If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SeattlePI)   A North Texas man who paid $350,000 for the right to hunt an endangered African black rhino said he's had to hire full-time security due to death threats after his name was leaked onto the Internet   (seattlepi.com) divider line 396
    More: Followup, North Texas, African, death threats, internet, black person  
•       •       •

6549 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Jan 2014 at 9:29 PM (26 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



396 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-20 09:40:04 AM

Kit Fister: I came here to point out that this hunt was of an animal well past it's breeding years that is aggressive and prevents younger males from breeding, thus stymying the growth of the population, and thus actually a hindrance to maintaining a healthy population. Also I was going to point out that the government of Nairobi has one of the best conservation programs in the world and that they use the money from this hunt to further the program to preserve the species as a whole. Finally I was going to point out that this animal would be killed either way, in order to preserve the herd, and making money off of it to continue the program was a side benefit.

Glad to see it was already mentioned.


This. Jesus Christ Fark, you are becoming more and more irrelevant. You would have learned ^^this^^ in the Reddit thread that was 2 days ago and the top comment.

But carry on with your ignorant hate parade.
 
2014-01-20 09:41:00 AM

ultraholland: I want to experience a black rhino. I want to be intimately involved with a black rhino.

wow, dude.


Secret Agent X23: I want to be intimately involved with a black rhino.

TMI, dude.


Once you go black....
 
2014-01-20 09:42:34 AM

RexTalionis: Kit Fister: Enjoying the act of hunting as a sport to many/most isn't about the killing, but the act of testing yourself against nature.

Shooting something at 1000 yards with a high power rifle where you were in no danger and the animal was not attacking you isn't testing yourself against nature.

Want to test yourself against nature? Be more like our ancestors and run the animal to exhaustion before you put it down with spears or an atlatl and arrow. That's sporting. Guns for hunting are not very sportsmanlike.


First of all, no hunter in their right mind will take a shot at over 400 yards for something. At a grand? Good luck making the shot. I shoot competitive long-range rifle. At 1000 yards, with the best rifle money can buy, under perfect conditions, the rifle itself is not capable of less than 7" groups.  Could it be done? Absolutely. And thousand+ yard shots are taken at men all the time. But the chances of hitting a game animal and doing the proper damage to them? Less likely. And, then there's the matter of having to hump 1000 yards over terrain to find the site of the shot, and tracking the animal who, by now, has had more than enough chance to take off if you didn't quite drop it immediately.

Secondly, "testing yourself against nature" means a hell of a lot more than some ideal man vs. wild. I've hunted animals with spears. I went on a spear hunt for wild boar. And those little farkers are both vicious and tough to kill. I had one run right up the spear shaft trying to get to me, and I had to shoot it to kill it.  No, "Testing yourself against nature" means enduring the cold and the wet and the wind while remaining perfectly still, trying to ensure you're not in a position where your prey can smell you coming, trying to ensure that, even if you THINK you're still and quiet, you're not going to make some unexpected move that will alert your prey.  THAT'S the test.

But yes, do continue to be an idiot. :)
 
2014-01-20 09:48:54 AM

Kit Fister: No, "Testing yourself against nature" means enduring the cold and the wet and the wind while remaining perfectly still, trying to ensure you're not in a position where your prey can smell you coming, trying to ensure that, even if you THINK you're still and quiet, you're not going to make some unexpected move that will alert your prey. THAT'S the test.


In this case, this guy is paying $350,000 to be lead to a reserve where that rhino happens to live and he gets to shoot it from the Jeep that the tour guides drove him around with. Real sportsmanlike, no?

Kit Fister: First of all, no hunter in their right mind will take a shot at over 400 yards for something. At a grand? Good luck making the shot. I shoot competitive long-range rifle.


cdn.riveraveblues.com

But yes, do continue to be an idiot. :)
 
2014-01-20 09:51:06 AM

hardinparamedic: DamnYankees: No they wouldn't. Have you ever met an Indian? The ones I've met (and my father is an adopted member of the Oglala Sioux) call themselves Indians and think the other names are stupid.

