Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 11:18 AM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 10:48:44 -0500, Muggles wrote:

Ruin a mans livelihood because he kills a cat. That's what a
lion is, it's a big cat.

He killed more than a lion, he killed additional research that was in
progress.


So, they'll study another lion, and then another one. I'm sure that's
not the only lion people are studying. At least I think the scientists
would be foolish to only be studying one lion.

He was chosen as a good healthy lion and good genetic character. His
siblings may all get killed now by another male lion taking over the
Cecil's family. BTW, he killed a Mull deer, Black bear, Moose up here in
Canada, all good record size animals. If what he did was OK, why all
the hunting clubs are dropping his membership? You think human lives
only matters? All lives are precious god's creation. Every living
things; animals, plants and every thing in between. That's how I see it.

On 8/1/2015 1:54 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:41:27 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 12:32 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:11:14 -0500, Muggles wrote:

The only grounds to legitimately judge him on are whether or not he knew
it was a protected lion (if he could see the tracking collar or not),
and if it was a legal or illegal hunt. If it was an illegal hunt, then
he should pay that penalty for an illegal hunt, not be judged because he
used the same methods to hunt that other hunters have used for years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_%28lion%29#Criminal_investigations


Interesting situation. Who is responsible for the outcome in a situation
where guides were hired and the expectation was that they have
everything in order? Palmer isn't from Africa and probably had that
expectation seeing that he paid $50k for the hunt.

It is Palmer's responsibility to vet the guide, hunting zones,
validate permits and local laws. Just as you would vet his dental
credentials and reputation before you visit his office. Same as if
you hire a contractor to work on your property. He cannot claim to be
the victim here. He didn't do his due diligence. Period.


Maybe he tried, maybe he didn't. Either way he hired someone else to do
a job for him with the expectation that person new the ins and outs
where he didn't know those things. Sometimes things just suck.

--
Maggie

On 8/1/2015 2:03 PM, dadiOH wrote:
Muggles wrote:

I have a difficult time judging hunters as to whether they are
sportsman or not because I'm not a hunter.

Sport: noun...
1. An active diversion requiring physical exertion and competition.

Hunting can involve physical exertion but competition? Competition with
whom? Other hunters to see who can kill the most in the shortest time? To
see whose dogs can tear a fox apart in the shortest time?

Hunting isn't a sport. Its only purpose is to allow someone to kill
something. Time was, hunting was a need...people fed themselves by hunting.
There is no longer that need in most of the world.

I'm a bit old fashioned I guess because I think we still need those
skills even today.

Not really. All his creditors will loose their investments. He could
go bankrupt.

If he can afford 50K to kill a lion he doesn't have unsecured creditors.
Dentists don't normally have investors either.

Having money doesn't mean he didn't have creditors he owed money to.


--
Maggie

Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:32 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:11:14 -0500, Muggles wrote:

The only grounds to legitimately judge him on are whether or not he knew
it was a protected lion (if he could see the tracking collar or not),
and if it was a legal or illegal hunt. If it was an illegal hunt, then
he should pay that penalty for an illegal hunt, not be judged because he
used the same methods to hunt that other hunters have used for years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_%28lion%29#Criminal_investigations


Interesting situation. Who is responsible for the outcome in a situation
where guides were hired and the expectation was that they have
everything in order? Palmer isn't from Africa and probably had that
expectation seeing that he paid $50k for the hunt.

That is BS, he must know what he was doing, he is not a first timer.
That excuse is VERY, VERY weak to have a leg. Quote from his guide who
was charged, "I regret I did not stop him shooting that lion(Cecil}"
He tracked him into protected area to finish him. Why did they try to
destroy his GPS collar? I don't judge Palmer, I just don't like his kind.

On 8/1/2015 2:16 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
Muggles wrote:
On 7/31/2015 10:24 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, July 31, 2015 at 8:22:01 AM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/30/2015 11:58 PM, Muggles wrote:


In poor countries people will do most anything if well paid/bribed.

Even if that's true, it's just one lion. I think there are worse
things
a person could do.


Yes, just one lion. I heard on the news that in the 1940's there were
about 450,000 lions in Africa, just 20,000 now. Oh, 19,999. Sorry
Cecil.

How about elephants and Rhinos being poached for their tusks? Do you
think it is OK to kill an elephant, saw off the tusks and just let it
rot? Its just one. Today.

Last night for dinner I had a big pork chop and I had a chicken egg for
breakfast. Hunting for food is OK, but this guy just wants to hang a
lion head on the wall so he can look at it and masturbate.

+1

He and similar are definitely sickos. I hope he gets everything
he deserves. Already, it's likely working. Hopefully the sudden
demise of his practice will mean it will be harder to afford the
$50K it costs to kill an exotic animal.


The man didn't kill a human, molest anyone, or even do anything worthy
of prison. He killed an old lion. He shouldn't have his practice or
his life ruined over a cat.

If we have one like Palmer running around killing exotic animals for
his hobby, what'd be left for your G-kids and their kids? All by
themselves? No singing birds, no fish to fish, no animals to look and
enjoy... Would you like to live in a world like that? There is war going
on in Amazon jungle searching for medicinal exotic plants by big drug
companies doing all kind of bad things. Nothing is left alone. Plants,
animals(on land, in the ocean), minerals.... We're heading for self
destruction destroying nature's eco system. Maybe bible is talking
about this. Species with fast pace of evolution is doomed quicker
compared to slower ones. That's us, human. At least not in my time.
Human has responsibility to maintain eco system of which we're part at
the top.

I don't see the world as being without singing birds or no fish or
animals at all because they are renewable resources - they reproduce. I
see it becoming harder to sustain growing populations with crop foods
that can't as easily reproduce itself without our assistance, tho.

