Originally posted by Hohbein Originally posted by daeandor As I said previously in this post, if you have been pacified by society to the point that you cannot even vaguely understand hunting, then there is no argument I could make to convince you that there is nothing wrong with what you saw in that video.
To say i've been 'pacified' by society isn't exactly accurate. I hate much of society today BECAUSE it's become so passive. However, to say it's 'normal' or 'natural' to actually have the urge to kill an animal, for absolutely NO good reason would make you mentally ill in my eyes. In fact i'd say anybody that can bring themselves to do so is teatering on the edge of sanity.
Does it not seem like a waste of life, to you? That lion had probably lived 15 gruelling years within the african plains, dodging starvation, fighting to stay alive... Every day had been a struggle.. All that effort for what? For some moron with a small penis complex to come along and shoot him dead in the name of 'fun'?
I'm far, far from a hippy. But I can show compassion, and more importantly respect for the other creatures that inhabbit this world with me. I wouldn't kill a spider, or even a fly, because I simply don't have the right to do so. Nobody has the right to kill any animal in the name of 'fun'.
According to natural law, we have that right, to kill anything for any reason.
But killing another living thing for no reason. It's a sin.
That being said, theres alot of parts of the world where hunting is necessary to make it safer for humans.
Whats the use of being the top predator if you don't exercise your natural rights for your own benefit?
Becoming a meal for a lion, despite the fact that you could have prevented it by killing all the lions in a certain area, that's also a sin and a waste of potential.
The term "sport" refers to using minimal force to kill what you perceive to be a threat. You CAN use a bomb, a landmine, you can drive around in a jeep and fire out the window.
Like if another man was a threat to you, you can challenge him to a duel rather than poisoning his drink.
For a lion, you can't kill it with a knife, or a sword, or a crossbow, or a small pistol. The minimum force you need is a scoped rifle. That is the bare minimum tool you need to have a chance against a lion.
If there wasn't 3 or 4 hunters shooting that lion, the guy who got attacked by it would be dead.
People think "oh its not fair you have a gun."
If I gave you a rifle and sent you out to kill a lion, chances are you would not make it out alive.
Its like bullfighting. Yeah the human has a small advantage, he's smarter, theres technique to killing a bull with sharp sticks.
But that sash they wear around the waist is not an ornament. They don't wear it to look like a faggot. Its actually there to keep his intestines inside his body in case the bull gores him.
Same concept with having 3-4 guys there. One guy is the hunter. The other 3 guys are there to save his life if something goes wrong, which it did, or at least tell his widow what happened.
"Bob shot a lion, then the lion ran up clawed Bob's face off."
The basical misunderstanding here is people think 1 man with gun vs lion, the lion has no chance.
Actually 1 man on foot with gun vs lion, its the human that's the underdog.
Gota step outa this discussion. Some of the topics are out of the context Im discussing and Id rather not drag my ideas thru the mud the direction of this conversation presents.
Originally posted by lyonman24 daendor (sp?) sorry. anyways war is not trophy hunting?? what world do you live in??? its one big cock fight to say them or us are better. there is no way you can defend war saying its nothing else. sure in the process we may save some innocent people but thats it. when more civilians out number goverment all over the world i say let the people rise up change stuff and fight for themselves. now onto hunting so the africans that actually hunted lions many years ago with spears and bows where wrong?? im sorry but if you need a gun to kill a deer, lion, or whatever you need to look in the mirror and see whats wrong with you first.
I'm not sure how to answer you on this lyonman24. It is such a stereotypical "I hate violence" statement that I pity the society that placed it in your head. I also don't know where you got the implication that I was defending war. War =| hunting on so many levels, it is obvious that you know nothing of either. Amazingly none of you are willing to consider the possibly what is wrong is with you instead of 'hunters'. Of course, on a forum it is so incredibly easy to argue the "it's wrong to do [insert stereotypically bad thing here]." Especially this forum.
Originally posted by fizzle322 The basical misunderstanding here is people think 1 man with gun vs lion, the lion has no chance.Actually 1 man on foot with gun vs lion, its the human that's the underdog.That's why it's called a sport.
but why did you shoot the lion in the first place?
Lions don't attack humans unless being threatened first. Humans don't eat lions because big cats taste like crap.
So why do you want to kill a lion in the first place?
Originally posted by fizzle322 The basical misunderstanding here is people think 1 man with gun vs lion, the lion has no chance.Actually 1 man on foot with gun vs lion, its the human that's the underdog.That's why it's called a sport.
but why did you shoot the lion in the first place? He was hunting it.
Lions don't attack humans unless being threatened first. Humans don't eat lions because big cats taste like crap. Not always true. There are places in Africa that are rich with refugees and in turn lions. An unarmed man is very easy to kill.