I'm sure some Indians don't like the term, and if I meet one who doesn't like it I won't use it, but I've never met an Indian who was offended by it.

Generally though, they prefer to be called by their actual tribe name.

Indian:



Native American:

Seriously. Don't be that guy. You might as well say "My black friends say it's cool if I say the N word"


My mother worked for the IHS (Indian health service) and we lived on the Navajo reservation....they used the nomenclature "Indian" frequently as a casual, informal term, Native American is a more formal, and far less used term. Like a poster pointed out earlier, they prefer to be called by their tribe name. The name Navajo is actually a derogatory title given to them by the spainiards meaning thief IIRC....they call themselves Dine (din-eh) which means "the people"
 
2014-01-20 09:59:52 AM

RexTalionis: Kit Fister: No, "Testing yourself against nature" means enduring the cold and the wet and the wind while remaining perfectly still, trying to ensure you're not in a position where your prey can smell you coming, trying to ensure that, even if you THINK you're still and quiet, you're not going to make some unexpected move that will alert your prey. THAT'S the test.

In this case, this guy is paying $350,000 to be lead to a reserve where that rhino happens to live and he gets to shoot it from the Jeep that the tour guides drove him around with. Real sportsmanlike, no?

Kit Fister: First of all, no hunter in their right mind will take a shot at over 400 yards for something. At a grand? Good luck making the shot. I shoot competitive long-range rifle.

[cdn.riveraveblues.com image 235x206]

But yes, do continue to be an idiot. :)


The animal in question would be killed either way, this way they get $350k to do it.  Who's missing the point, now?
 
2014-01-20 10:00:07 AM
People are retarded. The rhino he is going to shoot is older, non-reproducing and actually competing with breeding-aged males for females.

The conservation wardens were going to shoot this rhino anyway, this way they get $350k towards helping the rhino population
 
2014-01-20 10:00:24 AM

RexTalionis: Kit Fister: Enjoying the act of hunting as a sport to many/most isn't about the killing, but the act of testing yourself against nature.

Shooting something at 1000 yards with a high power rifle where you were in no danger and the animal was not attacking you isn't testing yourself against nature.

Want to test yourself against nature? Be more like our ancestors and run the animal to exhaustion before you put it down with spears or an atlatl and arrow. That's sporting. Guns for hunting are not very sportsmanlike.


No, they're not.

That's why I use landmines.
 
2014-01-20 10:05:15 AM
It's like no one's done business in Africa, before.
 
2014-01-20 10:09:43 AM
BAH GAWD KING! IT'S RHINO! GORE! GORE! GORE!

www.obsessedwithwrestling.com
 
2014-01-20 10:10:56 AM

RexTalionis: Want to test yourself against nature? Be more like our ancestors and run the animal to exhaustion before you put it down with spears or an atlatl and arrow. That's sporting. Guns for hunting are not very sportsmanlike.


Why is an atlatl an acceptable stopping point for technology, but a gun isn't?  You should have to invade the animals blood stream and fight off its immune system until it dies, like our single-celled ancestors did.

/ I don't know how single celled organisms killed each other, but that would have been a better analogy.
 
2014-01-20 10:13:24 AM

RexTalionis: Kit Fister: No, "Testing yourself against nature" means enduring the cold and the wet and the wind while remaining perfectly still, trying to ensure you're not in a position where your prey can smell you coming, trying to ensure that, even if you THINK you're still and quiet, you're not going to make some unexpected move that will alert your prey. THAT'S the test.

In this case, this guy is paying $350,000 to be lead to a reserve where that rhino happens to live and he gets to shoot it from the Jeep that the tour guides drove him around with. Real sportsmanlike, no?

