier today, something was triggered in my brain, so I read back... Slag.... "Having said that, killing for the pleasure of killing is just sick. It's wrong. The pleasure of hunting is not in the killing. The pleasure is the camaraderie of your companions and your dedication to the hunt as well as the satisfaction which comes from the actual hunting and stalking of the creature." Agreed. And, that is when I stopped "hunting". I did all of that and even pulled the trigger... of an unloaded gun. I "hunted" for a while with an unloaded gun. Unfortunately, I didn't have the coin to get into some good camera/camcorder equipment but I might after I sell my gun. For someone who wasn't raised with it, it's hard to understand that part of it, but those who photograph "game" surely must understand it somewhat. |
|
10 Mar 09 - 04:57 PM (#2585888) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Gurney Can you be more specific, Jim Caroll? which are your 'Thugs and morons' and which are your 'Boys?' You have a fair range here, although no-one has advocated such extremes as "Kill it before they are all gone!" to "Oh, don't touch it, it's so sweet! I'll have my steak rare and pass the insect spray." Or is anyone who disagrees with you wrong? |
|
10 Mar 09 - 06:14 PM (#2585938) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Slag Yes, gnu. I do all my hunting from behind the lens of a camera and have for the past umptydum years. I still shoot the wood rats and ground squirrels trying to undermine my house and the same for the flying termites (read: woodpeckers). Most all of my hunting friends have passed away. Were I to go on a hunt today, I'd take my camera, fishing pole and a couple of decks of cards. re Jim Caroll: to quote Dogbert (of Dilbert comics fame)" I find that the intelligent ones always agree with me. The rest just say stupid things. This tends to keep the questions at a minimum." Yup Jim, with iron clad logic like that, how could you ever possibly be wrong? |
|
10 Mar 09 - 07:18 PM (#2585986) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Ebbie Did you misspeak, Slag? Why on earth would you shoot woodpeckers? |
|
10 Mar 09 - 09:55 PM (#2586092) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Slag A while back they succeeded in pecking their way through to an an attic. This allowed the bats in. When the bat urine began to soak through the ceiling and stinking up the place I discovered the hole and at no small cost, I had the bats removed and the hole patched. Every morning shortly after sun up, there is a ratta tat tat tat somewhere on a side of the house. The really staccato racket is the red-shafted flickers. They are the most destructive. Both flickers and acorn woodpeckers are very intelligent birds and they hear the shotgun being chambered through the walls and are usually gone by the time I get outside. If I get a shot off the target is almost always too far away. If I'm am stealthy and get the jump on them I will get one or two every now and then. It helps keep the damage down. Most mornings (I'm NOT a morning person) I will just roll over with my deaf ear up. The redheads are just looking for bugs hiding in the overlaps. Their damage is minimal compared to the flickers. I hope that answers your concerns. If not, I will let you come and replace my siding and put your heart at ease. |
|
10 Mar 09 - 11:06 PM (#2586116) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Riginslinger I used to ride to work in a crummy driven by a hooktender who would go out of his way to run over wild rabbits, chipmonks, and squirrels. He would laugh when he did it, and then look over at the other guys who were riding in the front seat with him, at that point, they were expected to laugh too. If they didn't, they knew they would get some real shitty job for the day. It happened to me once; I got a shitty job. After that, I always rode in one of the back seats. |
|
11 Mar 09 - 12:11 AM (#2586134) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Art Thieme That thing in the photo is obviously a Jackalope!! Inbred jackrabbit and antelope mix. They are all over the U.P. of Michigan (Upper Peninsula) and parts of Minnesota to boot. I've seen several. The last time I saw one was about twenty years ago. I was up in Ironwood for the North Country Folk Festival that Phil Kucera ran. I was in a bar in Ramsay, Michigan with Fritz Schuler and we'd been watching Spider John Koerner play pool. I went out for some cool air-----and there it was. I'll never forget it because that was the same day I saw a jackrabbit having intercourse with a skunk. (The rabbit didn't get all he wanted, but he did get about all he could stand!) Art Thieme |
