The victims of Ricky Gervais

ohnonotgmail · 15-04-2015 9:30pm

diomed wrote: »

I assume this hunting of African animals in happening in the USA. The companies providing this service to hunters are called outfitters.
http://www.huntingoutfitters.com/
This is not hunting. It is killing African animals in enclosures with high powered weapons.

I worked in Africa for two years in the 1970s and visited game parks about a dozen times. Hunting was not legal in game parks, but hunting was legal outside the parks if you had a licence to kill that animal. It is a rich person's hobby, costing ten of thousands of dollars a trip.
I went on walking safaris with a camera, walking up to ten miles in a morning. I met hunters who were driven around the fringes of the game park with a guide. Why they wanted to be brought in front of animals so they could shoot the stationary animals remains a mystery to me.

I had a look at that site. It doesnt offer any game hunts. It is just a set of links to actual hunting guides. Most of which are for pretty standard game animals. None of the exotics like african game actually have any entries. No mention of the staked hunts you describe either. can you link to where it mentions staked hunts for african game that take place in the US?

Lau2976 · 15-04-2015 9:31pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well if you talk about compassion for animals then yes. Do you eat eggs? You know that battery hens live a live with much more cruelty than any of the animals this lady has hunted. So if you criticise this lady on the ground of cruelty then yes you would be a hypocrite. How could you not be?

But if you are a vegan then fair play you're being consistent

I don't think being not vegan means you can't find this appalling though. She hunts for the thrill. That's different then hunting for food, or eating the meat that comes from that. Personally I am vegan and I find any hunting wrong, but I think it's wrong to say that participating in the digestion of rotting flesh and being the person who caused that rotting flesh isn't slightly different.

ohnonotgmail · 15-04-2015 9:33pm

Lau2976 wrote: »

I don't think being not vegan means you can't find this appalling though. She hunts for the thrill. That's different then hunting for food, or eating the meat that comes from that. Personally I am vegan and I find any hunting wrong, but I think it's wrong to say that participating in the digestion of rotting flesh and being the person who caused that rotting flesh isn't slightly different.

well first off it makes absolutely no difference to the animals why they are killed. they tend not to care about those details. And the animals were eaten. So yes, it is hypocritical

diomed · 15-04-2015 9:36pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Can't see giraffe on their list of prey. The African game link is empty.
Can see turkey and "varmint" though. Not sure either would thrill the woman in the OP.

I didn't bother to check through that site.
Perhaps this one will do "777 Ranch, he has made it his goal to bring a bit of Africa to Texas"
http://777ranch.com/

Available
Addax Antelope, Alpine Ibex, American Bison, Aoudad Sheep, Arabian Oryx, Armenian Mouflon, Axis, Barasingha, Blackbuck, Blesbok, Bongo, Cape Buffalo, Catalina Goat, Common Lechwe, Corsican Sheep, Dama Gazelle, Dybowski Sika, Eland, Eld's Deer, Elk, Fallow Deer, Four-Horn Sheep, Gernsbok, Grant's, Hawaiian Black, Himalayan Tahr, Hog Deer, Hybrid Ibex, Impala, Iranian Red Sheep, Kudu, Markhor, Mouflon Sheep, Muntjac Deer, Nile Lechwe, Nilgai, Nubian Ibex, Nyala, Pere David's Deer, Pygmy Goal, Red Stag, Roan, Rusa, Sable, Scimitar Horned, Sika Deer, Sitatunga, Springbok, Texas Dall Sheep, Thomson Gazelle, Urial Sheep, Water Buck, Water Buffalo, Whitetail, Wildebeest, Yak, Zebra

The owner probably saved my life when I was charged by an elephant in Africa. He was a game park guide then.

