hunting trophies : its not new - so why the sudden manufactured outrage ?

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: ignorant_ape

Someone must have asked the question, "How easy is it to manufacture outrage?"

Well, here's your answer. . . . . .

Edit to add; Just saw the post above mine, well said.

So... you will stop trying to manufacture outrage against abortion which goes back to the start of humanity but you don't like that so it's ok to be outraged?

a reply to: biggilo

No, not at all. I was just stating that to demonstrate how easy outrage is to bring out in others. While I know that's typically the definition of trolling, it's apt in this thread. And if you've ever read anything else I've posted, I don't troll. It was a demonstration, only that.
Personally, I think this guy was totally in the wrong. I don't support trophy hunting in the least.

a reply to: pfishy

OK, fair enough man.

I understand the outrage that a protected lion was killed in fact I feel outraged about it, but towards the right people and for the right reasons.

The Guide company was the one who set up the hunt and knew they were breaking the law they should be and are being prosecuted.

HEAVY

The charity Lion Aid says on its website that it will be difficult to prosecute the person who paid for the hunt, because the client did what the professional hunter tells him to do.

“A client usually has no idea about the laws and regulations of the country he is hunting in – he just buys a safari and then places himself in the hands of his professional hunter guide. Finding the client could be interesting to let him tell his side of the story, but in terms of legal prosecution this person is hardly important,” Lion Aid says. Theo Bronkhorst, who runs the hunting company that Palmer hired, is already being investigated in Zimbabwe.

If it can be proven that the hunter knew the guides he hired were breaking the law then I am all for throwing the book at him.

As far as the outrage towards trophy hunters in general when it comes to African safaris then I only have one description for those people "libtards". That is because logic has completely escaped them over the animals they love and they are only being emotional.

Here is why.

Poachers kill 300 Zimbabwe elephants with cyanide


Poachers killed the elephants over the past three months by lacing waterholes and salt licks with cyanide. Animals are drawn to them during the dry season in the already arid and remote south-eastern section of the 5,660-square mile park.
After the elephants died, often collapsing just a few yards from the source, lions, hyenas and vultures which fed on their carcasses were also struck down, as were other animals such as kudu and buffalo that shared the same waterholes.

When Saviour Kasukuwere, Zimbabwe's environment minister, visited a village just outside the park two weeks ago she was told that the poachers had acted out of desperation as their crops had failed and tourism fees from hunters and safari operators had dried up.

The people yelling that the animals should just be left alone seem to think that if trophy hunts end the poachers will just stay away or they think the Rangers that drive off the poachers will work for free because they are just nice people.

The money brought in through licensing and other for trophy hunts is what pays for the Animals protection. Cut that off and all those critters will simply become a neusince to the locals lives. Animal parts will still be a commodity especially to Asian markets. Lion scrotum soup as a cure-all or aphrodisiac.

It should also be mentioned that the villagers would probably stop operating artificial watering holes for the wildlife. Well for the naturalist they probably would say famine and starvation and dehydration is the natural order and be fine with that.

Anyway, for those people that insist that ending legal trophy hunting in Africa is good for the animals that they love there, they are just being "tards" since they are being wilfully ignorant about the situation, but it makes them feel good.

A cure is not supposed to be worse than the disease.

a reply to: nerbot

Please see my above response to biggilo

a reply to: Grimpachi

It is all to do with money. Westerners are going there with £50,000 ($78,000). How much of that money do we think is actually going towards the villagers?

Money like that will seriously disturb the balance.

You are calling us retards for caring about wild life. No one here is suggesting they have the answers. I certainly do not, but knowing what I know about what is happening to the diversity of species and their habitat, all destruction courtesy of human activity, I will support any cover this can get, to make it a priority and so it gets the attention it deserves, practically first on the list of what to do for the world community.

So many sepcies are disappearing. There are only four white rhino left in the whole world, "Like many other rhinoceros species, the northern white rhino population was decimated by poachers who sold their horns on the black market".

That is where current behaviour has led. If nothing is changed then this will continue and gather momentum. It is very pleasant for me to witness how much humans are showing that they do care in great numbers. May be it is slightly misplaced, but it is good sentiment to care.

a reply to: Revolution9

It is all to do with money. Westerners are going there with £50,000 ($78,000). How much of that money do we think is actually going towards the villagers?

I have no idea how much goes to the villagers, but I know in the past they would slaughter hundreds of animals at a time for as little as $100 a tusk for elephants so how much do you think it will take to keep them happy? I also know the fees for hunting pays for the park rangers that stop the poaching.

Of course I already mentioned that.

Money like that will seriously disturb the balance.

What balance? Please give some examples.

You are calling us retards for caring about wild life.

No, I call people tards for being stupid. When they claim to care about the wildlife and push for things that will destroy the wildlife.

No one here is suggesting they have the answers. I certainly do not, but knowing what I know about what is happening to the diversity of species and their habitat, all destruction courtesy of human activity,

Yet, as you said you have zero answers.

I will support any cover this can get, to make it a priority and so it gets the attention it deserves, practically first on the list of what to do for the world community.

Let's get this straight. You will do all you can to give this cover, you have Zero answers/solutions, however you seem to endorse cutting off the primary means of funding(safari/trophy hunting) that actually pays to keep the habitat for the animals and the forces that protect them.

Freaking brilliant/sarc.

originally posted by: Revolution9
a reply to: Grimpachi


Money like that will seriously disturb the balance.

I love it when people actually say things this glaringly ridiculous, it makes it much easier to just ignore them because they are talking through their underpants.

a reply to: mindseye1609

They have good intentions, but this is seriously a case where good intentions pave the road to hell.

