Guns guns guns

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » November 22, 2004, 10:53 am

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6551094/

I love reading shit like this. Always brightens up a Monday morning.

Hoarmurath · Post by **Hoarmurath** » November 22, 2004, 11:19 am

An idiot goes whacko and kills 5 people, and this brightens your day?

EDIT: My mean statement was removed because it was, well, mean...and I'm not really a mean person at heart. Sorry.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » November 22, 2004, 11:25 am

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » November 22, 2004, 11:27 am

Clearly it was the gun's fault. That makes the death of 5 people, all of whom were only responding to radio calls for help, hi-fucking-larious.

Sick asshole.

archeiron · Post by **archeiron** » November 22, 2004, 11:28 am

The man was out of bullets and was arrested, Zeigle said.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » November 22, 2004, 11:42 am

a SKS 7.62 caliber semiautomatic, a common hunting weapon.

Not anyplace I've ever been...

Cars containing drunk drivers leap out and kill hundreds a year.

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » November 22, 2004, 11:54 am

Hehe Chidero, just on a side note, check your Magelo flags, just looked at your profile, and you got Earth/Water/Air access without having all the previous flags

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » November 22, 2004, 12:21 pm

SKS is a great rifle to shoot things dead with

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » November 22, 2004, 12:40 pm

*sigh*

Should they set some minimum level of education or mandatory mental health check before issuing a hunting license or in the background check before selling a gun?

Fucking psycho needs to be hung from the stand he was fighting over and his body left to the crows and wild animals to feast on.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » November 22, 2004, 12:56 pm

Animalor wrote:Should they set some minimum level of education or mandatory mental health check before issuing a hunting license or in the background check before selling a gun?

Most states do both already with varying effectiveness.

Animalor wrote:Fucking psycho needs to be hung from the stand he was fighting over and his body left to the crows and wild animals to feast on.

I agree. On the other hand, ff you put a permanent structure up on public land, it's essentially public property. Not saying this loon was in the right in any fashion, but arguing with someone carrying a gun is pretty stupid as well. Whether you've got one yourself or not is irrelevant.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » November 22, 2004, 1:03 pm

Since when is a SKS a common hunting rifle? Deer! Get it!!! BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM!!

Get it?

No

Reload

Nothing funny about people getting shot though.

I hope the castrate and burn that fuck alive.

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » November 22, 2004, 3:52 pm

Thank goodness they were all carrying guns to protect themselves with, or someone might have gotten hurt.

Seebs · Post by **Seebs** » November 22, 2004, 4:08 pm

that will teach those guys for rehearsnig their Rudolph skit in the woods.

Moonwynd · Post by **Moonwynd** » November 22, 2004, 4:27 pm

I have a pre-ban SKS (well, now there is no ban). Mine is/was a standard Russian model with the wooden stock, 10 round clip, and bayonet. I put a composite folding stock, flash suppressor, barrel attached bi-pod, and I have two 30 round clips. These guns, whether stock or modified, are NOT hunting rifles. I spent most of my life in the mountains of the northeast. I have never seen anyone using an SKS or AK-47 to hunt game. This guy was just whacko...and I feel for the families of the people that were killed. It's too bad this guy didn't do a Full Metal Jacket on the treestand and blow his own head off before he decided to hunt people....

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » November 22, 2004, 4:40 pm

For short range woods hunting it's not a bad gun really, pretty much equal to a 30/30 in power and accuracy. Assuming you aren't using military ammo anyway.

I've just never seen many people using military type autoloaders as hunting rifles.

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » November 22, 2004, 4:50 pm

I love reading shit like this. Always brightens up a Monday morning.

That makes the death of 5 people, all of whom were only responding to radio calls for help, hi-fucking-larious.

that will teach those guys for rehearsnig their Rudolph skit in the woods.

How...in any way...is this a laughing matter?

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » November 22, 2004, 4:52 pm

Niffoni wrote:Thank goodness they were all carrying guns to protect themselves with, or someone might have gotten hurt.

Not a funny subject but this made me laugh.

Seebs · Post by **Seebs** » November 22, 2004, 5:05 pm

Because of the Ridiculousness of it, even the irony.

You weren't hugged much were you? If we ever meet prepare for a loving hug .. maybe a noogie.

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » November 22, 2004, 5:09 pm

Unless I misread when I skimmed the article, 1 hunter (who will now be in jail for life) killed 5 other hunters and wounded 2 additional hunters. By my count, that's 6 - 8 fewer hunters in the world. Not much, but its a good start.