So why do you want to kill a lion in the first place? It is sport to him (wheather you approve of it or not people like to kill for sport.)
I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.
Originally posted by WantsumBier Here is a question for those of you who do not approve of hunting for sport. What about sport fishing?
Just as bad as other bloodsports.
Unless your planning on using the meat there is no reason to hunt. As I said before, take all these bloodsport supporting morons, drop them in a wild animal enclosure (Preferably Tigers, Lions come second but they tend to be really lazy unless they are hungry). Last one standing wins the argument (ohh they will be unarmed ofcourse, got to have a level playing field).
As yet I've never found someone who supports bloodsports willing to take a big cat 1 on 1.
Originally posted by Cowinspace Originally posted by WantsumBier Here is a question for those of you who do not approve of hunting for sport. What about sport fishing?
Just as bad as other bloodsports.
Unless your planning on using the meat there is no reason to hunt. As I said before, take all these bloodsport supporting morons, drop them in a wild animal enclosure (Preferably Tigers, Lions come second but they tend to be really lazy unless they are hungry). Last one standing wins the argument (ohh they will be unarmed ofcourse, got to have a level playing field).
As yet I've never found someone who supports bloodsports willing to take a big cat 1 on 1.
The Zulu warriors did it...it was a right of passage. They did get to use a spear and a shield.
Hand to claw the lion has got a little bit of an edge.
I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.
Ok ill re-enter the conversation. Seems to cooled off.
My friend has been so blessed to spearfish most of his life. Now in terms of hunting it is in my opinion and his the same as trophy hunting if you just want a fish to put up on the wall. In his case though hes feeding three very hungery kids, a wife and a grandmother. His prey consists of rock snapper, tuna and rarely groupers. Now in terms of hunting I honestly see it as many dozens of times more dangerous since your under water. Not to mention the fact tuna can break your body in two if they decide to bolt into your chest. There incredibely fast fish. Then add in the danger of becoming the hunted. He has several times been attacked by sea lions which is why he carries a knife. They tend to try to steal fish from the spears. The other risk is sharks. Hammerheads and White Sharks are common sights where he fishes. The Hammerheads are the real risk he says. They will attack simply because there agitated. Whereas Great Whites are more methodic and can be encouraged to not bother you. His favorite hun was when a 14 foot grear white female decided to circle him. He figure it was after a sea lion hed seen earlier. She just watched him. Her eyes were keen he said. Not threatening at all. More curious. She knew exactly what he was he said. She saw the spear and was keeping a respectful distance. In anycase he says they think. He says hes seen several divers actualy pet the sharks and seen two tapes of men doing it. Apparently the sharks have a sympathetic response to roll there eyes back and almost go to sleep if pet on the chin. I didnt believe it tell i saw the tapes of a man who regularly does it to a shark he says hes known for 10 years. Apparently the Great Whites can be acclimated to human behaviour. Meaning there brains are FAR more developed then there lesser cousins.
daeandor you didnt defend war you used it in a analogy so i was pointing out it was a bad one to use.
ok back when oh lets say early 1800's when man was still a major part of the earths mamal population but there where still alot of animals that where a threat yes hunting was nessisary. now with so many animals extinct or on the brink or extinction there still being hunted. some people have no problem hunting them and thats a shame. people who breed them for "sport" hunting are the lowest life forms.
now if you where hunting for food and thats it thats ok. but killing a animal for sport is wrong. just like the indians used every part of the buffalo that should be your intent when hunting for food/survival. they used the bladder for a water container, ect.
now if you use every part of the animal you kill its all you buddy but if not how can you say its ok? what cause your family has hunted game since the inception of your liniage? thats no reason to keep hunting. humans evolve with time and adapt to the present. in this time there is no logical reason to hunt big game unless you dont mind wipping out another mammal.
oh and to clarify when i was younger i went hunting with friends alot deer season and yes i used every last piece of that deer i shot. the bladder is a decoration in my stepdads den, the fur was made into a mantle rug my grandma has, the meat was cooked, the antlers made into a lamp, organs went into compost. out of the three years i went hunting i only got 2 it took 6 hours for me to track that damn deer after i got it with 2 arrows. see the thing with using arrows to guns arrows they can still run and if they get away and live hence a chance. guns equals no chance there is skill and tracking with arrows not with a gun.