15-04-2015 9:39pm

diomed wrote: »

I didn't bother to check through that site.
Perhaps this one will do "777 Ranch, he has made it his goal to bring a bit of Africa to Texas"
http://777ranch.com/

Available
Addax Antelope, Alpine Ibex, American Bison, Aoudad Sheep, Arabian Oryx, Armenian Mouflon, Axis, Barasingha, Blackbuck, Blesbok, Bongo, Cape Buffalo, Catalina Goat, Common Lechwe, Corsican Sheep, Dama Gazelle, Dybowski Sika, Eland, Eld's Deer, Elk, Fallow Deer, Four-Horn Sheep, Gernsbok, Grant's, Hawaiian Black, Himalayan Tahr, Hog Deer, Hybrid Ibex, Impala, Iranian Red Sheep, Kudu, Markhor, Mouflon Sheep, Muntjac Deer, Nile Lechwe, Nilgai, Nubian Ibex, Nyala, Pere David's Deer, Pygmy Goal, Red Stag, Roan, Rusa, Sable, Scimitar Horned, Sika Deer, Sitatunga, Springbok, Texas Dall Sheep, Thomson Gazelle, Urial Sheep, Water Buck, Water Buffalo, Whitetail, Wildebeest, Yak, Zebra

The owner probably saved my life when I was charged by an elephant in Africa. He was a game park guide then.

It's much the same as the other one.

Still no giraffe. Or any of the "Big 5" either.

ohnonotgmail · 15-04-2015 9:40pm

diomed wrote: »

I didn't bother to check through that site.
Perhaps this one will do "777 Ranch, he has made it his goal to bring a bit of Africa to Texas"
http://777ranch.com/

Available
Addax Antelope, Alpine Ibex, American Bison, Aoudad Sheep, Arabian Oryx, Armenian Mouflon, Axis, Barasingha, Blackbuck, Blesbok, Bongo, Cape Buffalo, Catalina Goat, Common Lechwe, Corsican Sheep, Dama Gazelle, Dybowski Sika, Eland, Eld's Deer, Elk, Fallow Deer, Four-Horn Sheep, Gernsbok, Grant's, Hawaiian Black, Himalayan Tahr, Hog Deer, Hybrid Ibex, Impala, Iranian Red Sheep, Kudu, Markhor, Mouflon Sheep, Muntjac Deer, Nile Lechwe, Nilgai, Nubian Ibex, Nyala, Pere David's Deer, Pygmy Goal, Red Stag, Roan, Rusa, Sable, Scimitar Horned, Sika Deer, Sitatunga, Springbok, Texas Dall Sheep, Thomson Gazelle, Urial Sheep, Water Buck, Water Buffalo, Whitetail, Wildebeest, Yak, Zebra

The owner probably saved my life when I was charged by an elephant in Africa. He was a game park guide then.

why post a link that you havent read and that doesnt back up your point? Bizarre.

anyway

Our ranch is the world leader in exotic breeding programs, with the goal of being a self-sustaining ranch

A staked hunt sounds a bit pathetic but if its only animals they have bred themselves then no problem.

Lau2976 · 15-04-2015 9:47pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well first off it makes absolutely no difference to the animals why they are killed. they tend not to care about those details. And the animals were eaten. So yes, it is hypocritical

Yeah your right it doesn't matter to them so how about as a whole we do something radical and not kill other living creatures! That isn't going to happen any time soon but stopping hunting for fun is one step closer.

You honestly think that killing an animal to survive and killing it to put in a mantle are the same thing?

diomed · 15-04-2015 9:51pm

Deleted User wrote: »

It's much the same as the other one.
Still no giraffe. Or any of the "Big 5" either.

I don't follow your reasoning. Is it alright to shoot defenseless animals in an enclosed area and claim it is a cull? Perhaps a focus on one species (giraffe) or a claim that the big five are not present in the outfitters enclosures makes it alright. If it was cheap to have lions, elephants, rhinoceros then they would have them available for shooting. The fact that they do not have the big five available in the USA for shooting is not something to the credit of the outfitters. They just can't acquire them.

This is a business where hunters pay big money to shoot animals. It is not a hunt as they do not pursue the animal, they are in an area where the animals they are hunting are not free to move away, probably do not have cover (trees, grass, undergrowth), nor are there other animals in the enclosed area that might be a danger to the hunters, the predators that in the wild would hunt these animals.