Edit - yup got it right. I liked this quote the best - “When you’re hunting you don’t expect somebody to try to shoot you and murder you."

No, that's a priviledge reserved for the dear. I don't know if CHidaro is getting a good chuckle out of this for the same reasons I am, but I know I always laugh a little when hunters are killed in "accidents" or other "hunting related" deaths. They are barbarians and getting what they deserve.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » November 22, 2004, 5:40 pm

Aaeamdar
Location: NYC

Knew the location before I looked, are you a vegan? If you aren't you're a hypocrite.

It's ironic that people get worked up enough over $40 worth of lumber leaning on a tree in the woods to kill each other over. I'd like to see how many of themwere sober when this happened.

There's no such thing as an accident.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » November 22, 2004, 5:42 pm

Ever eat meat? I guess that means you are an accomplice since you pay for meat. Would it be fair for some hunter to break into your home and shoot you and your family because you are getting what you deserve?

Atokal · Post by **Atokal** » November 22, 2004, 5:43 pm

Aaeamdar wrote:Unless I misread when I skimmed the article, 1 hunter (who will now be in jail for life) killed 5 other hunters and wounded 2 additional hunters. By my count, that's 6 - 8 fewer hunters in the world. Not much, but its a good start.

Edit - yup got it right. I liked this quote the best - “When you’re hunting you don’t expect somebody to try to shoot you and murder you."

No, that's a priviledge reserved for the dear. I don't know if CHidaro is getting a good chuckle out of this for the same reasons I am, but I know I always laugh a little when hunters are killed in "accidents" or other "hunting related" deaths. They are barbarians and getting what they deserve.

Once again we part ways on common sense. How is it a good thing. The deaths of fathers, sons, husbands vs bambi give me a fucking break.

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » November 22, 2004, 5:48 pm

I retract my previous statement. I admittidly did not read the whole article before posting, because the jokes got my attention first. I didn't realize they don't even know who shot first...We don't know if the asian guy was a psycho or if he was defending himself. We can make assumptions, but the report isn't even out yet.

It is indeed poetic justice, however I don't think they DESERVED getting murdered, and the woman and child sure as fuck shouldn't be a laughing matter.

You weren't hugged much were you?

Actually it's the opposite, but leading to the same extreme. I had a very loving family and am overly senstive about things like this, however I had thought it was a psycho who just opened up fire...Who knows, the hunters could have been the aggresors in the situation and the woman and child got in the line of fire. Cannot rule out that the suspect could have been defending himself. They don't even know which bullets came from which guns yet.

Sylvos · Post by **Sylvos** » November 22, 2004, 5:51 pm

Aaeamdar wrote:Unless I misread when I skimmed the article, 1 hunter (who will now be in jail for life) killed 5 other hunters and wounded 2 additional hunters. By my count, that's 6 - 8 fewer hunters in the world. Not much, but its a good start.

Edit - yup got it right. I liked this quote the best - “When you’re hunting you don’t expect somebody to try to shoot you and murder you."

No, that's a priviledge reserved for the dear. I don't know if CHidaro is getting a good chuckle out of this for the same reasons I am, but I know I always laugh a little when hunters are killed in "accidents" or other "hunting related" deaths. They are barbarians and getting what they deserve.

You are a fucking moronic faggot, note the use of two explitives and another adjective to describe you. Murder victims are never "Good to see". You sick pathetic fuck. Also, how the fuck you think man survived. Hunting, that's right. How you think mankind managed to live for the last 15,000 years you ignorant punk. Mankind is a Hunter, we walk upright. We have opposable thumbs to manipulate objects like guns. Hunting is not something that is barbaric, no more than your mom going to the grocery store and grabbing a few chicken breasts and pork ribs that were raised and slaughtered in a slaughter house. I would laugh a little you got killed by a cock rupturing your already distended anus and you managed to bleed to death anally. I know i'd chuckle a little to myself. You truely are a waste of fucking matter.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » November 22, 2004, 5:58 pm

Aaeamdar wrote:Unless I misread when I skimmed the article, 1 hunter (who will now be in jail for life) killed 5 other hunters and wounded 2 additional hunters. By my count, that's 6 - 8 fewer hunters in the world. Not much, but its a good start.

Edit - yup got it right. I liked this quote the best - “When you’re hunting you don’t expect somebody to try to shoot you and murder you."