I love all sorts of animals, but at the same time I realize just how
little control I have over so many things, including, how well animals
survive all over the world or what is happening to the rain forests. I'm
not in charge of anything that can affect the outcome one way or
another, so I've come to conclude that accepting things that happen is
the more reasonable choice on how to respond to such things.

--
Maggie

On 8/1/2015 2:26 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 11:18 AM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 10:48:44 -0500, Muggles wrote:

Ruin a mans livelihood because he kills a cat. That's what a
lion is, it's a big cat.

He killed more than a lion, he killed additional research that was in
progress.


So, they'll study another lion, and then another one. I'm sure that's
not the only lion people are studying. At least I think the scientists
would be foolish to only be studying one lion.

He was chosen as a good healthy lion and good genetic character. His
siblings may all get killed now by another male lion taking over the
Cecil's family. BTW, he killed a Mull deer, Black bear, Moose up here in
Canada, all good record size animals. If what he did was OK, why all
the hunting clubs are dropping his membership? You think human lives
only matters? All lives are precious god's creation. Every living
things; animals, plants and every thing in between. That's how I see it.

I don't know what the hunting regulations are for mull deer, black
bears, or moose, and being a member of a hunting club doesn't really
mean anything to me, either.

I wouldn't be out there killing those animals, but I don't see the man
as evil because he did. I've accepted the idea that some people like to
hunt big game animals even if I don't like to hunt.

--
Maggie

Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:35 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:53 AM, Muggles wrote:

I don't personally understand the need to hunt for sport, but some
people like doing it. Why? I don't know, but if it's legal me feeling
sorry for one lion that's killed on a legal hunt changes nothing.


Problem here is the particular lion. It was closer to dragging a puppy
out of a cage to shoot, not a rel hunt, stalking animals in the jungle.

If it was a legit shot in the wild, we'd never hear about it.

Isn't any animal a hunter goes after stalked and baited in some way? I
don't see how doing that with a lion is any different.

Is your state allow bait hunting? Not up here. Baiting is illegal. We
can't even use bait on fish hook most of time during season. Barbed hook
, unattended fishing line are illegal as well.
Ding, ding, ding!, you lost this argument. Unless you are arguing
argument's sake.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:17 PM, Muggles wrote:


Except this was not a jungle miles from nowhere. It was lured from a
game preserve where it was studied by a university.

If an animal leaves a preserve, then it's not on a protected reserve.

Evidently you don't know what "lured" means and the fact that it is
against the law to do that.


Ever fish in the ocean? It is different that fishing in an aquarium at
the pet store.

It doesn't much matter to the fish that's caught.


What a sport you are.

Is he Palmer No. 2?

Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 1:16 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:15:07 -0500, Muggles wrote:

I eat fish.

Were they harvested legally? There's an App for that.


LOL I'll have to inquire at the fish restaurant.

I don't eat farmed fish.

On 8/1/2015 2:34 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:32 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:11:14 -0500, Muggles wrote:

The only grounds to legitimately judge him on are whether or not he
knew
it was a protected lion (if he could see the tracking collar or not),
and if it was a legal or illegal hunt. If it was an illegal hunt, then
he should pay that penalty for an illegal hunt, not be judged
because he
used the same methods to hunt that other hunters have used for years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_%28lion%29#Criminal_investigations


Interesting situation. Who is responsible for the outcome in a situation
where guides were hired and the expectation was that they have
everything in order? Palmer isn't from Africa and probably had that
expectation seeing that he paid $50k for the hunt.

That is BS, he must know what he was doing, he is not a first timer.

If I hire someone to do a job for me that I don't know how to do, then I
have an expectation that person knows how to accomplish that job and
knows more than I know. If I were to spend $50k hiring someone, I'd
have even more of that same expectation.

That excuse is VERY, VERY weak to have a leg. Quote from his guide who
was charged, "I regret I did not stop him shooting that lion(Cecil}"
He tracked him into protected area to finish him. Why did they try to
destroy his GPS collar? I don't judge Palmer, I just don't like his kind.

I imagine if they didn't see the collar before it was shot and found it
after the fact that they would think "OH CRAP!!" and try to destroy the
collar. That seems like a logical response to me even if it was the
wrong one.

--
Maggie

On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 14:27:42 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 1:54 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:41:27 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 12:32 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:11:14 -0500, Muggles wrote:

The only grounds to legitimately judge him on are whether or not he knew
it was a protected lion (if he could see the tracking collar or not),
and if it was a legal or illegal hunt. If it was an illegal hunt, then
he should pay that penalty for an illegal hunt, not be judged because he
used the same methods to hunt that other hunters have used for years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_%28lion%29#Criminal_investigations


Interesting situation. Who is responsible for the outcome in a situation
where guides were hired and the expectation was that they have
everything in order? Palmer isn't from Africa and probably had that
expectation seeing that he paid $50k for the hunt.

It is Palmer's responsibility to vet the guide, hunting zones,
validate permits and local laws. Just as you would vet his dental
credentials and reputation before you visit his office. Same as if
you hire a contractor to work on your property. He cannot claim to be
the victim here. He didn't do his due diligence. Period.


Maybe he tried, maybe he didn't. Either way he hired someone else to do
a job for him with the expectation that person new the ins and outs
where he didn't know those things. Sometimes things just suck.

Regardless, it is still Palmer's responsibility to validate the facts.

On 8/1/2015 2:45 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:35 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:53 AM, Muggles wrote:

I don't personally understand the need to hunt for sport, but some
people like doing it. Why? I don't know, but if it's legal me feeling
sorry for one lion that's killed on a legal hunt changes nothing.


Problem here is the particular lion. It was closer to dragging a puppy
out of a cage to shoot, not a rel hunt, stalking animals in the jungle.

If it was a legit shot in the wild, we'd never hear about it.

Isn't any animal a hunter goes after stalked and baited in some way? I
don't see how doing that with a lion is any different.