It is target practice with animals.

ohnonotgmail · 15-04-2015 9:55pm

diomed wrote: »

I don't follow your reasoning. Is it alright to shoot defenseless animals in an enclosed area and claim it is a cull? Perhaps a focus on one species (giraffe) or a claim that the big five are not present in the outfitters enclosures makes it alright. If it was cheap to have lions, elephants, rhinoceros then they would have them available for shooting. The fact that they do not have the big five available in the USA for shooting is not something to the credit of the outfitters. They just can't acquire them.

This is a business where hunters pay big money to shoot animals. It is not a hunt as they do not pursue the animal, they are in an area where the animals they are hunting are not free to move away, probably do not have cover (trees, grass, undergrowth), nor are there other animals in the enclosed area that might be a danger to the hunters, the predators that in the wild would hunt these animals.

It is target practice with animals.

I've already said that shooting a staked animal is pathetic.
this thread is about a lady who hunted animals in africa.

ohnonotgmail · 15-04-2015 9:57pm

Lau2976 wrote: »

Yeah your right it doesn't matter to them so how about as a whole we do something radical and not kill other living creatures! That isn't going to happen any time soon but stopping hunting for fun is one step closer.

You honestly think that killing an animal to survive and killing it to put in a mantle are the same thing?

well if we ignore the whole killing animals is bad full stop and lets all become vegans bit then why does why the animal is killed matter if the meat is eaten?

Lau2976 · 15-04-2015 10:00pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well if we ignore the whole killing animals is bad full stop and lets all become vegans bit then why does why the animal is killed matter if the meat is eaten?

Because needs and wants matter. Because we need to define a need and a want when questioning our meat.

Does she need to kill that giraffe? No. She wanted to. That's the difference.

dodderangler · 15-04-2015 10:01pm

She's only gettin death threats from keyboard warriors.
Nothing to worry about

ohnonotgmail · 15-04-2015 10:07pm

Lau2976 wrote: »

Because needs and wants matter. Because we need to define a need and a want when questioning our meat.

Does she need to kill that giraffe? No. She wanted to. That's the difference.

not the animal they dont. and it is the animal you care about right? And as it happens (and i've explained this many many times already on this thread) the animal needed to be killed due to overpopulation. So what does it matter who kills it?

waulie_palnuts · 15-04-2015 10:07pm

What the **** planet do these people live on? Where does food come from? Humane slaughter houses? Would you ever **** off.

ohnonotgmail · 15-04-2015 10:08pm

waulie_palnuts wrote: »

What the **** planet do these people live on? Where does food come from? Humane slaughter houses? Would you ever **** off.

its all made by magical pixies.

15-04-2015 10:10pm

diomed wrote: »

I don't follow your reasoning. Is it alright to shoot defenseless animals in an enclosed area and claim it is a cull?

My argument was that your links were not relevant to the pic in the OP.

That shows a giraffe. You said you assume this hunt of African animals takes place in the USA and gave a link. I and others pointed out that it did not contain giraffes. You then said try another link. Which also doesn't show giraffe.

So your assumption appears to be wrong. That is all.

waulie_palnuts · 15-04-2015 10:10pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

its all made by magical pixies.

Who are paid a lovely wage. They don't have to pay for water either.

diomed · 15-04-2015 10:11pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

why post a link that you havent read and that doesnt back up your point? Bizarre.

What was my point? Saying I didn't back up my point when all I did was express revulsion at people who pay to shoot African animals in enclosure in the USA.

My point is that people who claim to be hunters, people who pay money to shoot non-USA animals in a USA enclosure, then pose for photographs with the dead animals as if they were great African hunters ... these people are sad.

You think it is alright if the African animals available for shooting were bred in the USA. Where did the breeding stock originate? Many of the antelope listed in the 777 website (lechwe, sitatunga) are in sharp decline.

Making money from beautiful creatures by putting them in an enclosure and shooting them is not good. Even if you bred them it is still not good. I saw wealthy Europeans in the 1970s being driven around the edges of North Luangwa paying $20k+ so they could shoot defenseless animals who ventured out of the park to drink or feed. As most game parks are bounded by rivers an animal might try to feed on either bank and if they are on the wrong bank they are shot.

What is bizarre? If revulsion at shooting defenseless animals in an enclosure if the new definition of bizarre then bizarre is the word.

diomed · 15-04-2015 10:13pm

Deleted User wrote: »

My argument was that your links were not relevant to the pic in the OP.

