Canned Hunts
For those who do not know what a "canned hunt" is, it is a hunt where the hunter is assured of bagging his trophy animal by virtue of the fact that the animal has been previously captured or simply raised in captivity and confined in a small pen, such that it can not escape from the hunter's bullet.
Personally, I find the practice reprehensible. It should not be labelled a "hunt" as the word "hunt" infers actually actively seeking out the animal in its natural environment. In my mind, a hunt has to entail some level of skill and luck for the hunter to succeed and the prey should have some sort of fighting chance. Canned hunts are nothing more than allowing someone the right to slaughter an animal. You might as well just lead the animal to the slaughter house and allow it to be humanely slaughtered by routine means rather than being felled by some misplaced round dispensed from someone not adept enough to actually hunt.
The Humane Society of the United States when speaking on canned hunts, called them "cruel and brutal activities," in which the animal has "absolutely no chance of escape." and that that prey has been "psychologically conditioned to behave as a target by life in captivity". (source)
Now don't get me wrong, I absolutely support actual hunting 100%. It is one tool in the proper management of wildlife populations. It puts food on the tables of millions of Americans and no one supplies more money in the U.S. for wildlife habitat preservation than hunters.
In 2005 Senator Frank Lautenberg (D/NJ) introduced the Sportsmanship in Hunting Act of 2005 that moved to prohibit the practice. The bill met with strong Democratic approval. It was read twice and then referred to the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary.
Now I know you are asking yourself, "Why are you addressing this issue right now? Why is it relevant?" Well I'll tell you, but it's liable to piss some people off and perhaps be viewed as calloused. Frankly I've never been one to mince words. So, if you don't like what you read, then navigate away from this page. No one is forcing you to read my thoughts. May I suggest Disney?
Establishing gun-free zones is tantamount to establishing canned hunts for sociopaths. Why do you think that Charles Carl Roberts and Cho Seung-Hui selected the targets that they did rather than attacking a National Guard Armory or a Police Station? Could it be that these cowards picked the targets that they did because they knew that it was a soft target and that no opposition would be offered to their demented schemes?
Either of these two could have been stopped dead in their tracks by one well-placed round from the gun of a responsible citizen with the equipment, desire and skill to spring into action. This has in fact occurred in other such incidents. For example, on October 1st 1997 in Pearl Mississippi the principal of the Pearl High School, Joel Myrick responded to a shooting spree in his school by running to his vehicle to retrieve his .45 caliber pistol, which he used to confront the shooter and hold him captive, preventing further violence until police arrived to take the miscreant into custody.
How many lives were saved on the Virginia Tech campus by police officers? The simple answer is, not a single one. Cho's rampage had run its course. He'd shot everyone he was going to shoot and then ended his spree by shooting himself. It wasn't a police officer's bullet that ended the violence. You can not rely on the police to save you in an incident such as this. Police don't prevent many murders at all, mostly they just investigate them once they've occurred. Sure, you might be able to rely on our police officers to ensure that your murderer receives his day in court for killing you, but you are a fool if you believe that you can rely on them to prevent your death.
The other issue is that years of liberal school indoctrination have made our children nothing but a herd of sheep. Who resisted Cho Seung-Hui's assault? Here were people faced with a life or death situation. They were going to die. Did any of them bum rush this guy? I mean even if he was Mr. Universe, a crowd of people bum rushing him would have ended the situation. Sure some people may have died in the attempt, but they were going to die any ways. Read again the quote from the Humane Society, "psychologically conditioned to behave as a target by life in captivity".
Our children are taught not to defend themselves in schools by policies such as suspending all participants in a scuffle regardless of who actually started the fray. The exceptions to this behavior are relatively few. Sure, passengers on United Flight 92 rose up and fought back as did the people on the shoe-bomber's flight. Those are exceptions.
It has gone so far that we as a society haven't a stomach to stand up in a fight. On June 6th 1944 tens of thousands of servicemen died in a single battle, but in the current war, the American public has been goaded by carefully scripted media propaganda into losing their stomach for a fight that cost us a fraction of that number of casualties during the course of an entire war!
Now answer me this... If Democrats are so opposed to canned hunts of animals, why then do they propose expanding canned hunts of people? Why do they insist on removing any chance of self-defense from our children?
I mean honestly, if you were able to remove every single legally held firearm from private ownership how would you prevent criminals from getting firearms? You could no more stem the flow of illegal weapons into this country than you could stem the flow of illegal immigrants or illicit drugs. How many potheads are there in this country? How well did outlawing pot work to eliminate it from our society? Why can I go into any inner city across this country and find crack cocaine changing hands? Criminals will always break the law, that is their stock and trade and you are nothing but naive to think otherwise.
Removing guns will only complete the emasculation of the once hearty American spirit. If America's current citizenry existed in 1776, we'd still have British monarchs on our currency. If they were transported back to December 6th 1941, our country would be split between Japan & Germany and no longer exist. Thomas Jefferson, Paul Revere, Abraham Lincoln and Patton must all be rolling over in their graves to see the sorry pansy-assed state to which this nation has fallen.
If you truly love your children end the canned hunting of human beings. Teach your children to fight back, to resist force with force. Teach them to fight to survive rather than compliantly lying on the floor waiting for some future Cho Seung-Hui to deliver a coup-de-grace. In the spirit of one of my favorite (and often quoted) Tool songs, teach your children to swim!
