Lion

[wiesiek]

well,
Makin` something legal doesn`t equal to doing good thing, ...,

of course plenty of wild animals /not to mention farming / is killed everyday, some of them for food.
Cecil just direct our attention on that matter.
Probably one of the last rings
I don`t think that we /humankind/ going to change rapidly our behavior,
too bad ...
we are changing not to much thru the millennium , so my screenplay for future looks dark and shitty
however
everybody has to do as much as he/she can .
so
I open this thread just to bring the attention in a hope, that it will be like small rock rolling downhill.

[Dmitri]

I don't hunt and I don't think I will ever understand why would anyone hunt anything for any reasons other than food.

One reason for hunts is to remove pests that are threatening people, killing livestock or destroying crops.

Yeah good point; that's understandable too. Hogs and goats in Hawaii, etc. I was basically talking about killing for fun/sport.

you and the others have demonized people for doing something that is a legal practice that you dont agree with...

There are plenty of things that are perfectly legal which I dislike and/or disagree with and believe are "wrong". And this goes the other way round, too. Legality has very, very little to do with this IMO; that's not what the OP was about.

[Bao]

you and the others have demonized people for doing something that is a legal practice that you dont agree with...

There are plenty of things that are perfectly legal which I dislike and/or disagree with and believe are "wrong". And this goes the other way round, too.

WW has a good point, IMHO. Luxury hunting might not be morally correct in the eyes of the mass, but it's still legal. It's a tricky thing to discuss if he did something bad or not. He might not have thought it was a bad thing to kill an animal in a legal, organized manner. It's wrong to demonize someone without having the background clear, even if he did a bad thing and you hate the practice.

Legality has very, very little to do with this IMO; that's not what the OP was about.

No, it was about cutting the head of someone because he was a dentist and a bastard.
So yes... that kind of emotional outburst has nothing to do with legality, so you're right there....

[Steve James]

It's wrong to demonize someone without having the background clear, even if he did a bad thing and you hate the practice.

Well, the guide/hunter who baited the lion could be blamed for the event. Regardless of what anyone here says, that person is going to trial for an illegal hunt/kill. So, legality is a moot issue here, since the Zimbabwean court where it happened says it was illegal.

We haven't heard much about the background of the guide, but he has admitted taking the monitoring collar off the dead animal and trying to disable it. If he mistakenly lured a protected lion, and mistakenly took it down, then he certainly knew from the collar that he had done something wrong. However, he did not alert the authorities. In addition, the lion had to be shot with a bow from close range. It's unlikely that he didn't know that this particular lion shouldn't have been taken.
How do we know? Well, probably because --as he admits-- this was the most well-known lion in the country. Cecil, specifically, was a tourist draw. It is very true that, if this had been any other lion, there wouldn't have been an uproar, and people would not have paid much attention.

Afa demonizing the dentist, there may be some nut who tries to decapitate him. But, that's a separate issue. The best argument against doing so is not that lions do or don't need to be conserved or that trophy hunting needs to be curtailed, or even that it would be "ILLEGAL." We should prosecute anyone who killed the dentist because killing is wrong. I.e., that's the moral issue. The "legal" argument, in this particular case, is moot.

edit

Zimbabwe wants Twin Cities lion hunter extradited with 'a bit of speed'
Walter Palmer said ‘‘everything is just fine,” but he refused to disclose his whereabouts.

A senior Zimbabwean diplomat said Monday that his government will move quickly in requesting extradition for Eden Prairie big-game hunter Walter Palmer, who faces allegations that he illegally shot a much-loved research lion during a hunt last month.

Richard Chibuwe, deputy chief of mission at Zimbabwe’s embassy in Washington, D.C., said his nation’s top prosecutor and other officials “are keeping in touch with our authorities to see if we can bring some kind of speed to extradition. We are hoping that things will move with a bit of speed.”

The U.S. State Department declined to comment and said it does not discuss extradition requests. A spokesperson said that since Zimbabwe and the United States signed an extradition treaty in 2000, neither nation has extradited anyone to the other.

But, afa the dentist, suppose we flipped the script and that executing someone who kills a lion were legal. Hey, remember Robin Hood? The whole story started because it was illegal for peasants to hunt on the King's lands, even if they were starving. Well, if it were legal, would it be right to execute the dentist? If it's the law, and Zimbabwe is requesting the dentist's extradition, do you believe that he should be extradited for trial. The US does have an extradition treaty with Zimbabwe. Should we follow the law? Anyway, as in other debates, let the court decide. No?

