Killing wild animals for fun

Post by **spot** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:03 am

There's probably a more neutral word for it, like "collateral damage". Hunting, fishing and shouting? Something like that.

An unutterably despicable cad went to Rhodesia (as Americans still call the place, while flying flags of the Confederacy) and harpooned a lion. The red-top gutter tabloid press has renamed him Kim "Pol Pot" Gaddafi and PETA has called for his public hanging for serial offences, the chap having blown up some form of American Bear with a grenade out of season a few years ago.

He was a Minnesotan dentist until last month. He will now, being a Celebrity, make a fortune as a public speaker. I rather hope he throws his hat into the Republican Presidential Primaries, he'll be a billionaire by the time he drops out. Or, of course, wins.

The bear and the lion, meanwhile, are dead.

If only he'd joined the Marines he could have machine-gunned Iraqi wedding guests instead, and got a medal for it.

Smaug · Post by **Smaug** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 4:46 am

spot;1483367 wrote: There's probably a more neutral word for it, like "collateral damage". Hunting, fishing and shouting? Something like that.

An unutterably despicable cad went to Rhodesia (as Americans still call the place, while flying flags of the Confederacy) and harpooned a lion. The red-top gutter tabloid press has renamed him Kim "Pol Pot" Gaddafi and PETA has called for his public hanging for serial offences, the chap having blown up some form of American Bear with a grenade out of season a few years ago.

He was a Minnesotan dentist until last month. He will now, being a Celebrity, make a fortune as a public speaker. I rather hope he throws his hat into the Republican Presidential Primaries, he'll be a billionaire by the time he drops out. Or, of course, wins.

The bear and the lion, meanwhile, are dead.

If only he'd joined the Marines he could have machine-gunned Iraqi wedding guests instead, and got a medal for it.

OUCH!! I would recommend avoiding a career in the diplomatic corps...

Post by **spot** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 5:10 am

What puzzles me is why these psychopathic killers, or "hunters" as they call themselves, don't stalk domestic pets instead.

It must surely be as technically difficult to put a crossbow bolt through a feral bull terrier from fifty yards in a town center as it is to wound a lion in an African wildlife reserve, and the psychopathic act would then qualify a public service rather than a life-changing cock-up. The killer would be unlikely to eat the corpse, but I doubt he planned to do that with the lion either.

A stuffed Staffordshire bull terrier's head mounted over the door of the den would be just as impressive.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 5:49 am

Oh it is sad story, and I heard the lion killed was quite a famous one. I know many countries in Africa allow hunting with licenses of certain animals, as a source of revenue.

Post by **spot** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 5:54 am

chonsigirl;1483383 wrote: I know many countries in Africa allow hunting with licenses of certain animals, as a source of revenue.

I suspect there are two moralities involved in the transaction.

Allowing killers to satisfy their cravings as a source of otherwise-unraisable revenue to support the reserve may well be commendable.

Being a killer with cravings to satisfy may, at the same time and for the same act, be a moral disgrace.

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 6:54 am

While I don't condone this guy, or an other of the clowns who have lately been called out for paying big bucks to go to Africa and kill "Big Game" for trophy, some responsibility must be put on the so-called guides and even the administration who allows such behavior to take place.

The man paid them to help him find a wild Lion to shoot, and well, this Lion seemed hardly wild, at all.

Post by **spot** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 7:17 am

So he's not just a psychopathic killer, he's gullible too. Isn't that how the West describes ISIS recruits?

Post by **spot** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 8:12 am

I just knew there had to be a euphemism involved in this. It's "taking", apparently, not "killing".

"Again, I deeply regret that my pursuit of an activity I love and practise responsibly and legally resulted in the taking of this lion," he added.

US dentist Walter Palmer 'regrets' killing Zimbabwe lion Cecil - BBC News

No, Mr Palmer, it's not taking. It's killing. Or, in your case, ineptly wounding - I suggest you rebuild your skills from the ground up, start with a Jack Russell [1] at point blank range and make sure it's dead before you go to the next level.

I notice you've engaged a publicity agent, too. Presumably so you can end up taking still more.

[1]: A passing reference to the classic punch-line "A Jack Russell, your Honour".