Hrmm ever try deer heart Lyon? DELICOUS! Very high in iron and quite tastey if served with mashed potatoes and A-1 sauce. OH and some fried onions. That used to be my favorite part of the hunt was right after we skinned and hung the deer in the garage wed run right in and clean and drain the heart of blood then fry that thing right up. It was also a great way to handle bullies at school who stole your food. A rather oafish football player kept taking my food tell I let him take some deer heart fried. I let him take one bite and he was like... what is this.. tastes strange. After I told him he turned many shades of green. Hrmm my second favorite is Elk liver with onions! Its better then cow liver! Not quite as good as chicken livers though. Served fried with A-1 sauce straight up hehe. If you can tell I love a-1 sauce and sweet meets. Never did eat the brain tho. Wasnt that we had any moral reason not to. Its just risky due to a parasite in this area. Knew a old lady who died from eatting squirrels here.
Originally posted by fizzle322 The basical misunderstanding here is people think 1 man with gun vs lion, the lion has no chance.Actually 1 man on foot with gun vs lion, its the human that's the underdog.That's why it's called a sport.
but why did you shoot the lion in the first place?
Lions don't attack humans unless being threatened first. Humans don't eat lions because big cats taste like crap.
So why do you want to kill a lion in the first place?
Don't be silly.
Wild animals attack humans for food all the time.
Its natural selection. Lions scope out human settlements. They pretend they're just walking around doing nothing, they're actually scoping a potential source of food.
When that lion gets killed, the other lions know, you don't f*ck with humans.
They learn to fear humans, and they raise their cubs to fear humans, because they know Simba went out near a ranch and got shot.
This is why lions don't usually attack humans, they have learned to fear us.
If you let a lion hang out near your ranch, you're an idiot. It will learn that you're not dangerous, and it will come to see humans as a potential source of food.
When you see a lion its not dangerous. Its scoping you out. Smelling your reaction. Fear? Hostility?
The danger is when you don't see it. That means it has decided that you are qualified to become food.
Thats why you never give it a chance to make that decision. You kill it when you see it. Then all the other lions will know that you're a dangerous predator, and they will stay away from you. Otherwise you will never see it when it ambushes you.
it took 6 hours for me to track that damn deer after i got it with 2 arrows. see the thing with using arrows to guns arrows they can still run and if they get away and live hence a chance. guns equals no chance there is skill and tracking with arrows not with a gun.
Oh yeah I'm sure the deer will live a wonderful life in the wild with an arrow lodged in his chest and bleeding a trail for the nearest predator.
And lions are not deer.
Deer don't chase you down after you shoot them. You're not gonna get eaten by a pack of deer while hunting one of their members.
Good luck killing a lion with a crossbow. It'll be eating you while you reload.
Actually I consider hunting Deer to be cowardly. Never heard of a deer killing a human. And you don't need it for food.
So you killed it for neither food nor security.
You hunt lions in Africa for security, to secure your land and your family, to make sure the other lions learn to fear you.
Like I have said three times now, you have exhibited that you are not willing to understand, therefore there still is nothing I could do to convince you. I said before that I did not mean that quote above as condescending, but yet you are condescending and derogatory to me. I am fully capable of compassion, but there is no way to 'prove' it to you. Essentially you are implying that I am subhuman by participating in trophy hunts. Yet, I am wondering how many selfish acts you participate in that result in similar deaths to creatures. Don't be so quick to judge. Nearly all of our activites as modern humans destroy land and habitat for animals. I at least know when I have killed one extra animal and have the stones to admit it in a society which frowns on acting human.
Would you mind elaborating upon which 'activities' I partake in which cause 'similar' deaths to animals? I can't think of any.
I'm not aiming my argument toward you personally, daeandor. I'm aiming it toward anybody that can call killing an animal 'fun'.
Originally posted by Vertex1980 Click at your own risk. This is just an example of people hunting animals. Looks like they might actually eat the meat... still sickens me.
that lion could take a few bullets and still fight back, its al,most fair, althouh it wasnt fair since if was like 3v1 if it was 1v1 that lion wouldnt stop until he killled the hunter, if it wa 1v1 it would have been fair, that lion only needs one clean strike to rip that guy in half, he still has to reload
fizzle if its not a good shot yes it can live and get away happens alot with arrow hunters who cant shot. also did you read the whole thing??? i used and ate everything except the bones. actually go read up on how they hunt lions you are way off on your statement. deer hunting in california atleast is open only for keeping the population down and they are not a endangered spieces. also this was hunting well over 14 years ago im 30 now. please read whole posts not just parts of it you will be better informed.
Would you mind elaborating upon which 'activities' I partake in which cause 'similar' deaths to animals? I can't think of any. I'm not aiming my argument toward you personally, daeandor. I'm aiming it toward anybody that can call killing an animal 'fun'.
Deforestation, destruction of habitat, urban sprawl. All a result of human population growth and consumer demands. Since I *know* you have a computer, electricity, and a connection to the internet, I can assume that you did not invent / manufacture it on your own. Bottom line is that as a consumer in western society, you have blindly participated in the slaughter of animals on a scale that does not even compair to trophy hunting.