Is your state allow bait hunting? Not up here. Baiting is illegal. We
can't even use bait on fish hook most of time during season. Barbed hook
, unattended fishing line are illegal as well.
Ding, ding, ding!, you lost this argument. Unless you are arguing
argument's sake.

I've never heard of not baiting a fish hook. How would any fish bite
the hook without any bait? All kinds of bait are sold in this area from
catfish bait to deer bait.

--
Maggie

On 8/1/2015 2:47 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 1:16 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:15:07 -0500, Muggles wrote:

I eat fish.

Were they harvested legally? There's an App for that.


LOL I'll have to inquire at the fish restaurant.

I don't eat farmed fish.

I do! Catfish are farmed a lot and very tasty.

--
Maggie

On 8/1/2015 2:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 14:27:42 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 1:54 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:41:27 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 12:32 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:11:14 -0500, Muggles wrote:

The only grounds to legitimately judge him on are whether or not he knew
it was a protected lion (if he could see the tracking collar or not),
and if it was a legal or illegal hunt. If it was an illegal hunt, then
he should pay that penalty for an illegal hunt, not be judged because he
used the same methods to hunt that other hunters have used for years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_%28lion%29#Criminal_investigations


Interesting situation. Who is responsible for the outcome in a situation
where guides were hired and the expectation was that they have
everything in order? Palmer isn't from Africa and probably had that
expectation seeing that he paid $50k for the hunt.

It is Palmer's responsibility to vet the guide, hunting zones,
validate permits and local laws. Just as you would vet his dental
credentials and reputation before you visit his office. Same as if
you hire a contractor to work on your property. He cannot claim to be
the victim here. He didn't do his due diligence. Period.


Maybe he tried, maybe he didn't. Either way he hired someone else to do
a job for him with the expectation that person new the ins and outs
where he didn't know those things. Sometimes things just suck.

Regardless, it is still Palmer's responsibility to validate the facts.


I suppose a man can only do what he knows to do and then can still screw
up. People aren't perfect.

--
Maggie

On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 14:52:48 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 2:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 14:27:42 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 1:54 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:41:27 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 12:32 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:11:14 -0500, Muggles wrote:

The only grounds to legitimately judge him on are whether or not he knew
it was a protected lion (if he could see the tracking collar or not),
and if it was a legal or illegal hunt. If it was an illegal hunt, then
he should pay that penalty for an illegal hunt, not be judged because he
used the same methods to hunt that other hunters have used for years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_%28lion%29#Criminal_investigations


Interesting situation. Who is responsible for the outcome in a situation
where guides were hired and the expectation was that they have
everything in order? Palmer isn't from Africa and probably had that
expectation seeing that he paid $50k for the hunt.

It is Palmer's responsibility to vet the guide, hunting zones,
validate permits and local laws. Just as you would vet his dental
credentials and reputation before you visit his office. Same as if
you hire a contractor to work on your property. He cannot claim to be
the victim here. He didn't do his due diligence. Period.


Maybe he tried, maybe he didn't. Either way he hired someone else to do
a job for him with the expectation that person new the ins and outs
where he didn't know those things. Sometimes things just suck.

Regardless, it is still Palmer's responsibility to validate the facts.


I suppose a man can only do what he knows to do and then can still screw
up. People aren't perfect.

Nobody has even suggested people are perfect. You seem to have a lot
of 'expectations' from people, they know how to do work on your home
but dismiss the responsibly from Palmer, an educated man, knowing and
trained in ethics. He knew exactly what he was doing by neglect and
avoided his responsibility to research, verify, validate the people he
hired. His penis got in the way, so he could kill an exotic game
animal for a trophy. Keep diggin' that hole.

On 8/1/2015 3:15 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 14:52:48 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 2:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 14:27:42 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 1:54 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:41:27 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 12:32 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:11:14 -0500, Muggles wrote:

The only grounds to legitimately judge him on are whether or not he knew
it was a protected lion (if he could see the tracking collar or not),
and if it was a legal or illegal hunt. If it was an illegal hunt, then
he should pay that penalty for an illegal hunt, not be judged because he
used the same methods to hunt that other hunters have used for years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_%28lion%29#Criminal_investigations


Interesting situation. Who is responsible for the outcome in a situation
where guides were hired and the expectation was that they have
everything in order? Palmer isn't from Africa and probably had that
expectation seeing that he paid $50k for the hunt.

It is Palmer's responsibility to vet the guide, hunting zones,
validate permits and local laws. Just as you would vet his dental
credentials and reputation before you visit his office. Same as if
you hire a contractor to work on your property. He cannot claim to be
the victim here. He didn't do his due diligence. Period.


Maybe he tried, maybe he didn't. Either way he hired someone else to do
a job for him with the expectation that person new the ins and outs
where he didn't know those things. Sometimes things just suck.

Regardless, it is still Palmer's responsibility to validate the facts.


I suppose a man can only do what he knows to do and then can still screw
up. People aren't perfect.

Nobody has even suggested people are perfect. You seem to have a lot
of 'expectations' from people, they know how to do work on your home
but dismiss the responsibly from Palmer, an educated man, knowing and
trained in ethics. He knew exactly what he was doing by neglect and
avoided his responsibility to research, verify, validate the people he
hired. His penis got in the way, so he could kill an exotic game
animal for a trophy. Keep diggin' that hole.


Being an educated man with money doesn't mean he doesn't hire people to
do a job and expect them to do that job.

IMO, murderers, rapists, and sex offenders are worse people and deserve
the kind of attention that people are wasting on Palmer.

--
Maggie

On 8/1/2015 1:17 PM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 11:43 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:36 PM, Muggles wrote:


So, they'll study another lion, and then another one. I'm sure that's
not the only lion people are studying. At least I think the scientists
would be foolish to only be studying one lion.


