Tiddles - deadly

[Trem]

Nah, Toms a good guy and I am sure he never imagined this mess to erupt.


Wait a minute, ACTUALLY it is Toms fault.......GET HIM!!!

 

[GekuL]

The weapons are prob low caliber to allow each member a shot at the animal. And yes gumbo is right, the guide should have downed him instantly he started charging at them. As for this whole killing for food is ok etc etc argument.

Talk about covering your arse from the old "But you eat the animals don't you?"
That argument only has relevence when eating meat is the only viable option. The fact you are sitting at your computer writing this shit shows it isn't.
Eating meat is fine, go for it i don't care, but don't start harping about killing for fun etc etc is morally wrong yada yada.

These two paragraphs really don't sit well together to be honest, as the first answers your second argument. One animal is hunted, using lower caliber weapons so that the animal can take a few more bullets before it goes down, and the other animal is just killed. You can't compare the two.
I am not against killing animals, but hunting, as in that video, is cruel with no significant gain other than ego.

 

[Tom]

heh sorry if I created a fuss, but you have to admit that threads like this are quite interesting.

I'm not going to argue with anybody's point of view regarding the morality of hunting, I respect totally those who disagree with it, just as I hope the opposite applies. I do wish people would refrain from saying 'stupid yanks firing bullets', as it doesn't really matter what nationality the hunters are. People from all nations go hunting, its ingrained in most cultures. Christ, the Swiss can walk around with fully automatic rifles if they want, and nobody says 'omg stupid fucking swiss idiots' etc. And before anyone says that they're more responsible, well the Swiss installed speed cameras around the country, and nearly every one was attacked with a high calibre weapon. They removed them soon after. I don't call that responsible, just like the farmers in this country who occasionally blow their families brains out because they've been drinking too much sheep dip.

I'll end by saying that I don't think those hunters are stupid or immoral, hunting isn't for me, and plainly not for others here either, but its their choice, and killing a Lion is really no different than shooting pheasants. If its a nature reserve, then the population is managed, and killing the odd Lion here and there isn't really going to make any difference. As a society, we have a jaundiced view of which animals should live, and which should die.

 

[throdgrain]

I'll end by saying that I don't think those hunters are stupid or immoral, hunting isn't for me, and plainly not for others here either, but its their choice, and killing a Lion is really no different than shooting pheasants. If its a nature reserve, then the population is managed, and killing the odd Lion here and there isn't really going to make any difference. As a society, we have a jaundiced view of which animals should live, and which should die.

Sorry to resort to internet type, but that is the most fucking stupid thing Ive read here in many a day.
You think animals should die to provide enjoyment for human beings, you really want your fucking head tested. And should die slowly apparently, to let the humans enjoyment last longer ?

ive had my doubts about FreddysHouse for some time, ie its not very much of a gaming forum, but you're just about the icing on the cake Tom.
Go talk to some people in real life matey, before its too late.

 

[Deadmanwalking]

If they're gonna kill the lion, they should have done it quickly, efficiently, with as little pain to the lion as possible. Do you think cows are killed in the same way when they're slaughtered for food? With 4 yanks taking pot shots at it before it falls over dying? It's inhumane and barbaric the way they did it, no doubt about it.

Assuming they hit with any of those shots?

Not to mention i never said it wasn't inhumane....i simply pointed out the Hypocrisy of half the peoples arguments. Steak anyone?

I for one think killing animals for 90% of the reasons we do is pathetic.

Jesus DMW, sitting at my computer typing shit?

What i said was more aimed at the armchair activists. Which considering your reply i bet you arn't. Fair play to you. Just as throddy has pointed out since, this forum can be full of soapbox heros. Who one minute are all high and mighty about an issue and then the next second completely contradicting those beliefs.

As i mentioned above i feel the killing of animals is a waste 90% of the time, the difference here is i don't feel a need to gain "Teh good points!!1" by spewing what is essentially shit. (I do that anyway without the need for points).

As shown this has obviously hit close to the bone with you. And i am sorry. But you have to look at it in context.... a "Gaming" forum in whatever form that is and not talking to the person face to face.

 

[Tom]

Animals aren't here for any reason at all. They just are. They're not sentient, and as such they are absolutely no different to any other living thing on this planet, and that includes trees and plankton. I see no reason why people should draw a distinction between shooting a Lion for fun, and chopping down a tree to make a decorative mirror.

 

[Deadmanwalking]

Animals aren't here for any reason at all. They just are. They're not sentient, and as such they are absolutely no different to any other living thing on this planet, and that includes trees and plankton. I see no reason why people should draw a distinction between shooting a Lion for fun, and chopping down a tree to make a decorative mirror.

Sorry to resort to internet type, but that is the most fucking stupid thing Ive read here in many a day.

Go go throddy powar!