Kit Fister: First of all, no hunter in their right mind will take a shot at over 400 yards for something. At a grand? Good luck making the shot. I shoot competitive long-range rifle.

[cdn.riveraveblues.com image 235x206]

But yes, do continue to be an idiot. :)


No, I got your "point". I was pointing out that you were factually incorrect and that there was more to it than just shooting an animal. Spear, Bow, or Gun, there's a hell of a lot more to it.

You seem to assume a lot.
 
2014-01-20 10:17:03 AM

serial_crusher: Why is an atlatl an acceptable stopping point for technology, but a gun isn't?


Have you TRIED one of those things? I couldn't even hit the ground with it. Rifles are more like point and click technology.
 
2014-01-20 10:25:50 AM

doglover: serial_crusher: Why is an atlatl an acceptable stopping point for technology, but a gun isn't?

Have you TRIED one of those things? I couldn't even hit the ground with it. Rifles are more like point and click technology.


you know how i know you've never tried to be accurate with a rifle?
 
2014-01-20 10:27:28 AM

Kit Fister: No, I got your "point". I was pointing out that you were factually incorrect and that there was more to it than just shooting an animal. Spear, Bow, or Gun, there's a hell of a lot more to it.


You know how they hunt in the African preserves? They don't sit out in a blind for hours, enduring hunger and the cold and wait for something to pass by.

They drive around in a Jeep and they shoot at animals from the safety and comfort of a jeep.

cache.desktopnexus.com

REAL SPORTSMANLIKE.
 
2014-01-20 10:29:15 AM
goodall.cc

www.bowkrazy.com
bridgettgaines.com

Look at all these big tough men, braving the elements and stalking and killing an animal.
 
2014-01-20 10:31:10 AM

RexTalionis: Kit Fister: No, I got your "point". I was pointing out that you were factually incorrect and that there was more to it than just shooting an animal. Spear, Bow, or Gun, there's a hell of a lot more to it.

You know how they hunt in the African preserves? They don't sit out in a blind for hours, enduring hunger and the cold and wait for something to pass by.

They drive around in a Jeep and they shoot at animals from the safety and comfort of a jeep.

[cache.desktopnexus.com image 450x339]

REAL SPORTSMANLIKE.


If you don't like it, then hunt the way you prefer.

/ you're not a real man unless you can take down a grizzly with your bear hands while wearing a blindfold
// pun intended
 
2014-01-20 10:37:14 AM
jshine:
/ you're not a real man unless you can take down a grizzly with your bear hands while wearing a blindfold
// pun intended



Or, for bonus points, cow it into submission using only a stern facial expression.
 
2014-01-20 10:49:51 AM

jshine: jshine:
/ you're not a real man unless you can take down a grizzly with your bear hands while wearing a blindfold
// pun intended


Or, for bonus points, cow it into submission using only a stern facial expression.


Hey now, the only man to successfully do that is Vlad Putin. After studying at the Chuck Norris school of badassery.
 
2014-01-20 10:59:10 AM

RexTalionis: Kit Fister: No, I got your "point". I was pointing out that you were factually incorrect and that there was more to it than just shooting an animal. Spear, Bow, or Gun, there's a hell of a lot more to it.

You know how they hunt in the African preserves? They don't sit out in a blind for hours, enduring hunger and the cold and wait for something to pass by.

They drive around in a Jeep and they shoot at animals from the safety and comfort of a jeep.

[cache.desktopnexus.com image 450x339]

REAL SPORTSMANLIKE.


So, let's review:

A typical African Black Rhino weighs .75-1.5 Tons. (up to 1400KG).  Add to that, the black rhinos in question are older, aggressive males with a top speed of 35 MPH, are highly territorial, and extremely aggressive (which is why the non-breeding elder males are culled).  They have excellent eyesight and smell, and hearing.

