Zimbabwe 'seeks lion Cecil's killer' Walter Palmer from US

Red

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,540
Likes
1,108
Location
Chesterfield
Supports
Opposing the pedestrianisation of Norwich city centre!!!!
Thread starter #1
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-33733722

Thoughts?

I hope he will be extradited, but I don't think it will happen. Totally cannot understand how anyone gets amusement from destroying a lion for sport. A fucked up individual.


The hunters reportedly lured Cecil out of Hwange National Park, where it is illegal to kill wildlife, at night. Cecil was shot with a bow and arrow. The wounded lion didn't die until 40 hours later, when the hunters tracked him down and shot him with a rifle. They then skinned and beheaded him. The Zimbabwe Professional Hunters and Guides Association confirmed that Cecil was killed outside the park on private land, and an investigation is ongoing into the legality of the hunt. http://www.thepetitionsite.com/821/738/351/demand-justice-for-cecil-the-lion-in-zimbambwe/

If you feel disgusted by this you might want to sign the petition to the Zimbabwe government telling them to stop issuing permits for the hunting of endangered animals.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/821/738/351/demand-justice-for-cecil-the-lion-in-zimbambwe/
 

KevinMcallister

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,769
Likes
859
Location
Leeds
Supports
Bielsa's bucket
#4
Im guessing your a vegetarian then?

i'm guessing you support needless barbaric sports then?

there, should be a worldwide hunt for this guy, maybe get Katniss Everdeen to hunt him down with a bow and arrow, wound him and let him suffer for 2 days before shooting him and skinning him
 

Frealaf

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,332
Likes
752
Location
Cyprus
Supports
Grimsby Town
Twitter
@Gladders1980
#5
i'm guessing you support needless barbaric sports then?

there, should be a worldwide hunt for this guy, maybe get Katniss Everdeen to hunt him down with a bow and arrow, wound him and let him suffer for 2 days before shooting him and skinning him
I'm guessing you and the people who liked your post support the death penalty too.

Hopefully he faces charges but I doubt it and even if he doesn't get sent down for it, hopefully his business and career as a dentist will be over because of the publicity.
 

KevinMcallister

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,769
Likes
859
Location
Leeds
Supports
Bielsa's bucket
#6
I'm guessing you and the people who liked your post support the death penalty too.

Hopefully he faces charges but I doubt it and even if he doesn't get sent down for it, hopefully his business and career as a dentist will be over because of the publicity.
I'm guessing you and your people roam around endless farmland?
 

Red

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,540
Likes
1,108
Location
Chesterfield
Supports
Opposing the pedestrianisation of Norwich city centre!!!!
Thread starter #8
I'm guessing you and the people who liked your post support the death penalty too.

Hopefully he faces charges but I doubt it and even if he doesn't get sent down for it, hopefully his business and career as a dentist will be over because of the publicity.
Ify
I'm guessing you and the people who liked your post support the death penalty too.
Only for lion killers.
 

Stevencc

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Messages
13,242
Likes
7,218
Location
°
Supports
°
#9
BREAKING NEWS - Freelaf (Or is it departed user that does the flying, I forgot) flew the private plane that transported the dentist murderer to and from the scene of the crime. Get him!
 

Gilly?

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,172
Likes
286
Location
Lincolnshire
Supports
British Darts Organisation
Twitter
@ActualGilly
#11
If ISIS really wanted to show the world what they've about they should just shoot a lion.

I feel bad that I seem to be the only one who didn't know this lion personally.
 

Ebeneezer Goode

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,647
Likes
1,539
Supports
England
#12
If ISIS really wanted to show the world what they've about they should just shoot a lion.

I feel bad that I seem to be the only one who didn't know this lion personally.
Only if it has a name and is liked by the locals though, otherwise no one will know/care.
 
Messages
3,569
Likes
1,225
Supports
Sheffield United
Twitter
@blade1889
#15
Remember being asked why I preferred other animals over humans and this kinda proves my point. We are the only species that has the ability to effect so many other for better or worse whether they be sea, land or sky dwelling yet we choose the latter so often.

There is such a vast difference between 'humanely' killing an animal for food and illegally killing an endangered one for fun whilst leaving it to suffer. I posted a petition about the dog meat festival on facebook and got many vegetarians telling me its their culture, I shouldn't eat any meat if I dont like that etc. etc. which is completely missing the point of the petition and animal cruelty, the meat I eat has not been burned, skinned or boiled alive!

Next point may be controversial but also the reason why I've highlighted illegal & suffering earlier. There are many legal big game shoots in Africa, they cost people loads to go on and whilst they are not something I could ever do (I annoy my mum by refusing to kill moths ffs) they are vital conservation wise. It unnerves me a bit seeing people get hounded for going on this legal shoots, which CecilTheLions killing was not. They pay a fortune and part of that money is put back into the wildlife parks to pay for security against poachers. Its an unnerving truth that without this sport less finances would be available to stop the poachers and as a result many more species would be threatened to the point of extinction. I agree with Ricky Gervais on some points but fear his constant berating of these hunters will ultimately cause more harm than good.
 
