# Big Cat Hunt



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

I would say this is cutting it a little on the close side :help: 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_yTNo36YOs&mode=related&search=[/ame]

big rockpile


----------



## cowgirlone (May 9, 2002)

Whoa! Too close for me.


----------



## Bwana (Jul 9, 2006)

Now THAT'S hunting...where you're just as likely to be the prey! It would've been even more exciting with no PH backup!  

Dave


----------



## momlaffsalot (Sep 9, 2004)

Too bad the lion didn't get him.


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

momlaffsalot said:


> Too bad the lion didn't get him.


Now why would you say that? Maybe you don't know the whole story.A woman had already wounded the animal,these guys were just putting it out of its misery :shrug: 


big rockpile


----------



## TnTnTn (Dec 23, 2004)

laffs--You may or may not agree with hunting or shooting anything-whatever. The tone of your post is hateful. Your disrespect for human life overshadows your concern for animal life.

Maybe your post was in jest--at least I hope so. TnTnTn


----------



## Rockin'B (Jan 20, 2006)

If that's not a canned hunt I'd be surprised.


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

Rockin'B said:


> If that's not a canned hunt I'd be surprised.


How do you figure? :shrug: 

big rockpile


----------



## Reptyle (Jul 28, 2005)

I had heard of tigers attacking people riding elephants, but I always thought it was a myth until I saw this:

[ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=pQSlTCAKucM&mode=related&search=[/ame]


----------



## digdirtplanthar (Jun 22, 2007)

Some people have watched some many Disney movies and cartoons that they have no idea of how life is really in the wild.

Every time I hear someone say they would like to see an animal win and kill the human you haft to wonder just what in the world is wrong with them? Why would anyone wish that an other person die or be killed?

I my get into trouble here but I just can't for the life of me understand how anyone can make such a hateful statement or even think that the life of an animal is more important that that of another human being. :shrug: 

digdirtplantharvest


----------



## Reptyle (Jul 28, 2005)

digdirtplanthar said:


> Some people have watched some many Disney movies and cartoons that they have no idea of how life is really in the wild.
> 
> Every time I hear someone say they would like to see an animal win and kill the human you haft to wonder just what in the world is wrong with them? Why would anyone wish that an other person die or be killed?
> 
> ...


Ask a blind person if they'd kill their dog to save someone on death row...Ask someone who's invested a lot of time and energy and their money into their livestock only be content to watch someone try and steal, while the owner is armed...I can imagine plenty of situations where I value an animal more so than some creatures who try to pass for human.


----------



## digdirtplanthar (Jun 22, 2007)

Reptyle said:


> Ask a blind person if they'd kill their dog to save someone on death row...Ask someone who's invested a lot of time and energy and their money into their livestock only be content to watch someone try and steal, while the owner is armed...I can imagine plenty of situations where I value an animal more so than some creatures who try to pass for human.


This is comparing apples to oranges. The thread is about a hunt and a loin and hunter, not about livestock or domestic animals at all.

The question is when does an animal become more important than a human being?

Also if you shoot and kill someone in most states for steeling your livestock you are the one that is going to go to jail. I'm not saying it's right but just because you have livestock and someone is steeling them doesn't give you the right under the law to kill that person.

A guide dog may be a different matter as under the law it is part of the owner. The guide dog can go anywhere that the owner goes including the hospital.

digdirtplantharvest


----------



## Reptyle (Jul 28, 2005)

digdirtplanthar said:


> This is comparing apples to oranges. The thread is about a hunt and a loin and hunter, not about livestock or domestic animals at all.
> 
> The question is when does an animal become more important than a human being?
> 
> ...


You're rationalizing now, but ealier your statment was a bit more broad...I just pointed out that there are circumstances in which some people might value their animals more than another human's life.


----------



## digdirtplanthar (Jun 22, 2007)

Reptyle said:


> You're rationalizing now, but ealier your statment was a bit more broad...I just pointed out that there are circumstances in which some people might value their animals more than another human's life.


I reread my post and it was all related to wild animals even the remarks about people not knowing how wild animals even live in the wild anymore.

I'm not rationalizing. I'm asking a real question that if you ever feel like you need to kill a human over an animal how do you justify it not only as a human being but under the law? How do you justify even making such statements?