|
11 Mar 09 - 12:35 AM (#2586142) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Ebbie You're right, Art. That is what the photo reminded me of. It's been years since I've seen a jackalope but I'll never forget them. Click on Number 4- the most familiar one to most of us, for one picture of a slightly older one than the one in the photo we've been discussing. This one obviously takes more after his daddy. Pet Jackalope |
|
11 Mar 09 - 01:41 AM (#2586155) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Slag So Art, was there any progeny from the rabbit skunk union? And if so, what did you call them? Is this why the rabbits around here stink so bad? Are they out having their way with the black and white denizens of the forest? |
|
11 Mar 09 - 06:04 AM (#2586238) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: ard mhacha last week I photographed a Canada Goose on our large park lake, asking around as to anyone slse seeing this rare visitor I asked a local `wildfowler` [bird shooter] if he had ever come across the bird on near-by Lough Neagh, he replied it wouldn`t be around too long,"we shoot anything that flies". This reply was greeted with loud laughter from our`wildfowler`, [what a strange term for a slaughterer of birds, and no, they don`t eat what they shoot they bin them, I have seen them. |
|
11 Mar 09 - 06:17 AM (#2586244) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Liz the Squeak Ard - one would be tempted to sic the RSPCA or the RSPB onto them... or the local Garda, to check their shotgun licences... LTS |
|
11 Mar 09 - 06:31 AM (#2586247) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Jim Carroll Thugs and morons = those who kill purely (wrong word) for pleasure Boys (should have included girls I suppose) those who don't Jim Carroll |
|
11 Mar 09 - 06:35 AM (#2586250) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,Shimrod "There are people in Northern Ireland who like to kill unarmed soldiers and pizza delivery men.Perhaps we should try and put a stop to that before worrying about the blood-lust of specimen-crazed "sporting" shooters ,however distasteful we might find the latter ??" This view suggests that only humans and human affairs are relevant and all other living things, and the general environment, are irrelevant or of trivial importance. Jared Diamond's book 'Collapse' suggests that this view has prevailed throughout history and many civilisations have come to a nasty end because of it - I'm pretty convinced that ours will too. |
|
11 Mar 09 - 07:20 AM (#2586266) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: ard mhacha Liz,I am sure the shotgun brigade from where ever they come from couldn`t care less what comes into range, this `binning` of their prey has been going on for years, I listen to them on unguarded moments and they talk away about what they `bag`. I have talked to the local bird reserve many times and that has proved to be a useless exercise, it is not that they don`t care, it is sheer despair at anything ever going to be done. The country lads in our area almost to a man seem to see this as part of their culture, not in the least perturbed about shooting birds, too bad if the odd rare bird is blasted along with the local Mallard, that is the impossible situation that confronts the conservationists. |
|
11 Mar 09 - 04:42 PM (#2586627) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Gurney Jim Caroll, Thank you for your reply to my question. Whilst I agree that wanton killers of wildlife are savages, they are not necessarily thugs or morons. Wanton being the operative verb. It was the brevity and vehemence of your post that spurred me to ask for a definition. It is, of course, hypocritical to abhor the killing of animals if you eat fish or meat, or wear leather, because almost all fish are taken from the wild by barberic methods which destroy other ecosystems, and farming for slaughter takes a mindset that I don't share. Though I do happily eat the end products of it. I could advance arguments against the unnatural lives forced on creatures to produce eggs and milk, if I felt inclined to play Devil's Advocate. Or even against vegetable farming, and the harm that that does to the environment. Morality is only a single view from a single perspective, and everyone has their own. Even someone who holds to the strictest Buddhist principles, arguably the most moral current, is allowed to eat meat provided someone gives it to them! Chris Marden. |
|
11 Mar 09 - 10:11 PM (#2586849) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity If you abhor hunting, then don't do it....and leave the others, who like to hunt, alone....mind your own business! |
