Too many sharpshooting hunters with good rifles to safely fly a drone…
Good point. And maybe they can also take them out with a bow and arrow.
Was this dentist guy single? Was he trying to pick up women on a dating website?
Tigers of Tinder: Why do men still think a posing with a wild beast will make them sexy?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/sex/10859996/Sexy-Tigers-of-Tinder-Why-do-men-need-to-pose-with-a-tiger-to-get-a-date.html
8-|
I think he has sexual harassment charges against him, so probably.
The sexual harassment case was settled. It went on for 6 years!! Was discussed earlier in the thread in several places
I thought that was the one on the list that he did not kill yet. 
"Palmers have two children - one daughter is a champion ballroom dancer, 27, who is married to her 57-year-old business partner "
I say this coming from a hunting family: trophy hunting is really twisted.
Guess the press is going after his kids now, too. What next, his dog?
That is, if it isn’t stuffed and mounted.
The daughter’s husband is 2 years older than her dad.
So she is a trophy wife?
@sorghum:
Yep, I guess the daughter had trophy envy,so became one:)
The arguments that hunting this big game is necessary to generate funds to protect the animals to me is a non starter, as it stands today it is an excuse to allow the hunt of these animals but I haven’t seen any real evidence that the money generated by these hunts has preserved any land or has saved any animals to be honest. I have yet to find citings either that the hunting land owners are breeding these animals to ‘help them survive’, from what I know the hunting lands operate by wild animals happening to come onto their property, and they are licensed to kill a certain number of animals a year on their land of certain types, not all that different than for example exists for fishing licenses here. Not to mention that given those licenses are administered by the government.
Yes, loss of habitat is a problem, but there are ways to address that without hunting the animals. Groups like the Nature conservancy buy up land to preserve it for wildlife, and if this was done on a larger scale by NGO’s or maybe within the auspices of the UN, it could be effective.The US and other western governments could act by banning the importation of trophies, much the way ivory is banned today, and groups like the world trade organization could put sanctions on countries like China that are the biggest market for poached animals , chinese traditional medicine is a disaster area wanting parts of animals like tigers and rhinos and such (usually for verility snort). In terms of the countries involve, incentivize, rather than hunting, offer incentives to the country in development aid or in the building of a tourist infrastructure, and in terms of human encroachment work on the real causes of loss of land, which often is in expanding agriculture because of destructive farming practices, and it also will require support in the form of family planning, too (which is the hardest part, in large parts of Africa thanks to religious groups there are big taboos against birth control and such). Arguing that big game hunting is the way to save these animals is ludicrous, it kind of reminds me of the policy in vietnam of destroying villages to save them.
There are a lot of subtexts to this thread, there are people who are against hunting, there are people who are against killing for sport, there are people who are against big game hunting , especially since many of these animals are endangered, and there are some who are enraged because of what Palmer did. There are people defending these hunts (and Palmer) because they think this hunting is okay, or they think any limits on hunting threatens all hunting, and there are those who reading between the lines who see Palmer as a victim of the persecution of the well off and their peculiar play toys and how they spend their wealth (since those doing big game hunting are not likely to be Joe and Jane you see at the local supermarket, unless maybe it was Harrods or something).
Some argue that the problem is the ‘locals’ who hunt and poach, but that reminds me of those trying to make slavery seem much less horrible, by arguing that Africans were often caught and sold into slavery by fellow Africans (all quite true), and it is the same problem, who is creating the demand? In Africa, the British and others would give certain tribes guns, and those tribes would war against fellow tribes, capture them, and then sell them to the British and others who would sell them into slavery, without the demand, it wouldn’t have happened. Likewise, poaching is reacting to demand, if they couldn’t get good prices on tiger pelts, tiger claws, rhino testicles, rhino horns, and of course ivory and elephant feet (the feet, believe it or not, are still being turned into umbrella stands and the like), there would be no reason to kill them. The poachers are not killing rhinos to directly feed their family, they are doing so for the horns, which are valuable for things like ceremonial daggers among some cultures in the mideast, and as medicine in China. The newly rich in China are spurring poaching in lion and tiger skins, garments made of them are major status items (as they are in the oil countries of the middle east), and so forth. You get rid of that demand, and there is basically no reason to kill the animals in question.