You are the one who is trying to rationalize killing someone even to protect your livestock. Now you might be able to do that for yourself but not under the law that we all must live under.

The days of hang them high is over for one simple reason. About 1/3 of the men lynched didn't even do the crime that they were accused of. It was simple back then to say I guess we made a mistake but now you no longer can use that excuse.

I've yet to see an animal that I have owned even as pets worth another human beings life. I know under the law you don't have that right. They need to be trying to kill you or harm you or your family in most states inside your home.

digdirtplantharvest


----------



## Reptyle (Jul 28, 2005)

digdirtplanthar said:


> I reread my post and it was all related to wild animals even the remarks about people not knowing how wild animals even live in the wild anymore.
> 
> I'm not rationalizing. I'm asking a real question that if you ever feel like you need to kill a human over an animal how do you justify it not only as a human being but under the law? How do you justify even making such statements?
> 
> ...


You are incorrect.


----------



## digdirtplanthar (Jun 22, 2007)

Reptyle said:


> You are incorrect.


I don't know what you are saying that is incorrect?

I also don't think that you have ever have been ask to take another humans life.

I see your still a young pup yourself.

If you think that men who were hung in the old West was all guilty you need to do some real research yourself on just how many men were hung only later found to be innocence of all kinds of crimes.

Liquor killed more innocence men than anything else in the old west. Someone would be put in jail and the towns people would get drunk, get a mob attitude and then haul them out of jail then hang the man before they even got a trail. That is a lynching.

I also see your from Texas. I will haft to do some research on Texas law to see if you can still kill someone for taking your animals but I will tell you that in most states if you shoot someone and don't kill them you will loose everything in a law suit anyway and go to jail but if you kill them you have lost everything and you may face the death penalty yourself.

Anytime you talk of taking another humans life you had better have a better reason other than taking their life over some animal. You are talking about 1st degree murder in most states, not protecting your family.

It's been some years since I was just a backwoods lawyer, some 40 years since I hung up my suit but the law has only changed more towards protecting life.

digdirtplantharvest


----------



## momlaffsalot (Sep 9, 2004)

TnTnTn said:


> laffs--You may or may not agree with hunting or shooting anything-whatever. The tone of your post is hateful. Your disrespect for human life overshadows your concern for animal life.
> 
> Maybe your post was in jest--at least I hope so. TnTnTn



No, my post was not in jest, this looks like, as Rockin B said, a canned hunt and to me, that kind of lays the odds against the animals and shouldn't even be considered a sport. I think hunting is fine, however, I think it should be for food, not for the fun of killing an animal. There's no respect in that. Just my opinion, and I am entitled to it. And that doesn't make me hateful either.


----------



## CGUARDSMAN (Dec 28, 2006)

momlaffsalot said:


> No, my post was not in jest, this looks like, as Rockin B said, a canned hunt and to me, that kind of lays the odds against the animals and shouldn't even be considered a sport. I think hunting is fine, however, I think it should be for food, not for the fun of killing an animal. There's no respect in that. Just my opinion, and I am entitled to it. And that doesn't make me hateful either.


What part of this looks canned to you??? that is what i would like to know :shrug:


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

CGUARDSMAN said:


> What part of this looks canned to you??? that is what i would like to know :shrug:


Me too!

Now as far as killing something just for the fun.Do it all the time,some of it is for population control.Some is just for the fun of it.Such as Coyotes,Crows,and Rats.Don't eat them but fun.Have went Bear and Cougar hunting just for the fun of it.Have went on so called Canned Hunts,found them just as much a challenge as any other hunting.And yes if I went on them it was mostly for an animal that would make a nice mount. :shrug: 

big rockpile


----------



## Rockin'B (Jan 20, 2006)

Canned hunts are far and away the most common way of hunting lion these days, particularly in South Africa. True lion hunts are outrageously expensive, especially one with such a nice clean mane and clean body. They are raised and turned loose in relatively small enclosures. 
This one looks like he was blow dried and put in place. It's a young lion. The old wild ones look all gnarly and like they have lived through a battle or four. 