As a size comparison:

www.flixya.com


Given the above, Yes, they drive out in groups, because if a rhino bull charges the vehicle, you face slightly less than certain death from it crushing you. A human is not going to outrun a charging bull rhino.

Also, they don't hunt from the vehicle. They drive into the preserve to get close, and then stalk on foot until they have set up the shot. If the rhino catches wind of them, or senses them, the bull can charge, and you're finished.

So, in terms of risk being taken? There's a huge one even in a truck. And bull male rhinos and elephants both can and DO charge vehicles for encroaching on territory.

This isn't a case of spotlighting deer at night and taking advantage of momentary blindness/paralysis from the shock. This isn't a case of some asshole riding a deer down on horseback or in a vehicle and shooting it. This isn't a case of penning the rhino and killing it like a cow.

Honestly, this is even more of a big win for the Nairobi officials: Make $350k, send some dumb white guy into the Rhino's territory to hunt the animal knowing how badly it can fark up your day instead of one of your own folks, and get rid of an aggressive animal that endangers the herd.
 
2014-01-20 11:00:24 AM

Kit Fister: RexTalionis: Kit Fister: Enjoying the act of hunting as a sport to many/most isn't about the killing, but the act of testing yourself against nature.

Shooting something at 1000 yards with a high power rifle where you were in no danger and the animal was not attacking you isn't testing yourself against nature.

Want to test yourself against nature? Be more like our ancestors and run the animal to exhaustion before you put it down with spears or an atlatl and arrow. That's sporting. Guns for hunting are not very sportsmanlike.

First of all, no hunter in their right mind will take a shot at over 400 yards for something. At a grand? Good luck making the shot. I shoot competitive long-range rifle. At 1000 yards, with the best rifle money can buy, under perfect conditions, the rifle itself is not capable of less than 7" groups.  Could it be done? Absolutely. And thousand+ yard shots are taken at men all the time. But the chances of hitting a game animal and doing the proper damage to them? Less likely. And, then there's the matter of having to hump 1000 yards over terrain to find the site of the shot, and tracking the animal who, by now, has had more than enough chance to take off if you didn't quite drop it immediately.

Secondly, "testing yourself against nature" means a hell of a lot more than some ideal man vs. wild. I've hunted animals with spears. I went on a spear hunt for wild boar. And those little farkers are both vicious and tough to kill. I had one run right up the spear shaft trying to get to me, and I had to shoot it to kill it.  No, "Testing yourself against nature" means enduring the cold and the wet and the wind while remaining perfectly still, trying to ensure you're not in a position where your prey can smell you coming, trying to ensure that, even if you THINK you're still and quiet, you're not going to make some unexpected move that will alert your prey.  THAT'S the test.

But yes, do continue to be an idiot. :)


Uh, the whole 7" grouping barrier is long since passed...
 
2014-01-20 11:07:19 AM

DeathByGeekSquad: Uh, the whole 7" grouping barrier is long since passed...


You're right. I failed to google the best groups ever.

So if you're Tom Sarver, yep, you can probably pull it off.
 
2014-01-20 11:22:20 AM
Two analogies that I think bear on this:

Around the turn of the 20th century, or thereabouts, medical experimentation came into vogue, but doctors and scientists were always at a loss for subjects to experiment on.  For a time, one obvious target for seeking subjects was from among condemned prisoners.  The thinking was, these guys were on the chopping block anyway, why pass up the opportunity to gain some meaningful scientific knowledge from them before they kick it.

Something people might be more familiar with is the question of what to do with the discoveries from Nazi scientists who had experimented on concentration camp victims.  The thinking went, those people are already dead, so why squander the discoveries made from their lives just because it was made through evil means by evil people?

In both cases, we as a society eventually erred on the side of waste.  We don't experiment on the condemned, even if they're going to die anyway.  Experimenting on vulnerable populations is immoral, and waste is preferable to that wrong.  We also largely discarded the work by Nazi researchers because it was immoral.  It doesn't matter that we were forced to essentially re-discover knowledge people had already died for, the waste was preferable to the wrong.