[emptycloud]

Zebras Lives Matter...nuff said

[Steve James]

You're right. Warthogs need love too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xB5ceAruYrI

[wiesiek]

just to make it clear:
decapitating dentist it was just form of expression from my side, regardless of my >love< to all hunters and dentists particularly .
but
If you consider it truly - somebody who kill , should keep his soul ready for celestial travel in any minute...

[windwalker]

whats in a name "cecil"

Rhodes wanted to expand the British Empire because he believed that the Anglo-Saxon race was destined to greatness. In his last will and testament, Rhodes said of the British, "I contend that we are the finest race in the world and that the more of the world we inhabit the better it is for the human race.

Just fancy those parts that are at present inhabited by the most despicable specimens of human beings what an alteration there would be if they were brought under Anglo-Saxon influence, look again at the extra employment a new country added to our dominions gives."[25]

Cecil Rhodes

He wanted to make the British Empire a superpower in which all of the British-dominated countries in the empire, including Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Cape Colony, would be represented in the British Parliament.[26] Rhodes included American students as eligible for the Rhodes scholarships. He said that he wanted to breed an American elite of philosopher-kings who would have the United States rejoin the British Empire.

As Rhodes also respected the Germans and admired the Kaiser, he allowed German students to be included in the Rhodes scholarships. He believed that eventually the United Kingdom (including Ireland), the USA, and Germany together would dominate the world and ensure peace.[

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

Hard to believe the history sometimes

Andy seems to think

Hell I can even respect Wilfred Thessiger taking out his 500th lion - he knew what real hunting was about. (He was, of course, one of the original SAS taking on Rommel in the desert.)

As someone to look up to and respect..also notes that the country is f___d up but IMO kinda missed out on why?
It dosnt excuse the present gov. but kinda helps to understand why.

the United Kingdom (including Ireland), the USA, and Germany together would dominate the world and ensure peace.

gotta be f___ing kidding me not sure but one of the counties listed seems to have achieved the dominate part but missed the peace part.

[windwalker]

It's wrong to demonize someone without having the background clear, even if he did a bad thing and you hate the practice.

Well, the guide/hunter who baited the lion could be blamed for the event. Regardless of what anyone here says, that person is going to trial for an illegal hunt/kill. So, legality is a moot issue here, since the Zimbabwean court where it happened says it was illegal.

We haven't heard much about the background of the guide, but he has admitted taking the monitoring collar off the dead animal and trying to disable it. If he mistakenly lured a protected lion, and mistakenly took it down, then he certainly knew from the collar that he had done something wrong. However, he did not alert the authorities. In addition, the lion had to be shot with a bow from close range. It's unlikely that he didn't know that this particular lion shouldn't have been taken.
How do we know? Well, probably because --as he admits-- this was the most well-known lion in the country. Cecil, specifically, was a tourist draw. It is very true that, if this had been any other lion, there wouldn't have been an uproar, and people would not have paid much attention.

Afa demonizing the dentist, there may be some nut who tries to decapitate him. But, that's a separate issue. The best argument against doing so is not that lions do or don't need to be conserved or that trophy hunting needs to be curtailed, or even that it would be "ILLEGAL." We should prosecute anyone who killed the dentist because killing is wrong. I.e., that's the moral issue. The "legal" argument, in this particular case, is moot.

edit

Zimbabwe wants Twin Cities lion hunter extradited with 'a bit of speed'
Walter Palmer said ‘‘everything is just fine,” but he refused to disclose his whereabouts.

A senior Zimbabwean diplomat said Monday that his government will move quickly in requesting extradition for Eden Prairie big-game hunter Walter Palmer, who faces allegations that he illegally shot a much-loved research lion during a hunt last month.

Richard Chibuwe, deputy chief of mission at Zimbabwe’s embassy in Washington, D.C., said his nation’s top prosecutor and other officials “are keeping in touch with our authorities to see if we can bring some kind of speed to extradition. We are hoping that things will move with a bit of speed.”

The U.S. State Department declined to comment and said it does not discuss extradition requests. A spokesperson said that since Zimbabwe and the United States signed an extradition treaty in 2000, neither nation has extradited anyone to the other.

But, afa the dentist, suppose we flipped the script and that executing someone who kills a lion were legal. Hey, remember Robin Hood? The whole story started because it was illegal for peasants to hunt on the King's lands, even if they were starving. Well, if it were legal, would it be right to execute the dentist? If it's the law, and Zimbabwe is requesting the dentist's extradition, do you believe that he should be extradited for trial. The US does have an extradition treaty with Zimbabwe. Should we follow the law? Anyway, as in other debates, let the court decide. No?

