Hunters are 'serial killers'.

A surreal look into the forum of a bunch of animal rights nuts:
http://www.animalsuffering.com/forum...ighlight=crain

Apparently, hunters are serial killers and justice is served when they die;

Quote:

---

well, someone had to make a post like that eventually [ie. asking why they are celebrating a person's death]. just let us have a moment to revel in justice since we spend much of the rest of our lifes stressed, under arrest or doing boring profitless protests because of the selfish **** like this **** in the world.
this man set out to kill others for fun, bet he didnt want to die himself did he?? i say ha ha bloody ha.

---

Quote:

---

Hunters who "properly protect themselves" (follow the safety guidelines, point their weapons in the "right" directions, aren't stupid enough to fall out of their tree stands) are frequently killed/maimed as a direct result of their hunting activity. What can be expected? You climb a tree, crawl under or over fencing, stumble around on uneven ground while carrying a loaded rifle or shotgun ... safety guidelines be damned. Throw in a cooler of favorite brew and the safety inhibitions just sort of take a back seat to the anticipation of the "thrill of the kill."

When the hunters kill each other, that's not exactly the thrill they have in mind, but what the hell ... a kill is a kill. Who knows? Maybe the widow will have her hunter hubby's head mounted on the den wall as a poignant rememberance of his love for the sport. I'm surprised the law doesn't allow this in my beloved state of Texas.
...
Hunters are willing to deal with these dangers because they are selfish, arrogant killers who willingly live violent, hateful lifestyles involving the cruel, pointless destruction of innocent, sentient life. Whether or not they are so willing to accept the consequences when those potential dangers become their stark realities is another matter. Of course, at that point, most of them are not in a position to debate the issue.

So: When a hunter is killed while in pursuit of his sport, I again offer my expression of sympathy:

"Happy! Happy! - Joy! Joy!"

---

Apparently, when humans (which are equal to animals) hunt, its evil, but when animals do it, its the natural cycle.

Need a bit more righteous anger? Check out these animal-whacko books;
http://www.akuk.com/mainpage.php?sta...=20&ThisSub=46
Look for 'rage and reason'.

It is one thing to disagree about hunting, but these folks have gone off the deep end of hate.

Edit: What drives them to this? Perhaps feeling empty in the world, then looking for something to stand for, to fill a void in their life?

CR

Well, it can be said that some guys are just out there to spill as much blood as possible without repercussions, even though I doubt killing another man is on the agenda. I'm pretty indifferent either way - some guys want to go off and put their lives at risk for a weekend to go kill stuff, that's fine with me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Edit: What drives them to this? Perhaps feeling empty in the world, then looking for something to stand for, to fill a void in their life?

CR

---

It's their religion. Animal rights activists of that sort are as dogmatic and illogical as any other religious fanatic. Like all religions, theirs fills some void (usually a self-created void in the first place) in their lives. They fill the void with illogical nonsense, overbearing self-righteousness, unreasoning faith in their belief system and a general inability to grasp the possibilty of differing views. They "know" they're right. Because of that, they can't be reasoned with in any meaningful way. No different than any other religion, really.

I really got a laugh out of some of the threads on that site.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

It is one thing to disagree about hunting, but these folks have gone off the deep end of hate.

Edit: What drives them to this? Perhaps feeling empty in the world, then looking for something to stand for, to fill a void in their life?

CR

---

I think it borders on insanity... you decide which side of the border they're on. :dizzy2:
I don't hunt and don't envision myself ever doing so- but I think it serves an important recreational and conservational service. And some of those animals are tasty. :yes:

Man....that site is wacky...:inquisitive:

personally I´d say I think there is something wrong with people that hunt for fun....hunting for food I have no problem with....but I see something basically wrong in going out and killing something just for the hell of it......but even speaking of those people I wouldn´t go as far as calling them "serial killers"....a little twisted maybe....but come on...let´s not go over the deep end here.

I'm also against hunting if one does it only for fun and some trophy.
But this forum seems to be full of weird people of all sorts.:wall:

I can see a warning for unsuitable language. :laugh4:

That's a horrible way to die. Falling from a blind I doubt he died quickly. Those people are even worse, they revel at the site of a man, a husband, a father dieing. What's worse is they don't even care that they profess to love all animals and yet care nothing of this mans death.

