Per Tony Hwang:
Boycott him so he can't kill any more animals.

I'm confused about the guy.

I find network news too moronic to watch unless there is no avoiding it,
so don't really know much about him or what he did.

But what I have come away with so far is:

- He gets off on shooting large animals.

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?
--
Pete Cresswell

"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
...
Per Tony Hwang:
Boycott him so he can't kill any more animals.

I'm confused about the guy.

I find network news too moronic to watch unless there is no avoiding it,
so don't really know much about him or what he did.

But what I have come away with so far is:

- He gets off on shooting large animals.

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?
--
Pete Cresswell

Yes, of course you are right. And people forget that animals need to be
culled, and big bucks paid go to the government for habitat/refuge
maintenance, etc.

taxed and spent wrote:
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
...
Per Tony Hwang:
Boycott him so he can't kill any more animals.

I'm confused about the guy.

I find network news too moronic to watch unless there is no avoiding it,
so don't really know much about him or what he did.

But what I have come away with so far is:

- He gets off on shooting large animals.

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?
--
Pete Cresswell

Yes, of course you are right. And people forget that animals need to be
culled, and big bucks paid go to the government for habitat/refuge
maintenance, etc.


Yes, cull is necessary under certain instances, this particular lion is
never a candidate. He was research subject for years to maintain
good family of lions with strong gene. After tracking him down and
killed him they beheaded, skinned him, tried to destroy GPS collar he
was wearing. They planned it which is criminal act. Right now my
daughter is in Tanzania, on a safari to admire and enjoy majestic
animals of all kinds. You shoot them with camera not with cross bow or
guns. I just received an email from her with a picture of Cheetah she
took in the night. She said the animal was just 3 feet away looking at
her. In Tanzania cross bow hunting is illegal.

In article ,
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote:

Per Tony Hwang:
Boycott him so he can't kill any more animals.

I'm confused about the guy.

I find network news too moronic to watch unless there is no avoiding it,
so don't really know much about him or what he did.

But what I have come away with so far is:

- He gets off on shooting large animals.

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?

Basically with some extra circumstances. It appears as though he
bribed the guide, the lion was supposedly lured outside of the protected
area that was his usual habitat, and he was after this one specifically
bcause of its fame.
--
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital."
-- Aaron Levenstein

Per Kurt Ullman:

Basically with some extra circumstances. It appears as though he
bribed the guide, the lion was supposedly lured outside of the protected
area that was his usual habitat, and he was after this one specifically
bcause of its fame.

Then, IMHO, he gets promoted from garden-variety asshole to flaming
asshole.

I have to wonder if he beats off to the picture of him and the carcass.
--
Pete Cresswell

On 7/30/2015 11:30 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Tony Hwang:
Boycott him so he can't kill any more animals.

I'm confused about the guy.

I find network news too moronic to watch unless there is no avoiding it,
so don't really know much about him or what he did.

But what I have come away with so far is:

- He gets off on shooting large animals.

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?

I tend to blame the guide but baiting is legal and I do not know how far
they went to bait that particular lion or any other lion or how far
they range.

Everything, like it or not, may have been on the up and up. I like to
hunt myself but am not in favor of canned hunts.

Also understand that in such a hunt, if you wound the animal, that is
counted as a kill on your permit so you do what ever necessary to find
and dispatch the wounded animal.

On 7/30/2015 10:30 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Tony Hwang:
Boycott him so he can't kill any more animals.

I'm confused about the guy.

I find network news too moronic to watch unless there is no avoiding it,
so don't really know much about him or what he did.

But what I have come away with so far is:

- He gets off on shooting large animals.

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?


I agree with you.

--
Maggie

On 7/30/2015 4:09 PM, Muggles wrote:

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?


I agree with you.


The guide is at least partly at fault, but we don't know details. Did
the guy suggest this situation to Palmer? Was he paid to choose this
particular animal?

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

On 7/30/2015 5:52 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/30/2015 4:09 PM, Muggles wrote:

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?


I agree with you.


The guide is at least partly at fault, but we don't know details. Did
the guy suggest this situation to Palmer? Was he paid to choose this
particular animal?

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.

--
Maggie

Muggles wrote:
On 7/30/2015 5:52 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/30/2015 4:09 PM, Muggles wrote:

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?


I agree with you.