I think that's the core point people would make here.  Yes, this is a rhino who will likely have to die anyway, and yes the money received from the hunt will finance conservation efforts, but that's not enough.  Sport hunting an endangered species is wrong, and the waste of whatever profit could have been derived from hunting that animal or harvesting its carcass is preferable to the wrong.  If the animal needs to be put down, then have a game warden do it, and burn the carcass or leave it to be consumed naturally.  Earn the conservation money the right way.
 
2014-01-20 11:27:45 AM

Secret Agent X23: I want to be intimately involved with a black rhino.

TMI, dude.


Ving Rhames, I presume?
 
2014-01-20 11:28:18 AM

violentsalvation: God the stupid comments just keep coming. WTF difference does it make? the animal is going to be killed either way. That part is wildlife management and conservation, it's not some reckless killing. I don't like trophy hunting but the other rhinos could use $350k steered at them. You guys can have the next one if you can find a preserve or zoo able to take it, fund and find a way to move it, and match the winning bid on the next hunt. That's it, you can do as much for the species as a trophy hunter. Get to work.


That's an oxymoron. You can conserve it or you can manage it, but they're not the same thing, despite all the pretty words invented to make it seem so. Humans are mostly in the wildlife management business nowadays, since we screwed everything up so badly that we have no choice now. And partly because we're greedy farkers, and haha, why would we just leave anything the hell alone? We don't do that.

The Nature Conservancy does conservation, mostly. Every wildlife agency in the country does management, mostly. The environmental groups that whine about every single thing would like to do conservation, but they ignore one simple thing--we don't get to do that anymore. This is not the Garden of Eden; we've moved way beyond that, and now we have to manage.

This is an ongoing argument even among people who do this stuff for a living. If you want to conserve, join the Sierra Club and write letters. If you want an actual job with wildlife, you have to do management.
But shooting shiat does not translate into "conservation." That's just a word we use as greedy assholes to make ourselves feel better.
 
2014-01-20 11:30:43 AM

Nuuu: We also largely discarded the work by Nazi researchers because it was immoral. It doesn't matter that we were forced to essentially re-discover knowledge people had already died for, the waste was preferable to the wrong.


http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3561733?uid=29163&uid=3739736& ui d=29162&uid=2&uid=3&uid=67&uid=62&uid=3739256&sid=21103300782397

The Nazi data are widely used in hypothermia studies, even decades after the war.
 
2014-01-20 11:32:23 AM

Nuuu: Sport hunting an endangered species is wrong, and the waste of whatever profit could have been derived from hunting that animal or harvesting its carcass is preferable to the wrong. If the animal needs to be put down, then have a game warden do it, and burn the carcass or leave it to be consumed naturally. Earn the conservation money the right way.


media.tumblr.com
 
2014-01-20 11:50:15 AM

Nuuu: Two analogies that I think bear on this:

Around the turn of the 20th century, or thereabouts, medical experimentation came into vogue, but doctors and scientists were always at a loss for subjects to experiment on.  For a time, one obvious target for seeking subjects was from among condemned prisoners.  The thinking was, these guys were on the chopping block anyway, why pass up the opportunity to gain some meaningful scientific knowledge from them before they kick it.

Something people might be more familiar with is the question of what to do with the discoveries from Nazi scientists who had experimented on concentration camp victims.  The thinking went, those people are already dead, so why squander the discoveries made from their lives just because it was made through evil means by evil people?

In both cases, we as a society eventually erred on the side of waste.  We don't experiment on the condemned, even if they're going to die anyway.  Experimenting on vulnerable populations is immoral, and waste is preferable to that wrong.  We also largely discarded the work by Nazi researchers because it was immoral.  It doesn't matter that we were forced to essentially re-discover knowledge people had already died for, the waste was preferable to the wrong.