No, that's a priviledge reserved for the dear. I don't know if CHidaro is getting a good chuckle out of this for the same reasons I am, but I know I always laugh a little when hunters are killed in "accidents" or other "hunting related" deaths. They are barbarians and getting what they deserve.

That is by far the most retarded thing I have ever read from you. Perhaps you should just join PETA or ELF and get it all out in the open.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » November 22, 2004, 6:00 pm

Maybe he thinks man survived by sucking cock?

Arsecn · Post by **Arsecn** » November 22, 2004, 6:02 pm

Dar is a meat eater, not a vegan. He also can't spell 'deer' correctly... cmon Noel, you're slipping.

Seebs · Post by **Seebs** » November 22, 2004, 6:05 pm

Kilmoll .. you made me spew pepsi out my nose.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » November 22, 2004, 6:09 pm

That makes the death of 5 people, all of whom were only responding to radio calls for help, hi-fucking-larious.
How...in any way...is this a laughing matter?

It's not, and, in my case at least, it was a purely sarcastic response to Chidoro's original post. Note that I went on to call him a sick asshole. To rejoice at hunters (including a father and son pair) getting killed or to call it poetic justice just makes you, and anyone else that believes these people got what they deserved, a fucking asshole.

I don't hunt (or fish, for that matter), own a gun, and I don't really care to. I see nothing wrong with those that do hunt, though. I have friends and acquaintences that hunt, and happily take the tasty wild game that they provide whenever I have the opportunity to do so. Hunting or fishing for one's meat strikes me as a much more humane way to put meat on the table than, say, buying factory raised beef, pork and poultry where the animals spend their entire brief existances in the least humane of conditions.

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » November 22, 2004, 6:10 pm

While I think Dar's view is a bit extreme, I don't think there's any good justification for hunting anymore. We DID survive off it, because we had no other choice. Now we have MORE than enough meat for anyone's needs. We slaughter too many creatures every year on farms, we don't need to go out and kill wild animals too. Hunting used to be justified, but isn't anymore, because it is not for survival, it is for some sick and twisted idea of bonding with nature. "That's the most beautiful buck I've ever seen...wish I had my gun". <<<<THAT is fucking sick and twisted.

And don't fucking argue that we need hunting to survive when many hunters only do it for SPORT. Sport hunting is incredibly barbaric and should not be legal. If you are killing animals for the sole sake of having their head on your wall, you are a fucking murderer. Simple as that.

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » November 22, 2004, 6:19 pm

Yes, I am a vegetarian. I am not a vegan, because I do eat dairy (milk, eggs) from "organic" sources.

Your comments about hunting are moronic. You are acting like I am passing judgment on pre-modern man. That's stupid. The people hunting today are not doing so because they need to, they are doing it because they enjoy killing. Sorry if I can't work up any sympathy for people who enoy killing so much being killed themselves by one of their own. We are well beyond the point where we need to kill and tourture animals for food. But in the case of hunting, its not even about food any more, its about killing for fun.

Rekaar. · Post by **Rekaar.** » November 22, 2004, 6:20 pm

So rather than hunt wildlife - as is the natural order of things - and kill them for food after they've had a free life you prefer raising them from birth in cages for eventual slaughter? It's really about you having no firm grasp of reality. You're a picture perfect city boy.

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » November 22, 2004, 6:25 pm

So rather than hunt wildlife - as is the natural order of things - and kill them for food after they've had a free life you prefer raising them from birth in cages for eventual slaughter? It's really about you having no firm grasp of reality. You're a picture perfect city boy.

No you fucking moron. The farm industry isn't gonna fucking stop or even slow down from people hunting instead of buying beef. All you are doing by hunting is adding to the death count. That is the reality that you ignore. What about sport hunting? You didn't adress that at all. You think that's ok?

Arundel Pajo · Post by **Arundel Pajo** » November 22, 2004, 6:26 pm

Re: hunting...

If people eat what they kill, and don't waste it....and as long as wildlife populations are closely monitored and not over-hunted, then I have no real problem with hunting.

I do have issues with people who hunt purely for trophies. You gonna eat that javalina? How about that bobcat?

If it's to put seasonal wild game on the table, then I agree with the sentiment expressed above - it's actually far more humane than factory farms.

My girlfriend is fairly anti-hunting across the board, but then she's also a vegetarian, so her stance on hunting is valid in my eyes.