High Threshold · Post by **High Threshold** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 10:51 am

LarsMac;1483385 wrote: While I don't condone this guy, or an other of the clowns who have lately been called out for paying big bucks to go to Africa and kill "Big Game" for trophy, some responsibility must be put on the so-called guides and even the administration who allows such behavior to take place.

The man paid them to help him find a wild Lion to shoot, and well, this Lion seemed hardly wild, at all.
True. There's a double standard here. Mugabe has exceeded his "bag limit" of homo sapiens but Lord, hands off the lion. Yes, and some still stick spears into the shoulders of bulls, force horses to jump over dangerous hurdles, and run down the fox till it dies of a heart attack. All in the name of sport. So why pick on an American who's a perfectly legal consumer? Or is this the same mindset that declares that it is perfectly legal for a woman to rent her body out by the hour but illegal for someone to pay the fee?

Smaug · Post by **Smaug** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 11:15 am

High Threshold;1483406 wrote: True. There's a double standard here. Mugabe has exceeded his "bag limit" of homo sapiens but Lord, hands off the lion. Yes, and some still stick spears into the shoulders of bulls, force horses to jump over dangerous hurdles, and run down the fox till it dies of a heart attack. All in the name of sport. So why pick on an American who's a perfectly legal consumer? Or is this the same mindset that declares that it is perfectly legal for a woman to rent her body out by the hour but illegal for someone to pay the fee?

It's a sick species that kills for entertainment. Have we really become so jaded? You bet we have!!:-5

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 11:47 am

Smaug;1483407 wrote: It's a sick species that kills for entertainment. Have we really become so jaded? You bet we have!!:-5

You mean like kitty cats?

High Threshold · Post by **High Threshold** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 11:48 am

Smaug;1483407 wrote: It's a sick species that kills for entertainment. Have we really become so jaded? You bet we have!!:-5
"Man" was far worse than he is today, I dare say.

Discover the "Brazen Bull," the Ancient Greek Torture Machine That Doubled as a Musical Instrument | Open Culture

Smaug · Post by **Smaug** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 12:04 pm

High Threshold;1483411 wrote: "Man" was far worse than he is today, I dare say.

Discover the "Brazen Bull," the Ancient Greek Torture Machine That Doubled as a Musical Instrument | Open Culture

I'm not so sure about that. What about the "screaming boxes" used in Nazi death-camps for torturing Jews? A Jew would be placed in a wooden box barely big enough to squeeze into, nails were then hammered through the box and into the person inside. Then the camp guards would kick the box for a while...

I do agree that the "brazen bull" was a PARTICULARLY refined cruelty, though. Only a truly evil mind could come up with something like that!

High Threshold · Post by **High Threshold** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 12:12 pm

Smaug;1483414 wrote: I'm not so sure about that. What about the "screaming boxes" used in Nazi death-camps for torturing Jews? A Jew would be placed in a wooden box barely big enough to squeeze into, nails were then hammered through the box and into the person inside. Then the camp guards would kick the box for a while...

I do agree that the "brazen bull" was a PARTICULARLY refined cruelty, though. Only a truly evil mind could come up with something like that!
The point is that whether it be the ancient Greeks or the Nazis, this American fellow who was provided for and escorted by legal authorities - is an improvement.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 12:15 pm

spot;1483395 wrote: I just knew there had to be a euphemism involved in this. It's "taking", apparently, not "killing".

"Again, I deeply regret that my pursuit of an activity I love and practise responsibly and legally resulted in the taking of this lion," he added.

US dentist Walter Palmer 'regrets' killing Zimbabwe lion Cecil - BBC News

No, Mr Palmer, it's not taking. It's killing. Or, in your case, ineptly wounding - I suggest you rebuild your skills from the ground up, start with a Jack Russell [1] at point blank range and make sure it's dead before you go to the next level.

His choice of words was appropriate. Too bad it does doesnâ€™t serve your view of way things ought to be.

spot;1483395 wrote: I notice you've engaged a publicity agent, too. Presumably so you can end up taking still more.

Considering the publicity and outrage seems to be a prudent move on his part.

For one, I am holding my judgement until more information comes available.

I wonder how lion meat taste?

Post by **spot** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 12:18 pm

Smaug;1483414 wrote: What about the "screaming boxes" used in Nazi death-camps for torturing Jews? A Jew would be placed in a wooden box barely big enough to squeeze into, nails were then hammered through the box and into the person inside. Then the camp guards would kick the box for a while...

