Nugent pleads guilty over illegal bear killing

chadwick

some people have heads on their walls, yes/no?

i am guessing some 10c members here have heads displayed fully in their houses

maybe their kids believe its a good idea and had a white tail buck deer stuffed

my head is spinning for answer as to why this act is supported to death

chadwick

pandora wrote:

markin ball wrote:

I am not asking for your reasons on why you don't oppose those persons that trophy hunt, I am asking you what your rationale is for not being "opposed to (the act of) trophy hunting".

I accept trophy hunters therefore I accept what they do ... yes?
if it is within the law.

Because I would not conceive doing it doesn't mean others shouldn't.

you support rhino trophies and the murder of elephant

this is what you are saying, yes/no?

pandora

chadwick wrote:

pandora wrote:

chadwick wrote:

murdering a polar bear for its pelt is the exact equivalent as a person who murderers other humans and why not throw in child molester. yep i will throw that in there too.

a bear killer is the exact equivalent as a child molester as is the mountain lion killer the exact equal of that of a rapist

this is where you lose me though Chad... and have repeatedly

A hunter, not a poacher, does not have motives like this.
Of course some hunters may be despicable
but you put every hunter into the same category without knowing anything about them.
and lump them with killers and child molesters :?

That is unfair, its also exactly what I did 15 years ago.

You do this to many humans, those unlike yourself, as many people do, as I did.
A do as I do , a think as I think ... attitude. Remember there are exceptions to the rule
and we can not know what is in the heart.

Freeing yourself of that helps one learn about others and love them unconditionally
and come to terms with the fact each of us have to learn from our mistakes.

i never put every 'hunter' in the same catergory ever in my life

you do not follow what i write at all. i do not know how many times i need to spell it out for you

say what :? it was your last quote... you did not differentiate between hunters
I highlighted maybe you can tell me then which hunters are these that are murderers
rapists and child molesters :? I think they might want to know.

redrock

pandora wrote:

markin ball wrote:

I am not asking for your reasons on why you don't oppose those persons that trophy hunt, I am asking you what your rationale is for not being "opposed to (the act of) trophy hunting".

I accept trophy hunters therefore I accept what they do ... yes?
if it is within the law.

Because I would not conceive doing it doesn't mean others shouldn't.

So... following this logic and going with 'shock tactics' again.... you accept and do not judge a child rapist (because that's what they are) AND you also condone/do not oppose the ACT of raping this child? Note: naturally, I know this act is against the law.

Cosmo

Let me add this:
To those whom support Ted Nugent's actions and excuse his draft dodging as youthful indiscretion...
Do you feel the same way towards Jane Fonda in the Viet Nam era?
...
Personally, I don't.
I hold her responsible for her actions.
It is one thing to protest the war on college campuses and try to effect a change in policy towards Indo-China... it's a completely a different thing to go to Hanoi and be a guest of the nation we are in armed conflict with. I would feel the same way if Sean Penn, for example, were to have gone to Afghanistan as a guest of Usama bin Laden.
Do your excuses cross political lines... or is your opinion/support strictly partisan?

pandora

redrock wrote:

pandora wrote:

markin ball wrote:

I am not asking for your reasons on why you don't oppose those persons that trophy hunt, I am asking you what your rationale is for not being "opposed to (the act of) trophy hunting".

I accept trophy hunters therefore I accept what they do ... yes?
if it is within the law.

Because I would not conceive doing it doesn't mean others shouldn't.

So... following this logic and going with 'shock tactics' again.... you accept and do not judge a child rapist (because that's what they are) AND you also condone/do not oppose the ACT of raping this child? Note: naturally, I know this act is against the law.

:? huh that is not all what I said
you must be missing what it is I accept ... why?
In line with the topic though ...
I am going to research the laws pertaining to trophy hunting and if my perception
of it is correct ... I have seen some when we went out to Yellowstone and the Tetons ...
big game trophies that is. There is much history I believe behind the sport.

redrock

pandora wrote:

redrock wrote:

pandora wrote:

I accept trophy hunters therefore I accept what they do ... yes?
if it is within the law.

