- Joined
- Nov 12, 2012
- Messages
- 82,074
- Reaction score
- 19,733
- Location
- Houston, in the great state of Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
It actually was a donation to wildlife conservation.
I agree. If you have money, and the market is such that you have to pay that amount of money to have the rights to bag a rhino, then so be it. It still does not keep me from the opinion that someone who would pay this much money to bag a rhino is not a pompus ass. Do you know how much food $350k can provide for an impoverished community? This was no more then a "look at me" stunt. I would feel like a complete ass if I were the person that was highlighted in this story.
Do you actually know anything about animal cognition, or do you just pretend to? Science would indicate otherwise.Doubt it cares
Well, if you really want to redistribute income, you could advertise 13 year old girls virginity for less money and make a huge profit.
Do you actually know anything about animal cognition, or do you just pretend to? Science would indicate otherwise.
Science indicates dead animals care about being dead? All cognition stops when the brain function cease.
I don't really have to pretend to know anything to know that dead animals can't think.
So you are one of those "Its ok to run over baby ducks with a lawn mower because they dont feel anything after they die" guys.
Seems like an excellent way to raise funds and a form of good conservation.
I really don't see the problem.
The rhino was apparently an old rhino that no longer bred but was chasing off other potential male mates. I understand the reasoning, but I feel like they should have just moved it instead of killing it. The hunting of these animals should not be encouraged under any circumstances. Efforts to save endangered species should be getting enough funding without relying on hunters willing to pay top dollar to kill these animals.
Hunter pays £225,000 to shoot black rhino: 'I believe in survival of species' | Environment | The Guardian
A US hunter who paid $350,000 (£225,000) to kill a black rhino in Namibia has successfully shot the animal, saying his actions would help protect the critically endangered species. Corey Knowlton, from Texas, downed the rhino with a high-powered rifle after a three-day hunt through the bush with government officials on hand to ensure he killed the correct animal. Knowlton, 36, won the right to shoot the rhino at an auction – attracting criticism, and even death threats, from conservationists. He took a CNN camera crew on the hunt to try to show why he believed the killing was justified. “The whole world knows about this hunt and I think it’s extremely important that people know it’s going down the right way, in the most scientific way that it can possibly happen,” Knowlton told CNN. “People have a problem just with the fact that I like to hunt … I want to see the black rhino as abundant as it can be. I believe in the survival of the species.” Since 2012, Namibia has sold five licences a year to kill individual rhinos, saying the money is essential to fund conservation projects and anti-poaching protection.
No, one will suffice.Yeah, I agree! Heck why don't they sell off another 5000 more of these kills and wow, they'd raise a bundle!
Oh, wait.
No, one will suffice.
Science indicates dead animals care about being dead? All cognition stops when the brain function cease.
I don't really have to pretend to know anything to know that dead animals can't think.
Why stop at one? They need the money.
There is harm in killing a human. A rhino isn't a human.Science indicates that animals are conscious and that they strive to live just as we do. This is obviously what I meant. Unless you think there is no harm in killing a human since brain function ceases afterwards?
Just one reason that I would dearly love to see people like this just get a huge tax bill instead of a huge tax break. :roll:A US hunter who paid $350,000 (£225,000) to kill a black rhino in Namibia has successfully shot the animal, saying his actions would help protect the critically endangered species.
There is harm in killing a human. A rhino isn't a human.
I said that I doubt the rhino cares. It's dead it can't.
Being the dominate species. Animals are lower life forms. We kill them for their flesh so we can eat it. We imprison them in our homes and call them pets. We enslave them to be beasts of burden, and sometimes we kill them just because we don't like the way they look.I'm sure the rhino cared about living. That's the harm in dying against your will, including for human beings. What exactly is it about humans that makes it harmful to kill them that doesn't translate to when other animals are killed?
Being the dominate species. Animals are lower life forms. We kill them for their flesh so we can eat it. We imprison them in our homes and call them pets. We enslave them to be beasts of burden, and sometimes we kill them just because we don't like the way they look.
So... because we CAN do those things, makes it right to do those things?
No, because we can reason that doing those things is necessary makes them necessary.So... because we CAN do those things, makes it right to do those things?
Yes, survival of the fittest...
They AREN'T necessary. Merely because we have reasoned otherwise does not make said reason automatically sound.No, because we can reason that doing those things is necessary makes them necessary.
Yes, survival of the fittest...
Greetings, AP. :2wave:
Good to see you again! *big hug* And while you're here, I'd like to wish you a great Memorial Day tomorrow. :2usflag: Seems like there's also a birthday to be celebrated right around this time, too! amirite? :think:
I don't claim to know a lot about hunting/ animal reproduction/conservation but if there are 5000 (lets say for instance) black rhinos and you shoot one. 5000-1=4999. 4999<5000.
I am not a vegan. I use leather products I eat meat and I kill pestsThey AREN'T necessary. Merely because we have reasoned otherwise does not make said reason automatically sound.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?