And if the problem is ‘locals’ killing the animals, then the whole argument about hunting licenses for big game hunters is moot, because then it is obvious that hunting licenses don’t stop the poaching and given the decline in species numbers with legal hunting of big game animals, it shows that at best is a drop in the bucket and if what I suspect is true, most of the money from those hunting licenses is lining the pockets of local officials and game wardens, and isn’t doing much to preserve animals. And if those licenses are not protecting the animals, which if you look at the numbers of elephants for example, whose prime decline is caused by poaching, then all they are doing is killing off even more animals, albeit in relatively small numbers, and the only reason for them is to gratify the ego of the people allowed to do this.
Banning the importation of trophies won’t solve the problems these animals have, but it is a start, it sets a tone and says we won’t tolerate killing endangered species (and the reasons lions are not on the list is political, any animal put on this list in the mind of some will lead to the outright ban on sport hunting, which is idiotic, but they believe it). So if we then put sanctions on, for example, poached ivory feeding a hungry market in China, they can’t say “well, you allow people to take endangered species and bring them into the US”. Basically, like with many things revolving around countries like China, the rest of the world has looked the other way, afraid to do anything about it, and this is why the poaching goes on. If real pressure was put on the Chinese government to, for example, not only enforce their own laws, but do something like happened with smoking in this country, put a full court press on making having stuff from endangered animals, rather than a status item, something to be ashamed of, it would help a great deal, likewise if they enforced the laws on ivory (which they are signatories to), it likely would cut down the poaching of elephants because there would be no market for the ivory.
The solutions are not simple, but the real answer is someone actually has to do something, and it will take multi faceted action. And yes, making big game hunting shameful is part of that, if someone bragged about going around killing bald eagles (which once upon a time was quite common in the US) or hawks, they would be treated like crap by most people. Sorry, but when you see some 55 year old man with his shirt off with his arm around a lion he just killed, that is pure macho posturing, look what a man I am, I killed a lion, and comments about his inadequacy are fair game to me or anyone else who thinks killing big game, especially the way he did it, was manly, to me it is about as manly as bragging about beating up someone smaller and weaker than you are.
There was a clip on the news (CNN I think) yesterday interviewing someone in immigration showing the DAILY seizure of attempted illegal importing of endangered/exotic animals and animal parts. They even showed a stuffed tiger fetus. Ewww.
I actually saw my first drone in action last night. We went to a county fair to listen to a cover band, and all of a sudden we saw this thing, blinking red and green lights, hovering above us for a couple of minutes; then it took off and hovered over a different part of the fair. It came back several times in those two hours.
This is not a correct characterization, as I have had this discussion in many a history classes, and it is surprising how much students have not been taught in high school and college.
It is not that people who say the above are saying slavery is less horrible; it is that too many history professors pretend that history is a one-sided race issue and conveniently gloss over a leave out that Africans (along with Muslims) were the front-end of slavery and delivered the people to the ports ands ships from the interior. The white traders did not travel deep into the interior capturing people some books portray. Nothing less horrible about that, as slavey is slavery.
And more interesting still, slavery in Africa continues today, unabated essentially, not to mention many Muslim countries. As I recall, most of the Boko Harem females are still missing and enslaved somewhere. And this is but one group; there are hundreds such groups.
Overall, your quote is a reminder that it is an injustice to history to pretend that slavery was just a white culture problem, as too many try to portray. No, slavery was and still is a world-wide, human problem, race notwithstanding.
I agree. The public shaming, the worldwide outcry is appropriate.
Palmer was not the least bit sorry about killing this animal, in fact he bragged about it, until he was publicly named as the person responsible. Then the self-serving statement of regret…that he didn’t know…that he thought it was legal. Jerk.
@Jazzymom, I’m glad you started this post. It has been very informative.
Your latest media reference indicates that Mr. Slimeball was trying to be a ladies man. A sick, demented, perverted ass trying to “break a record” by killing beautiful, defenseless animals.
I don’t know if I feel sorry for the wife and children. I can’t imagine a woman staying with a two-timing, SOB slimeball creep.
I read from somewhere that the majority of those “trophy animal hunters” are from US and Russia. I guess these two countries have quite a many wealthy people because the average Joe could never afford this kind of “hobby”.