Quote:

---

Edit: What drives them to this? Perhaps feeling empty in the world, then looking for something to stand for, to fill a void in their life?

---

There are alot of backward and strange people in this world. Quite alot of hate must have been around that person for them to go down that path. Sad really, they hate hunters and yet it is the hunter that has done so much more for animal conservation and endangered species protection then they will ever do.



But I guess there's the ultimate question one could ask in this situation. CR how did you run across that forum?:shame: :no: You certainly have some strange surfing habits.:laugh4:

These sort of people are the New Zealand religous fanatics. The people who break into science facilities and smash them up. They are convinced that they are saving the world by making everything "natural". They are convinced that having huge conservation areas, islands and programmes which cost millions aren't good enough. They want to destroy all signs of human progress in their quest for what is natural.

Nobody ever points out to them that their homes aren't natural, or that speaking isn't natural or that planting things isn't natural or that having a political view point isn't natural or caring for any species other than your own isn't natural.
:furious3:

There are too many stupid people in the world and because we have such a small population these stupid people are able to get their nutcase party into parliment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by School Teacher

They aren't the Green party! They are RED! ALL OF THEM!!!

---

and I always thought the same thing. They are anarcho-communists with a plan to destroy human civilisation and create a society of apes without any un-naturally creative or intelligent thought allowed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hepcat

and I always thought the same thing. They are anarcho-communists with a plan to destroy human civilisation and create a society of apes without any un-naturally creative or intelligent thought allowed.

---

As the resident anarcho-communist, I must take exception to the above characterization. You're referring to anarcho-primitivists, or just plain primitivists. Nutjobs the lot of them. They are a subset of the Green anarchists. Green anarchists are a subset of anarchists. Anarcho-communists are also a subset of anarchists; but while there might be some overlap in small part, they aren't the same thing. So, anarcho-communism is not the same thing as anarcho-primitivism. Just as neoconservatives aren't the same thing as conservatives and neo-liberals aren't the same thing as classical liberals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hepcat

They are convinced that they are saving the world by making everything "natural".

---

That's the root of the problem with any fundamentalist, as these whack jobs illustrate. If you think that you've got 100% of the answers, and you need to save the world, there's no atrocity you won't commit.

This group looks even loonier than the extreme Greens in the U.S.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aenlic

As the resident anarcho-communist, I must take exception to the above characterization. You're referring to anarcho-primitivists, or just plain primitivists. Nutjobs the lot of them. They are a subset of the Green anarchists. Green anarchists are a subset of anarchists. Anarcho-communists are also a subset of anarchists; but while there might be some overlap in small part, they aren't the same thing. So, anarcho-communism is not the same thing as anarcho-primitivism. Just as neoconservatives aren't the same thing as conservatives and neo-liberals aren't the same thing as classical liberals.

---

hmmmm... I can't understand why anyone would want to bring about anarchy, whether it be anarcho-communist, anarcho-primitivist or just plain old anarchy, they are all anti-society so I despise them all (I prefer a more authoritarian government). I could probably spend hours arguing with you on this point but I don't think this is the topic for it. They just really annoy me, and it is the people who say "well they are working for the enviroment and making the world a cleaner place, I guess I will vote for them." who also annoy me. People who aren't as extreme but are brainwashed by a mixture of the media and the ecologists who make them think that we are on the verge of becoming a wasteland.

The government is working hard and spending a lot of money on helping the endemic flora and fauna to recover from the mammal immigration that crippled their populations. Busting up a sciece lab won't speed up the proccess. We have a steady emmigration of skilled labourers and well qualified people which means that all the stupid people are left behind to proclaim that judgement day is at hand if we don't get rid of our microwaves and electronics which are evil and stop our mass prejudice against trees. For example:

There used to be a hill in Auckland called 'One tree hill' because there was only one solitary tree on top of it. This tree had several attempts on it's life (people trying to cut it down) and was held up by cables and had a fence around it. The government finally decided to take it down a few years ago as it was so scarred and bent and old that leaving it there was just silly. It was ONE tree which was dying anyway. But the HUGE fuss kicked up over it was just ridiculous.