|
12 Mar 09 - 12:40 AM (#2586922) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,heric the Dave Bartle photoset, from d-bartz, above: http://beagle.riflephoto.com/index/module/media/pId/102/id/6162/category/gallery%7Cthewhiteroebuck/start/0 |
|
12 Mar 09 - 05:53 AM (#2586998) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Jim Carroll Chris Marden, Thanks for your thoughts, and I apologise if my earlier comments were intemperate. My attitude on killing and torturing for sport were formed when I was a 16 year old apprentice on the Liverpool docks and I was taken to a coursing event by two workmates. I can't remember if I enjoyed the main event, but as we were leaving we came across a small crowd gathered around two dogs who had a hare between them - the veterans referred to it as 'a string'. One dog had the creatures ears, the other had a hind leg, and they were slowly tearing the animal, which was screaming like a baby, apart. The crowd stood and cheered until somebody stepped over and stamped on the hare's head; it writhed on the ground for another few minutes before it finally died. Thugs and morons are the words that have sprung to mind ever since. I share your hypocritical confusion over eating meat. Guest from Sanity You mean 'Live and Let Kill' - I understand there's a dog fight planned for this weekend a few miles from here - what do you suggest? Jim Carroll |
|
12 Mar 09 - 06:47 AM (#2587028) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: KEVINOAF Hunting rights are taken for granted in my neck of the woods and my wishes as a landowner, for my land not to be hunted :have had to be reinforced by returning the fire of these imbeciles,The issues raised by this topic are complex,as a hunter -gatherer reformed I sympathise with the killing of game for food,but the argument of pest control is frequently over used (and abused ) by the hunting fraternity tho justify slaughter of predators. often to the detriment of balance of nature and causing a increase in the my number of true pests (rodents , etc ) that are their normal prey, Having an an endangered species on my land I seek to protect it and enjoy my status as their steward. the real pests however are the hunters! I am not a veggie and I do partake of meat (even game )so the needs of the farming community are also to be considered.The argument that man doesn't need meat would possibly lead to the extinction of a host of farm species if taken literally,- most people like to eat meat and veggies will always be a minority.Equally absurd is the illusion that chickens are born in a cardboard box with bread-crumbs instead of feathers! both sides of this debate need to take a reality check |
|
12 Mar 09 - 06:55 AM (#2587037) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,Cliff Dog fighting - illegal! If you know where & when you have a duty to report this to the police. That activity has no bearing at all on legal shooting, fishing etc. I work with shooters & fishermen & without exception they condemn this sort of activity (including the torture of the hare cited above). You may as well blame old lady muggings on wildfowlers also. (I am NOT a wildfowler BTW) |
|
12 Mar 09 - 10:00 AM (#2587152) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Jim Carroll "Dog fighting - illegal!" I was under the impression that hunting foxes with hounds was now illegal in Britain, yet is still goes on regularly - where do I go to report them? Jim Carroll |
|
12 Mar 09 - 10:54 AM (#2587186) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: Jim Carroll B.T.W. I was not referring to the legal status of the event, but to the bestiality of the participants, summed up perfectly for me by an e-mailed petition I received last year. It contained a film clip of a dog filmed in an art gallery (I think somewhere in South America) in various stages of starvation; the objective being to follow its 'progress' to its death. It was an 'exhibit' at the gallery for which the 'artist' had received an Arts Grant. Jim Carroll |
|
12 Mar 09 - 11:37 AM (#2587210) Subject: RE: BS: Killing for pleasure From: GUEST,heric I heard about that. Now we're into killing for art and science (not for long I hope - hard to take, and could go on forever.) Long ago there was a story about a university study where they put long eared and short eared bunnies in ovens to see which would die faster. There's also a famous very old story about an experimenter operating on a dog, strapped down without sedation, which dog licked the scientist's hand. (If memory serves, that story was reported by Darwin, as before his time, but it rings eternal.) |