And I did not say killing an animal is fun. I merely implied that hunting dangerous game is rewarding and more of a challenge than anyone here cares to acknowledge.
Originally posted by Hohbein Lion V Hunters Some may have seen this before, I know I have, but not for a long time. Just came across it tonight while browsing youtube, it's one of the most awsome video's I think i've come across. I just wish the lion had done a bit more damage, perhaps killed a couple of them. Anyway, it's well worth the watch if you HATE unneccessary hunting. That lion are teh ANDY MCNAB of lionz!
Saw this video a few months ago. Seems like the back story of this was that there was a rogue lion in the area that had attacked and killed a few locals and these guys were called in to take the animal out.
------------------------------ You see, every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with their surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You spread to an area, and you multiply, and you multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet.-Mr.Smith
Originally posted by daeandor Originally posted by Hohbein
Would you mind elaborating upon which 'activities' I partake in which cause 'similar' deaths to animals? I can't think of any. I'm not aiming my argument toward you personally, daeandor. I'm aiming it toward anybody that can call killing an animal 'fun'.
Deforestation, destruction of habitat, urban sprawl. All a result of human population growth and consumer demands. Since I *know* you have a computer, electricity, and a connection to the internet, I can assume that you did not invent / manufacture it on your own. Bottom line is that as a consumer in western society, you have blindly participated in the slaughter of animals on a scale that does not even compair to trophy hunting.
And I did not say killing an animal is fun. I merely implied that hunting dangerous game is rewarding and more of a challenge than anyone here cares to acknowledge.
So let me get this straight. Your actually trying to compare me using my computer, to you shooting a lion dead for 'fun'? In fact, your actually trying to suggest that what I'm doing is worse and less humane? Fascinating...
There's no real point in arguing this matter. It's much like the vegetarian argument of 'if I stop eating meat, I'll be saving animals!'.. when of course, they are not, at all. By using electricity, I don't personally effect the lives of any animals, not atall. The electricity I use would still be produced, in fact if I didn't use it, who would? Would it really be right for these animals to have died for no good reason?
You, on the other hand, kill animals for absolutely no good reason, other than your own personal enjoyment and satisfaction. By shooting dead one lion, or buffalo or whatever, you are DIRECTLY effecting not only the life of that animal, but the life of it's offspring. You have taken it into your own hands to end a life for your own entertainment, to cause suffering and devestation for no actual reason.
So, who's worse? The guy that uses something that animals have had to die for to help produce, or the guy that kills animals for no other reason than it being 'entertaining'?
Daendor: So let me get this straight. Your actually trying to compare me using my computer, to you shooting a lion dead for 'fun'? -----
In your heart it's the same thing. Whether its the real thing or a cardboard mockup, in your mind its the same.
SWAT guys wooden popup targets, so when its a real bad guy they won't hesitate. Emotionally there is no difference, you get the same feelings from shooting the real bad guy.
There is no difference between lusting after someone and committing adultery.
Either way, you already betrayed your partner in your heart.
I know in the age of moral relativism these concepts seem harsh and judgemental. They are not. We are all killers. We are all adulterers. We are all sinners.
Every time I put a piece of meat in my mouth, I consented to the killing of an animal for my tastebuds.
Nobody HAS to eat meat. Some people are vegetarians. Its a choice that you eat meat. So you consent to keeping an animal in a small cage for years with no real meaningful life. You consent to having its throat cut. You consent to having it watch its child butchered. You consent to consuming its flesh because it tastes good with pickles and tartar sauce.
You are a killer as surely as if you had killed the animal yourself.
You killed the cow for your pleasure. They killed the lion for their security.
Killing the lion was a more noble act than you or me eating the burger.
In your heart it's the same thing. Whether its the real thing or a cardboard mockup, in your mind its the same.
SWAT guys wooden popup targets, so when its a real bad guy they won't hesitate. Emotionally there is no difference, you get the same feelings from shooting the real bad guy.
There is no difference between lusting after someone and committing adultery.
Either way, you already betrayed your partner in your heart.
I know in the age of moral relativism these concepts seem harsh and judgemental. They are not. We are all killers. We are all adulterers. We are all sinners.
Every time I put a piece of meat in my mouth, I consented to the killing of an animal for my tastebuds.
Nobody HAS to eat meat. Some people are vegetarians. Its a choice that you eat meat. So you consent to keeping an animal in a small cage for years with no real meaningful life. You consent to having its throat cut. You consent to having it watch its child butchered. You consent to consuming its flesh because it tastes good with pickles and tartar sauce.