He also isn't moving nearly as fast as lions that I have seen films of in full charge on true wild hunts. Also, not many true wild hunts are filmed. Canned hunts are.
It just looks like a canned hunt to me and I'd be shocked if it wasn't. But, I could be wrong, it has happened before....(grin)


----------



## Rockin'B (Jan 20, 2006)

Here is another canned hunt. This one has been proven to be canned and spent time running around all the hunting internet sites and one can even see the high fence in the background. These guys are morons, btw. They deserved to have had damage done by this pen raised lion.

http://media.ebaumsworld.com/lionhunt.wmv


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

Rockin'B when was the last time you was in South Africa hunting? And what kind of area are you considering a Canned Hunt?

Just because it is Fenced don't make it Canned :shrug: Some areas are as Big as some States.

As far as Canned Hunts being the way of Hunting Big Cats in Africa BULL!

My Buddy shot this Cat last month in Africa at 5 foot and it sure wasn't no Canned Hunt.










big rockpile


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

It's very obvious that those were canned hunts, especially the tiger hunt - you can tell those people were just sitting, facing in the right direction, waiting for the tiger to get flushed out of those grasses. The tiger was desperate, and I think the elephant driver and the camera man were taken by surprise even though they were waiting for the tiger to appear out of the grasses. I notice there was no sound - so audience couldn't hear the beaters.

There's a word that defines a self-aware human who willfully chooses to spend their time hunting down and killing animals simply for fun and for their own gratification and blood-lust under the guise of sport hunting, and that word is *psychopath*. If you disagree with this then please explain to me - what exactly is "*fun*" about killing something that isn't doing you any harm and that you aren't going to eat?


If a SHTF situation arises it will be these kinds of psychopaths that I will be most on guard against because they're the ones who will make use of the situation as an excuse to go on serial killing sprees in their own twisted version of an open season against humans.


:flame:


----------



## Reptyle (Jul 28, 2005)

digdirtplanthar said:


> I don't know what you are saying that is incorrect?


There was so much I didn't feel the need to limit myself...



> I also don't think that you have ever have been ask to take another humans life.


You presume to know anything about me? I'm not admitting I have or have not because that really isn't any of your business, and it hardly matters in this conversation.



> I see your still a young pup yourself.


A very nice attempt to belittle me, eh? I'm a "young pup," which somehow lessons my point in this conversation? By this statement I can only imagine that you are no longer a "young pup?" Shall use your same tactics and ask how your trip over on the Mayflower was? What was the world like before fire was discovered?
It's kinda pointless and hardly beneficial to this conversation.


Y'know it's funny, I never argued the legality of killing someone in defense of an animal I simply stated that there are those who place more value on an animal's life than they would some people. For some reason you took exception to this, perhaps this struck home...I don't know, nor do I care. You are right, if I killed someone for messing with my livestock I'd go to jail, but in a forum where we often discuss TSHTF scenarios it may one day be a possibility where those laws no longer apply. I have not done any research on this, but there may still be some parts of the world where stealing someone's cattle could result in your death.


----------



## tyusclan (Jan 1, 2005)

naturelover said:


> It's very obvious that those were canned hunts, especially the tiger hunt - you can tell those people were just sitting, facing in the right direction, waiting for the tiger to get flushed out of those grasses. The tiger was desperate, and I think the elephant driver and the camera man were taken by surprise even though they were waiting for the tiger to appear out of the grasses. I notice there was no sound - so audience couldn't hear the beaters.
> 
> There's a word that defines a self-aware human who willfully chooses to spend their time hunting down and killing animals simply for fun and for their own gratification and blood-lust under the guise of sport hunting, and that word is *psychopath*. If you disagree with this then please explain to me - what exactly is "*fun*" about killing something that isn't doing you any harm and that you aren't going to eat?
> 
> ...


You have already made up your mind based on your emotional viewpoint. Any fact-based argument attempting to change that viewpoint is probably not going to work, but I'll try anyway.

First of all, just because a hunt takes place in a fence (and many do not, btw) doesn't means it's "canned". As rockpile pointed out earlier, many of those fenced in areas are larger than a lot of New England states.

Secondly, the game departments of those countries sell very expensive licenses to people who wish to travel to their country to *attempt* to take that particular game animal. Those licenses are very expensive, and if you wind up not taking the particular animal you do not get your money back. Those game departments then take that money and hire officers to help prevent poaching, as well as purchase land to protect habitat.