Messages
1,797
Likes
1,741
Location
Guildford, Surrey
Supports
mighty, mighty Ks
#16
I don't disagree with the general thrust of your post but, to my mind, a legal shoot seems no less morally repugnant than one that isn't officially sanctioned. In both scenarios the participant has travelled half way across the globe to kill an endangered species - the fact that you are able to do this legally scarcely makes the person wielding the rifle any less of an irredeemable c***. It seems pretty legitimate to object to the recreational slaughter of endangered animals. If people can't do that without being portrayed as hopeless idealists (and I think the jury's still somewhat out on how effective it is as a conservation tool) then that simply serves to demonstrate what a terrifying state we're in when it comes to protecting vulnerable species.
 
Messages
3,569
Likes
1,225
Supports
Sheffield United
Twitter
@blade1889
#17
You don't have to like it to see it, sadly, has a value. And its far better on a legal shoot where the animals are bred for the sole purpose of the shoot, on legal shoots you have control on the numbers being killed and if it weren't for those shoots the animals would never have been alive in the first place so the shoots are not to the detriment of the species numbers. South Africa (I think it was, it was either there or Mozambique) place a lot of their success conservation wise as a result of money that has come in from shoots. Ugly truth, dont like it myself but theres plenty of things I dont like but see the value in. Humans are animals. And yes I totally agree with the last bit, we are in a terrifying place when it comes to conservation.

You mention endangered animals but what about the people who get lots of coverage from Gervais and other FB groups who hunt other animals such as giraffes and zebras, what's your stance on them? *I realise Giraffes are also threatened, interestingly I found one site that lists endangered animals as saying hunting grounds in some areas are seen as havens for giraffes (or words to that effect), along with serengetti/mara etc.
 
Last edited:

Red

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,540
Likes
1,108
Location
Chesterfield
Supports
Opposing the pedestrianisation of Norwich city centre!!!!
Thread starter #18
Whether or not it benefits conservation, the killing of any animal for sport is repugnant.
 
Messages
3,569
Likes
1,225
Supports
Sheffield United
Twitter
@blade1889
#19
Whether or not it benefits conservation, the killing of any animal for sport is repugnant.
How? Sport is done for fun, I eat meat for fun (guessing you do?) so long as it's lived a 'humane' life previously...whats the difference? The 'sacrifice on the alter of freedom' quote springs to mind, if it wasnt there and less money was put into conservation & anti-poaching leading to the near-certain extinction of species that are barely hanging on now...that would be fine, would it?
 

Stevencc

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Messages
13,242
Likes
7,218
Location
°
Supports
°
#20
You eat meat for sustenance. Sure it is enjoyable as well but it has a purpose.

Killing an animal for sport is just bizarre to me.

There is a massive difference between the two.
 

Red

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,540
Likes
1,108
Location
Chesterfield
Supports
Opposing the pedestrianisation of Norwich city centre!!!!
Thread starter #21
I don't get any fun from eating anything. The lion was shot with an arrow, which must have been agonising and it was not put out of its misery until 40 hours later. Not my idea of a fun excursion. Gladiators were killed for sport, or fun as you put it, but we've evolved since then. Unfortunately not in terms of how we treat animals. Regarding the conservation aspect I don't get the logic of killing animals to preserve animals.
 

Cardsfan

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,106
Likes
875
Supports
Woking
#22
How? Sport is done for fun, I eat meat for fun (guessing you do?) so long as it's lived a 'humane' life previously...whats the difference? The 'sacrifice on the alter of freedom' quote springs to mind, if it wasnt there and less money was put into conservation & anti-poaching leading to the near-certain extinction of species that are barely hanging on now...that would be fine, would it?
I think he means (and this is what I think too) that despite the consequences or the legality of it, someone travelling across the world and paying money to kill a defenceless animal is barbaric and vile, whether done illegally or legally for the purpose of conservation. A trophy hunter going on a legal hunt is still doing so for the same disgusting reason.
 
Messages
3,569
Likes
1,225
Supports
Sheffield United
Twitter
@blade1889
#23
You eat meat for sustenance. Sure it is enjoyable as well but it has a purpose.

Killing an animal for sport is just bizarre to me.

There is a massive difference between the two.
You don't have to eat meat to survive.

I don't get any fun from eating anything. The lion was shot with an arrow, which must have been agonising and it was not put out of its misery until 40 hours later. Not my idea of a fun excursion. Gladiators were killed for sport, or fun as you put it, but we've evolved since then. Unfortunately not in terms of how we treat animals. Regarding the conservation aspect I don't get the logic of killing animals to preserve animals.
I totally agree the Cecilt he Lion killing was barbaric and as mentioned previously 100% are against that. Gladiators were killed for fun and no benefit came of that, like it or loathe it there is benefit long-term from legal hunts. Because you are preserving entire species as a result, legal hunts (and this is why I only agree with legal hunts) specifically bread animals for the sole purpose of that hunt, if there was no hunt they would not have been alive in thef irst place, their species numbers are not negatively effected by hunts but other species numbers (including their own) are possitively affected. An animal being humanely killed in a hunt is no different to me eating meat, both time animals have been specfically bread to be killed humanely.