I think that's the core point people would make here.  Yes, this is a rhino who will likely have to die anyway, and yes the money received from the hunt will finance conservation efforts, but that's not enough.  Sport hunting an endangered species is wrong, and the waste of whatever profit could have been derived from hunting that animal or harvesting its carcass is preferable to the wrong.  If the animal needs to be put down, then have a game warden do it, and burn the carcass or leave it to be consumed naturally.  Earn the conservation money the right way.


We shall agree to disagree.
 
2014-01-20 12:04:56 PM
We do some really stupid stuff in the name of "charity."
 
2014-01-20 12:14:09 PM

jshine: Nuuu: Sport hunting an endangered species is wrong, and the waste of whatever profit could have been derived from hunting that animal or harvesting its carcass is preferable to the wrong. If the animal needs to be put down, then have a game warden do it, and burn the carcass or leave it to be consumed naturally. Earn the conservation money the right way.

[media.tumblr.com image 300x300]


It's wrong because feelings!
 
2014-01-20 12:47:14 PM
If you're really worried about your safety, then doing TV interviews, posing for cameras, and asking them to make sure they spelled your name and address correctly is probably not the best way to keep a low profile.

When I first heard about them auctioning off the hunt, I didn't like it, but as I read more, it made a lot more sense.  Certainly it makes no sense to say "You have no right to kill that animal, so I'm going to kill you".  That's just hypocritical.

But I'm not convinced he's actually being threatened, and I'm sure that he would be safer if he wasn't doing TV interviews to make sure that everyone knows who he is and what he looks like.
 
2014-01-20 12:49:04 PM

periboob: What kind of pussy gets all excited hunting something that cant shoot back?


Sounds like you've never had hetero sex.
 
2014-01-20 12:54:16 PM
So the hunter guy is worried about being hunted...

Funny...
 
2014-01-20 12:56:55 PM
Is a black rhino harder to kill and hence requires more 'skill'?
I'm guessing no, so basically he just wants to kill something rare.

Dick.
 
2014-01-20 01:03:51 PM

spqr_ca: Sport hunting is what put this species into endangerment


Citation needed.  Poaching for horns is not sport hunting.
 
2014-01-20 01:15:00 PM

serial_crusher: Meh, the younger rhinos get the protection they need.  The conservationists get a ton of money to further conservation efforts.  The rich asshole gets an opportunity to be a rich asshole.

Sounds to me like everybody wins.


Yep.  There's really no downside for the rhino population since he's not breeding anymore and he's aggressive.  It will actually be good for the younger males, and improve the chances of successful breeding.  But don't tell that to the bunny huggers ... they don't want to hear about science when they like villainizing any kind of hunting as if it were the murder of a unicorn (even though they have no problem eating meat from a store that was killed for them by someone else).  This guy may be an ass for even wanting to kill a black rhino - but this particular rhino is going to need to be put down by the game manager anyway ... auctioning off the hunt just has the added benefit of riasing funds to go toward conservation efforts.  It's not the same as some billionaire being flown in to poach one in the wild.  It's actually the opposite.
 
2014-01-20 01:27:14 PM

MLWS: Is a black rhino harder to kill and hence requires more 'skill'?
I'm guessing no, so basically he just wants to kill something rare.

Dick.


You guessed wrong.
 
2014-01-20 02:07:40 PM

Kit Fister: DeathByGeekSquad: Uh, the whole 7" grouping barrier is long since passed...

You're right. I failed to google the best groups ever.

So if you're Tom Sarver, yep, you can probably pull it off.


Actually, from my Google-Fu, it seems that a number of folks hit that.  Additionally, I was able to pull up a series of images from a hunter who specialized in long shots on game animals.  I did not, however, post those here because of blood, etc - and clearly some people would go on a mission to get them removed regardless of how they fit into guidelines.