You are a killer as surely as if you had killed the animal yourself.
You killed the cow for your pleasure. They killed the lion for their security.
Killing the lion was a more noble act than you or me eating the burger.
Right. *cracks knuckles*
Your quite right, I do not 'have' to eat meat. However, if I weren't to pickup that chicken from the supermarket shelf and eat it, what would it have died for? Are you aware just how many animals are killed and WASTED each year? By eating meat, I'm not consenting to having animals locked in cages and butchered... I'm merely giving their life at least SOME meaning. If I weren't to eat them, what exactly would they have suffered and died for? To be tossed into a dustbin and eventually incinerated along with everybody elses 'trash'?
Your quite right, I do not 'have' to eat meat. However, if I weren't to pickup that chicken from the supermarket shelf and eat it, what would it have died for? Are you aware just how many animals are killed and WASTED each year? By eating meat, I'm not consenting to having animals locked in cages and butchered... I'm merely giving their life at least SOME meaning. If I weren't to eat them, what exactly would they have suffered and died for? To be tossed into a dustbin and eventually incinerated along with everybody elses 'trash'?
I do not kill animals. I scavenge.
Well you and I both know that if I stopped buying the chicken, and you stopped buying the chicken, and everybody else stopped buying the chicken, the market would shrink, thered be less need for breeding animals to die in meat factories, and the whole practice would eventually come to a sputtering halt.
We know this intellectually, but we have no faith in it ever happening.
But that's really a copout isn't it.
You know that a single person has an effect on the market. The store you shop in will stock 1 less package, in their computer will be a few pounds less worth of meat purchased every year. The meat factory will use one fewer bottles of bull sperm.
Sure the cycle will continue and probably even grow. But at least you wouldn't be contributing to it.
I know theres alot of hatred and killing in the world. Alot of wars.
But I don't have to join them. I don't have to be one of them. Thats a choice.
Now whether the cycle continues with or without me, thats a different matter.
Originally posted by fizzle322 Originally posted by Hohbein .
Right. *cracks knuckles*
Your quite right, I do not 'have' to eat meat. However, if I weren't to pickup that chicken from the supermarket shelf and eat it, what would it have died for? Are you aware just how many animals are killed and WASTED each year? By eating meat, I'm not consenting to having animals locked in cages and butchered... I'm merely giving their life at least SOME meaning. If I weren't to eat them, what exactly would they have suffered and died for? To be tossed into a dustbin and eventually incinerated along with everybody elses 'trash'?
I do not kill animals. I scavenge.
Well you and I both know that if I stopped buying the chicken, and you stopped buying the chicken, and everybody else stopped buying the chicken, the market would shrink, thered be less need for breeding animals to die in meat factories, and the whole practice would eventually come to a sputtering halt.
We know this intellectually, but we have no faith in it ever happening.
But that's really a copout isn't it.
You know that a single person has an effect on the market. The store you shop in will stock 1 less package, in their computer will be a few pounds less worth of meat purchased every year. The meat factory will use one fewer bottles of bull sperm.
Sure the cycle will continue and probably even grow. But at least you wouldn't be contributing to it.
I know theres alot of hatred and killing in the world. Alot of wars.
But I don't have to join them. I don't have to be one of them. Thats a choice.
Now whether the cycle continues with or without me, thats a different matter.
This might be true in an bubble! Supermarkets are not going to reduce their packages of chicken they available because one persons stops buying it. Large chains like Walmart, Safeway, Luckys, and the like will first discount the surplus then if it does not sell they will toss it.
You also did not take into account that someone else moves into the neighborhood that really likes chicken. In the end fewer and fewer retailers care about the individual consumer.
I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.
Originally posted by Hohbein Lion V Hunters Some may have seen this before, I know I have, but not for a long time. Just came across it tonight while browsing youtube, it's one of the most awsome video's I think i've come across. I just wish the lion had done a bit more damage, perhaps killed a couple of them. Anyway, it's well worth the watch if you HATE unneccessary hunting. That lion are teh ANDY MCNAB of lionz!
I might recommend a DVD called "Grizzly Man". Shows an animal lover who thinks he communes with the bears and can become one with them. In a sense, he does become "one with them".
Comments
Does it not seem like a waste of life, to you? That lion had probably lived 15 gruelling years within the african plains, dodging starvation, fighting to stay alive... Every day had been a struggle.. All that effort for what? For some moron with a small penis complex to come along and shoot him dead in the name of 'fun'?
I'm far, far from a hippy. But I can show compassion, and more importantly respect for the other creatures that inhabbit this world with me. I wouldn't kill a spider, or even a fly, because I simply don't have the right to do so. Nobody has the right to kill any animal in the name of 'fun'.