Thirdly, an enormous amount of money is pumped into local economies by hunters. In most instances a professional hunter is required in Africa. Those hunting firms hire local people as cooks, trackers, skinners, and you name it. Hunting provides jobs for the people of those areas who would otherwise have no job.

If you look down on "trophy" hunting, please realize that the fact that someone desires to *try* (sometimes they don't get one) to take "trophies" of those animals makes those animals economically viable. The money spent on licenses, fees, travel, guns, ammunition, trophy fees, etc. generate the resources that the game departments use to maintain the populations of those animals.


----------



## CGUARDSMAN (Dec 28, 2006)

naturelover said:


> It's very obvious that those were canned hunts, especially the tiger hunt - you can tell those people were just sitting, facing in the right direction, waiting for the tiger to get flushed out of those grasses. The tiger was desperate, and I think the elephant driver and the camera man were taken by surprise even though they were waiting for the tiger to appear out of the grasses. I notice there was no sound - so audience couldn't hear the beaters.
> 
> There's a word that defines a self-aware human who willfully chooses to spend their time hunting down and killing animals simply for fun and for their own gratification and blood-lust under the guise of sport hunting, and that word is *psychopath*. If you disagree with this then please explain to me - what exactly is "*fun*" about killing something that isn't doing you any harm and that you aren't going to eat?
> 
> ...


you belong to peta??


----------



## momlaffsalot (Sep 9, 2004)

Naturelover brings up some valid points. Not PETA crazy, just valid points...instead of calling names or trying to belittle someone, why don't you answer the question of what exactly is fun about killing something you don't intend to eat and is not a threat to you? That, to me, is scarier than PETA, and I find them plenty scary.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

I am not a member of PETA - I disapprove of PETA. I have guns and I've killed animals for food in the past and I'll probably have to do it again sometime in the future. But I don't kill animals for fun. I don't approve of anybody trophy hunting for big cats like lions and tigers because their numbers are so vastly reduced by human depredations and they are now endangered.

tyusclan , I DO understand the economics you spoke of, but you mentioned that in most instances a professional hunter is required in Africa. I didn't see any professional hunters in those 3 youTube flicks that were posted - I saw inexperienced wannabees who were killing trapped animals for the thrill of the kill. The second film of the lion that was shot so many times - that is deplorable and not an honourable kill!

To some extent I understand the thrill of the kill, I'm familiar with the sensations that accompany a successful kill of meat - but I have asked this question many times from many people and never received a satisfactory answer. What is FUN about killing a terrified, harrassed animal that has done no harm and is not going to be used for meat?

Maybe somebody can explain to me what is fun about that.

:shrug:


----------



## Rockin'B (Jan 20, 2006)

Big Rockpile,

Leopard is very different than lion. 

Didn't mean to ---- you off, but what I said about lion in South Africa is true.

I'll bow out. I have no need to argue about this.


----------



## Rockin'B (Jan 20, 2006)

Here is a link to a forum that is an essentially Africa based hunting forum. I've been a member there for years. This place is populated by serious Africa hunters.

Do a search using the words "canned hunt" and you can read a ton of material about it.

It's an interesting forum with many very expert hunters on it. 

http://www.accuratereloading.com/


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

man is a predatory animal (if you believe evilution), as such it is ingrained into his DNA to secure his future prey by eliminating the competition (whenever it can be done safely), just like it is for wolves, coyotes, dogs, hyenas, lions and all other social predators. (solitary predators like leopards & bears don't seem to make a concerted effort to wipeout the competition like social predators do)
or if you don't believe in evilution
god gave man dominion (absolute rule) over the animals. along w/ that comes the management of wild animal populations & the decision of life or death over domestic animals (those held in fences). AT NO TIME did he say we were no allowed to enjoy the job.

ROCKINB
how large of a fenced area does it take to not be a canned hunt (to end the "unfair" advantage? (it's a moot point anyway since animals raised in fences are livestock to be disposed of as the owner sees fit.) a true canned hunt is one where the animal has zero chance of escape or retaliation as in the famous black panther video that spurred the outlawing of stocking predators on Texas game ranches (most of them are larger than most cattle ranches and are far larger than most wildlife management areas, especially east of the mississippi). FAIR & SPORT are entirely subjective terms that can only be applied to humans as animals lack any understanding of the concept and animal predators will use EVERY advantage to kill prey w/o regard to their ability to consume it before it spoils.
the appearance of the lion in no way determines the "canned" or "wildness" of the hunt. if i video my greyhound/saluki at full run (40 MPH +) he would look very "blow dried" & yet i can assure you he is very dusty & his hair is a bit ratty right now.