Sure, you can study the aging process by getting a new specimen every
year or so. I sure hope you are just acting dumb.

geeesh If I were dumb I certainly couldn't counter some of the silly
arguments people pose that justify destroying a mans livelihood.

Disagreement doesn't equal dumb. If it did every lawyer on the face of
the earth would be out of a job.

OTOH, if you believe in something, you should be able to argue your
point of view without attacking other people by calling them dumb just
because you disagree.


To say "they'll study another lion, and then another one" is a dumb
statement. Research does not always work like that.I don't know if you
are dumb or not, but what you said was.

On 8/1/2015 2:30 PM, Muggles wrote:


I see nothing wrong with charging the guide if the guide broke the laws
there, but I think it's wrong to hold the dentist liable when the
expectation was that the guide would make sure it was legal. The guide
provided that service and failed.


That should be decided after an investigation. We don't have proof that
he knew anything, but considering past behavior, it is very possible.
Considering he moved a bear 30 miles to fake a legal killing, he is very
capable of cheating here too.

On 8/1/2015 3:31 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 1:17 PM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 11:43 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:36 PM, Muggles wrote:


So, they'll study another lion, and then another one. I'm sure that's
not the only lion people are studying. At least I think the scientists
would be foolish to only be studying one lion.


Sure, you can study the aging process by getting a new specimen every
year or so. I sure hope you are just acting dumb.

geeesh If I were dumb I certainly couldn't counter some of the silly
arguments people pose that justify destroying a mans livelihood.

Disagreement doesn't equal dumb. If it did every lawyer on the face of
the earth would be out of a job.

OTOH, if you believe in something, you should be able to argue your
point of view without attacking other people by calling them dumb just
because you disagree.


To say "they'll study another lion, and then another one" is a dumb
statement. Research does not always work like that.I don't know if you
are dumb or not, but what you said was.

Come on, now. Any researcher worth their weight is going to be studying
multiple subjects at the same time, in addition to, they'll be studying
the effect of losing that particular lion in the pride. They haven't
lost their study at all. They'll simply expand the study to include
what happens in groups like this with the behavior of the remaining
family members. Some of that information has already been passed on.

What I think is dumb is believing that other lions won't replace the
lost lion in the study. The purpose of such studies is to gather real
information regardless of the circumstances and use the data to
understand how those subjects respond to various circumstances.

The study will continue probably without a hop, skip, or a jump, and the
resulting information will be deemed as extremely valuable when it comes
to analyzing how other prides respond to similar family losses.

--
Maggie

On 8/1/2015 3:27 PM, Muggles wrote:


Maybe he tried, maybe he didn't. Either way he hired someone else to do
a job for him with the expectation that person new the ins and outs
where he didn't know those things. Sometimes things just suck.


And sometimes you seek out the sleazy people that will get you what you
want no matter the legality. Just look at his past. I hope he is
questioned.

On 8/1/2015 3:39 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 2:30 PM, Muggles wrote:


I see nothing wrong with charging the guide if the guide broke the laws
there, but I think it's wrong to hold the dentist liable when the
expectation was that the guide would make sure it was legal. The guide
provided that service and failed.


That should be decided after an investigation. We don't have proof that
he knew anything, but considering past behavior, it is very possible.
Considering he moved a bear 30 miles to fake a legal killing, he is very
capable of cheating here too.

Sure, he's capable of cheating, but all I'm saying is I'd rather see the
proof before I decide the man should have his life destroyed. Even if
he did do something wrong, I'd still have to reject the idea that he
should lose his business and the world gets to destroy him over it. More
evil people in the world never get judged that harshly.

--
Maggie

On 8/1/2015 3:48 PM, Muggles wrote:


If I hire someone to do a job for me that I don't know how to do, then I
have an expectation that person knows how to accomplish that job and
knows more than I know. If I were to spend $50k hiring someone, I'd
have even more of that same expectation.

Sure just like the Mafia hired people to eliminate problems. They knew
the contractor has the expertise to eliminate the problem, but they had
no idea that they may use illegal means.




I imagine if they didn't see the collar before it was shot and found it
after the fact that they would think "OH CRAP!!" and try to destroy the
collar. That seems like a logical response to me even if it was the
wrong one.


High School kids would do that, experienced professionals would do the
right thing.

On 8/1/2015 3:43 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 3:27 PM, Muggles wrote:


Maybe he tried, maybe he didn't. Either way he hired someone else to do
a job for him with the expectation that person new the ins and outs
where he didn't know those things. Sometimes things just suck.


And sometimes you seek out the sleazy people that will get you what you
want no matter the legality. Just look at his past. I hope he is
questioned.

I hope he is questioned, too.

--
Maggie

On 8/1/2015 3:49 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 3:48 PM, Muggles wrote:


If I hire someone to do a job for me that I don't know how to do, then I
have an expectation that person knows how to accomplish that job and
knows more than I know. If I were to spend $50k hiring someone, I'd
have even more of that same expectation.

Sure just like the Mafia hired people to eliminate problems. They knew
the contractor has the expertise to eliminate the problem, but they had
no idea that they may use illegal means.




I imagine if they didn't see the collar before it was shot and found it
after the fact that they would think "OH CRAP!!" and try to destroy the
collar. That seems like a logical response to me even if it was the
wrong one.


High School kids would do that, experienced professionals would do the
right thing.

I've seen experienced professionals do the wrong thing many times, too.
I just don't think anything is a pat answer.
--
Maggie

On 8/1/2015 1:51 PM, Muggles wrote:


I don't see anything wrong with paying to hunt big game animals legally.
Granted, it's not a hobby I find appealing, personally.

Same here, but the key word is "legally". That is questionable.


Uh no, he did not. He crossed the line luring an animal from a game
preserve. That is the big difference. He is sleazy.