If somebody is going to be so virulently anti-hunting, even for food, then they'd sure as hell better be vegetarian. The hypocracy in standing against hunting yet scarfing down a factory raised quarter pounder is staggering to say the least.

You have to ask youself if such is the case...are you against hunting because you love the animals, or because you hate them rednecks?

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » November 22, 2004, 6:29 pm

This is not a funny at all and I'm ashamed of those of you that have chosen to make fun of this situation.

Now, if they had been stuffed and mounted in a vicious attack pose, THAT would be fucking hilarious.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » November 22, 2004, 6:37 pm

Hunting won't put a dent in the commercial meat factories any more than "alternative" farming (free range, organic, pastured, artisinal, heirloom breeds, etc.) will. It's just a little naive to say that hunting an animal that has lived its entire life freely is somehow more barbaric than slaughtering an animal that existed in the same confined space while being pumped full of steroids, antibiotics and who knows what other crap until it's time to meet the pneumatic hammer. The end result is the same: meat on the table, although a legitimate argument can be made that the wild game is "better" in any number of ways.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » November 22, 2004, 6:43 pm

Meat is expensive, venison, elk, caribou, etc are both delicious and healthier meat than cow and game animal harvests are required to keep the populations manageable. Hey, sounds good to me!

But seriously, to read an article about a family being murdered by some wacko and then go on and say you are happy that these people are dead is pretty fucking pathetic.

Dexail · Post by **Dexail** » November 22, 2004, 6:43 pm

I hit a deer the other night going home. Jumped out to see if I could find it, but it was too dark. So she probably hobbled into the woods after the initial adrenaline rush and is either crippled or dead. Shame too, she would have tasted delicious.

By the way, hunting and animal population is closely monitored by wildlife officials. No hunters = overpopulation of wildlife. Then they either starve or there are a lot more running around to get hit by cars. Maybe we should outlaw motor vehicles.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » November 22, 2004, 6:49 pm

Just a couple points, I don't think I'm going to change anyone's mind:

Considering the deaths are essentially the same whether via massive shock from an air driven hammer of massive shock from a high velocity bullet, where would you rather spend your 12-24 months of life. A factory farm or in the woods?

Given that we've destroyed all the predators, and aren't likely to re-introduce them how would you rather see an animal die? Hit by a car, starvation, disease or shot? None are pleasant, the last I'd think is the least objectionable. They can't all live, that's not realistic. Neither is relocating them, it's been tried more than once with terrible results.

The "incidental kill" from maintaining a vegetarian diet can greatly exceed what would have been killed "on purpose" to supply people maintaining an omnivorous diet. The numbers of birds and other small animals killed to grow a field of grain or vegetables is astounding. A totally carnivorous diet would likely be the route of least harm.

Nearly the sole reason wildlife numbers are where they are today is directly due to taxes levied againsts hunters and fishermen. Self serving? Quite likely, but no one else would have paid for it 50 years ago, or will pay for it now.

And no, I don't hunt.

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » November 22, 2004, 6:49 pm

So rather than hunt wildlife - as is the natural order of things - and kill them for food after they've had a free life you prefer raising them from birth in cages for eventual slaughter?

Umm, no. What part of "I am a vegetarian" did you miss? Frankly, the farm/hunting trade-off is difficult. If I could eleminate one, and only one, I'd eliminate farming on utilitarian princiapls. Farming is by far the most cruel and destructive to animals practice we commit. It is, however, motivated by profit. Hunting is motivated by the enoyment of killing.

So I hold more contempt for the hunter than I do the farmer (who really is no worse than, say a drug dealer - he is a person willing to engage in certain activities because their is a market for it) or the meat eater (who really is eating meat out of habit for the most part - though I am sure there are some who are eating it specifically because they enjoy the cruelty it represents). Farming, however, is a bigger problem. I choose to fight farming by not contributing to industry (by not buying meat and meat products) and supporting the strengthening of anti-cruelty laws.

Hunters are another matter. They are killers who kill because they enjoy killing. I certainly would support any legislation that would make hunting illegal but additionally, unlike the farmers, I do derive some satisfation from reading news reports of their untimely demise at the hands of their own sick pleasures. For what its worth, I'd fully support a hunting range with hunters as the only targets. Voluntarily of course. Sort of a paintball, but with real guns. Then those "sportsman" could involve themselve in a real challenge with their guns.