According to natural law, we have that right, to kill anything for any reason.
But killing another living thing for no reason. It's a sin.
That being said, theres alot of parts of the world where hunting is necessary to make it safer for humans.
Whats the use of being the top predator if you don't exercise your natural rights for your own benefit?
Becoming a meal for a lion, despite the fact that you could have prevented it by killing all the lions in a certain area, that's also a sin and a waste of potential.
The term "sport" refers to using minimal force to kill what you perceive to be a threat. You CAN use a bomb, a landmine, you can drive around in a jeep and fire out the window.
Like if another man was a threat to you, you can challenge him to a duel rather than poisoning his drink.
For a lion, you can't kill it with a knife, or a sword, or a crossbow, or a small pistol. The minimum force you need is a scoped rifle. That is the bare minimum tool you need to have a chance against a lion.
If there wasn't 3 or 4 hunters shooting that lion, the guy who got attacked by it would be dead.
People think "oh its not fair you have a gun."
If I gave you a rifle and sent you out to kill a lion, chances are you would not make it out alive.
Its like bullfighting. Yeah the human has a small advantage, he's smarter, theres technique to killing a bull with sharp sticks.
But that sash they wear around the waist is not an ornament. They don't wear it to look like a faggot. Its actually there to keep his intestines inside his body in case the bull gores him.
Same concept with having 3-4 guys there. One guy is the hunter. The other 3 guys are there to save his life if something goes wrong, which it did, or at least tell his widow what happened.
"Bob shot a lion, then the lion ran up clawed Bob's face off."
The basical misunderstanding here is people think 1 man with gun vs lion, the lion has no chance.
Actually 1 man on foot with gun vs lion, its the human that's the underdog.
That's why it's called a sport.
but why did you shoot the lion in the first place?
Lions don't attack humans unless being threatened first. Humans don't eat lions because big cats taste like crap.
So why do you want to kill a lion in the first place?
but why did you shoot the lion in the first place? He was hunting it.
Lions don't attack humans unless being threatened first. Humans don't eat lions because big cats taste like crap. Not always true. There are places in Africa that are rich with refugees and in turn lions. An unarmed man is very easy to kill.
So why do you want to kill a lion in the first place? It is sport to him (wheather you approve of it or not people like to kill for sport.)
I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.
Here is a question for those of you who do not approve of hunting for sport.
What about sport fishing?
I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.
Unless your planning on using the meat there is no reason to hunt. As I said before, take all these bloodsport supporting morons, drop them in a wild animal enclosure (Preferably Tigers, Lions come second but they tend to be really lazy unless they are hungry). Last one standing wins the argument (ohh they will be unarmed ofcourse, got to have a level playing field).
As yet I've never found someone who supports bloodsports willing to take a big cat 1 on 1.
Unless your planning on using the meat there is no reason to hunt. As I said before, take all these bloodsport supporting morons, drop them in a wild animal enclosure (Preferably Tigers, Lions come second but they tend to be really lazy unless they are hungry). Last one standing wins the argument (ohh they will be unarmed ofcourse, got to have a level playing field).
As yet I've never found someone who supports bloodsports willing to take a big cat 1 on 1.
The Zulu warriors did it...it was a right of passage. They did get to use a spear and a shield.
Hand to claw the lion has got a little bit of an edge.
I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.
(And besides the advantage here is purely natural, unlike hunting with weapons which is decidedly unnatural)
My friend has been so blessed to spearfish most of his life. Now in terms of hunting it is in my opinion and his the same as trophy hunting if you just want a fish to put up on the wall. In his case though hes feeding three very hungery kids, a wife and a grandmother. His prey consists of rock snapper, tuna and rarely groupers. Now in terms of hunting I honestly see it as many dozens of times more dangerous since your under water. Not to mention the fact tuna can break your body in two if they decide to bolt into your chest. There incredibely fast fish. Then add in the danger of becoming the hunted. He has several times been attacked by sea lions which is why he carries a knife. They tend to try to steal fish from the spears. The other risk is sharks. Hammerheads and White Sharks are common sights where he fishes. The Hammerheads are the real risk he says. They will attack simply because there agitated. Whereas Great Whites are more methodic and can be encouraged to not bother you. His favorite hun was when a 14 foot grear white female decided to circle him. He figure it was after a sea lion hed seen earlier. She just watched him. Her eyes were keen he said. Not threatening at all. More curious. She knew exactly what he was he said. She saw the spear and was keeping a respectful distance. In anycase he says they think. He says hes seen several divers actualy pet the sharks and seen two tapes of men doing it. Apparently the sharks have a sympathetic response to roll there eyes back and almost go to sleep if pet on the chin. I didnt believe it tell i saw the tapes of a man who regularly does it to a shark he says hes known for 10 years. Apparently the Great Whites can be acclimated to human behaviour. Meaning there brains are FAR more developed then there lesser cousins.