Naturelover
when animals are being driven or beaten (whether by hounds as in southern deer hunts in the coastal swamps or people as in northern drives) the shooter(s) is placed in the most likely avenue(s) of escape to intercept & HOPEFULLY harvest the game. to someone ignorant (lacking knowledge or experience) in the technique, it would look very "unfair" or "canned."
hunting for fun doesn't mean a useful purpose is unfulfilled. most animals considered varmints & furbearers are not eaten by most hunters/trappers. the harvesting of all wildlife helps to control their populations within the physical carrying capacity of the area & the social carrying capacity (how many people will tolerate because of the potential threats & inconvenience they represent, and it's usually MUCH lower than the physical capacity). this applies equally to animals most people don't want to eat like coyotes as well as ones they do like deer. Statistically far fewer violent PSYCHOPATHS are raised in hunting & farming homes than in "normal suburban" & poor urban ones. (however the wanton TORTURE of animals was a key step for pretty much all of them)
what is "fun" is the satisfaction of performing a valuable service to the wildlife at large. for example i allow/encourage my saluki/grey to run down & kill stray & feral housecats (especially on public land far from homes & farms) because he enjoys it, i enjoy watching the run & catch (although not the kill so much as it takes him a bit to strangle them. since he lacks mucle on one side of his head, he can't kill them quickly by crushing the spine) and it saves countless songbirds lives (some of which are rare or endangered). OTH i have been known to eat fluffy. and i thoroughly enjoy taking wild hogs (even the big inedible boars) & bear because it is quite exciting to take down an animal that can kill me back (i don't use guns or any projectile weapon for that matter). not as much fun as a gunfight but still pretty good.

CGuardsman
she may well be a member of PETA, but you might want to ask first. after all what descent sane person would want to be associated w/that pack of degenerate freaks?

TnTnTn & digdirtthewhosits
some people NEED killing like pedophiles, rapists & and (at least under common law) anyone who tries to steal what's (mine or yours). (under english common law) anyone trying to steal your livestock (or other property) isn't just stealing a thing, they are stealing the portion of your life you exchanged to aquire, raise or manufacture the property. in other words they are literally taking your life (part of it). since they obviously do not respect your right to your life & the fruits of your labors then they do not deserve the protections of society. additionally anyone wantonly destroying your property (to include animals) is in fact stealing it for their own amusement. so yes sometimes the life of an animal is worth more than the life of a human being.


----------



## digdirtplanthar (Jun 22, 2007)

Pops2 said:


> TnTnTn & digdirtthewhosits
> some people NEED killing like pedophiles, rapists & and (at least under common law) anyone who tries to steal what's (mine or yours). (under english common law) anyone trying to steal your livestock (or other property) isn't just stealing a thing, they are stealing the portion of your life you exchanged to aquire, raise or manufacture the property. in other words they are literally taking your life (part of it). since they obviously do not respect your right to your life & the fruits of your labors then they do not deserve the protections of society. additionally anyone wantonly destroying your property (to include animals) is in fact stealing it for their own amusement. so yes sometimes the life of an animal is worth more than the life of a human being.


Sir I hate to bring you up o date but were not under English common law and to make a post saying we are or implying we are is a bad mistake on your part if you believe that. 

Sir If you kill someone protecting your animals you will be charged with first not second degree murder.

Now I have never said this is right or totally agree with it. But I don't want to ever haft to be put back in a position that I haft to kill or be killed. 

I will follow the law that I defended for 3 years and abide by it.

digdirtplantharvest


----------



## tyusclan (Jan 1, 2005)

naturelover said:


> tyusclan , I DO understand the economics you spoke of, but you mentioned that in most instances a professional hunter is required in Africa. I didn't see any professional hunters in those 3 youTube flicks that were posted - I saw inexperienced wannabees who were killing trapped animals for the thrill of the kill. The second film of the lion that was shot so many times - that is deplorable and not an honourable kill!