I don't believe luring an animal in any hunt is uncommon practice. Duck
hunters have calls, so is it illegal for them to call ducks on a reserve
to fly into an area where duck hunting is allowed? I'm guessing it isn't.


Luring from the wild is perfectly legal. Luring from a preserve,
sanctuary, zoo, is not. This lion was in a preserve so he would not be
hunted and the guides lured him away. As someone else pointed out, it
is like going to the Bronx Zoo.





Cheaper than jailing him.


Not really. All his creditors will loose their investments. He could go
bankrupt.


It is not my tax dollars

On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 15:23:06 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 3:15 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 14:52:48 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 2:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 14:27:42 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 1:54 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:41:27 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 12:32 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:11:14 -0500, Muggles wrote:

The only grounds to legitimately judge him on are whether or not he knew
it was a protected lion (if he could see the tracking collar or not),
and if it was a legal or illegal hunt. If it was an illegal hunt, then
he should pay that penalty for an illegal hunt, not be judged because he
used the same methods to hunt that other hunters have used for years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_%28lion%29#Criminal_investigations


Interesting situation. Who is responsible for the outcome in a situation
where guides were hired and the expectation was that they have
everything in order? Palmer isn't from Africa and probably had that
expectation seeing that he paid $50k for the hunt.

It is Palmer's responsibility to vet the guide, hunting zones,
validate permits and local laws. Just as you would vet his dental
credentials and reputation before you visit his office. Same as if
you hire a contractor to work on your property. He cannot claim to be
the victim here. He didn't do his due diligence. Period.


Maybe he tried, maybe he didn't. Either way he hired someone else to do
a job for him with the expectation that person new the ins and outs
where he didn't know those things. Sometimes things just suck.

Regardless, it is still Palmer's responsibility to validate the facts.


I suppose a man can only do what he knows to do and then can still screw
up. People aren't perfect.

Nobody has even suggested people are perfect. You seem to have a lot
of 'expectations' from people, they know how to do work on your home
but dismiss the responsibly from Palmer, an educated man, knowing and
trained in ethics. He knew exactly what he was doing by neglect and
avoided his responsibility to research, verify, validate the people he
hired. His penis got in the way, so he could kill an exotic game
animal for a trophy. Keep diggin' that hole.


Being an educated man with money doesn't mean he doesn't hire people to
do a job and expect them to do that job.

Keep digging that hole. Dismiss HIS responsibility to satisfy your
position.

IMO, murderers, rapists, and sex offenders are worse people and deserve
the kind of attention that people are wasting on Palmer.

Now you have punted and compared those with him. Trying to justify
what he did as acceptable behavior. Tell the class how his behavior is
equal.

On 8/1/2015 4:01 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 15:23:06 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 3:15 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 14:52:48 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 2:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 14:27:42 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 1:54 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:41:27 -0500, Muggles wrote:

On 8/1/2015 12:32 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:11:14 -0500, Muggles wrote:

The only grounds to legitimately judge him on are whether or not he knew
it was a protected lion (if he could see the tracking collar or not),
and if it was a legal or illegal hunt. If it was an illegal hunt, then
he should pay that penalty for an illegal hunt, not be judged because he
used the same methods to hunt that other hunters have used for years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_%28lion%29#Criminal_investigations


Interesting situation. Who is responsible for the outcome in a situation
where guides were hired and the expectation was that they have
everything in order? Palmer isn't from Africa and probably had that
expectation seeing that he paid $50k for the hunt.

It is Palmer's responsibility to vet the guide, hunting zones,
validate permits and local laws. Just as you would vet his dental
credentials and reputation before you visit his office. Same as if
you hire a contractor to work on your property. He cannot claim to be
the victim here. He didn't do his due diligence. Period.


Maybe he tried, maybe he didn't. Either way he hired someone else to do
a job for him with the expectation that person new the ins and outs
where he didn't know those things. Sometimes things just suck.

Regardless, it is still Palmer's responsibility to validate the facts.


I suppose a man can only do what he knows to do and then can still screw
up. People aren't perfect.

Nobody has even suggested people are perfect. You seem to have a lot
of 'expectations' from people, they know how to do work on your home
but dismiss the responsibly from Palmer, an educated man, knowing and
trained in ethics. He knew exactly what he was doing by neglect and
avoided his responsibility to research, verify, validate the people he
hired. His penis got in the way, so he could kill an exotic game
animal for a trophy. Keep diggin' that hole.


Being an educated man with money doesn't mean he doesn't hire people to
do a job and expect them to do that job.

Keep digging that hole. Dismiss HIS responsibility to satisfy your
position.

I'm not dismissing his responsibility at all. I am dismissing any
judgements to attack the man that go far beyond any reasonable
punishment that's applicable to the circumstances. Justice isn't served
by pack animal mentality. If he is guilty of anything a just punishment
might be to pay for another animal to be reared, or something another
those lines. If what he did was wrong he should have a just punishment,
not have his life ruined by people who feel they have the right to do
so. That's no better than vigilante justice, imo.

IMO, murderers, rapists, and sex offenders are worse people and deserve
the kind of attention that people are wasting on Palmer.

Now you have punted and compared those with him. Trying to justify
what he did as acceptable behavior. Tell the class how his behavior is
equal.


That's the point. His behavior isn't equal, yet, people are seeking to
punish him as if his behavior were worse than that of murderers,
rapists, or sex offenders.

--
Maggie

On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 2:09:25 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:57 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 1:22:45 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
people are closer to my standard than yours.

Statistics are never an indicator of being right or wrong. It's just the
current trend.

Another example of the sad state of education in America. I give you
factual numbers on the rapid decline of lions and this is what you
have to say? Statistics are an indicator of being right or wrong.

No they aren't. I deal with statistics every day, and how they are
interpreted is totally dependent upon the most current agenda and goals.
Right vs. wrong generally has no bearing with statistics.