I'd be grateful for some reference which describes this happening, I've never come across the story before. Which camp? Who reported it? It surely must appear in an official account somewhere.

As for the Brazen Bull, I honestly don't think one was built and used. Not as reported by Pindar a hundred years after the alleged use, even though he claims there was only one victim and that was the man who order it built, not as reported by the early Christian Fathers when describing martyrdoms (notoriously lying propagandist accounts, those), and not as reported of Alaric II killing a tyrant Emperor either. I can't see why anyone would believe these stories, much less claim the device was in common use - the alleged victims in that entire millennium amount to around six people.

Post by **spot** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 12:25 pm

tude dog;1483416 wrote: His choice of words was appropriate. Too bad it does doesnâ€™t serve your view of way things ought to be.
Appropriate? "Taking" is a euphemism disguising a deliberate killing.

If you're in the know and one of the hunting fraternity it's a code you understand. To the world at large it's a disguise of the underlying reality of the event.

There's a word for that sort of language in this context - it's called Jargon and it divides an inner aware group from everyone else.

Proper jargon involves a condensed abbreviation of a well-defined process.

Jargon as euphemism is employing a code word for a real one, like "taking" for "killing".

High Threshold · Post by **High Threshold** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 12:38 pm

tude dog;1483416 wrote: ......... I wonder how lion meat taste?
Difficult to say. Having lived in Rhodesia myself I can tell you that the white man served up a number of antelope dishes such as Kudu â€¦... but elephant, hippo, and lion meat were usually given to the African population to consume. My assumption is that lion wouldn't taste all too very good.

Smaug · Post by **Smaug** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 12:55 pm

spot;1483418 wrote: I'd be grateful for some reference which describes this happening, I've never come across the story before. Which camp? Who reported it? It surely must appear in an official account somewhere.

As for the Brazen Bull, I honestly don't think one was built and used. Not as reported by Pindar a hundred years after the alleged use, even though he claims there was only one victim and that was the man who order it built, not as reported by the early Christian Fathers when describing martyrdoms (notoriously lying propagandist accounts, those), and not as reported of Alaric II killing a tyrant Emperor either. I can't see why anyone would believe these stories, much less claim the device was in common use - the alleged victims in that entire millennium amount to around six people.

It was a description of a torture method that was described by a Jewish death-camp survivor on a holocaust programme on T.V. about 10 or so years ago. Personally I'm inclined to believe the story, especially in the light of the many barbaric things perpetrated on "undesirable elements" as defined by the Nazis. Just take a look at "Dr." Mengele...

Incidentally, I couldn't find any reference either, but the absence of something does not prove it's non-existence. Maybe they don't want to give people bad ideas!

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 1:15 pm

spot;1483420 wrote: Appropriate? "Taking" is a euphemism disguising a deliberate killing.

If you're in the know and one of the hunting fraternity it's a code you understand. To the world at large it's a disguise of the underlying reality of the event.

There's a word for that sort of language in this context - it's called Jargon and it divides an inner aware group from everyone else.

Proper jargon involves a condensed abbreviation of a well-defined process.

Jargon as euphemism is employing a code word for a real one, like "taking" for "killing".

The deal is it is the best interest of all that the animals thrive which involves another word like 'culling'.

From what I read Zimbabwe regulates hunting to gain revenue, and why not? They have a supply of desirable animals to hunt and why not let someone take one?

Smaug · Post by **Smaug** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 1:21 pm

tude dog;1483427 wrote: The deal is it is the best interest of all that the animals thrive which involves another word like 'culling'.

From what I read Zimbabwe regulates hunting to gain revenue, and why not? They have a supply of desirable animals to hunt and why not let someone take one?

If someone were hunting a member of your family for pleasure or money, would you still feel the same? Hunting for pleasure alone is a particularly pathetic human pastime, and it's past-time it stopped!

Apart from that, they're not ours to take. Mankind's ignorance, arrogance and cruelty beggars belief sometimes!!

Post by **spot** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:58 pm

Smaug;1483423 wrote: Incidentally, I couldn't find any reference either, but the absence of something does not prove it's non-existence. Maybe they don't want to give people bad ideas!I think Internet discussions work on the basis that FOAF isn't what we in the conversation trade call evidence, that's all. Come on, think about it - if it were true it would be spread over the Internet like confetti, it would have appeared in a thousand books all of which are Google-searchable, it would be a stratospheric aspect of SS brutality. You know as well as I do it has to be fake.