I know of nowhere in Africa that will allow the hunting of dangerous game without the services of a professional hunter. In the first post on this thread at least one of those two men behind the hunter would have been a ph. 

In the video you mentioned where they shot the lion again and again, I agree that the hunters (and I use the word loosely) were totally inept. There would still have had to be a ph there. Just because someones a "professional" doesn't make him competent. But even a competent professional hunter will sometimes miss on a charging animal. They are very difficult to hit. 

In both of those videos, if you don't think those people were in danger of being killed then you know nothing about lions. 

And the tiger is the only big cat that is truly endangered in any way. Africa is still crawling with lions and leopards.

The "fun" that you asked about is the fact that you are putting your life in danger. You're pitting yourself against an animal that has the desire and ability to kill you if you get close enough.


----------



## jen74145 (Oct 31, 2006)

tyusclan said:


> The "fun" that you asked about is the fact that you are putting your life in danger. You're pitting yourself against an animal that has the desire and ability to kill you if you get close enough.


Thrill of the hunt, I get... needing to get rid of something you likely aren't going to eat (fox stealing chickens or somesuch) I totally understand... killing to eat/be warm I also understand. But that "Whee, I GOT one!" attitude makes me nuts. Nothing wrong with being proud of a clean, fair kill that will sustain you, but to literally enjoy killing something is a whole different ballgame. 

I always feel a little sad when death of another creature is required, I know He gave us dominion over them, but before our sin there was no death... so hence the twinge of guilt, know what I mean?


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

Ah well put my.02 in.Didn't know this was going to get into Canned Hunts a thrill of killing but like I say here is my .02.

As far as killing something that I won't eat and enjoying it.Truth when I was younger went hunting for Bear and Mountain Lion,using Dogs.It was more of the Hunt than the kill.Back then Bears were considerd Varmits instead of Game animals.Tried eating Bear didn't care for it.Had a friend that was charged by a Grizzly that he wasn't hunting.He killed it,it for sure wasn't fit to eat.

I have killed thousands of animals for Fur.I do eat some,it is good control of the animals,plus it gives me extra income.I bought my first Farm with money made from Fur money.

Now as far as Canned Hunts.Me and some friends go on a off season Ranch Hunt every year.Mostly for Hogs.Lots of these Ranches offer animals that a person wouldn't get a chance to hunt in the wild because they are either rare or extinct.The animals are the same as our Livestock,which are destine for the Butcher.This person owns these animals and sells them for a very high dollar.They are to be killed,not to set back and say how pretty they are.Alot of the animals are not fit to eat either because they are old or old Males.But some are very good eating.

But to get back to our annual hunt.The other Guys were going after Hogs I decided to go after Mouflan Ram.We stayed at their Lodge,they fed us,entertained us,and took us where they thought the animals might be.

Like I say I was after Mouflan Ram I hunted for a day and half on a 3 day hunt,with help of one of my friends I found my Ram.It lacked 2 inches being considerd a Throphy because he broke the ends off.But I like the looks of it.I was told he wouldn't be fit to eat but I brought the meat Home.My Dogs really enjoy it.









Now as far as the thrill of killing.If this makes sence its more the thrill of the hunt,but yes I enjoy the kill because it shows I set up right,my calling was good,I knew my weapon.But I still have reverence for the animal.

Now as far as Hunting Humans :shrug: In 1970 I was trained to kill Humans by the U.S. Goverment,they trained me very well,but I never got a chance to use it.Should I hunker down and say I wouldn't enjoy doing what I was trained to do,that every thing I was taught came together and I did what I was trained :shrug: But if it comes to protecting my Country,Family,or myself I can and I will.

Ok one last thing You are either Predator or Prey and I prefer to be Predator.

big rockpile


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

digdirt
except for LA all US states legal systems are based on english common law. when no other precedent exists english common law is used as the precedent in arguing a case.


----------



## Beast24 (Jun 29, 2007)

I believe that if you are being threatened in any way by anything, the common sense thing to do would be to snuff out the danger. That is why humans are on the top of the food chain. Killing varmits for animal control, and heck, I even shoot some for fun, to see if I can. Humans like the hunt, because it is man vs. wild. Who will win? It is like testing their manhood to see if they are still on the top of their game.


----------

