Gun Dog Forum

kninebirddog wrote:Animal rights activist and the media are more then likely twisting and spinning this to their agenda

ezzy333 wrote:

kninebirddog wrote:Animal rights activist and the media are more then likely twisting and spinning this to their agenda

Of course they are and the Animal Rights people love it. That type of hunting is not my choice but for those that like it, mit is as good as what we like. I like the comparison we are seeing comparing the reaction to the reaction of the Planned Parenthood scandal. !000X more concern about a lion as an unborn fetus. Do you think maybe we are in trouble?

mnaj_springer wrote:

ezzy333 wrote:

kninebirddog wrote:Animal rights activist and the media are more then likely twisting and spinning this to their agenda

Of course they are and the Animal Rights people love it. That type of hunting is not my choice but for those that like it, mit is as good as what we like. I like the comparison we are seeing comparing the reaction to the reaction of the Planned Parenthood scandal. !000X more concern about a lion as an unborn fetus. Do you think maybe we are in trouble?

I didn't see/hear this comparison Ezzy... Can you update me? Or provide a link if you have one?

Quailcommando wrote:The guys a poacher been in trouble before over a bear that he killed. Media does blow things up but they went on a wildlife preserve and lured this lion off then killed him. This is bad for him no matter how you look at it.

Gertie wrote:I'm honestly a little surprised at the amount of attention this is actually getting. That said, I hope they make an example out of this guy and throw the book at him. Poaching is bad, high profile poaching like this is really bad and is also terrible for sportsmen. With that said, I'm a little confused about why anyone who cares about hunting is supporting this guy in anyway. He's contributing to a growing number of the uninformed populace's idea that we're all a bunch of unethical animal killers that are more concerned about acquiring trophies and bragging rights than we are about conservation, enjoying the outdoors, and legally participating in a great heritage and tradition. Groups like Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Quail Forever, Wild Turkey Federation, etc. have worked very hard to not only restore habitat and encourage conservation, but also demonstrate to the public that most hunters are ethical and responsible people who genuinely care about wildlife and are willing to put their money where their mouth is to prove it. In short, this kind of negative publicity just makes maintaining a positive image of hunters more difficult and provides ammo for those who are looking for excuses to go after hunting/hunters in general.

Gertie wrote:I get that. However, he was the one who took the shot so, ultimately, it's his responsibility to know the laws and ensure he's in compliance. The lion was shot at night, on property that did not possess the proper permits, was baited out of the park, and shot with a compound bow. These are known and undisputed facts as reported by park officials and confirmed by the two guides. Each one of those individual acts is illegal in that country and that is poaching. The other stuff (intentionally shooting with a bow to avoid alerting park rangers, trying to destroy the GPS collar, etc. etc.) are still up for debate but at a minimum he illegally killed the lion. This man also has a past history of poaching violations which indicates he's more than willing to act illegally to get what he's paid for.

Neil wrote:The major networks did spend much more time on Cecil than Planned Parenthood:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/ka ... tfkt2:QThC

And social media was even more lopsided.

Guys if it is lawful hunting, and it has not been proven it was not in this case, we have no right to judge. I can make a logical case fishing is wrong.

Neil

Quailcommando wrote:

Neil wrote:The major networks did spend much more time on Cecil than Planned Parenthood:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/ka ... tfkt2:QThC

And social media was even more lopsided.

Guys if it is lawful hunting, and it has not been proven it was not in this case, we have no right to judge. I can make a logical case fishing is wrong.

Neil

Got to have a permit which no one had so someone broke the law.

I bet you make sure you have everything required by law before you pull the trigger on anything!

polmaise wrote:

mnaj_springer wrote:

ezzy333 wrote:Of course they are and the Animal Rights people love it. That type of hunting is not my choice but for those that like it, mit is as good as what we like. I like the comparison we are seeing comparing the reaction to the reaction of the Planned Parenthood scandal. !000X more concern about a lion as an unborn fetus. Do you think maybe we are in trouble?

I didn't see/hear this comparison Ezzy... Can you update me? Or provide a link if you have one?

Wake up school boy
https://video-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hvide ... e=55BBF752

Neil wrote:Well said CJ. Once again we are allowing the Left to try and convict these people with their version of facts. "Hands up, don't shoot". He may well be gulty, but we don't know, yet.

Despite global media coverage of Cecil's killing, the big cat's untimely demise has gone largely unnoticed in Zimbabwe, where average annual income is just over $1,000 and unemployment is higher than 80 percent.

Neil wrote:That is where we disagree, I think it a very accurate comparison. I, along of most of the country, thought for months that Michael Brown was shot down by a rabid police officer, because that is what the Left leaning media told us. Even after the truth belied that narrative, many continue to believe it, perhaps you are one of them.