I think he means (and this is what I think too) that despite the consequences or the legality of it, someone travelling across the world and paying money to kill a defenceless animal is barbaric and vile, whether done illegally or legally for the purpose of conservation. A trophy hunter going on a legal hunt is still doing so for the same disgusting reason.
The animals you eat are defenceless. Totally their reasons are the same, they aren't going into those hunts thinking 'great, I'm doing my bit for conservation' but the fact still remains that indirectly they are benefitting conservation.



To all above, would thew orld be better if Trophy Hunting was not a thing. But poaching was easier and as a result Lions, Rhinos, Elephants were poached to extinction? In an ideal world poaching would not be a concern but it is.
 

Stevencc

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Messages
13,242
Likes
7,218
Location
°
Supports
°
#24
It's beneficial to your body, strength and energy to eat meat - it isn't essential as you say but the positives, without excess, are well known.

Paying money to shoot an animal until it dies for that reason alone benefits no one and nothing except the short lived erection of the shooter and the bank balance of whoever set the whole morbid affair up.

They aren't comparable and it's weird that you are conflating the two.
 

Cardsfan

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,106
Likes
875
Supports
Woking
#25
You don't have to eat meat to survive.



I totally agree the Cecilt he Lion killing was barbaric and as mentioned previously 100% are against that. Gladiators were killed for fun and no benefit came of that, like it or loathe it there is benefit long-term from legal hunts. Because you are preserving entire species as a result, legal hunts (and this is why I only agree with legal hunts) specifically bread animals for the sole purpose of that hunt, if there was no hunt they would not have been alive in thef irst place, their species numbers are not negatively effected by hunts but other species numbers (including their own) are possitively affected. An animal being humanely killed in a hunt is no different to me eating meat, both time animals have been specfically bread to be killed humanely.



The animals you eat are defenceless. Totally their reasons are the same, they aren't going into those hunts thinking 'great, I'm doing my bit for conservation' but the fact still remains that indirectly they are benefitting conservation.



To all above, would thew orld be better if Trophy Hunting was not a thing. But poaching was easier and as a result Lions, Rhinos, Elephants were poached to extinction? In an ideal world poaching would not be a concern but it is.
Meat is not vital but it is a sensible component of a healthy diet, animals killing animals for the sake of nutrition is common and natural. Using evolutionary advantages to prey on defenceless creatures for the sake of pleasure most certainly is not.
 
Messages
3,569
Likes
1,225
Supports
Sheffield United
Twitter
@blade1889
#26
It's beneficial to your body, strength and energy to eat meat - it isn't essential as you say but the positives, without excess, are well known.

Paying money to shoot an animal until it dies for that reason alone benefits no one and nothing except the short lived erection of the shooter and the bank balance of whoever set the whole morbid affair up.

They aren't comparable and it's weird that you are conflating the two.
It does though, I'm not going to debate the meat being essential part cos I don't have time to drag stuff up but you can live fine without it, quorn contains more protein than most meats as an example.

Meat is not vital but it is a sensible component of a healthy diet, animals killing animals for the sake of nutrition is common and natural. Using evolutionary advantages to prey on defenceless creatures for the sake of pleasure most certainly is not.
would the world be better if Trophy Hunting was not a thing. But poaching was easier and as a result Lions, Rhinos, Elephants were poached to extinction? In an ideal world poaching would not be a concern but it is. - nobody yet has provided any argument against this.
 

Stevencc

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Messages
13,242
Likes
7,218
Location
°
Supports
°
#27
My rebuttal: Quorn tastes like dust.

Shooting an animal for no real reason - I'm not talking conservation, protection of another species, for food, to put it out of it's misery - purely shooting an animal for fun, really doesn't benefit anyone but the guy doing the killing and whoever happens to benefit financially from it.
 

Stevencc

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Messages
13,242
Likes
7,218
Location
°
Supports
°
#29
Are you suggesting that filthy rich American dentists aren't qualified to handle such duties there Cards?
 
Messages
3,569
Likes
1,225
Supports
Sheffield United
Twitter
@blade1889
#30
My rebuttal: Quorn tastes like dust.

Shooting an animal for no real reason - I'm not talking conservation, protection of another species, for food, to put it out of it's misery - purely shooting an animal for fun, really doesn't benefit anyone but the guy doing the killing and whoever happens to benefit financially from it.
So Quorn tastes like sawdust, I agree. Therefore I eat meat, I dont have to but do.

And the evidence disagrees with you that no one and nothing else benefits. You cant suddenly take conservation out of the equation when it does benefit from legal hunts.

Again,
would the world be better if Trophy Hunting was not a thing. But poaching was easier and as a result Lions, Rhinos, Elephants were poached to extinction? The survival of species is dependent on funds to prevent their poaching, to prevent humans taking al their habitat, and legal hunts provide some of those funds.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
14,994
Messages
931,101
Members
5,167
Latest member
JRogers_91