That shows a giraffe. You said you assume this hunt of African animals takes place in the USA and gave a link. I and others pointed out that it did not contain giraffes. You then said try another link. Which also doesn't show giraffe.

So your assumption appears to be wrong. That is all.

I am not trying to prove a giraffe was shot in an outfitters park in the USA. I am saying hunters who pay to shoot animals in enclosure are sad people.

Lau2976 · 15-04-2015 10:15pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

not the animal they dont. and it is the animal you care about right? And as it happens (and i've explained this many many times already on this thread) the animal needed to be killed due to overpopulation. So what does it matter who kills it?

Yeah it is. Which is why I'm vegan. So it makes it ok to do it in that way then? If that's the argument lets cull this earth of the overpopulation of humans by letting some rich Americans shoot them all, and then for the "memories" pose beside their bodies and hang them on their mantle!

Were also going to ignore natures natural way of solving overpopulation in animals? Ok then...

15-04-2015 10:16pm

diomed wrote: »

I am not trying to prove a giraffe was shot in an outfitters park in the USA. I am saying hunters who pay to shoot animals in enclosure are sad people.

It started off so...differently.

diomed wrote: »

I assume this hunting of African animals in happening in the USA.

Lau2976 · 15-04-2015 10:17pm

waulie_palnuts wrote: »

What the **** planet do these people live on? Where does food come from? Humane slaughter houses? Would you ever **** off.

For the majority if people it comes from a supermarket and before that they don't care. But personal opinion on eating animals aside, killing animals for meat is different then killing them for fun

diomed · 15-04-2015 10:20pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I've already said that shooting a staked animal is pathetic.
this thread is about a lady who hunted animals in africa.

But hunting animals in Africa is rich people driven around by guides, put in front of the animals, and then they shoot the animals. They are not hunters, they are shooters. Guides may spice it up a little with a bit of walking, a camp fire, and such. But the animals congregate in the one place. The hunter goes to that place and shoots them.

I went on a six day walking safari (photography only). With six months wet season and six months dry season the only time a safari, hunting or shooting, will be successful, is at the very end of the dry season. Why? In the wet season you would/could be in ten feet of water. At the end of the dry season the water is gone, the vegetation has mostly disappeared leaving the trees. The only water is a trickle in the river. And that is where you find the animals at dawn and dusk.

Hunter? Laughable. Just a killer who pays big money to kill.

i57dwun4yb1pt8 · 15-04-2015 10:42pm

would love too see a lion chewing on her. and not in a good way

ohnonotgmail · 15-04-2015 10:44pm

diomed wrote: »

I am not trying to prove a giraffe was shot in an outfitters park in the USA. I am saying hunters who pay to shoot animals in enclosure are sad people.

this is what you said

I assume this hunting of African animals in happening in the USA. The companies providing this service to hunters are called outfitters.
http://www.huntingoutfitters.com/
This is not hunting. It is killing African animals in enclosures with high powered weapons.

you tried to say that the lady in the OP killed her giraffe in a staked hunt in the US. which was a patent lie.

ohnonotgmail · 15-04-2015 10:46pm

Lau2976 wrote: »

Yeah it is. Which is why I'm vegan. So it makes it ok to do it in that way then? If that's the argument lets cull this earth of the overpopulation of humans by letting some rich Americans shoot them all, and then for the "memories" pose beside their bodies and hang them on their mantle!

Were also going to ignore natures natural way of solving overpopulation in animals? Ok then...

the chinese and the indians might object if americans turrned up to hunt their citizens.

ohnonotgmail · 15-04-2015 10:46pm

DaDumTish wrote: »

would love too see a lion chewing on her. and not in a good way

your attempt to take the moral high ground has failed miserably.

jackofalltrades · 15-04-2015 11:07pm

Lau2976 wrote: »

Does she need to kill that giraffe? No. She wanted to. That's the difference.

According to herself she didn't plan to kill a giraffe while she was in Africa.
She only got involved with the hunt due to the circumstances of it.

wrote:

For the majority if people it comes from a supermarket and before that they don't care.