Stop lying. You're obviously too stupid deal with statistics every day.
It's just an unbelievable rat hole to even attempt to go down. Stop wasting
our time. If you say that the sun rises in the west and I say it rises
in the east, having statistics that show that in the 300 days of observation
it rose in the east 300 times and zero times in the west, clearly has
direct bearing on who's right and who's wrong. How's that for a lesson in statistics?


The dwindling numbers of lions might be an indicator of climate change
causing habitat change, which results in the lions dying off. None of
that has anything to do with right vs. wrong.

Again with the right vs wrong. Idiot, if the lions are down to
16,000 from 400,000 just fifty years ago, everyone else here reading
this knows that it shows that they are in trouble and it's not
smart killing off more of them. And again, only a true fool would
try to interject the cause of why the lion population is down,
because everyone here knows it's because of man. Not that it matters.
If it was due to a virus, it would still be remarkably stupid to
go around shooting them to further the decline.


How you interpret the
numbers has to be done accurately, and simply quoting a statistic in
order to support your argument won't fly and can come across as
deliberately being deceptive.




Here, from Scientific American:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/...ct-protection/

"African Lions Face Extinction by 2050, Could Gain Endangered Species Act Protection "

The African lion (Panthera leo leo) faces the threat of extinction by the year 2050, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service director Dan Ashe warned today. The sobering news came as part of the agency's announcement that it has officially proposed that African lions receive much-needed protection under the Endangered Species Act.

The decision to list the big cats as threatened--one level below endangered--would allow the U.S. government to provide some level of training and assistance for on-the-ground conservation efforts and restrict the sale of lion parts or hunting trophies into the country or across state lines.


Is suppose Scientific American also doesn't know statistics, right?
BTW, where the are your sources that say lions are doing just
peachy keen and should be hunted and hung on walls?


I said the numbers of lions has decreased 95% in the last 50 years,
the numbers show exactly that, they show that I'm right. And you're
right it's a trend, a very bad one. Even a child could figure that out..

A trend still isn't an indicator statistically of right vs. wrong. A
trend simply is a collection of data. The cause of the trend may or may
not be attributed to good or bad, but still is dependent upon individual
interpretation. If statistics are to be taken seriously, then they must
be interpreted without any agenda.



Again with the fetish about right vs wrong. Why don't you harp
about hot vs cold, or up vs down for a while? It makes as much
sense. Everyone here knows that lions numbers are down drastically,
they need to be protected, not shot. WTF is all this about "right"
vs "wrong"?






The reasons of the trend could be anything from A to Z,
some being valid data, others being a stumped toe.

Now you want to segue into another diversion that's largely
irrelevant.

If you're going to talk about statistics in order to support your
argument, then there must be clarification on how those numbers are
interpreted. If you want to use them to support your argument, then you
should be prepared to discuss them.


--
Maggie

I have used them and once again shown that you are indeed the true
village idiot. In fact, you're the dumbest poster I've ever seen
here. Why don't you end it by saying that if a
species is meant to survive, it will somehow survive? That gets
my vote for the most ignorant, stupid post I've ever seen here.
Congratulations.

On 8/1/2015 4:12 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 2:09:25 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:57 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 1:22:45 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
people are closer to my standard than yours.

Statistics are never an indicator of being right or wrong. It's just the
current trend.

Another example of the sad state of education in America. I give you
factual numbers on the rapid decline of lions and this is what you
have to say? Statistics are an indicator of being right or wrong.

No they aren't. I deal with statistics every day, and how they are
interpreted is totally dependent upon the most current agenda and goals.
Right vs. wrong generally has no bearing with statistics.


Stop lying. You're obviously too stupid deal with statistics every day.
It's just an unbelievable rat hole to even attempt to go down. Stop wasting
our time. If you say that the sun rises in the west and I say it rises
in the east, having statistics that show that in the 300 days of observation
it rose in the east 300 times and zero times in the west, clearly has
direct bearing on who's right and who's wrong. How's that for a lesson in statistics?

OTOH, if you say that the lion population is diminished X percentage
over a period of 50 years you'll have the specific data that tells the
age, gender, death rates, new birth rates of each lion in a specific
area. You'll also be able to correlate the regional data of
temperature, rainwater, food supply or lack of food supply and be able
to analyze all of the specific data and determine what circumstances
affected the decline of the lion population. You just can't throw out a
statistic and use it to prove a narrow conclusion to back up your viewpoint.

How's that for a lesson on stats? I don't need to call you stupid to
counter your argument. It's not personal, but if you want to use
statistics to back up any argument you use in reference to the decline
in the lion population you're going to have to do a better job of it.
Some people might buy it, but anyone with any knowledge of statistics
would have a field day with that approach.


The dwindling numbers of lions might be an indicator of climate change
causing habitat change, which results in the lions dying off. None of
that has anything to do with right vs. wrong.

Again with the right vs wrong. Idiot,

I realize being challenged is something that probably frustrates you so
you feel the need to resort to name calling. That just shows me how
weak your position actually is.

if the lions are down to
16,000 from 400,000 just fifty years ago, everyone else here reading
this knows that it shows that they are in trouble and it's not
smart killing off more of them. And again, only a true fool would
try to interject the cause of why the lion population is down,
because everyone here knows it's because of man. Not that it matters.
If it was due to a virus, it would still be remarkably stupid to
go around shooting them to further the decline.

Everyone doesn't know that man is the cause of the decline in the lion
population. You can't simply spout stats off and then tell people what
you want them to believe caused those statistics, and that's what you're
trying to do. That's no more responsible than what politicians do in
order to get elected.



--
Maggie

On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 3:47:00 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 3:39 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 2:30 PM, Muggles wrote:


I see nothing wrong with charging the guide if the guide broke the laws
there, but I think it's wrong to hold the dentist liable when the
expectation was that the guide would make sure it was legal. The guide
provided that service and failed.


