Cecil the lion's killer revealed as American dentist

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimmyG88
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
GEddie said:
We couldn’t “impose our will” on nature if we wanted to. (Which is why I am not going to board the global-warming bandwagon, either).

Assuming, as I do, that this man did not intend violation of local game laws, the fact that he hunted by bow and not by firearm raises him a notch in my estimation. Getting close enough to a powerful predator for an arrow kill requires substantial risk of neck; it’s not just a matter of exchanging a ton of money for an animal trophy.

ICXC NIKA
Click to expand...
Yes, bow hunting is much more of a challenge.

Since we are a world of meat eaters, I wish more people took the effort to experience the full cycle of gathering what they eat. I don’t have much time for people with strong opinions about how things are, yet they buy all their meat pre-cut and packaged into single serving sizes. They’ve never plucked a chicken nor skinned a deer. Meat cleavers are for smashing garlic cloves.

I haven’t hunted since I was a teen. I didn’t really enjoy it, but I respect what happens to put meat in the store.
 
adrift said:
I think you have mischaracterize on a couple of fronts.
  1. your snide remark of sadly usually American without acknowledging this from your article
It looks like the locals are to blame.
2. He had a license You may not like it but with you tying it with killing endangered species you slant your remarks
3. The guide has been charged, not American
4. The land owner also charged.
it is a separate issue if trophy hunting should be allowed not trying to make out that this hunt was some “American” who illegally hunted and killed an endangered species :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I understand the U.S. authorities have charged him in the past for a similar offence.
 
The man is not a bow hunter or a hunter at all, this kind of “hunting” is unethical and pointlessly destructive, and has more in common with smashing a window or torching a car than hunting, in my opinion.

This is a man who hunted a lion illegally and had no follow up shot/spotter ready for a large animal, so it would not surprise me if that FOURTY HOUR pursuit was due to hiding in a bush with a crossbow, taking an uncertain shot with little or no concern for humane dispatch and standing off the pursuit while he got a gun ready.

As a side effect he hasn’t done bow hunters a favour either, because incompetent and unethical kills like that are exactly what sees bow hunting restricted (outside America), so the bow hunting community owes this chap some thanks for the horrible international PR. Really the same could be said about hunting generally, which could do without people venturing forth from hunting Disneyland to give hunting a bad name for everyone else in the international media.
 
Bubba_Switzler said:
How old is hunting for sport? Well, the pharoes did so we can pretty much say it is a prehistoric behavior.

eBlueJay Marketplace

Virtuyally anyone who says they “hunt for food” is a liar.
Click to expand...
Bubba,technically the pharaohs are no longer prehistory.
The picture you show illustrates symbols of a pharaoh,probably the hunter,and a horse neatly ornamented .
Since Egypt was already agricultural at that time,the picture illustrates life of leisure and probably luxury linked with what looks like a sport or entertainment.
One can probably conclude,by the disproportion between the hunter,the carriage ,horse and dog, and the kind of prey they are hunting for,that hunting for leisure or entertainment came by the hand of a certain display of power. Not predynastic here.

Hunters,primitive hunters,did so to survive. As so many beautiful paintings on caves such as those in Lascaux show from the Paleolithic .
There may have been men who killed for pleasure,who knows…you may be right…

But…if there are historians here they will do much better than me to explain it.
I ve just arrived from a National Park,Patrimony of Humanity ,Ichigualasto Valle de la Luna, with its over 200 million years geological beauty,and one cannot but wonder how amazing God is.
 
graciew said:
Bubba,technically the pharaohs are no longer prehistory.
The picture you show illustrates symbols of a pharaoh,probably the hunter,and a horse neatly ornamented .
Since Egypt was already agricultural at that time,the picture illustrates life of leisure and probably luxury linked with what looks like a sport or entertainment.
One can probably conclude,by the disproportion between the hunter,the carriage ,horse and dog, and the kind of prey they are hunting for,that hunting for leisure or entertainment came by the hand of a certain display of power. Not predynastic here.

Hunters,primitive hunters,did so to survive. As so many beautiful paintings on caves such as those in Lascaux show from the Paleolithic .
There may have been men who killed for pleasure,who knows…you may be right…

But…if there are historians here they will do much better than me to explain it.
I ve just arrived from a National Park,Patrimony of Humanity ,Ichigualasto Valle de la Luna, with its over 200 million years geological beauty,and one cannot but wonder how amazing God is.
Click to expand...
I haven’t the foggiest notion what point you are trying to make other than to confirm what I am saying. The closest you come to contradicting me is to imply that Egypt was not prehistoric but if such paintings constitute history we can safely infer, I think, that hunting for pleasure did not suddenly begin with such paintings. It was prehistoric.

As for the luxury implied, does that not exactly match the hunting of lions by dentists ion safari? The more aristicratic the hunter, the more exotic the game. For most of human history post agriculture, hunting was an aristocratic pastime. Only in America did it become a hobby of the common man and only because leisure became common.

Nobody hunts for food.
 