Smaug · Post by **Smaug** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 4:55 pm

spot;1483433 wrote: I think Internet discussions work on the basis that FOAF isn't what we in the conversation trade call evidence, that's all. Come on, think about it - if it were true it would be spread over the Internet like confetti, it would have appeared in a thousand books all of which are Google-searchable, it would be a stratospheric aspect of SS brutality. You know as well as I do it has to be fake.

If that is the case, why did the survivor tell the tale? I can't think offhand why he would lie. I'm going to have a good "trawl" and see if I can verify this but don't expect instant results! If it DOES prove to be true after all, it would definitely mark a low point for those Nazi piles of excrement!

The other possibility is that it was an isolated incident, nevertheless I'm going to look into it.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 5:27 pm

Smaug;1483428 wrote: If someone were hunting a member of your family for pleasure or money, would you still feel the same?

Seems to me where a country issues hunting licenses's to hunt humans something something has gone terribly wrong.

Smaug;1483428 wrote: Hunting for pleasure alone is a particularly pathetic human pastime, and it's past-time it stopped!

Not much tastes better than a 100 percent organic meat.

Smaug;1483428 wrote: Apart from that, they're not ours to take. Mankind's ignorance, arrogance and cruelty beggars belief sometimes!!

You are welcome to that opinion.

Smaug · Post by **Smaug** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 5:31 pm

I've found the account that I remembered seeing years ago about the "screaming box". I was incorrect about the victim, though. He wasn't Jewish, though you'll have to forgive me there as the programme was a fair while ago, and I was working from memory alone, which isn't always perfect (is anyone's?)

To read the account, go to segment 167 (segment no's. at bottom of page)

To be quite frank, nothing the Nazis did, no matter how evil, perverted or degrading, would surprise me. Anyway, here's the link (not a video link), horrific as it is.

http://www.faculty.umb.edu/lawrence_blu ... ictims.pdf

I won't mention lampshades...Or cheap bars of soap....Or gold reserves boosted with the gold teeth of death-camp victims....

A truly evil regime.

Smaug · Post by **Smaug** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 5:57 pm

tude dog;1483438 wrote: Seems to me where a country issues hunting licenses's to hunt humans something something has gone terribly wrong.

Not much tastes better than a 100 percent organic meat.

You are welcome to that opinion.

You can extract the urine if you like, but animals have feelings similar to our own in many ways (affection,fear,family bonds,stress) so it's pathetic to see you try to dismiss the point in this flippant manner. So I'll put it this way; If a country granted hunting licences for man-hunting, and one of those being hunted for money was a family member of yours, would you be happy about that? If the answer is NO, then why inflict this suffering on an innocent animal, unless you're going to actually eat what you've killed which is a totally different thing than hunting for pleasure alone.

You said "take". That about sums up the morality here doesn't it?

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:13 am

Smaug;1483439 wrote: I've found the account that I remembered seeing years ago about the "screaming box". I was incorrect about the victim, though. He wasn't Jewish, though you'll have to forgive me there as the programme was a fair while ago, and I was working from memory alone, which isn't always perfect (is anyone's?)

To read the account, go to segment 167 (segment no's. at bottom of page)

To be quite frank, nothing the Nazis did, no matter how evil, perverted or degrading, would surprise me. Anyway, here's the link (not a video link), horrific as it is.

http://www.faculty.umb.edu/lawrence_blu ... ictims.pdf

I won't mention lampshades...Or cheap bars of soap....Or gold reserves boosted with the gold teeth of death-camp victims....

A truly evil regime.

That's ideal. That's documented. A man of impeccable credentials whose word I wouldn't for a moment dispute, Eugen Kogon, after several arrests, was sent in September 1939 to the Buchenwald concentration camp and spent six years there.