daeandor you didnt defend war you used it in a analogy so i was pointing out it was a bad one to use.
ok back when oh lets say early 1800's when man was still a major part of the earths mamal population but there where still alot of animals that where a threat yes hunting was nessisary. now with so many animals extinct or on the brink or extinction there still being hunted. some people have no problem hunting them and thats a shame. people who breed them for "sport" hunting are the lowest life forms.
now if you where hunting for food and thats it thats ok. but killing a animal for sport is wrong. just like the indians used every part of the buffalo that should be your intent when hunting for food/survival. they used the bladder for a water container, ect.
now if you use every part of the animal you kill its all you buddy but if not how can you say its ok? what cause your family has hunted game since the inception of your liniage? thats no reason to keep hunting. humans evolve with time and adapt to the present. in this time there is no logical reason to hunt big game unless you dont mind wipping out another mammal.
oh and to clarify when i was younger i went hunting with friends alot deer season and yes i used every last piece of that deer i shot. the bladder is a decoration in my stepdads den, the fur was made into a mantle rug my grandma has, the meat was cooked, the antlers made into a lamp, organs went into compost. out of the three years i went hunting i only got 2 it took 6 hours for me to track that damn deer after i got it with 2 arrows. see the thing with using arrows to guns arrows they can still run and if they get away and live hence a chance. guns equals no chance there is skill and tracking with arrows not with a gun.
but why did you shoot the lion in the first place?
Lions don't attack humans unless being threatened first. Humans don't eat lions because big cats taste like crap.
So why do you want to kill a lion in the first place?
Don't be silly.
Wild animals attack humans for food all the time.
Its natural selection. Lions scope out human settlements. They pretend they're just walking around doing nothing, they're actually scoping a potential source of food.
When that lion gets killed, the other lions know, you don't f*ck with humans.
They learn to fear humans, and they raise their cubs to fear humans, because they know Simba went out near a ranch and got shot.
This is why lions don't usually attack humans, they have learned to fear us.
If you let a lion hang out near your ranch, you're an idiot. It will learn that you're not dangerous, and it will come to see humans as a potential source of food.
When you see a lion its not dangerous. Its scoping you out. Smelling your reaction. Fear? Hostility?
The danger is when you don't see it. That means it has decided that you are qualified to become food.
Thats why you never give it a chance to make that decision. You kill it when you see it. Then all the other lions will know that you're a dangerous predator, and they will stay away from you. Otherwise you will never see it when it ambushes you.
And lions are not deer.
Deer don't chase you down after you shoot them. You're not gonna get eaten by a pack of deer while hunting one of their members.
Good luck killing a lion with a crossbow. It'll be eating you while you reload.
Actually I consider hunting Deer to be cowardly. Never heard of a deer killing a human. And you don't need it for food.
So you killed it for neither food nor security.
You hunt lions in Africa for security, to secure your land and your family, to make sure the other lions learn to fear you.
Which character are you test by Naruto - Kun.com
fizzle if its not a good shot yes it can live and get away happens alot with arrow hunters who cant shot. also did you read the whole thing??? i used and ate everything except the bones. actually go read up on how they hunt lions you are way off on your statement. deer hunting in california atleast is open only for keeping the population down and they are not a endangered spieces. also this was hunting well over 14 years ago im 30 now. please read whole posts not just parts of it you will be better informed.
Deforestation, destruction of habitat, urban sprawl. All a result of human population growth and consumer demands. Since I *know* you have a computer, electricity, and a connection to the internet, I can assume that you did not invent / manufacture it on your own. Bottom line is that as a consumer in western society, you have blindly participated in the slaughter of animals on a scale that does not even compair to trophy hunting.
And I did not say killing an animal is fun. I merely implied that hunting dangerous game is rewarding and more of a challenge than anyone here cares to acknowledge.
------------------------------
You see, every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with their surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You spread to an area, and you multiply, and you multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet.-Mr.Smith
And I did not say killing an animal is fun. I merely implied that hunting dangerous game is rewarding and more of a challenge than anyone here cares to acknowledge.
So let me get this straight. Your actually trying to compare me using my computer, to you shooting a lion dead for 'fun'? In fact, your actually trying to suggest that what I'm doing is worse and less humane? Fascinating...
There's no real point in arguing this matter. It's much like the vegetarian argument of 'if I stop eating meat, I'll be saving animals!'.. when of course, they are not, at all. By using electricity, I don't personally effect the lives of any animals, not atall. The electricity I use would still be produced, in fact if I didn't use it, who would? Would it really be right for these animals to have died for no good reason?