I had been to 'one tree hill' several times when the tree was there and it isn't that special. Well anyway, the tree was cut down, so now it is called 'none tree hill' or 'no tree hill' and all the controversy ended there because the Greens found something new to complain about. ALL THEY DO IS JUST TRY AND COMPLAIN ABOUT ANYTHING THAT GOES ON!!!! AND THEN THEY DON'T EVEN SHOW ANY COMMITMENT WHEN IT HAPPENS!!!!

They just use the publicity to show off "oooh look at me I am so important because I have something to complain about and I can say the word ecology as though I know what it means"!:wall:

I think all these anarcho-communists anarcho-primitivists (I am going to use that from now on) should be shot! Then this country would be a much happier place. :yes:

End of Rant :sweatdrop:

....and farmers are cereal killers.

Sorry, couldn't resist. I'll have someone smack me.




Rabbit:

I agree with you whole-heartedly on this one. There is some kind of basic disconnect with reality in that mode of thinking.


Aenlic:

I have little respect for anarchy as a political model, viewing it as eminently impractical. An a-governmental communal sharing model of society is far too "theoretical" to actually work.

I would also caution you to be careful about accidently lumping in all who hold religious beliefs with fanatics of various stripes. I think you were noting that fanaticism can lead to total close-mindedness and amorality -- a concern with which I concur -- but some of your phrasing seemed to imply that all religious belief was a form of fanaticism, which is not a valid claim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

I have little respect for anarchy as a political model, viewing it as eminently impractical.

---

Anyone who thinks anarchy is the way to grand human harmony should spend a few weeks in Baghdad, or at the very least be forced to watch The Road Warrior repeatedly.

From anarchy comes tribalism, and where people go from there is the usual plate of worms; dictatorship, feudalism, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Apparently, when humans (which are equal to animals) hunt, its evil, but when animals do it, its the natural cycle.

---

I'd like to think the introduction of scopes & high powered rifles into the whole hunter-prey relationship would explain the attitude toward hunting a little, but I suspect they'd still be righteously outraged if you used a used a fire hardended stick. Funny they never seem to kick up a fuss about fishing competitions.

Not all "green" policy is total lunacy, & its a shame that the freaks get the spotlight, the bbc interviewed a new zealander this week, who was saying that the feed for cows & sheep in europe had a high energy cost. Its grown in one place, proccessed then shipped to the country where the animals eat it...His point was, that in new zealand the energy required for the animal feed was very low..."They eat the grass" Now doesn't that beg the question, what the fark are they being fed, & what's wrong with grass? :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prodigal

what the fark are they being fed, & what's wrong with grass? :inquisitive:

---

Theirselves, nothing goes to waste

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronin

Man....that site is wacky...:inquisitive:

personally I´d say I think there is something wrong with people that hunt for fun....hunting for food I have no problem with....but I see something basically wrong in going out and killing something just for the hell of it......but even speaking of those people I wouldn´t go as far as calling them "serial killers"....a little twisted maybe....but come on...let´s not go over the deep end here.

---

I don't see anything bad in a little sport, so long as you don't waste what you get. I don't like the way some crazies go out and kill 50 fowl and then leave the carcasses to rot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrossLOPER

I don't see anything bad in a little sport, so long as you don't waste what you get. I don't like the way some crazies go out and kill 50 fowl and then leave the carcasses to rot.

---

Like you said...I see nothing wrong if you eat what you hunt..and only hunt what you really need....but some people sure do it because they turn hunting into some sort of twisted powertrip...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Theirselves, nothing goes to waste

---

Be interesting to know who it was that managed to convince people to buy processed meat to feed their herbivores with, that said its no doubt the same people that dreamed up vegetarian cat food.

I mean, tell me if the logic's weird but what's wrong with feeding the cat cow, & the cow the veggie option?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prodigal

I'd like to think the introduction of scopes & high powered rifles into the whole hunter-prey relationship would explain the attitude toward hunting a little, but I suspect they'd still be righteously outraged if you used a used a fire hardended stick. Funny they never seem to kick up a fuss about fishing competitions.

---

Oh well, we have rifles, an eagle has wings and claws, isn't that kind of unfair towards a rabbit as well?
Should hunters jump onto the deer and bite through their throats?:sweatdrop:

While I am not a big "gun guy," or a fan of trophy hunting, I agree that calling hunters "serial killers" is laughable. I guess that by that logic, cattle ranchers are the equivalent of Nazi death camp commandants?

:laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goofball

While I am not a big "gun guy," or a fan of trophy hunting, I agree that calling hunters "serial killers" is laughable. I guess that by that logic, cattle ranchers are the equivalent of Nazi death camp commandants?

:laugh4:

---

Shhhhhhh! Don't give them any ideas. :creep:

Definitely a nut job website. Where nutters can argue with other nutters but ultimately agree anyway. "Evil animal killers" would probably get banned instantly, and not be allowed to speak their mind. I've never understood these types. They rant on about protecting animals from hunting, yet they fail to realise that a food chain exists, with one type of animal eating another, how nature intended it. Humans happen to be at the top of that chain. We didn't get to where we are today by eating grass. Their ancestors ate meat and their earlier ancestors probably ate each other. We've got beyond cannibalism, but we still need meat as part of our diet.

Hunters, using their flawed logic, are in fact worthy of more respect than farmers or those that eat meat. Hunters go out and kill, gut and clean, and often prepare and cook, their own food. Food that had a sporting chance at life, not food that was confined for life then slaughtered. They can only see the hunter as a person who is taking "pleasure" from the kill. This is why they hate them more. Fox hunters are probably "sport" hunters in the true sense. Their quarry yeilds no food stuff. A deer hunter will bring home venison. Big difference. Food.

These types of people always seem to exhibit similar behaviour to those that are parts of extremist religious groups

https://img374.imageshack.us/img374/...tarycatzd0.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Apparently, when humans (which are equal to animals) hunt, its evil, but when animals do it, its the natural cycle.

---

You missing an important part of their logic. We humans have tried to remove ourselfs from the natural cycle. But not enough. We still kill and eat other furry things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed RAbbit

Need a bit more righteous anger? Check out these animal-whacko books;
http://www.akuk.com/mainpage.php?sta...=20&ThisSub=46
Look for 'rage and reason'.

---

Try reading planet of the apes. :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Oh well, we have rifles, an eagle has wings and claws, isn't that kind of unfair towards a rabbit as well?
Should hunters jump onto the deer and bite through their throats?:sweatdrop:

---

Should they? Yes. Will they? No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caravel

Definitely a nut job website. Where nutters can argue with other nutters but ultimately agree anyway. "Evil animal killers" would probably get banned instantly, and not be allowed to speak their mind. I've never understood these types. They rant on about protecting animals from hunting, yet they fail to realise that a food chain exists, with one type of animal eating another, how nature intended it. Humans happen to be at the top of that chain. We didn't get to where we are today by eating grass. Their ancestors ate meat and their earlier ancestors probably ate each other. We've got beyond cannibalism, but we still need meat as part of our diet.

Hunters, using their flawed logic, are in fact worthy of more respect than farmers or those that eat meat. Hunters go out and kill, gut and clean, and often prepare and cook, their own food. Food that had a sporting chance at life, not food that was confined for life then slaughtered. They can only see the hunter as a person who is taking "pleasure" from the kill. This is why they hate them more. Fox hunters are probably "sport" hunters in the true sense. Their quarry yeilds no food stuff. A deer hunter will bring home venison. Big difference. Food.

These types of people always seem to exhibit similar behaviour to those that are parts of extremist religious groups

---

However, fox hunting also controls the population of a fairly nasty predator, they kind of predator which kills fwuffy widdle wabbits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

From anarchy comes tribalism, and where people go from there is the usual plate of worms; dictatorship, feudalism, etc.

---

Lemur, old fruit, I think you need to stop playing so much Civilisation IV.

:wink3:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prodigal

I'd like to think the introduction of scopes & high powered rifles into the whole hunter-prey relationship would explain the attitude toward hunting a little, but I suspect they'd still be righteously outraged if you used a used a fire hardended stick. Funny they never seem to kick up a fuss about fishing competitions.

---

Couple problems though. Those crazies have already done their darndest to ban atl atl hunting and are now trying to ban crossbow hunting. So all a hunter has left is a high powered rifle. As for fish, they don't care that their bowl of granola has cost the lives of countless millions grain plants. They only care about animals that look cute and fuzzy, its a "don't kill bambi" complex.