Trump admin to reverse ban on elephant trophies from Africa

[*Nately120*]

(11-17-2017, 01:00 AM)Benton Wrote: I used to know a guy who would go boar hunting with a spear.

Other guys would use dog packs to corner them, then shoot the boar. Not this guy. Shield and spear, like some kind of cave man. He'd antagonize them till they charged, plant the shield and then stab over the top. Crazy to watch.

Wasn't former NFL QB and IR-regular Kevin Kolb known to hunt boar with a bowie knife

[hollodero]

(11-16-2017, 11:48 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Let's assume thes hunts do help the environment.

This change doesn't permit the hunters to kill the elephants for the benefit of the environment.  It allows the hunters to bring back the ivory to decorate their man cave.

You got that all wrong. The elephant's head isn't for bragging, it's for setting a good example. Look, my friends visiting my man cave, I hereby raise awareness to the whole elepant problem. They're endangered and you guys do too little about that, you wouldn't have noticed without my elephant's head, right? Also, local communities now are really forced to take action to preserve the elephants I didn't get.

And it helps their conservation in other way. Picture elephants as deer. If we don't shoot them, there would be too many, they'd destroy their own ecosystem and then they would have to throw themselves over a cliff. And who could want so much suffering. Or even worse, they could become a full-blown elephant plague. Elephants in the cities, elephants blocking the fast lane, elephants all over Africa, and then the migration pressure towards Europe. Also here. You order bananas, and what do you find in one of the boxes, hiding in the corner? Right. They would spread everywhere, soon in every china shop there'd be an elephant. Whenever you talk to someone, there would always be this elephant in the room. Soon they'd be in city councils and gain political weight, and just when we got used to the pigs. And that all was avoided by me, the war hero who faught this danger abroad before they follow us home.

Elephant trophies are important and good for everyone including elephants. Seeing it differently is short-sighted and ignorant.

[Vlad]

My my the runaway flow of emotions from liberals when either lions, elephants, or gorillas are killed.
You know, the majestic beasts.

What about fish?

FLM bro..

Fish Lives Matter too ya know.

[GMDino]

(11-20-2017, 11:20 AM)Vlad Wrote: My my the runaway flow of emotions from liberals when either lions, elephants, or gorillas are killed.
You know, the majestic beasts.

What about fish?

FLM bro..

Fish Lives Matter too ya know.

Are fish an endangered species?  Do we have rules about overfishing?

I understand the concept of the hunt to help take care of the rest of the herd.

No need to bring back a "trophy".  Which is all the US stops.

Trump has suspended it again.  For now.

I predicted that Trump will allow it...but late on a Friday when it will get less press.

I also predicted that he would tweet about Clinton next. 





 Nailed it.  

[hollodero]

(11-20-2017, 11:20 AM)Vlad Wrote: My my the runaway flow of emotions from liberals when either lions, elephants, or gorillas are killed.
You know, the majestic beasts.

What about fish?

FLM bro..

Fish Lives Matter too ya know.

Oh thank god you're so much less hypocritical and so much more consequential than liberals. You eat fish, hence every animal can get killed without hesitation. Makes perfect sense.

[JustWinBaby]

People really care whether or not the guy brings a trophy back? Does taking a trophy make the elephant less dead?

[GMDino]

(11-20-2017, 05:12 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: People really care whether or not the guy brings a trophy back?   Does taking a trophy make the elephant less dead?

No, it does not.  Does hunting an animal that is lined up for you because you paid a large amount of money make it a sport worth getting a trophy?

I mean, sure, they COULD just donate the money.  But then where are the bragging rights and cool trophies?

[Benton]

(11-20-2017, 05:15 PM)GMDino Wrote: No, it does not.  Does hunting an animal that is lined up for you because you paid a large amount of money make it a sport worth getting a trophy?

Far right: Participation trophies are ruining our society.
Also far right: This giant elephant foot stool is the trophy I got for participating in a safari adventure.