The guide is at least partly at fault, but we don't know details.
Did the guy suggest this situation to Palmer? Was he paid to choose
this particular animal?

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.

Would you think the same thing if it had been the LAST lion?

On 7/31/2015 5:23 AM, dadiOH wrote:
Muggles wrote:
On 7/30/2015 5:52 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/30/2015 4:09 PM, Muggles wrote:

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?


I agree with you.


The guide is at least partly at fault, but we don't know details.
Did the guy suggest this situation to Palmer? Was he paid to choose
this particular animal?

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.

Would you think the same thing if it had been the LAST lion?



I'd think it would be a sad loss, but at that point, what would be the
point in fretting about it? The world is full of sad losses. I'm an
animal lover, and if it were up to me paid hunts of big game would be
illegal unless there were a need to thin a herd or people needed food.

--
Maggie

On 7/30/2015 10:58 PM, Muggles wrote:
On 7/30/2015 5:52 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/30/2015 4:09 PM, Muggles wrote:

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?


I agree with you.


The guide is at least partly at fault, but we don't know details. Did
the guy suggest this situation to Palmer? Was he paid to choose this
particular animal?

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.

I think it was a travesty and an illegal hunt. I believe the guy knew
exactly what he was doing. Seems he was more concerned about killing a
lion than the possible implications of his actions. I think the guy
should be prosecuted, but I just don't believe it's worth all the hoopla
going on. I've never seen this kind of outrage about more babies aborted
than born in NYC.

SeaNymph wrote:
On 7/30/2015 10:58 PM, Muggles wrote:
On 7/30/2015 5:52 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/30/2015 4:09 PM, Muggles wrote:

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?


I agree with you.


The guide is at least partly at fault, but we don't know details. Did
the guy suggest this situation to Palmer? Was he paid to choose this
particular animal?

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.

I think it was a travesty and an illegal hunt. I believe the guy knew
exactly what he was doing. Seems he was more concerned about killing a
lion than the possible implications of his actions. I think the guy
should be prosecuted, but I just don't believe it's worth all the hoopla
going on. I've never seen this kind of outrage about more babies aborted
than born in NYC.

I believe he has been doing questionable hunt for long time and now this
may be last hunt for him. He is definitely unethical. I shoot lots
of animals big and small with camera, not with arrows or guns. Is he
man enough to take the consequences? Or just chicken **** coward?

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.

On 7/31/2015 8:32 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

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.


I've not tried to find it on the web. But I remember
on Rush's show, Dr. Walter Williams commented on this
concept. Some animal they outlawed hunting, so the
poachers went wild, and wiped out the game population.

As such, it's better to manage hunting with permits,
rather than outlaw hunting completely.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

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.

On 7/31/2015 8:32 AM, 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.

In the trophy hunts, meat most likely goes to others, probably the
native workers.

I see lion tastes somewhere between beef and chicken:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3309355.html

There is a hunting show on the Outdoor Channel called "Meateater"

http://themeateater.com/

This guys crazy. Watched him eat coyote. He had a bout of trichinosis
from eating under cooked bear meat.

On 7/31/2015 7:32 AM, 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.

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.

--
Maggie

On Thursday, July 30, 2015 at 11:58:08 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/30/2015 5:52 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/30/2015 4:09 PM, Muggles wrote:

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?


I agree with you.


The guide is at least partly at fault, but we don't know details. Did
the guy suggest this situation to Palmer? Was he paid to choose this
particular animal?

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.

--
Maggie

Murder is usually considered worse than say rape. Would you say
that there are worse things a person can do in defense of a rapist?

On 7/31/2015 10:20 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, July 30, 2015 at 11:58:08 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/30/2015 5:52 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/30/2015 4:09 PM, Muggles wrote:

- He paid big bucks to go to Africa, hire a licensed guide
to take him to where he could shoot one of those
large animals.

- He shot a large animal.

- It turned out to be a poor choice of animals.

That being true (or is it ?... somebody correct me)
wouldn't the fault lie with the guide, who should have known
that this particular animal was not a politically-correct target?


I agree with you.


The guide is at least partly at fault, but we don't know details. Did
the guy suggest this situation to Palmer? Was he paid to choose this
particular animal?

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.

--
Maggie

Murder is usually considered worse than say rape. Would you say
that there are worse things a person can do in defense of a rapist?


I don't understand your comparison.

--
Maggie