In 1950 he wrote a book, Theory and Practice of Hell, and on page 199 he describes an incident which happened at Buchenwald in the spring of 1938 before he arrived at the camp. I have no doubt it happened. Here's a precis from "The Nazi Persecution of the Gypsies" by Guenter Lewy, Professor Emeritus of Political Science University of Massachusetts:The treatment of the asocials, and the Gypsies among them, is said to have been particularly harsh. In the spring of 1938, a Gypsy made an escape attempt. He was caught and subjected to exemplary punishment that is described by Eugen Kogon in his recollections of Buchenwald:

"Commandant Koch had him placed in a wooden box, one side covered by chicken wire. The box was only large enough to permit the prisoner to crouch. Koch then had large nails driven through the boards, piercing the victim's flesh at the slightest movement. The Gypsy was exhibited to the whole camp in this cage. He was kept in the roll call area for two days and three nights without food. His dreadful screams had long lost any sem-blance of humanity. On the morning of the third day he was finally relieved of his suffering by an injection of poison."

The problem I have with your post is that "What about the "screaming boxes" used in Nazi death-camps for torturing" is two plurals - many boxes, many camps. It makes the single criminal act at Buchenwald in 1938, ordered for one man by the camp commander, into a standardized form of torture, which it most definitely wasn't. There were no "screaming boxes", there was one atrocity in which one box was constructed by one of the most notoriously sadistic Nazi officials in the entire history of the Third Reich, Karl-Otto Koch. His wife Ilse was rightly infamous for the tatooed human-skin lampshades you mentioned, something no other Nazi official was accused of creating.

Commandant Koch was so bad, so extreme, so beyond the pale, that he was executed before the war ended, having been found guilty of murder and embezzlement by a Nazi court. He was sentenced to death and executed by firing squad on 5 April 1945 by the SS themselves.

Smaug · Post by **Smaug** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:45 am

spot;1483448 wrote: That's ideal. That's documented. A man of impeccable credentials whose word I wouldn't for a moment dispute, Eugen Kogon, after several arrests, was sent in September 1939 to the Buchenwald concentration camp and spent six years there.

In 1950 he wrote a book, Theory and Practice of Hell, and on page 199 he describes an incident which happened in the spring of 1938 before he arrived at the camp. I have no doubt it happened. Here's a precis from "The Nazi Persecution of the Gypsies" by Guenter Lewy, Professor Emeritus of Political Science University of Massachusetts:The treatment of the asocials, and the Gypsies among them, is said to have been particularly harsh. In the spring of 1938, a Gypsy made an escape attempt. He was caught and subjected to exemplary punishment that is described by Eugen Kogon in his recollections of Buchenwald:

"Commandant Koch had him placed in a wooden box, one side covered by chicken wire. The box was only large enough to permit the prisoner to crouch. Koch then had large nails driven through the boards, piercing the victim's flesh at the slightest movement. The Gypsy was exhibited to the whole camp in this cage. He was kept in the roll call area for two days and three nights without food. His dreadful screams had long lost any sem-blance of humanity. On the morning of the third day he was finally relieved of his suffering by an injection of poison."

The problem I had with your post was that "What about the "screaming boxes" used in Nazi death-camps for torturing" is two plurals - many boxes, many camps. It makes the single atrocious punishment from Buchenwald in 1938, ordered for one man by the camp commander, into a standardized form of torture, which it most definitely wasn't. There were no "screaming boxes", there was one atrocity in which one box was constructed by one of the most sadistic Nazi officials in the entire history of the Third Reich, Karl-Otto Koch. His wife Ilse was famous for the tatooed human-skin lampshades you mentioned.

Commandant Koch was so bad, so extreme, so beyond the pale, that he was executed before the war ended, having been found guilty of murder and embezzlement by a Nazi court. He was sentenced to death for disgracing both himself and the SS, and executed by firing squad on 5 April 1945.

As I said, you'll have to forgive my "plural" inacurracy, as the programme where I saw/heard that account was a good while ago, and the non-video link to the story took a bit of finding, as you can no doubt see!

As for Koch, he MUST have been pretty foul to be tried and shot for disgracing the SS!!! Didn't think that was possible!!

Mind you, there were plenty of other evil characters around at that time, too many to name! A terrible chapter in "our" history and one that doesn't bear repeating.

Cheers for the research on Koch, Spot, and for putting me right about the "screaming box(s)". I'm quite glad to be wrong on THAT score! I wonder how many other "one-off" tortures they came up with at various camps? (I wasn't suggesting looking, it's all rather vile for my taste).