Regardless of the legal outcome in this matter, most will believe the dentist guilty.

mnaj_springer wrote:

Neil wrote:That is where we disagree, I think it a very accurate comparison. I, along of most of the country, thought for months that Michael Brown was shot down by a rabid police officer, because that is what the Left leaning media told us. Even after the truth belied that narrative, many continue to believe it, perhaps you are one of them.

Regardless of the legal outcome in this matter, most will believe the dentist guilty.

Neil, I never stated whether or not it's an accurate comparison, so you don't know if we disagree on that. You missed the point... Bringing up unrelated events does nothing to further your viewpoint; it only distracts from it. That's the point.

cjhills wrote:Quail commander: How do you know no one had a permit? Remember all the information is from Bunny Hugging non-hunters or Anti- hunters.
Wealthy hunters pay huge amounts to hunt in Africa. A good share of which goes to the various governments. Without this income many species would likely be extinct.
All we know for sure is that he paid a outfitter a large amount of money for a trophy lion hunt. Do you really think an outfitter, in a country like Africa, where trophy hunts are the largest source of income to support conservation and are carefully controlled ,would take a client hunting without the proper permits. They shoot lions over bait all the time. We do not know if they intentionally lured this particular lion off a preserve or if he just happened to be in the wrong place. We also do not know if the hunter knew anything at all about the lion possibly being illegal. It seems rather unlikely since there was no way they would not get caught.
Might be a bit premature to judge. I think we need a few more facts before the public lynching, which is already happening in Minneapolis...................Cj

Neil wrote:Well said CJ. Once again we are allowing the Left to try and convict these people with their version of facts. "Hands up, don't shoot". He may well be gulty, but we don't know, yet.

Neil wrote:

mnaj_springer wrote:

Neil wrote:That is where we disagree, I think it a very accurate comparison. I, along of most of the country, thought for months that Michael Brown was shot down by a rabid police officer, because that is what the Left leaning media told us. Even after the truth belied that narrative, many continue to believe it, perhaps you are one of them.

Regardless of the legal outcome in this matter, most will believe the dentist guilty.

Neil, I never stated whether or not it's an accurate comparison, so you don't know if we disagree on that. You missed the point... Bringing up unrelated events does nothing to further your viewpoint; it only distracts from it. That's the point.

OK, that is not how I was taught debate nor consistent with my knowledge of human logic. A comparison or analogy will often gain acceptance of your position, even if not germane. If A is believed to be true by the audience, equating it with B, makes B more likely true. In this case, that Brown was a thug is true and germane, as the Left tried to convince us he was a surrendering gentle giant. They are now trying to convince us the Dentist is guilty. It fails only if you, as part of the audience, do not believe A to be true.

Neil wrote:Springer, knowing your audience is key. I am betting 90+ percent of those here do not believe Michael Brown had his hands up in surrender.

Believe what you will, I have neither the time nor inclination to teach you basic debating skills.

So please, let's get back on topic.

mask wrote:Unless the rules have changed in the last twenty years, which is certainly possible, any animal that leaves a preserve or park into a legal hunting concession is fair game. The fact that he shot it with a crossbow and botched it up does not make the story any prettier and only fuels the fire. Untill all the facts are known most of this is a guess anyway.

mnaj_springer wrote:

Neil wrote:Springer, knowing your audience is key. I am betting 90+ percent of those here do not believe Michael Brown had his hands up in surrender.

Believe what you will, I have neither the time nor inclination to teach you basic debating skills.

So please, let's get back on topic.

I wouldn't learn much anyway. But you do realize this site pops up when you do a google search, right? Your audience, when you post on this forum, extends beyond the membership of this forum. I think you don't know the audience as well as you think.

Quailcommando wrote:Neil, You should contact old Walter Palmer with your knowledge on everything you can probable get all charges dropped!

mnaj_springer wrote:Neil, you're ridiculous. This site pops up with google searches and non-members can read. That's how people find this site. The fact that you couldn't find the site you're currently on means nothing. For all I know, you googled "colonoscopy."

And I never said it was viewed by millions... So it turns out I'm not delusional, at least regarding that thought. I am delusional in thinking this post is anything more than a way to waste some time before supper...

Neil wrote:

mnaj_springer wrote:Neil, you're ridiculous. This site pops up with google searches and non-members can read. That's how people find this site. The fact that you couldn't find the site you're currently on means nothing. For all I know, you googled "colonoscopy."

And I never said it was viewed by millions... So it turns out I'm not delusional, at least regarding that thought. I am delusional in thinking this post is anything more than a way to waste some time before supper...

You are starting to annoy me, go to Google, enter "Cecil the Lion" and see if it leads you here. It is my understanding that "Views" includes all that, well, view it, not just members.