 

[old.user4556]

 

[nath]

Animals aren't here for any reason at all. They just are. They're not sentient, and as such they are absolutely no different to any other living thing on this planet, and that includes trees and plankton. I see no reason why people should draw a distinction between shooting a Lion for fun, and chopping down a tree to make a decorative mirror.

How the fuck do you know?

Give me a room full of dogs rather than people any day.

Amen.

 

[Doomy]

 

[Mr.Monkey]

I click on the first link, and all I get is the picture of a fat black woman licking her tits.

It's horrible.

 

[Scooba da Bass]

Safe

 

[Driwen]

Animals aren't here for any reason at all. They just are. They're not sentient, and as such they are absolutely no different to any other living thing on this planet, and that includes trees and plankton. I see no reason why people should draw a distinction between shooting a Lion for fun, and chopping down a tree to make a decorative mirror.

the difference is we know that the lion gets stressed and feels pain by the shooting, the tree doesnt (or atleast we dont think it does). A tree wont really fight you to survive the lion clearly did that, so he is sentient (in some ways atleast).

I dont feel there is a difference between fishing/lion hunts/shooting birds though and if its just done for the fun of the hunt/kill its wrong, you mess with nature so you can have some fun.

 

[Chilly]

There clearly IS a difference between an ant and a human in terms of thought and reaction to surroundings etc, but where to do u draw the line? (dont even try imho)

 

[mank!]

Animals aren't here for any reason at all. They just are. They're not sentient, and as such they are absolutely no different to any other living thing on this planet, and that includes trees and plankton. I see no reason why people should draw a distinction between shooting a Lion for fun, and chopping down a tree to make a decorative mirror.

Oh my god. There is a huge difference between shooting a living, breathing, sentient(!) animal and chopping down a fucking tree!

 

[Cdr]

Oh my god. There is a huge difference between shooting a living, breathing, sentient(!) animal and chopping down a fucking tree!

Aye, a tree doesnt try to bite your face off........unless its a venus fly trap.......but then thats a plant and not a tree.

 

[mank!]

Aye, a tree doesnt try to bite your face off........unless its a venus fly trap.......but then thats a plant and not a tree.

Well, that's true but not the whole story

 

[Mazling]

<soapbox rant-style="vaguely-liberal">

First off, i think Tom knew what he was doing when he started this thread, and it has turned out to be a pretty decent one. kudos.

ive had my doubts about FreddysHouse for some time, ie its not very much of a gaming forum, but you're just about the icing on the cake Tom.
Go talk to some people in real life matey, before its too late.

*Almost* afraid to say, that you should look at internet life a bit more closely. It's just like real-life(tm), except you are much less constrained by what you can say - purely because you aren't under imminent danger of stomping on someone's face, or having your own face stomped on; it isn't all inter-dependent social sort of contrsruct-a-safe-living-environment type of thing. The board won't corrupt and segfault every time someone let's out their most heartfelt beliefs and feelings. Yet, it can de dangerous to walk down a purely hypothetical kind of argument.
Stop worrying about what you're going to do - and the effect it will have on others - and more why you are doing it.

Oh my god. There is a huge difference between shooting a living, breathing, sentient(!) animal and chopping down a fucking tree!

Where's the quote about trees not being able to scream when you need it?

</soapbox-heroism>

 

[Mr.Monkey]

I would hug a tree. But not a lion. Unless it was tranquilised, or a rug.

 

[Driwen]

Oh my god. There is a huge difference between shooting a living, breathing, sentient(!) animal and chopping down a fucking tree!

just out of curiousity, if the animal is killed without any hurting (meaning it just drops dead, no stress or anything involved). Why does the animal has more right to life than the tree?

 

[mank!]

just out of curiousity, if the animal is killed without any hurting (meaning it just drops dead, no stress or anything involved). Why does the animal has more right to life than the tree?

Do trees feel pain, do trees have thoughts, do trees communicate?

 

[Tom]

I wasn't aware that the ability to experience pain was a prerequisite for a right to exist.

Just because a lifeform doesn't exhibit characterisitics which we associate with our own existance, doesn't mean you can deny its right to exist.

Hunting Lions is no different than swatting flies. Just because its bigger and there are less of them, and because they're seen as pests (to citizens of countries that don't have to beware of predators) doesn't make the killing of said creature any less acceptable. You're arguing over semantics.

If we're talking about poaching, well thats different, and I in no way support the actions of illegal hunters. This Lion wasn't killed illegaly, it was in a managed environment (I presume, since the video doesn't prove either of these points conclusively) and therefore its death will make no significant contribution to the environment in which it lives. Therefore, I don't have a problem with it.

 

[Driwen]

Do trees feel pain, do trees have thoughts, do trees communicate?

a tree can solve minor problems, so in a way they do.

a lion probably knows 6 words, so that is hardly communication.

now pain (displeasure/pleasure) is indeed something a tree doesnt feel and animals do (not counting insects as animals as im not really sure they know (dis)pleasure).
Allthough a tree does grow towards the light (which is caused iirc, because plants grow faster in the dark, so the side with less light grows faster causing it to grow towards the sun) and (dis)pleasure is just a mechanism so we do and dont do certain things.