I'm also ashamed to say that BRITISH people were involved with the Nazis in WW2.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Free_Corps

Thankfully, this was not a large group.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:23 pm

Smaug;1483441 wrote: You can extract the urine if you like, but animals have feelings similar to our own in many ways (affection,fear,family bonds,stress) so it's pathetic to see you try to dismiss the point in this flippant manner.

If you say so. But you forget that nature is savage, Lion Vs Cheetah - Male lion kills 2 cheetahs

Just an example of nature, first I came upon. They claw, chew and eat each other.

Smaug;1483441 wrote: So I'll put it this way; If a country granted hunting licences for man-hunting, and one of those being hunted for money was a family member of yours, would you be happy about that? If the answer is NO, then why inflict this suffering on an innocent animal, unless you're going to actually eat what you've killed which is a totally different thing than hunting for pleasure alone.

Seriously?

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:37 pm

As I recall the story about Cecil, the lion was initially on a reservation, where hunting was forbidden, but group was hired to herd the animals away from the safety of the reservations boundaries.

On another tack, I wonder what Cameron's (public) opinion is on the matter, when he's the one trying to lift the ban on Fox Hunting. Apart from the size of the animal, what is the real difference?

Plus, he is the one who has approved the licence for a company to set up a puppy farm for the breeding of Beagles for the purpose of testing cosmetics.

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:58 pm

FourPart;1483493 wrote: Plus, he is the one who has approved the licence for a company to set up a puppy farm for the breeding of Beagles for the purpose of testing cosmetics.When???

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:01 pm

spot;1483500 wrote: When???
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/ ... al-testing

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/ ... -in-the-uk

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:06 pm

FourPart;1483504 wrote: https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/ ... al-testing

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/ ... -in-the-uk

The Department for Communities and Local Government overturned a planning decision, and not a single one of those damned beagles will be tested on anything to do with cosmetics! Where on earth do you get the "cosmetics" claim from? And why on earth are you blaming a departmental decision on the Prime Minister?

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:35 pm

spot;1483506 wrote: The Department for Communities and Local Government overturned a planning decision, and not a single one of those damned beagles will be tested on anything to do with cosmetics! Where on earth do you get the "cosmetics" claim from? And why on earth are you blaming a departmental decision on the Prime Minister?
I think I may have been getting confused with PETA's other petition to stop the ban on Cosmetic Testing on Animals being brought in by the back door. However, regardless of the purpose, the ban on raising these Beagles for the sole purpose of torturous testing & vivisection being overturned is the real issue. I don't just see this as a Departmental Issue. Cameron is ultimately responsible for party's actions in such matters. This isn't merely a matter of local policy. It refers to major National & International Politics. The contract concerned relates to an American company setting up the laboratory in Hull.

Also:

Testing done on beagles in university and other research facilities includes medical/pharmaceutical, household products and cosmetics. When they are no longer wanted for research purposes, some labs attempt to find homes for adoptable, healthy beagles. Working directly with these labs, Beagle Freedom Project is able to remove and transport beagles to place them in loving homes. All rescues are done legally with the cooperation of the facility.
(About ARME's Beagle Freedom Project)

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:05 pm

This is a horrible story & people are going crazy with Death threats etc.

Are you aware this dentist has been in trouble before for this "hunting" and the judge put him on probation, I believe it was a Bear kill ? - he didn't stop.

This dentist closed his office a went into hiding.

The Dentist should be sent back to Zimbabwe and give free dental work to all as punishment. " it would be good PR work if nothing else".

Patsy

Kathy Ellen · Post by **Kathy Ellen** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 5:01 pm

Great answer Patsy!!

Kathy Ellen · Post by **Kathy Ellen** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 5:04 pm

Hey there yzgi,

Jaysus, haven't chatted in years. How are ya?

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 5:37 pm

Well, Ms. Kathy - good to see ya. Hope your enjoying your time & things are good.

I really do think this dentist should be sent back - face the music and give free dental to all.

horrible story.

Patsy

Smaug · Post by **Smaug** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 5:43 pm

tude dog;1483491 wrote: If you say so. But you forget that nature is savage, Lion Vs Cheetah - Male lion kills 2 cheetahs

Just an example of nature, first I came upon. They claw, chew and eat each other.

Seriously?

Why do these animals claw, chew and eat each other?