Burt_Macklin said:
Whether or not Palmer faces any legal repercussions in Zimbabwe his practice is in ruins and he is publically shamed. Can’t say that I feel bad for him though. Killing endangered animals as a pastime deserves some blowback.
Click to expand...
That is of course, the beauty of the free market. If his patients don’t want to see him, nobody can stop them.
 
adrift said:
The only way this is true is if what is hunted is never eaten. I have a brother-in-law who cannot tolerate beef. He can tolerate deer and elk. He hunts them for food.
Click to expand...
No, you are mistaking a benefit with a purpose. Eating what you hunt, in fact sharing your kill with others, is an important part of the experience of hunting. But hunting is not an efficent method of putting food on the table. Nor is game generally the tastiest food available.

There are many domestic alternatives to beef as a trip to the grocery store will demonstrate. Your brother-in-law simply chooses to replace beef with what he hunts, a reasonable choice for someone with the time and interest.
 
Exiled_Child said:
There’s no probably about it.🤷 Some people just like to kill things. Being such a cowardly sneak and creep that you could “bravely” slaughter a lion with a high powered rifle is as senseless and idiotic as slaughtering a little girl and throwing her corpse in a dumpster. They differ only in degree. Both reveal a soul-dead personality-type, though.
Click to expand...
I agree 100%, Why else would someone desire to go hunting? I understand hunting if its needed for food, but in todays world, its a whole lot easier to go down to the market, theres really no need for hunting of any kind.

The only reason it still happens, is so these people can indulge in killing without getting into any trouble. Ive seen countless pictures of people next to game they have shot, usually with a big smile on their face…I dont understand this, they are humans that successfully killed an animal…big deal? However if the odds were on a more level playing field, it may be acceptable.
 
Bubba_Switzler said:
No, you are mistaking a benefit with a purpose. Eating what you hunt, in fact sharing your kill with others, is an important part of the experience of hunting. But hunting is not an efficent method of putting food on the table. Nor is game generally the tastiest food available.

There are many domestic alternatives to beef as a trip to the grocery store will demonstrate. Your brother-in-law simply chooses to replace beef with what he hunts, a reasonable choice for someone with the time and interest.
Click to expand...
Putting food on the table can be accomplished in many ways. It is like saying that those who raise a garden don’t do it for the food. You might say that hunting is not just about putting food on the table but unless they are leaving the meat to rot then your premise is wrong.
 
mikekle said:
I agree 100%, Why else would someone desire to go hunting? I understand hunting if its needed for food, but in todays world, its a whole lot easier to go down to the market, theres really no need for hunting of any kind.

The only reason it still happens, is so these people can indulge in killing without getting into any trouble. Ive seen countless pictures of people next to game they have shot, usually with a big smile on their face…I dont understand this, they are humans that successfully killed an animal…big deal? However if the odds were on a more level playing field, it may be acceptable.
Click to expand...
This is mostly correct.

However, what you ought to consider in the “level playing field” is the fact that most hunts fail, particulary big game hunts. Although the hunter and the hunted are not equal the hunted enjoys its own advantages and laws and traditions of hunting enhance that. So, for example, you can’t shoot birds on the ground when they are nesting but only as they are flying in the air. Part of the big smile you see is the satisfaction of success when failure is more common. (Nobody takes pictures of themselves with the game that got away or never showed up in the first place.)

Yes, hunting involves killing but guess what? So does eating at McDonalds.
 
adrift said:
Putting food on the table can be accomplished in many ways. It is like saying that those who raise a garden don’t do it for the food. You might say that hunting is not just about putting food on the table but unless they are leaving the meat to rot then your premise is wrong.
Click to expand...
Gardening is a very good analogy, in fact. Nobody gardens for food. They do it because they enjoy it. They enjoy the food they grow and get nutrition from it but it is hopelessly inefficient farming. There no sensible distinction between someone who gardens for pleasure and someone who gardens for food.

Some hunting does not involve food at all. For example, in the western US ranchers invite farmers to kill coyotes that threaten their herds. They are not good eating.

Similarly, some gardening involves no food whatsoever, e.g. rose bushes.
 
mikekle said:
I agree 100%, Why else would someone desire to go hunting? I understand hunting if its needed for food, but in todays world, its a whole lot easier to go down to the market, theres really no need for hunting of any kind.
Click to expand...
You do realize that one purpose in hunting is to thin herds so that they don’t starve? What market do you go to that you can buy elk or deer?
 
JimmyG88 said:
I just do not believe that it’s civilised for people to shoot wildlife for pleasure. It’s sadism.
Click to expand...
Well, there is a difference between a hunter going after deer or even legal bear trophies- and hopefully donating the meat. That’s entirely normal.

That’s not what this guy did here and not what he has been guilty of before.

He is hunting “exotic” animals seen as virile predators to make himself feel more powerful and virile himself.

This is a sign of some personality pathology.

There are very valid ways to enjoy hunting and this fellow wasn’t involved in normal hunting.
 
GEddie said:
Presumably a local-citizen lured the animal out of the park to be killed; he is the one to be blamed for this abuse of hunting privileges.

ICXC NIKA.
Click to expand...
This is what the dentist is claiming and of course he would claim this.

We do not know that his statement is true and we will have to wait and see how this plays out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top