That being said, I'm in favor of the actions the Texan is taking, on the assumption that the information provided (money is actually going to conservation efforts, Rhino was flagged as a problem, etc) is correct.  I am an avid fisherman, and while I do take an occasional catch home, I'm mostly catch/release w/  substantial yearly donations to fish management/conservation.
 
2014-01-20 02:23:05 PM
leaked on the Internet?  It was on the frickin' nightly news!
 
2014-01-20 02:48:27 PM

DeathByGeekSquad: Kit Fister: DeathByGeekSquad: Uh, the whole 7" grouping barrier is long since passed...

You're right. I failed to google the best groups ever.

So if you're Tom Sarver, yep, you can probably pull it off.

Actually, from my Google-Fu, it seems that a number of folks hit that.  Additionally, I was able to pull up a series of images from a hunter who specialized in long shots on game animals.  I did not, however, post those here because of blood, etc - and clearly some people would go on a mission to get them removed regardless of how they fit into guidelines.

That being said, I'm in favor of the actions the Texan is taking, on the assumption that the information provided (money is actually going to conservation efforts, Rhino was flagged as a problem, etc) is correct.  I am an avid fisherman, and while I do take an occasional catch home, I'm mostly catch/release w/  substantial yearly donations to fish management/conservation.


Yeah. Basically, what I know from the long range competition circuit is this:

1. only about 1% of shooters taking long range shots are going to make it into the rarefied zone of, let's say, Quarter-to-Half MOA shots at a thousand yards. As you say, there're people who can do it -- and that have developed a number of custom tweaks to make it possible. If you look at what they use and so on, it's pretty indicative that the whole process is not done with even an exceptional hunting rifle, but a purpose-built tool.

2. Only about 10% of shooters are going to make it at or under MOA at a grand without some serious hardware to back it up, and even then, maybe 20% of shooters would be able to take customized hardware and make those kind of consistent shots.

3. Of the remaining people that even contemplate it, the basic skills of wind, elevation, coriolis effect, ballistic trajectory, etc. are things that they really don't understand well enough to do more than walk in a shot by trial and error. (USMC sniper courses, as an example, requires accuracy ratings in the MOA-or-under category, and has a very high rate of attrition because people just can't make the shots)

So, yeah, there're people that are excellent shooters who use that skill to make extremely long range kills on game. Then there are people who have no business trying to make that kind of kill and end up doing bad things to the animal.

Most hunters out of sheer laziness of retrieving their game keep their ranges down. Most hunters also hunt in places where 500+ yard shots are few and far between in general, and don't want to invest the kind of money it would take to handle the ranges anyway.

Not that I disagree with you at all, Just saying that this notion of hunters being able to shoot some animal at a thousand yards is laughable just because I'd say 99% of the *hunters* I've met, if you asked them to hit a target at a grand, would miss completely 9 out of 10 shots.
100 yards? 150? 400? Maybe. And then you're close enough that the animal's going to hear you coming because your fat, lazy ass is tromping around like you own the place, you had coffee and bacon for breakfast, you put on deoderant, and wear clothes you washed with Tide. Frankly, you have an overpowering scent of *man* and they're going to mostly see you coming and avoid you.

Funny story: first time i ever went hunting, I was confident. Hell, I *knew* there was no way to lose! I was down in the woods near a horse farm (and not shooting AT the horse farm, duh), and I knew there were deer that stayed around there to take the hay and feed off the horses. I thought i was smart. I scrubbed myself that morning head to toe with descenting soaps. I hung my hunting gear in the horse barn a week prior and let it get all nice and horse-smelling. I made sure to brush and floss and chew on stuff meant to take the scent off your breath. I set up in a spot between some fallen trees after gauging the wind to make sure i was down wind from my shooting lane. I hunt out cover scents all over me, stepped in a lot of horse manure, and did everything I could to either attract deer or at least hide myself from them.