For territory, food, water or mating purposes, NOT USUALLY FOR PLEASURE, unlike jaded, wanton, vain, sadistic individuals posing as "the good 'ol boys", overfull of testosterone-fuelled, self-gratifying, ego-tripping, beer-swilling BS!!

Domestic cats excepted (they don't know any better).

We do! (well, MOST of us do)

Anyone choosing to shoot a defenceless animal for PLEASURE needs to see a psychiatrist urgently, or drink a pint of petrol twice daily for a couple of weeks, then apply a lighted match to the tonsils, IMO.

Seriously. :-5

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:10 am

Patsy Warnick;1483516 wrote: Are you aware this dentist has been in trouble before for this "hunting" and the judge put him on probation, I believe it was a Bear kill ?

Before all this is over I do hope the chap's Kill Diary goes public. I assume psychopathic killers like him keep detailed records with photos of every animal he's attacked, with how far off it was and how long it took to die and how far he had to chase it before he could take another shot. Anyway, I want an illustrated guide to The Dental Killings.

I am right, am I? These killers do actually document the slaughter?

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:13 am

FourPart;1483510 wrote: Also:

(About ARME's Beagle Freedom Project)

No no no - if you're going to make a claim like that, back it up from an unbiased source. Do you seriously think animal testing still happens anywhere at all in mainstream cosmetics safety testing? It was dropped decades ago, the buying public refused buy any product that was animal tested so the manufacturers stopped, the bad publicity was ruining their business. Of course the "Beagle Freedom Project" will be putting out a claim like that but I'll eat my hat if it's true.

G#Gill · Post by **G#Gill** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 2:21 am

spot;1483524 wrote: Before all this is over I do hope the chap's Kill Diary goes public. I assume psychopathic killers like him keep detailed records with photos of every animal he's attacked, with how far off it was and how long it took to die and how far he had to chase it before he could take another shot. Anyway, I want an illustrated guide to The Dental Killings.

I am right, am I? These killers do actually document the slaughter?

There were various pictures of this Minnesota dentist shown on the TV news yesterday. If I remember rightly there was a photo of him holding a dead cheetah, another of him holding a dead lion, another with a bear and even a rhino or was it a hippo ? There were, needless to say, many photographs of his leering, grinning face holding various different 'trophies' - the man is a serial killer, who obviously derives great pleasure and satisfaction from killing wild animals, even endangered species. Makes you wonder if that sort of person is anywhere near hunting and killing humans, when they get bored with killing animals. ?

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 2:29 am

I wouldn't much care if he killed humans, there are laws against that. What annoys me is that he can behave as he does while staying within the law. He may have slipped up once or twice but that's carelessness on his part. The law is not providing adequate protection for wild animals.

Is there a hunting members-only group that terminated this chap's membership for fear of bad publicity this week? Maybe they have catalogues of gloating hunters with their trophies. Perhaps we could try a name-and-shame page of such photos.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:18 am

Oh goody - another euphemism. Cecil was apparently "Harvested".PRESS RELEASE

July 29th, 2015 | PDF Format

CHATFIELD, MINNESOTA â€“ In response to the recent press coverage about one of our members and the lion named Cecil, we would like to point out that the Pope & Young Clubâ€™s focus is on North American big game species only. We have nothing to do with African game species within our organization.

The Pope & Young Club holds our members to high ethical standards and legal activities. We are presently looking into this issue and when the facts are clear we will act. Until then, we ask that you please refrain from any hateful or threatening comments that all too often follow these situations.

Pope and Young Club, founded in 1961, has long-established, defined and maintained an ethical code of hunting referred to as Fair Chase. Fair Chase is the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit of free-ranging wild game animals in a manner which does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over the animal. As such, the Pope and Young Club does not condone any actions in violation of Fair Chase.

All bowhunters, when entering an animal into the Pope and Young Club Records Program, are required to submit an affidavit that attests the animal harvested was taken legally and ethically, in adherence to all game laws as well as the Clubâ€™s defined Rules of Fair Chase.

The fair chase philosophy reaches to the very foundations of the hunting spirit; it should be a dominant factor in the personal hunting ethic of every responsible individual; it is key to bowhuntingâ€™s future. The fair chase concept extends beyond the hunt itself; it is an attitude and a way of life based in a deep-seated respect for wildlife, for the environment, and for other individuals who share the bounty of this vast continentâ€™s natural resources.