And this is a big problem, there's a complete disconnect as to where the meat actually comes from.
People like Ricky Gervais are up in arms about this yet they're still going to turn around and eat me.
And more than likely the animal they're going to eat is going to have had a shorter and poorer quality life.
They don't seem to understand that they're are responsible for the deaths of countless animals.

But personal opinion on eating animals aside, killing animals for meat is different then killing them for fun

But this giraffe was killed for meat.
They could have let it die naturally and then the locals would have had to got the meat from somewhere else.
Possibly killing more than one animal.

Just because you're hunting for sport doesn't mean you're relishing in the death of another animal.

bb1234567 · 16-04-2015 12:09am

Whatever about humanely culling animals, smiling next to a dead animal and then uploading it is very inappropriate

osarusan · 16-04-2015 12:20am

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Just because you're hunting for sport doesn't mean you're relishing in the death of another animal.

I would have thought that is pretty much exactly what it means.

Hunting for sport = you consider it sport, or enjoyable, to hunt and kill an animal.

blatantrereg · 16-04-2015 1:17am

You don't have to be a vegan to say hunting is wrong. Same way as you don't have to be vegan to say animal farming is wrong. However if you want to justify a feeling of moral superiority or if you want to attack someone who hunts then I think you are either a vegan or a hypocrite.

Personally, while I certainly dislike those images, generally animal farming sits with me less well than hunting.

Saying farming is okay but hunting isn't because farming is for food or because you need meat is bull****. Almost no-one needs meat, short of alternative foods being unavailable. In Ireland alternative foods are available more cheaply than meat is. You eat meat because you choose to. That's your business but you are in no way ethically superior to someone who hunts.

Personally I haven't eaten meat or fish in years but I still contribute to animal suffering through consumption of eggs and dairy - Males being routinely slaughtered etc. I like the taste and they're convenient sources of protein and vitamin b12. It would be hypocritical for me to get on a soapbox about hunting when (like most others) I casually contribute to animal suffering for the sake of my own indulgence and convenience. Indulgence and convenience are not ethically superior to sport.

jackofalltrades · 16-04-2015 2:13am

osarusan wrote: »

I would have thought that is pretty much exactly what it means.

Hunting for sport = you consider it sport, or enjoyable, to hunt and kill an animal.

I'm specifically talking about enjoying seeing it die.
You can enjoy the technical aspects of hunting.
Stalking the animal, getting close enough using a weapon, without enjoying seeing it die.

You accept that another animal has to die, just like when you buy meat from a shop.
You just prefer to go out and do it yourself.

Shenshen · 16-04-2015 8:20am

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Just because you're hunting for sport doesn't mean you're relishing in the death of another animal.

Possibly true, the lady in question very much looks like she's thrilled to bits about it.

And I think this is what's so disturbing. Everybody realises that to manage wildlife, some of it will have to be killed. Same as everybody realises that in order to maintain reasonable safety as a country, we need soldiers.
But most people don't want to think of a hunter as enjoying killing animals, much as they don't want to think of a soldier enjoying killing "the enemy" (whoever that may be, at any given time).

It might speak to a very deep and old instinct in us - kill the animal to eat, but keep your distance from the guy who will go on killing when he's not hungry.

conorhal · 16-04-2015 10:13am

blatantrereg wrote: »

You don't have to be a vegan to say hunting is wrong. Same way as you don't have to be vegan to say animal farming is wrong. However if you want to justify a feeling of moral superiority or if you want to attack someone who hunts then I think you are either a vegan or a hypocrite.

Personally, while I certainly dislike those images, generally animal farming sits with me less well than hunting.

Saying farming is okay but hunting isn't because farming is for food or because you need meat is bull****. Almost no-one needs meat, short of alternative foods being unavailable. In Ireland alternative foods are available more cheaply than meat is. You eat meat because you choose to. That's your business but you are in no way ethically superior to someone who hunts.

Personally I haven't eaten meat or fish in years but I still contribute to animal suffering through consumption of eggs and dairy - Males being routinely slaughtered etc. I like the taste and they're convenient sources of protein and vitamin b12. It would be hypocritical for me to get on a soapbox about hunting when (like most others) I casually contribute to animal suffering for the sake of my own indulgence and convenience. Indulgence and convenience are not ethically superior to sport.