When do-gooders through ignorance do nothing, but harm I can only shake my head in disapproval.

originally posted by: mindseye1609

originally posted by: Revolution9
a reply to: Grimpachi


Money like that will seriously disturb the balance.

I love it when people actually say things this glaringly ridiculous, it makes it much easier to just ignore them because they are talking through their underpants.

I don't actually wear underpants, but carry on.

Have a think about how much that kind of money is worth out there on Safari, lol. People would set up a snuff movie for you for that kind of money.

You know what I mean very well. So MR. Wise Guy, what is your solution? What have you got to contribute other than a couple of lines dissing me, with no actual constructive criticism? Don't be so rude. Hit me back with at least some argument. Do you think out there in good ol' Zimbabwe business is all clean and hunky dory? Land of no corruption??? Hmmm??? What with Mr Mugabe at the helm and all? Think again. Any way, why you so interested in my underwear?

Ignore me if you like. That is your prerogative.

a reply to: Revolution9

Go look at my very long posts that are getting numerous in the original 22 maybe 23 page now Cecil thread.

Here's an article if you feel frisky

indefinitelywild.gizmodo.com...

Here's a great documentary on the subject by Louie Theroux, he's very pro animal and does not pull any punches on the hunter/ranchers behalf.

youtu.be...


Any money going to Africa is good, even the corrupt money that officials steal. I know it's ridiculous but even that money helps. That guy re tiles his bathroom and build additions on his house and buys extra groceries and whatever, he injects money into the economy. Not as much money as if it went into conservation funds correctly and whatnot but it's still and influx of money to Africa and that's soarly needed, those poor folks will dig all day for gold for a couple dollars cause other are so few and far between over there.


And I'm not trying to condone crooked officials or whatever im just saying, money into Africa is a positive thing as long as it's not arming guerrillas and war lords, they've taken their fair share.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Who is doing any harm? As it stands people are expressing their horror that people do this kind of thing for fun and in the manner these safaris are conducted. It is not just me is it?

Man, I can't accept your view on this that this is a good way to go about business. Even people who hunt find it morally questionable.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
well ?

a brief persusal of the ATS archives reveals that prior to 2015 - hunting trophies were not discussed

now - every week there is a new fake outrage over a hunting trophy

JUST WTF ??????????????????

did you only just realise this went on ????

certain popular celebrities are getting over excited by this , this year - connection ????

i am merely amused that this phenonemon has been ignored so long - now its a sudden hot topic for " social justice warriors "

I didn't peruse the archives...pedophiles in the vati-can, heroic media personality pedophiles etc etc...

Answer: interwebz and the uniquitous social media...

Just because it wasn't 'recorded' on outlets, doesn't mean it wasn't happening...and doesn't mean the 'outrage' is any less justified...

Å99

a reply to: mindseye1609

Thank you. That is a much nicer and most welcome comment. I wasn't trying to score points, just genuine care.

I'll never get over the human beings killing just for fun though. It wasn't that long ago that they were doing that en masse to people (Rome, etc). May be not so long before they will no longer do it to animals. I'm hoping that.

I'm sure there were some very good arguments about why killing people for sport in the arenas should not be stopped, too.

a reply to: mindseye1609

Hey, I will give all that you supplied a good old read.

Can I just suggest that a lot of this "people power" thing is about people discovering they have a collective voice. Most of us don't get a chance to say how we feel in the realms of real power. The internet at least gives us a chance of world communication. Debate gives us the chance to explore and learn.

originally posted by: Revolution9
a reply to: Grimpachi

Who is doing any harm? As it stands people are expressing their horror that people do this kind of thing for fun and in the manner these safaris are conducted. It is not just me is it?

Man, I can't accept your view on this that this is a good way to go about business. Even people who hunt find it morally questionable.

If you find it horrible that a guide company would break the law and lure a protected animal from a protected area for a hunt I can agree.

If you find it horrible that legal trophy hunting takes place there then I have to explain how short sighted that is.

The size of game ranches are just as large as the protected areas there. The reason there are game ranches is because there are hunters that will pay to hunt.

Do you honestly think that if there were no hunters paying to hunt those lands the owners of those lands would tolerate having animals that would destroy their crops or threaten their lives remaining on those lands?

The sensible answer is no, they wouldn't. The more land there is for wildlife allows more wildlife to flourish, but there are people that want to do away with trophy hunting and if they are successful I guarantee the owners of those game ranches will do away with the animals that are no longer beneficial to them.

So the question is, do people want more land for more animals or less land and less animals? No one should be foolish enough to think the land owners are simply animal lovers providing space for the critters out of the kindness of their hearts.

a reply to: mindseye1609

So, an African dictator model of the trickle-down economics theory is acceptable?
Just kidding.

a reply to: KyoZero

Haha - yeah but not until the media told you to be.

I wonder what the next bandwagon you'll jump on will be? Human rights? Slavery? Child labour?

a reply to: and14263

Haha - yeah but not until the media told you to be.

Speak for yourself , you don't know what triggers anger in anyone other than yourself , just because you are not affected by this doesn't mean other peoples feelings aren't genuine and long held.

a reply to: and14263

Is that how it is for you? You unaware of what is going on until something like this happens? Quite a lot of us have felt strongly about these happenings for a long time. I have been aware of it and against it since I read about the low life owner of Godaddy in Zimbabwe shooting an elephant, wasn't surprised at a thief like him doing it. Then of course these is that little blonde tart who goes around doing it and posting pictures on social media of herself. Honestly, if you think this is just a media bandwagon you are very sheltered and should try reading a broader variety of sources.