The question is does the lion actually enjoy living, I think the more sentient the more you enjoy life. Off course we can never be sure if any creature/plant does that unless we can communicate with them.
And are we allowed to chop down a tree, because it gives us pleasure to do so/to have something made out of wood and with animals are we allowed to kill them just for pleasure or for their meat allthough we could most likely be fine without it. Where do we draw the line, where our pleasure is more important than the displeasure of another creature?

 

[mank!]

The question is does the lion actually enjoy living, I think the more sentient the more you enjoy life.

I think any sentient being deserves the right to life, whether they enjoy it or not. I don't enjoy life but I have a right to live, just as I have a right to die. That lion had that right taken away from it the second it got shot at. That animal was shot in cold blood, not for food, just for pleasure. I can understand killing animals for meat, and I am a meat eater, but that's life and shooting animals in coldblood is not part of life.

edit: I just watched the video, other than it making me feel sick and rather angry, it left me feeling that was done in nothing but cold blood, for pleasure. The 'whoops' and handclaps don't sound like relief to me either, but pleasure.

 

[leggy]

This Lion wasn't killed illegaly, it was in a managed environment and therefore its death will make no significant contribution to the environment in which it lives. Therefore, I don't have a problem with it.

Out of curiosity. If I was guarenteed a pardon for murder. Would it make it ok for me to shoot you in the face with a high powered rifle?

I see no significant contribution to your environment so, by your logic, it is acceptable for me to kill you. This, we all know, is bollocks however.

 

[Deadmanwalking]

Out of curiosity. If I was guarenteed a pardon for murder. Would it make it ok for me to shoot you in the face with a high powered rifle?

I see no significant contribution to your environment so by your logic, it is acceptable for me to kill you. This, we all know, is bollocks however.

You can't see the contibution you would be making to the environment?!

 

[old.user4556]

Just because a lifeform doesn't exhibit characterisitics which we associate with our own existance, doesn't mean you can deny its right to exist.

Agreed.

If fish screamed when we caught them, would they ban fishing? Where do you draw the line? Fisherman catch fish for fun using nasty hooks to pull them from the water where they suffocate. If we shot lions for fun, and then drowned them afterwards, would that be unacceptable because it's a big cat? What's the difference?

Leggy, sorry but I think your last statement was pedantic bollocks .

G

 

[Driwen]

I think any sentient being deserves the right to life, whether they enjoy it or not. I don't enjoy life but I have a right to live, just as I have a right to die. That lion had that right taken away from it the second it got shot at. That animal was shot in cold blood, not for food, just for pleasure. I can understand killing animals for meat, and I am a meat eater, but that's life and shooting animals in coldblood is not part of life.

you eat meat, but you wouldnt have to. You are eating it for your own pleasure as you could avoid eating fish/meat and still live fine, so you are responsible for killing animals for your pleasure (and those animals have way less of a life than that lion had and are also killed in coldblood not by you off course, but their meat is on your plate).

Also anything that lives is sentient in some way and at some level and you have to draw a line somewhere to see which creatures you can kill just for the pleasure of killing it (and dont say you dont kill creatures for your pleasure as you will killed bugs just to get rid of them or plucked some grass as you were both).

 

[leggy]

Agreed.
Leggy, sorry but I think your last statement was pedantic bollocks .

This seems to be a common theme with my posts these days.

It wasn't pedantic it was a fair statement. He says, because it was done legally (i.e. someone said it was ok to kill it) then therefore it is reasonable. When in reality legality has no bearing whether something is acceptable or not.

It was legal for the US to invade iraq. It was not, however, acceptable. (From and anti-war stance).

What kind of person has the right to decide whether it is legal or not to kill a living thing? This is another example of our over inflated level of self importance.

 

[mank!]

you eat meat, but you wouldnt have to. You are eating it for your own pleasure as you could avoid eating fish/meat and still live fine, so you are responsible for killing animals for your pleasure (and those animals have way less of a life than that lion had and are also killed in coldblood not by you off course, but their meat is on your plate).

I see your point, but it's pretty exaggerated. There is a world of difference between me having a steak for my dinner and going on a safari with the sole intention of shooting an animal dead for the thrill of it.

Also anything that lives is sentient in some way and at some level and you have to draw a line somewhere to see which creatures you can kill just for the pleasure of killing it (and dont say you dont kill creatures for your pleasure as you will killed bugs just to get rid of them or plucked some grass as you were both).

We're talking about animals, not insects/creatures. Yes, I've killed bugs but probably not since I was little. I'm scared of spiders but I won't kill them, I'll run away screaming and get someone to get rid of it.

gah, I didn't want to get involved with this thread but it's a bit late now.