But you don't undersaaaaaaaaand. She's rich, white and 'Murican! So your logic is interfering with my smug sense of moral superiority, and that's unfair of you. I hope a lion eats you! You deserve it for for pointing out my high horse is only a merry-go-round pony of intelectually bankrupt hot air!

jimgoose · 16-04-2015 10:21am

Good buzz: Middle-aged American gal knows her bows and rifles, enjoys big-game hunting (controlled culling, obviously) and isn't bothered who knows it.

Bad buzz: Nathan Barley-type comedian who, like many, takes lots of things for granted posts photo on the Web provoking the violent umbrage of the usual suspects.

All is well under Heaven, nothing to see here.

osarusan · 16-04-2015 10:31am

jackofalltrades wrote: »

I'm specifically talking about enjoying seeing it die.
You can enjoy the technical aspects of hunting.
Stalking the animal, getting close enough using a weapon, without enjoying seeing it die.

You accept that another animal has to die, just like when you buy meat from a shop.
You just prefer to go out and do it yourself.

I think there is a difference between hunting for sport and having a need for meat that means an animal 'has to die'.

I can understand people hunting to get meat for their family. And I can even imagine them enjoying what they do. I wouldn't consider that hunting for sport.

I'd consider it hunting for sport when the hunt is primarily (or solely) done for pleasure, and the procurement of meat is a secondary benefit (if it happens at all). In these cases, while the actual death of the animal might not be relished, it certainly isn't enough of a deterrent to make the hunter stop hunting.

Mostly though, I'd consider her story about her ethical killing of the giraffe to be a load of bollocks.

dodderangler · 16-04-2015 10:59am

I've hunted since I was big enough to carry a rabbit that my father would shoot. I have my own guns and have hunted with dogs, ferrets and birds of prey.
I've never considered it a sport. It's a hobbie and a great one at that.
Shooting for sport meaning shooting an animal for no reason other than to kill it is wrong. That pretty much being a poacher. I've only shot what il eat and wouldn't shoot an abundance if things. Example is I could see twenty rabbits but I'd only shoot 3 let's say and I'd enjoy the walk of being in the countryside.
I do look down on Dublin from the mountains and people havint a clue about the beauty i see when I'm out.
Not always about the hunt! It's about getting out instead of being like half the people posting on this being keyboard warriors sitting on their hole talking Shiite an being complete hypocrites.
The meat I get is fresh, healthy and a bullet to the head is guaranteed no suffering. The meat you get in markets or shops is a hell of a lot worse

smash · 16-04-2015 11:06am

dodderangler wrote: »

Not always about the hunt! It's about getting out instead of being like half the people posting on this being keyboard warriors sitting on their hole talking Shiite an being complete hypocrites.

Ever tried just going hill walking? :pac:

dodderangler · 16-04-2015 11:33am

smash wrote: »

Ever tried just going hill walking? :pac:

Knew someone would reply being smart. Shows lack of intelligence when it comes to hunting.
Like everyone else you think it's walk into field and shoot everything in sight well it's not!
Maybe go out hunting with someone and you may learn and change your opinion

16-04-2015 11:36am

dodderangler wrote: »

I have my own guns and have hunted with dogs, ferrets and birds of prey.

Hunting with a bird of prey = cool, big hair, like the front of a Roxy Music album.

Hunting with a ferret = not cool, Yorkshire, Last of the Summer Wine, flat caps and brown tweed.

Shenshen · 16-04-2015 11:42am

dodderangler wrote: »

Knew someone would reply being smart. Shows lack of intelligence when it comes to hunting.
Like everyone else you think it's walk into field and shoot everything in sight well it's not!
Maybe go out hunting with someone and you may learn and change your opinion

Didn't you yourself say it was about getting out and enjoying the beauty of the landscape?
Or is the landscape only beautiful while you hunt, and you wouldn't leave the house otherwise?

Egginacup · 16-04-2015 11:51am

I'd like to take this cow and stick her in the ring with Katy Taylor.