I dont see how the US could or would extradite the dentist
considering:

The U.S. has also imposed targeted sanctions against top Zimbabwean officials and "those who formulate, implement, or benefit from policies that undermine or injure Zimbabwe's democratic institutions or impede the transition to a multi-party democracy" since 2002 and prohibits the sale of military items and services to Zimbabwe.[45] Since 2003, the U.S. has added to the list of Zimbabwean individuals and entities whose assets owned or held in the U.S. are frozen by executive order; currently the list includes 128 individuals and 33 entities.[46] President Bush extended these sanctions and restrictions for a year on March 1, 2007, explaining:

State Department spokesman Tom Casey indicated that the U.S. was considering additional sanctions. One way to enhance the targeted sanctions would be to apply the travel ban, which currently extends only to spouses, to the families of Mugabe and others subject to existing sanctions and to extend the restrictions to more individuals in the Zimbabwean government. Another option is to adjust current sanctions, which permit U.S. importers and exporters to trade with Zimbabwe on most goods, to prohibit trade with Zimbabwe on selected items that benefit Mugabe, his associates, or his policies. Unilateral trade sanctions are usually ineffective but can send an important political signal.

http://www.heritage.org/research/report ... ld-respond

Their president Mugabe, alluded to this at his recent birthday part.

The USA "can't have it both ways," he said. "If they want to be friends then they must be friends with us in total and we allow them to have some safaris. But they can't say 'allow our people to visit, allow our people to have safaris, to kill our lions and take safari trophies to America'."

In answer to your question it will be interesting to see if the US is consistent in its policies or bends to popular demands.
IMO this whole incident was really never about the loin, which I along with others have tried to point out.

Its not clear at this time whether there was a permit or not for the land the lion was killed on, only that this "loin" happened to be a money maker for the park
and was under a study, which even so would not have stopped it from being hunted if the collar was not noted or seen and it was off the park land.

It's going to be quite interesting to see what happens.
Their gov, IMO made it worse which will or might impact all other types of safari experiences hunts or photo.

[Mr_Wood]

For someone who doesn't care ...

I do care. I just feel this whole story has been a massive social media witch hunt, blown out of all proportion. I feel bad for the dentist, not because he is a pathetic human being but more because even more pathetic human beings decided this was their chance to scapegoat some poor fool for bad decisions he made to glorify themselves as being 'holier than holy'

give me a break.

[Mr_Wood]

enter Ronnie O'Sullivan, nuff said

[Steve James]

@Mr. Wood, fwiw, I wasn't referring to you; and the photo was ambivalent.

Afa this being blown out of all proportion, I'm not really sure of what the correct proportion would be. It's a big deal because of the victims and the circumstances, but the outrage will surely pass. The dentist is a victim of his circumstance, but that doesn't mean that he's innocent. If it had been any other lion; if the lion hadn't been baited off his preserve; if he had killed it humanely; if he had notified the authorities that he made an error; then, maybe some people would feel more inclined to ignore that he did it just to have some skin and bones.

It is interesting to me, otoh, that there's so much outrage about people being outraged. Moreover, the outrage is directed at people who agree --when it comes to the issue of trophy hunting. Both sides argue that they "care." Why don't they acknowledge that they agree on the basic point? Nobody's come up to say that they like to kill animals for trophies. In fact, that's been implied as a slur by people who (don't) support the dentist; his hunting; hunting, or even guns. No one's argued against conservation, either. So, this is not like many other issues where there is real disagreement.

If the main problem is that the dentist is getting too much heat, oh well. But, nobody here is really after his head. He did something that people didn't like. Yeah, they can be asked to htfu; but, so can those who complain about them.

[Steve James]

I dont see how the US could or would extradite the dentist considering:

I was really asking a question about legality versus morality. If it is legal to extradite him, should the law be followed. I agree that it is highly unlikely that he will be extradited. I just don't think that people who argue how legal what he did was would agree with sending him back to Zimbabwe if the penalty were very severe.

It's interesting that when Andy talks about how messed up Zimbabwe can be, he's scolded

[Mr_Wood]

dunno, none of this sits well with me, all those people passing judgement. more of a pop at social media than anything and the political power it seems to be wielding. what's next ? fb court ? wouldn't surprise me. 100,000 likes and the government will take action. If the lion had eaten a man prior to this as he is instinctively geared up to do, would there be so much of a fuss ? Don't get me wrong, I love nature and all that is within, just the whole 'I am morally outraged' outburst is a bit tired for me.

[Steve James]

Social media is another issue. RSF is social media to me.

Afa whether there would be as much outrage if the lion had killed and eaten the hunter, I doubt it. But, no one here who's outraged at the outrage of others was complaining about man-eaters before, either. If they did, there'd be those who'd make the same argument: i.e., "what's the big deal; it happens all the time."