Because I would not conceive doing it doesn't mean others shouldn't.

So... following this logic and going with 'shock tactics' again.... you accept and do not judge a child rapist (because that's what they are) AND you also condone/do not oppose the ACT of raping this child? Note: naturally, I know this act is against the law.

:? huh that is not all what I said
you must be missing what it is I accept ... why?

I don' think I'm missing anything. There is no 'why?' I need to answer. It's all in my response, if you cared to read it (unless you don' understand it, though I think I made myself clear. Maybe someone else can explain if they want to be bothered. )

You don't oppose the ACT of killing an animal to satisfy some egocentric need, therefore condoning this ACT. An act is not a person.

Good luck on your research. I'm sure you will find exactly what you wish to find.

pandora

redrock wrote:

pandora wrote:

:? huh that is not all what I said
you must be missing what it is I accept ... why?

I don' think I'm missing anything. You don't oppose the ACT of killing an animal to satisfy some egocentric need, therefore condoning this ACT.

Good luck on your research. I'm sure you will find exactly what you wish to find.

what you are missing of course is that I would accept your analogy,
it is incorrect
Thank you ... I am looking forward to learning more on the subject
in an unbiased manner.

gimmesometruth27

redrock wrote:

pandora wrote:

redrock wrote:

I don' think I'm missing anything. You don't oppose the ACT of killing an animal to satisfy some egocentric need, therefore condoning this ACT.

Good luck on your research. I'm sure you will find exactly what you wish to find.

again there is nothing to research, nothing to study, nothing to ponder, nothing to debate yada yada yada...

either you are against the type of "hunting", errmm, poaching done by nugent, or you support it. i think we all know who supports it and who is against it...this thread makes that abundently clear.

redrock

I was obviously wrong in thinking my analogy would be clearer in showing the difference between 'accepting' (not judging) a person as it would seem one cannot understand certain mindsets and accepting/condoning/not opposing the reprehensible ACT this person may have committed.

pandora

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

again there is nothing to research, nothing to study, nothing to ponder, nothing to debate yada yada yada...

either you are against the type of "hunting", errmm, poaching done by nugent, or you support it. i think we all know who supports it and who is against it...this thread makes that abundently clear.

no I was speaking of Trophy hunting in general
I would like to understand the laws the people have created and understand if I know exactly
what it encompasses. I would like to know more of the history also.

Either you are for or against this type of hunting ...why I will research the sport.

I think it will remain to be seen poaching but I will also research that ...

I know you are opposed you said to all hunting
that animals have souls, why you are a vegetarian,
bless your heart.... that is a beautiful commitment to your personal values.

Godfather.

I have a feeling this thread will be locked also...because some KIDS don't play well with others..
lets all have a BBQ someday...

Godfather.

Jeanwah

poaching
present participle of poach (Verb)
Verb:

1. Cook (an egg), without its shell, in or over boiling water.
2. Illegally hunt or catch (game or fish) on land that is not one's own or is under official protection.



Trophy hunting
Web definitions

Trophy hunting is the selective hunting of wild game animals. While parts of the slain animal may be kept as a hunting trophy or memorial (usually the skin, antlers and/or head), the carcass itself is sometimes used as food.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_hunting

(Trophy hunts) hunting endangered species, usually by rich people, to add to their collection of other slaughtered, endangered species.

redglitterx.wordpress.com/dictionary/

pandora

redrock wrote:

I was obviously wrong in thinking my analogy would be clearer in showing the difference between 'accepting' (not judging) a person as it would seem one cannot understand certain mindsets and accepting/condoning/not opposing the reprehensible ACT this person may have committed.

yeah not really getting that... sorry :?

I just know some keep calling hunters rapists murderers and child molesters
makes me go huh :?:

that seems incredibly judgmental and unforgiving and I can't see that anolgy
and I'm thinking the hunters wouldn't either maybe.