"Right Rebecca, you've got two fists and you're taller than Katy (nearly everyone is), so it's a fair fight. Get busy"

See how brave she is then. Nice flurry of jabs would turn that smarmy grin into a toothless grimace

rubadub · 16-04-2015 11:51am

Deleted User wrote: »

I have no issue as long as it's legal.

I don't pay much attention to the legality of peoples acts -since there are lots of ludicrous laws that I would disagree with. Also many acts I would have issues with are perfectly legal. Like someone holding on to a fart to let it off in a lift full of people -perfectly legal, and a perfect cunt for doing it. Or a less odd example, taking up the job of chugging, perfectly legal but known to be highly objectionable.

jackofalltrades wrote: »

No, she was asked to kill a specific giraffe.
The carcass was then given to the locals so they could eat the meat.

People won't go hunger as a result of her actions, I think that's quite an accomplishment.

I would think my local butcher or farmer to be an oddball fucker if he laid down to be photographed beside a pig he just slaughtered smiling & grinning like a prize cunt. Or a vet posing with a kitten he had to put down for humane reasons.

dodderangler · 16-04-2015 12:03pm

Shenshen wrote: »

Didn't you yourself say it was about getting out and enjoying the beauty of the landscape?
Or is the landscape only beautiful while you hunt, and you wouldn't leave the house otherwise?

I also sai people think hunting is about going to a field an killing everything in sight but it's not!
I do walk my permission without a gun often bringing my daughter and showing her all the different animals about and educating her on them

smash · 16-04-2015 12:26pm

dodderangler wrote: »

Knew someone would reply being smart. Shows lack of intelligence when it comes to hunting.

Not at all, please read below.

dodderangler wrote: »

Like everyone else you think it's walk into field and shoot everything in sight well it's not!

No I don't. My reply was in relation to your quote of:
"Not always about the hunt! It's about getting out instead of being like half the people posting on this being keyboard warriors sitting on their hole talking Shiite an being complete hypocrites."

If it's about getting out, then go hill walking...

dodderangler wrote: »

Maybe go out hunting with someone and you may learn and change your opinion

But I've no need or want to go out hunting.

16-04-2015 12:31pm

rubadub wrote: »

I would think my local butcher or farmer to be an oddball fucker if he laid down to be photographed beside a pig he just slaughtered smiling & grinning like a prize cunt. Or a vet posing with a kitten he had to put down for humane reasons.

Plenty of pics of them standing up, grinning and holding out the results of their work...

27043590-young-chef-holding-raw-meat-professional-butcher-showing-ribs-and-smiling.jpg

27043590-young-chef-holding-raw-meat-professional-butcher-showing-ribs-and-smiling.jpg

osarusan · 16-04-2015 12:58pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Plenty of pics of them standing up, grinning and holding out the results of their work...

Irrelevant to what the poster's point was though.

StewartGriffin · 16-04-2015 1:03pm

dodderangler wrote: »

Example is I could see twenty rabbits but I'd only shoot 3. a bullet to the head is guaranteed no suffering. The meat you get in markets or shops is a hell of a lot worse

Wow, what kind of rifle have you got that you can headshot a rabbit every single time? Or do you crouch, smeared in rabbit feces, until they're close enough to look in your eyes while you pop them with a shotgun?

Or, more realistically, how many times have you missed, and watched an injured animal drag itself away to bleed out a long and painful death in its burrow?

ScumLord · 16-04-2015 1:09pm

StewartGriffin wrote: »

Wow, what kind of rifle have you got that you can headshot a rabbit every single time? Or do you crouch, smeared in rabbit feces, until they're close enough to look in your eyes while you pop them with a shotgun?

I have a friend who shoots rabbits for people, they're a pest in some parts of the country breeding like.. Wel, rabbits.

He wears a ghillie suit and says they practically hop right up to him. they're not exactly known for being intelligent animals. Hunting is about knowing your prey and it's weaknesses and then exploit that weakness. Once you've some experience under your belt you'll be successful the majority of the time.

16-04-2015 1:11pm

osarusan wrote: »

Irrelevant to what the poster's point was though.

The posters point was that it would be weird if a butcher was posing, grinning, by the results of their kill.

It was exactly the point I addressed.

The victims of Ricky Gervais

Comments