So, there I am, coldest part of dawn during a november hunting season cold snap, freezing my balls off, waiting for the deer to show. I'm just SURE that they'll be there. I wait. And I wait. And I wait. I try a buck call just like i'd been taught. And I wait some more. And more. And more. Sun comes up, beams down through the trees, I can hear the squirrels moving around, I can hear the birds waking up, and the rustle of animals in the woods. I'm just so sure there's a deer down there ready for me to shoot. So I keep watching, hesitant to blink, my nose already numb from the cold (did I tell you it was cold?), doing my damnedest not to move, my ass numb from the ground, my body stiff and aching, every muscle clenching and unclenching to keep the circulation going.

It's getting late in the morning. Watch says 8:30. I'm sure I've got frostbite, i'm cold, I'm hungry, I just can't take sitting there anymore. It's time to get out of the woods and call it a bust. Just then, I hear a snort. *right* behind me. I freeze. I KNOW if i try to turn around, whatever it is is going to spook and run off, and worst case, if it's a buck, I might get the horns and he might get ME that morning. So I sit there, silently commanding the animal to move around in front of me. Goddamnit, buck, I'm smarter than you, I picked the perfect spot, I'm a human, you're a deer, DO WHAT I SAY.

I hear another snort and the sound of an animal moving off. I turn around and look, and I see the horns and the ass of a deer, easily an 8-pointer. He stops, he looks at me, and I swear to god it snorted like a laugh. If he could talk, I'm sure he would have said "Better'n you have tried, kid, but C+ for effort." In Sam Elliot's voice, too. My mind works that way.

Two weeks later, my uncle who was hunting that exact same spot asks me what the hell happened, it was a sure thing, he saw 50+ deer go through there, but never close enough for him to hit with his bow. I told him the above.

I know, I know, CSB.
 
2014-01-20 02:49:41 PM

mtx1234: leaked on the Internet?  It was on the frickin' nightly news!


Yeah, after someone got hold of his info and announced it - on the internet!
 
2014-01-20 03:03:33 PM

AgentPothead: [ingat.info image 400x400]


I see this has been covered, thanks!
 
2014-01-20 03:14:54 PM
I went on a photo safari in South Africa and was surprised to learn that our guide, who seemed to love wild African animals more than life itself, was a big supporter of controlled hunting. His point was that people pay such unbelievably high prices to hunt the animals that it generates gobs of money to support conservation. In fact, he claimed that, without paid hunting, there would probably be no more exotic animals in Africa. Ironic? Definitely. But it's hard to argue with someone as knowledgeable as this guy was.
 
2014-01-20 03:27:45 PM

The Dog Ate My Homework: I went on a photo safari in South Africa and was surprised to learn that our guide, who seemed to love wild African animals more than life itself, was a big supporter of controlled hunting. His point was that people pay such unbelievably high prices to hunt the animals that it generates gobs of money to support conservation. In fact, he claimed that, without paid hunting, there would probably be no more exotic animals in Africa. Ironic? Definitely. But it's hard to argue with someone as knowledgeable as this guy was.


Well, and that's just it.

Outsider wants to pay lots of money and provide the leg work to kill an animal which was sick/old/a liability anyway? And they get to say they hunted X while we make bucketloads of money, bring in the money from their staying in our hotels, eating at our restaurants, and buying local products? Sure, why not? Everyone's happy (except PETA, but fark PETA).
 
2014-01-20 05:40:15 PM
[grumpycatgood.jpg]
 
2014-01-20 07:45:19 PM

JH3675: El Viento: Now you can call me skeptical but I think a few rich white people sat down to figure out how to go kill a rhino and mount his head legally.

It would be much more palatable if it was a few rich black/asian/arab/latino people, wouldn't it?


Actually no it wouldn't but considering it's a Dallas Hunting Club, those people, black/asian/arab/latino,are probably not allowed admission. Sorry your butt is sore. Go soak a cork.
 
Displayed 46 of 396 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report