Seriously though, meh. I'm not sure where elephants rank on the list of the world's problems, but they're pretty low on mine. So are rich people needing something to have as a conversation piece. Because, ultimately, that's what a photo of a trust fund kid holding up an elephant tail is about, having other trust fund kids look and say 'what was that like?' If we devoted less time talking about trust fund kids holding up elephant tails and more time talking about people working in aids clinics, we'd have some different discussions on Africa and other places with great needs.

Unfortunately, dead elephants are as politicized as sexual assault these days.

[hollodero]

(11-20-2017, 05:12 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: People really care whether or not the guy brings a trophy back?   Does taking a trophy make the elephant less dead?

I don't care too much initially. Sure, being able to bring home trophies might be an additional incentive for someone to go shoot some elephant. It might decrease inhibititions to do so. But ok. What is so enraging to me is why one would actually want to make the legislative effort to again allow it. And how one would actually defend that initiative just because it's a republican idea - or, even more likely, just because America-hating, democRATS-voting liberals don't like the idea. I have a feeling that's all there is behind people all in favour of elephant trophies. On the backs of a highly endangered species.

Plus, have you read the reasoning how hunting elephants actually helps conserving the species. Cynicism at its best.

[StoneTheCrow]

(11-20-2017, 11:30 AM)GMDino Wrote: Are fish an endangered species?  Do we have rules about overfishing?

I understand the concept of the hunt to help take care of the rest of the herd.

No need to bring back a "trophy".  Which is all the US stops.

Trump has suspended it again.  For now.

I predicted that Trump will allow it...but late on a Friday when it will get less press.

I also predicted that he would tweet about Clinton next. 





 Nailed it.  

Trump got a stupid amount of attention for taking a few sips of water. There’s no such thing as less press when it comes to that guy.

[JustWinBaby]

(11-20-2017, 08:40 PM)hollodero Wrote: Plus, have you read the reasoning how hunting elephants actually helps conserving the species. Cynicism at its best.

I think big game hunting is ridiculous, but I'm not going to say people should be banned from doing it.  If that country wants to charge money for it, bring in some tourism dollars, and maybe throw some bucks towards conservation, then who are we to tell them no?

I'm guessing the law has more to do with discouraging poaching.  Otherwise, if someone pays to kill an elephant who cares if they bring back a trophy?

Some people in this country really do seem to care more about elephants and lions then genocide.

[hollodero]

(11-20-2017, 08:59 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: I think big game hunting is ridiculous, but I'm not going to say people should be banned from doing it.  If that country wants to charge money for it, bring in some tourism dollars, and maybe throw some bucks towards conservation, then who are we to tell them no?

Well... the law in question isn't about forbidding it, it's about reversing ostracism. Maybe we aren't to ostracise, maybe we shouldn't tell anyone what to pay money for, I don't know. This reversal, however, looks like encouraging elephant killing. To be more precise, it looks of course like bowing to a certain group of donors, but however.

(11-20-2017, 08:59 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: I'm guessing the law has more to do with discouraging poaching.  Otherwise, if someone pays to kill an elephant who cares if they bring back a trophy?

Some people in this country really do seem to care more about elephants and lions then genocide.

You're not wrong here. Caring about elephants sure is some kind of moral figleaf, masking a distinct non-caring about more important stuff. But somehow that argument goes both ways - in that the admin cares more about the bragging rights for some rich elephant-hunting scumbags than more severe problems that would demand action. In regard to Africa, there's a lot to be said about that, what countries are forced to do or to cultivate instead of food because the world bank says so and all that and so much more. Yet they care about trophies being allowed again. What purpose does this serve, how does that make the world possibly a better place.

That being said, it still angers me, especially the "conserving the species by killing them" part, raises more money for the problem and forces local communities to more action and all that. That was so damn cynical, as I said. Even Trump seems to agree with me :)

[GMDino]

(11-20-2017, 08:41 PM)StoneTheCrow Wrote: Trump got a stupid amount of attention for taking a few sips of water. There’s no such thing as less press when it comes to that guy.

Well that was because Trump shows himself to be a fool and a hypocrite over and over.  I mean if he didn't say outlandish thing people might stop showing him doing the same outlandish thing.