That should be decided after an investigation. We don't have proof that
he knew anything, but considering past behavior, it is very possible.
Considering he moved a bear 30 miles to fake a legal killing, he is very
capable of cheating here too.

Sure, he's capable of cheating, but all I'm saying is I'd rather see the
proof before I decide the man should have his life destroyed. Even if
he did do something wrong, I'd still have to reject the idea that he
should lose his business and the world gets to destroy him over it. More
evil people in the world never get judged that harshly.

--
Maggie

There was a funeral for a San Francisco police officer who was murdered by an illegal alien Mexican criminal at a traffic stop and the local paper and many news sources ignored the funeral. The mayor didn't show up, none of the criminal alien hugging Democrat politicians showed up but thousands of citizens and law enforcement people showed up. It wasn't newsworthy. ﴾͡�̯͡�﴿ O'RLY?

[8~{} Uncle Shocked Monster

On 8/1/2015 4:48 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 3:47:00 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 3:39 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 2:30 PM, Muggles wrote:


I see nothing wrong with charging the guide if the guide broke the laws
there, but I think it's wrong to hold the dentist liable when the
expectation was that the guide would make sure it was legal. The guide
provided that service and failed.


That should be decided after an investigation. We don't have proof that
he knew anything, but considering past behavior, it is very possible.
Considering he moved a bear 30 miles to fake a legal killing, he is very
capable of cheating here too.

Sure, he's capable of cheating, but all I'm saying is I'd rather see the
proof before I decide the man should have his life destroyed. Even if
he did do something wrong, I'd still have to reject the idea that he
should lose his business and the world gets to destroy him over it. More
evil people in the world never get judged that harshly.

--
Maggie

There was a funeral for a San Francisco police officer who was murdered by an illegal alien Mexican criminal at a traffic stop and the local paper and many news sources ignored the funeral. The mayor didn't show up, none of the criminal alien hugging Democrat politicians showed up but thousands of citizens and law enforcement people showed up. It wasn't newsworthy. ﴾͡�̯͡�﴿ O'RLY?

[8~{} Uncle Shocked Monster


Now, that's sad. Did they find the criminal? I hope so.

--
Maggie

On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 4:32:49 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 4:12 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 2:09:25 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:57 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 1:22:45 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
people are closer to my standard than yours.

Statistics are never an indicator of being right or wrong. It's just the
current trend.

Another example of the sad state of education in America. I give you
factual numbers on the rapid decline of lions and this is what you
have to say? Statistics are an indicator of being right or wrong.

No they aren't. I deal with statistics every day, and how they are
interpreted is totally dependent upon the most current agenda and goals.
Right vs. wrong generally has no bearing with statistics.


Stop lying. You're obviously too stupid deal with statistics every day..
It's just an unbelievable rat hole to even attempt to go down. Stop wasting
our time. If you say that the sun rises in the west and I say it rises
in the east, having statistics that show that in the 300 days of observation
it rose in the east 300 times and zero times in the west, clearly has
direct bearing on who's right and who's wrong. How's that for a lesson in statistics?

OTOH, if you say that the lion population is diminished X percentage
over a period of 50 years you'll have the specific data that tells the
age, gender, death rates, new birth rates of each lion in a specific
area. You'll also be able to correlate the regional data of
temperature, rainwater, food supply or lack of food supply and be able
to analyze all of the specific data and determine what circumstances
affected the decline of the lion population. You just can't throw out a
statistic and use it to prove a narrow conclusion to back up your viewpoint.

On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 4:50:33 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 4:48 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 3:47:00 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 3:39 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 2:30 PM, Muggles wrote:


I see nothing wrong with charging the guide if the guide broke the laws
there, but I think it's wrong to hold the dentist liable when the
expectation was that the guide would make sure it was legal. The guide
provided that service and failed.


That should be decided after an investigation. We don't have proof that
he knew anything, but considering past behavior, it is very possible.
Considering he moved a bear 30 miles to fake a legal killing, he is very
capable of cheating here too.

Sure, he's capable of cheating, but all I'm saying is I'd rather see the
proof before I decide the man should have his life destroyed. Even if
he did do something wrong, I'd still have to reject the idea that he
should lose his business and the world gets to destroy him over it. More
evil people in the world never get judged that harshly.

--
Maggie

There was a funeral for a San Francisco police officer who was murdered by an illegal alien Mexican criminal at a traffic stop and the local paper and many news sources ignored the funeral. The mayor didn't show up, none of the criminal alien hugging Democrat politicians showed up but thousands of citizens and law enforcement people showed up. It wasn't newsworthy. ﴾͡�̯͡�﴿ O'RLY?

[8~{} Uncle Shocked Monster


Now, that's sad. Did they find the criminal? I hope so.

--
Maggie

Yea, but he didn't kill a friendly lion named Pedro so nobody cared because there was no manufactured hysteria by the media. There were no marches in the streets and White folks burning down their own neighborhoods. Nobody went to the sanctuary city hall to place badge wearing teddy bears and flowers plus signs saying CRIMINAL ALIENS GO HOME! It just wasn't newsworthy so there was no outrage from the public because White cops lives don't matter. ﴾͡�̯͡�﴿ O'RLY?

[8~{} Uncle Shocked Monster

On 8/1/2015 2:14 PM, Muggles wrote:



Do you understand what a realist is? I accept things I cannot change,
and I invest energy into things I actually can do something about.


I agree with you. One thing you can do something about is not killing
declining species.

On 8/1/2015 3:50 PM, Muggles wrote:


I've never heard of not baiting a fish hook. How would any fish bite
the hook without any bait? All kinds of bait are sold in this area from
catfish bait to deer bait.


