Why not?
(I ask this question only if, again, you’re offering some sort of objective standard. If you are merely saying that FOR YOU, in your opinion only, “a purpose” does not include “make buckets of money for some moron singer,” then I can hardly disagree. If you’re proposing an objective standard, I’d like to know how you derive it.)
I have never been able to decide if I think there can be objective standards for moral behavior. It’s a difficult subject, so I tend to view everything as relative. I don’t believe in God, so I’m left with my best grasp of what’s kind, what’s reasonable, what’s ethical. I can only speak for myself.
Killing animals for no other reason than to turn a profit (that is, the killing in and of itself has no purpose–pest control, culling, meat, etc.) is unacceptable to me. To kill an animal painfully and needlessly disgusts me, and I suspect that this bear’s death was not the pinnacle of painless death that has been suggested in this thread. (I realize that there’s no way really to say if any death is painless, but we can definitely say when some deaths are not painless. I suspect this bear’s death was the latter. It just isn’t easy to kill a bear.)
This thread is a nice warm-up for the shitstorm certain to appear when the lands next to the MacNeil River bear observatory in Alaska will open for the first time to trophy hunters. Another case, equally extreme, of unfair killings some try to justify as “hunts” performed by “hunters”. I call bullshit on both.
“They’re just questions, Leon. In answer to your query they’re written down for me. It’s a test, designed to provoke an emotional response. Shall we continue?”
You win the thread.
That just can’t be true. I’m sure if you pumped 10 or 50 arrows into a bear in a cage, it woud die. Eventually.
That would be “bow and arrows”, though. The only way to do it with bow and arrow would be to climb in there and pull the thing out every time 
Oh, and Grossbottom? 
Yeah, I didn’t mean that the bear is made of adamantium everywhere except the heart and lungs. I meant (and should have been clearer) that the only reliable way to bring down a bear efficiently and humanely on a hunt is with a clean heart/lungs shot with complete pass-through. Otherwise, you prolong the bear’s pain and your own, because you’ll be chasing a sparse to nonexistent blood trail for a long, long way.
He was indited by a Federal grand jury. According to this Boston Globe story:
AND BTW, though I don’t supose it matters muxh, the alleged violation took place about 2 years ago.
That’s not true.
In one of my prior incarnations, I was the manager of a hunting/fishing/adventure travel agency affiliated with the largest hunting and fishing membership organization in the world.
We had libraries of hunting videos produced by guides and outfitters from around the world–probably dozens from Canadian bear hunting outfitters alone. Clients were given these to preview the various outfitters they were considering for their hunts.
I’ve seen many of them. Not once did I ever see an arrow make a clean pass-through (other than a missed or bad shot). Most often, the arrow buried to near the fletching. On good shots the bears fell within camera range (usually viewed from the tree stand). I don’t recall any of them requiring miles of tracking. A few hundred yards, maybe.
Further, an animal’s hide, or fat, or muscle doesn’t serve as a bandage or tourniquet for the heart of lungs. If it did, the animal either wouldn’t be able to breathe or would be too hypertensive to pump blood and would die from it.
But back to the OP…
I think what Gentry did was fully assholish–even if it’s determined to be within the letter of the law. Canned hunts suck. Where’s the sport in killing an animal that, a few minutes before, was licking your hand?
I did preview. Honest.
or, dammit.
I’m sorry, but do you think the videos of the guys who gut shot a bear, then tracked it for three miles through the hot, stinking swamps with mosquitoes and deer ticks get sent to the hunting video library? It’s CUT!, set up for take two, cue the bear.
I’ve been to Hollywood, I’ve been to Redmond, I’ve searched the Ocean for a Heart of Lungs!
You get Neil Young popping into your head. I get T’Pau.
Give a little bit of Heart of Lungs
Give a little bit of ursine tongues
Give a little bit of Heart of Lungs
And don’t you make me beg for more!
…I shot an arrow at your
Heart and lungs
The way a fool would do, madly…"
Most outfitters wouldn’t make a production video of a poor shot. Hell, Canadian bear hunting is about as close to a guaranteed kill as you can get (after maybe a Wyoming antelope hunt or a Quebec caribou hunt). They (the outfitters) don’t need to make videos of bad shots; they’ve got plenty of good ones to choose from.
That ain’t to say that many a poor schmuck hasn’t hiked through the brambles for hours in search of their wounded quarry since most outfitters say that a wounded animal is your animal–you don’t get a second turn. If you winged it (or gut shot it), you find it.
And why would they send deer ticks to the hunting video library?
I didn’t see that one-what was it?
[QUOTE=Blake]
Are you are all angry simply because this is a bear? Why is a bear substantially different to a pig?
[QUOTE]
Well, the bear was tame, which pretty much qualifies him as a pet. What would you think of someone who got their jollies by buying puppies at the pet store and chopping their heads off while videotaping nhe event? Let’s say, once a week. In their front yard. I mean, it’s just a dumb animal, right? If you can afford it, and it’s legal, more power to you.
Killing animals for fun is fucked up. Purchasing an animal for the sole, express purpose of killing it is a chickenshit thing to do.