You, on the other hand, kill animals for absolutely no good reason, other than your own personal enjoyment and satisfaction. By shooting dead one lion, or buffalo or whatever, you are DIRECTLY effecting not only the life of that animal, but the life of it's offspring. You have taken it into your own hands to end a life for your own entertainment, to cause suffering and devestation for no actual reason.
So, who's worse? The guy that uses something that animals have had to die for to help produce, or the guy that kills animals for no other reason than it being 'entertaining'?
I think we all know, I'm right.
SWAT guys wooden popup targets, so when its a real bad guy they won't hesitate. Emotionally there is no difference, you get the same feelings from shooting the real bad guy.
There is no difference between lusting after someone and committing adultery.
Either way, you already betrayed your partner in your heart.
I know in the age of moral relativism these concepts seem harsh and judgemental. They are not. We are all killers. We are all adulterers. We are all sinners.
Every time I put a piece of meat in my mouth, I consented to the killing of an animal for my tastebuds.
Nobody HAS to eat meat. Some people are vegetarians. Its a choice that you eat meat. So you consent to keeping an animal in a small cage for years with no real meaningful life. You consent to having its throat cut. You consent to having it watch its child butchered. You consent to consuming its flesh because it tastes good with pickles and tartar sauce.
You are a killer as surely as if you had killed the animal yourself.
You killed the cow for your pleasure. They killed the lion for their security.
Killing the lion was a more noble act than you or me eating the burger.
Right. *cracks knuckles*
Your quite right, I do not 'have' to eat meat. However, if I weren't to pickup that chicken from the supermarket shelf and eat it, what would it have died for? Are you aware just how many animals are killed and WASTED each year? By eating meat, I'm not consenting to having animals locked in cages and butchered... I'm merely giving their life at least SOME meaning. If I weren't to eat them, what exactly would they have suffered and died for? To be tossed into a dustbin and eventually incinerated along with everybody elses 'trash'?
I do not kill animals. I scavenge.
Well you and I both know that if I stopped buying the chicken, and you stopped buying the chicken, and everybody else stopped buying the chicken, the market would shrink, thered be less need for breeding animals to die in meat factories, and the whole practice would eventually come to a sputtering halt.
We know this intellectually, but we have no faith in it ever happening.
But that's really a copout isn't it.
You know that a single person has an effect on the market. The store you shop in will stock 1 less package, in their computer will be a few pounds less worth of meat purchased every year. The meat factory will use one fewer bottles of bull sperm.
Sure the cycle will continue and probably even grow. But at least you wouldn't be contributing to it.
I know theres alot of hatred and killing in the world. Alot of wars.
But I don't have to join them. I don't have to be one of them. Thats a choice.
Now whether the cycle continues with or without me, thats a different matter.
Right. *cracks knuckles*
Your quite right, I do not 'have' to eat meat. However, if I weren't to pickup that chicken from the supermarket shelf and eat it, what would it have died for? Are you aware just how many animals are killed and WASTED each year? By eating meat, I'm not consenting to having animals locked in cages and butchered... I'm merely giving their life at least SOME meaning. If I weren't to eat them, what exactly would they have suffered and died for? To be tossed into a dustbin and eventually incinerated along with everybody elses 'trash'?
I do not kill animals. I scavenge.
Well you and I both know that if I stopped buying the chicken, and you stopped buying the chicken, and everybody else stopped buying the chicken, the market would shrink, thered be less need for breeding animals to die in meat factories, and the whole practice would eventually come to a sputtering halt.
We know this intellectually, but we have no faith in it ever happening.
But that's really a copout isn't it.
You know that a single person has an effect on the market. The store you shop in will stock 1 less package, in their computer will be a few pounds less worth of meat purchased every year. The meat factory will use one fewer bottles of bull sperm.
Sure the cycle will continue and probably even grow. But at least you wouldn't be contributing to it.
I know theres alot of hatred and killing in the world. Alot of wars.
But I don't have to join them. I don't have to be one of them. Thats a choice.
Now whether the cycle continues with or without me, thats a different matter.
This might be true in an bubble! Supermarkets are not going to reduce their packages of chicken they available because one persons stops buying it. Large chains like Walmart, Safeway, Luckys, and the like will first discount the surplus then if it does not sell they will toss it.
You also did not take into account that someone else moves into the neighborhood that really likes chicken. In the end fewer and fewer retailers care about the individual consumer.
I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.
I might recommend a DVD called "Grizzly Man". Shows an animal lover who thinks he communes with the bears and can become one with them. In a sense, he does become "one with them".
Yes, go watch "Grizzly Man".