Personally, I find the practice reprehensible. It should not be labelled a "hunt" as the word "hunt" infers actually actively seeking out the animal in its natural environment. In my mind, a hunt has to entail some level of skill and luck for the hunter to succeed and the prey should have some sort of fighting chance. Canned hunts are nothing more than allowing someone the right to slaughter an animal. You might as well just lead the animal to the slaughter house and allow it to be humanely slaughtered by routine means rather than being felled by some misplaced round dispensed from someone not adept enough to actually hunt.
The Humane Society of the United States when speaking on canned hunts, called them "cruel and brutal activities," in which the animal has "absolutely no chance of escape." and that that prey has been "psychologically conditioned to behave as a target by life in captivity". (source)
Now don't get me wrong, I absolutely support actual hunting 100%. It is one tool in the proper management of wildlife populations. It puts food on the tables of millions of Americans and no one supplies more money in the U.S. for wildlife habitat preservation than hunters.
In 2005 Senator Frank Lautenberg (D/NJ) introduced the Sportsmanship in Hunting Act of 2005 that moved to prohibit the practice. The bill met with strong Democratic approval. It was read twice and then referred to the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary.
Now I know you are asking yourself, "Why are you addressing this issue right now? Why is it relevant?" Well I'll tell you, but it's liable to piss some people off and perhaps be viewed as calloused. Frankly I've never been one to mince words. So, if you don't like what you read, then navigate away from this page. No one is forcing you to read my thoughts. May I suggest Disney?
Establishing gun-free zones is tantamount to establishing canned hunts for sociopaths. Why do you think that Charles Carl Roberts and Cho Seung-Hui selected the targets that they did rather than attacking a National Guard Armory or a Police Station? Could it be that these cowards picked the targets that they did because they knew that it was a soft target and that no opposition would be offered to their demented schemes?
Either of these two could have been stopped dead in their tracks by one well-placed round from the gun of a responsible citizen with the equipment, desire and skill to spring into action. This has in fact occurred in other such incidents. For example, on October 1st 1997 in Pearl Mississippi the principal of the Pearl High School, Joel Myrick responded to a shooting spree in his school by running to his vehicle to retrieve his .45 caliber pistol, which he used to confront the shooter and hold him captive, preventing further violence until police arrived to take the miscreant into custody.
How many lives were saved on the Virginia Tech campus by police officers? The simple answer is, not a single one. Cho's rampage had run its course. He'd shot everyone he was going to shoot and then ended his spree by shooting himself. It wasn't a police officer's bullet that ended the violence. You can not rely on the police to save you in an incident such as this. Police don't prevent many murders at all, mostly they just investigate them once they've occurred. Sure, you might be able to rely on our police officers to ensure that your murderer receives his day in court for killing you, but you are a fool if you believe that you can rely on them to prevent your death.
The other issue is that years of liberal school indoctrination have made our children nothing but a herd of sheep. Who resisted Cho Seung-Hui's assault? Here were people faced with a life or death situation. They were going to die. Did any of them bum rush this guy? I mean even if he was Mr. Universe, a crowd of people bum rushing him would have ended the situation. Sure some people may have died in the attempt, but they were going to die any ways. Read again the quote from the Humane Society, "psychologically conditioned to behave as a target by life in captivity".
Our children are taught not to defend themselves in schools by policies such as suspending all participants in a scuffle regardless of who actually started the fray. The exceptions to this behavior are relatively few. Sure, passengers on United Flight 92 rose up and fought back as did the people on the shoe-bomber's flight. Those are exceptions.
It has gone so far that we as a society haven't a stomach to stand up in a fight. On June 6th 1944 tens of thousands of servicemen died in a single battle, but in the current war, the American public has been goaded by carefully scripted media propaganda into losing their stomach for a fight that cost us a fraction of that number of casualties during the course of an entire war!
Now answer me this... If Democrats are so opposed to canned hunts of animals, why then do they propose expanding canned hunts of people? Why do they insist on removing any chance of self-defense from our children?
I mean honestly, if you were able to remove every single legally held firearm from private ownership how would you prevent criminals from getting firearms? You could no more stem the flow of illegal weapons into this country than you could stem the flow of illegal immigrants or illicit drugs. How many potheads are there in this country? How well did outlawing pot work to eliminate it from our society? Why can I go into any inner city across this country and find crack cocaine changing hands? Criminals will always break the law, that is their stock and trade and you are nothing but naive to think otherwise.
Removing guns will only complete the emasculation of the once hearty American spirit. If America's current citizenry existed in 1776, we'd still have British monarchs on our currency. If they were transported back to December 6th 1941, our country would be split between Japan & Germany and no longer exist. Thomas Jefferson, Paul Revere, Abraham Lincoln and Patton must all be rolling over in their graves to see the sorry pansy-assed state to which this nation has fallen.
If you truly love your children end the canned hunting of human beings. Teach your children to fight back, to resist force with force. Teach them to fight to survive rather than compliantly lying on the floor waiting for some future Cho Seung-Hui to deliver a coup-de-grace. In the spirit of one of my favorite (and often quoted) Tool songs, teach your children to swim!
posted by G-Man at 10:12 PM
|
<< Home