Quite an insult to 2 million people in our country alone :(

pandora

Godfather. wrote:

I have a feeling this thread will be locked also...because some KIDS don't play well with others..
lets all have a BBQ someday...

Godfather.

I love a BBQ! :wave:

So far everyone is pretty civil

pandora

Jeanwah wrote:

poaching
present participle of poach (Verb)
Verb:

1. Cook (an egg), without its shell, in or over boiling water.
2. Illegally hunt or catch (game or fish) on land that is not one's own or is under official protection.



Trophy hunting
Web definitions

Trophy hunting is the selective hunting of wild game animals. While parts of the slain animal may be kept as a hunting trophy or memorial (usually the skin, antlers and/or head), the carcass itself is sometimes used as food.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_hunting

(Trophy hunts) hunting endangered species, usually by rich people, to add to their collection of other slaughtered, endangered species.

redglitterx.wordpress.com/dictionary/

thanks
there's a start

but why would the law allow the rich to hunt for endangered animals?

now see I thought it would be illegal to do that!

Jeanwah

pandora wrote:

redrock wrote:

I was obviously wrong in thinking my analogy would be clearer in showing the difference between 'accepting' (not judging) a person as it would seem one cannot understand certain mindsets and accepting/condoning/not opposing the reprehensible ACT this person may have committed.

yeah not really getting that... sorry :?

I just know some keep calling hunters rapists murderers and child molesters
makes me go huh :?:

that seems incredibly judgmental and unforgiving and I can't see that anolgy
and I'm thinking the hunters wouldn't either maybe.

Quite an insult to 2 million people in our country alone :(

Because humans are so superior to every other species, right? We should be able to kill and eat every other species because we're king of the world? Quite an insult to every other species in the kingdom. See my definitions above.

Jeanwah

pandora wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

poaching
present participle of poach (Verb)
Verb:

1. Cook (an egg), without its shell, in or over boiling water.
2. Illegally hunt or catch (game or fish) on land that is not one's own or is under official protection.



Trophy hunting
Web definitions

Trophy hunting is the selective hunting of wild game animals. While parts of the slain animal may be kept as a hunting trophy or memorial (usually the skin, antlers and/or head), the carcass itself is sometimes used as food.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_hunting

(Trophy hunts) hunting endangered species, usually by rich people, to add to their collection of other slaughtered, endangered species.

redglitterx.wordpress.com/dictionary/

thanks
there's a start

but why would the law allow the rich to hunt for endangered animals?

now see I thought it would be illegal to do that!

Who said it was legal? See the poaching definition. It depends on the animal killed, whether it's legal or not. However, seeing that you're always spouting your moral beliefs, to defend this lifestyle in this thread tells me one of two things.... you're simply too in the dark about what you're standing up for, or you're just taking the opposite side for sake of stirring the pot.

Godfather.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DN4K-t1s ... re=related

the Nuge for president.

Godfather.

pandora

Jeanwah wrote:

pandora wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

poaching
present participle of poach (Verb)
Verb:

1. Cook (an egg), without its shell, in or over boiling water.
2. Illegally hunt or catch (game or fish) on land that is not one's own or is under official protection.



Trophy hunting
Web definitions

Trophy hunting is the selective hunting of wild game animals. While parts of the slain animal may be kept as a hunting trophy or memorial (usually the skin, antlers and/or head), the carcass itself is sometimes used as food.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_hunting

(Trophy hunts) hunting endangered species, usually by rich people, to add to their collection of other slaughtered, endangered species.

redglitterx.wordpress.com/dictionary/

thanks
there's a start

but why would the law allow the rich to hunt for endangered animals?

now see I thought it would be illegal to do that!

Who said it was legal? See the poaching definition. Duh, Pandora.

So all trophy hunting is illegal? I am speaking of big game hunting

so big game is different than trophy... I thought that would be interchangeable

I know you cant help your sweet self but no need to need rude
hope that is not considered insulting behavior