Pope & Young Club Records

I note the site's taken down its World Records photo page.

G#Gill · Post by **G#Gill** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:05 am

Very interesting ! Thanks for your obvious diligence in producing this information. I wonder what they will do when they discover what this dentist has been doing over the years. I do hope they will make everything public.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 7:11 am

spot;1483528 wrote: I wouldn't much care if he killed humans, there are laws against that. What annoys me is that he can behave as he does while staying within the law. He may have slipped up once or twice but that's carelessness on his part. The law is not providing adequate protection for wild animals.

Is there a hunting members-only group that terminated this chap's membership for fear of bad publicity this week? Maybe they have catalogues of gloating hunters with their trophies. Perhaps we could try a name-and-shame page of such photos.

To be fair to the guy, or try to be, anyway, it appears to me that these "guides" that he hired were more to blame than he.

He may not have known that the the Lion was, by most definitions quite tame, and that these two scumbags had lured the critter out into the hunting area knowing he was all but harmless.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 7:30 am

LarsMac;1483541 wrote: To be fair to the guy, or try to be, anyway, it appears to me that these "guides" that he hired were more to blame than he.

He may not have known that the the Lion was, by most definitions quite tame, and that these two scumbags had lured the critter out into the hunting area knowing he was all but harmless.
He has a recorded history of lying to enforcement officials, verbally and in writing, about his belief that an illegal killing was legal.In 2008, Palmer pleaded guilty in federal court in Wisconsin to misleading a federal agent in connection with the hunting of a black bear. Two years earlier, Palmer killed a bear near Phillips, in Price County. That location was 40 miles outside where he held a permit to hunt bear.

Palmer and others transported the bear carcass to a registration station inside the allowed hunting zone. At the station, he falsely certified that the bear had been killed in the legal zone. He then brought the bear to Minnesota.

Twice, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agent interviewed Palmer, who said he believed he killed the bear legally.

Facing a maximum penalty of five years in prison, Palmer was sentenced to one yearâ€™s probation and fined nearly $3,000.

Dentist regrets killing Cecil the Lion, thought hunt was legal - Naples Daily News

Can you think of any possible way that anything other than a deliberate lie was given, after the killing of the bear, about his belief in the legality of the act?

So why on earth would you believe him this time.

Smaug · Post by **Smaug** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 7:35 am

LarsMac;1483541 wrote: To be fair to the guy, or try to be, anyway, it appears to me that these "guides" that he hired were more to blame than he.

He may not have known that the the Lion was, by most definitions quite tame, and that these two scumbags had lured the critter out into the hunting area knowing he was all but harmless.

The question in my mind is; Who paid the guides? If it was the dentist, then he's to blame. Most of these "big game hunters" pay large amounts of money for the "priviledge" of murdering these exotic animals. Without this revolting "patronage", these events probably wouldn't happen. The buck stops with the dentist, IMO.

He's the paymaster, so he's responsible!

Smaug · Post by **Smaug** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 7:52 am

spot;1483525 wrote: No no no - if you're going to make a claim like that, back it up from an unbiased source. Do you seriously think animal testing still happens anywhere at all in mainstream cosmetics safety testing? It was dropped decades ago, the buying public refused buy any product that was animal tested so the manufacturers stopped, the bad publicity was ruining their business. Of course the "Beagle Freedom Project" will be putting out a claim like that but I'll eat my hat if it's true.

Animal-tested cosmetics/ingredients were banned in the EU in 2013, though perversely continue on in other countries, such as China and the US, though China is starting to look at alternatives now.

Cosmetics and Household-Product Animal Testing | Animals Used for Experimentation | The Issues | PETA

To my mind, there is absolutely no reason, or possible excuse that can justify cosmetics/household product testing on animals.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:25 am

Smaug;1483546 wrote: To my mind, there is absolutely no reason, or possible excuse that can justify cosmetics/household product testing on animals.
Fortunately it would be entirely illegal for any company acquiring beagles from the newly-licensed Hull breeding facility to test cosmetics on them. I have no idea why the claim was made to begin with, it was propagandist rather than informational.

As to using "David Cameron" as an abbreviation for the entire Westminster government, again I don't see the purpose. It just dissolves the meaning of words. Why bother having a vocabulary at all.