Arsecn · Post by **Arsecn** » November 22, 2004, 6:50 pm

I don't hunt (or fish, for that matter), own a gun, and I don't really care to.

You work in a library or are you in prison?

Dexail · Post by **Dexail** » November 22, 2004, 6:54 pm

Aaeamdar wrote:
I do derive some satisfation from reading news reports of their untimely demise at the hands of their own sick pleasures.

And if someone had said they derive some satisfaction from reading news reports of a homosexual getting AIDS because of his sexual preference, you would fly off the fucking handle.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » November 22, 2004, 6:55 pm

By the way, hunting and animal population is closely monitored by wildlife officials. No hunters = overpopulation of wildlife. Then they either starve or there are a lot more running around to get hit by cars. Maybe we should outlaw motor vehicles.

Exactly. In some areas there is an overpopulation of animals and they extend hunting season. Or allow you to kill more than usual. To say all sport hunting should be done away with is a very uneducated opinion.

And I say that as someone who doesn't eat meat. Other than fish but come on... Sushi is tasty.

Nearly the sole reason wildlife numbers are where they are today is directly due to taxes levied againsts hunters and fishermen. Self serving? Quite likely, but no one else would have paid for it 50 years ago, or will pay for it now.

This is also a good point. My dad hunts/fishes and when I was there last he showed me what it costs to get a license for various outdoor activities. It's not exactly cheap.

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » November 22, 2004, 6:56 pm

No hunters = overpopulation of wildlife.

A myth hunters groups want you to believe. In fact, however, birth control (as humerous as that may sound) is actually more effective at population control in areas where man has killed the natural preditors.

Acies · Post by **Acies** » November 22, 2004, 6:57 pm

This isn't funny. I do not like personally going out into the woods with the intent of killing an animal, but I do not begrudge those that do. It is part of human nature, hell, even nature. This makes me worried about the state of humanity. Still Dar, though I agree that it is not a nessecityto hunt, those hunters were victims in a crime. It was not a "I am going to kill you for food" or "Kill you to keep from being food" situation. As human beings, we have the ability to reason. This guy ignored our laws and reasoning and murdered 5 people.

What would have made this funny is if a deer killed 5 hunters and wounded 3 more.

**Edited for additional content**

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » November 22, 2004, 6:58 pm

It isn't more barbaric, it's equally barbaric. This thread happenes to be about hunting though, which is why I'm focusing on that. Farm slaughter is another problem and a much much bigger and more complicated problem, however I wouldn't be bitching about either if I weren't a vegetarian. I am against both.

There is as little reason to be a meat eater these days as there is to be a hunter. It's just not necessary. You can get everything your body needs from plants. Protein, fats, vitamins, carbs, etc. can all be obtained from different fruits, berries, roots, vegetables, nuts, fungi!, and grains and are ALL more healthy for you than meats.

A popular myth is that meat is the best way to get protein, when in fact it's less effecient than getting proteins from plant sources. There, you now have no reason to eat meat besides liking how it tastes. If slaughtering animals is justified by your taste buds attraction to meat(foods can be as addictive as drugs, btw), then that's your decision, but there's plenty of reasons for people to be upset with that. I used to justify it myself, but once you learn about the alternatives and accept them, it's hard to go back to meat.

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » November 22, 2004, 7:00 pm

Dexail,
Do you really need your poor analogy explained to you? If so, let me know and I'll be happy to baby step it for you.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » November 22, 2004, 7:07 pm

Arsecn wrote:
I don't hunt (or fish, for that matter), own a gun, and I don't really care to.
You work in a library or are you in prison?

I don't follow this at all. I don't hunt. I don't fish. I don't own a gun. I don't care to do any of those things, but I don't see anything wrong with any of them. What does that have to do with your response?

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » November 22, 2004, 7:10 pm

It is exactly this type of "I am a vegetarian, therefore you all are wrong" attitude that caused me to flee places like Los Angeles. Hey man, you can have your latte enima and eat all the bean curd you want.... I think I will stick with hunting and fishing.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » November 22, 2004, 7:13 pm

Aaeamdar wrote:...birth control is actually more effective at population control in areas where man has killed the natural preditors.

That's almost correct, but impractical in some cases and too expensive in nearly every other.

It's not done widely for very good reasons, especially where you'd think it would be easiest such as in metropolitan areas. It's not a solution except in the very short term, then more animals move in and you're back where you started.