Lures

On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 21:02:58 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 8/1/2015 3:50 PM, Muggles wrote:


I've never heard of not baiting a fish hook. How would any fish bite
the hook without any bait? All kinds of bait are sold in this area from
catfish bait to deer bait.


Lures

+1

A shiny treble hook works great.

On 8/1/2015 5:48 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 4:32:49 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 4:12 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 2:09:25 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 12:57 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 1:22:45 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
people are closer to my standard than yours.

Statistics are never an indicator of being right or wrong. It's just the
current trend.

Another example of the sad state of education in America. I give you
factual numbers on the rapid decline of lions and this is what you
have to say? Statistics are an indicator of being right or wrong.

No they aren't. I deal with statistics every day, and how they are
interpreted is totally dependent upon the most current agenda and goals.
Right vs. wrong generally has no bearing with statistics.


Stop lying. You're obviously too stupid deal with statistics every day.
It's just an unbelievable rat hole to even attempt to go down. Stop wasting
our time. If you say that the sun rises in the west and I say it rises
in the east, having statistics that show that in the 300 days of observation
it rose in the east 300 times and zero times in the west, clearly has
direct bearing on who's right and who's wrong. How's that for a lesson in statistics?

OTOH, if you say that the lion population is diminished X percentage
over a period of 50 years you'll have the specific data that tells the
age, gender, death rates, new birth rates of each lion in a specific
area. You'll also be able to correlate the regional data of
temperature, rainwater, food supply or lack of food supply and be able
to analyze all of the specific data and determine what circumstances
affected the decline of the lion population. You just can't throw out a
statistic and use it to prove a narrow conclusion to back up your viewpoint.

How's that for a lesson on stats? I don't need to call you stupid to
counter your argument. It's not personal, but if you want to use
statistics to back up any argument you use in reference to the decline
in the lion population you're going to have to do a better job of it.
Some people might buy it, but anyone with any knowledge of statistics
would have a field day with that approach.


The dwindling numbers of lions might be an indicator of climate change
causing habitat change, which results in the lions dying off. None of
that has anything to do with right vs. wrong.

Again with the right vs wrong. Idiot,

I realize being challenged is something that probably frustrates you so
you feel the need to resort to name calling. That just shows me how
weak your position actually is.

if the lions are down to
16,000 from 400,000 just fifty years ago, everyone else here reading
this knows that it shows that they are in trouble and it's not
smart killing off more of them. And again, only a true fool would
try to interject the cause of why the lion population is down,
because everyone here knows it's because of man. Not that it matters.
If it was due to a virus, it would still be remarkably stupid to
go around shooting them to further the decline.

Everyone doesn't know that man is the cause of the decline in the lion
population. You can't simply spout stats off and then tell people what
you want them to believe caused those statistics, and that's what you're
trying to do. That's no more responsible than what politicians do in
order to get elected.

--
Maggie

IT'S ALL THE FAULT OF GLOBAL WARMING!! WE NEED TO IMMEDIATELY PLACE A 100% TAX ON EVERYONE IN THE WORLD TO PROTECT THE WILD AFRICAN LIONS! KILL ALL THE HUNTERS, TAKE ALL THEIR MONEY AND STUFF!! á•™(‡€€¸†¼€¶)á•—

This wacky message brought to you by PETKILL,"People for the Ethical Treatment of Killer Lions"

[8~{} Uncle Ethical Monster


You should write a book on ethics!

--
Maggie

On 8/1/2015 6:03 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 4:50:33 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 4:48 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 3:47:00 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/1/2015 3:39 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 2:30 PM, Muggles wrote:


I see nothing wrong with charging the guide if the guide broke the laws
there, but I think it's wrong to hold the dentist liable when the
expectation was that the guide would make sure it was legal. The guide
provided that service and failed.


That should be decided after an investigation. We don't have proof that
he knew anything, but considering past behavior, it is very possible.
Considering he moved a bear 30 miles to fake a legal killing, he is very
capable of cheating here too.

Sure, he's capable of cheating, but all I'm saying is I'd rather see the
proof before I decide the man should have his life destroyed. Even if
he did do something wrong, I'd still have to reject the idea that he
should lose his business and the world gets to destroy him over it. More
evil people in the world never get judged that harshly.

--
Maggie

There was a funeral for a San Francisco police officer who was murdered by an illegal alien Mexican criminal at a traffic stop and the local paper and many news sources ignored the funeral. The mayor didn't show up, none of the criminal alien hugging Democrat politicians showed up but thousands of citizens and law enforcement people showed up. It wasn't newsworthy. ﴾͡�̯͡�﴿ O'RLY?

[8~{} Uncle Shocked Monster


Now, that's sad. Did they find the criminal? I hope so.

--
Maggie

Yea, but he didn't kill a friendly lion named Pedro so nobody cared because there was no manufactured hysteria by the media. There were no marches in the streets and White folks burning down their own neighborhoods. Nobody went to the sanctuary city hall to place badge wearing teddy bears and flowers plus signs saying CRIMINAL ALIENS GO HOME! It just wasn't newsworthy so there was no outrage from the public because White cops lives don't matter. ﴾͡�̯͡�﴿ O'RLY?

[8~{} Uncle Shocked Monster


More sadness ...

--
Maggie

On 8/1/2015 7:52 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 2:14 PM, Muggles wrote:



Do you understand what a realist is? I accept things I cannot change,
and I invest energy into things I actually can do something about.


I agree with you. One thing you can do something about is not killing
declining species.

I've not killed any monarch butterflies, ever.

--
Maggie

On 8/1/2015 8:02 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 8/1/2015 3:50 PM, Muggles wrote:


I've never heard of not baiting a fish hook. How would any fish bite
the hook without any bait? All kinds of bait are sold in this area from
catfish bait to deer bait.


Lures

Aren't lures bait?

--
Maggie