Ship of Fools: The Minnesota dentist who shot Cecil the Lion

Thread: The Minnesota dentist who shot Cecil the Lion Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=029033

Posted by Episcoterian (# 13185) on :

This is my first incursion in Hell. Whatever.

This.

Since I first learned of the demise of the beloved feline, all I can think of is that I wish I had some thousand dollars to spare and put a price tag on this ***hole's head. Nevermind that. I'd gladly take a crossbow and make a sieve out of the guys's hide before chopping his head off and making a trophy out of it, to gladly display in my living room.

Anyway, I believe all big game hunters should automatically become legal game. THAT would bring some real adrenaline to the sport.

Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on :

Wow. What a waste.

Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on :

What an asshole.

I note with pleasure that his Facebook and Twitter presences have been deactivated in the wake of all the e-scolding he's received.

Reminds me of Melissa Bachmann's similar exploit a couple of years ago, resulting in this brilliant tweet from Ricky Gervais.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

Just read this. "It was legal," he said. Yeah, and I suppose it would be legal to buy the Mona Lisa ( if you could) and paint a smiley over her face, but everyone would hate you for that, too.

My heart goes out to the locals. It must be like losing a beloved neighbor.

Having said that, I also read his Yelp page, and ( just a general observation) I am not sure the answer to the problem is to make some entry level Yelp code monkey's next few days a living hell by giving them thousands of posts to delete.

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :

What gets me is that the poor old lion was lured out of its sanctuary to be murdered. Because it wouldn't have been legal to kill it inside but once it was out, "fair game".

I really don't understand the mentality behind enjoying killing a living creature for no other reason than your own gratification. This lion wasn't a threat to anybody, and he was old. He should have been able to live out his days in peace and safety.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

It's the nadir of a "privileged" mindset-- you define your status by what you can get away with. The more people it angers or hurts, the more power you have displayed.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

I don't agree with trophy hunting. It's like porn.
Here's some from Canada.

Hunting for the table is another thing entirely, and no-one poses for photos. No-one eats lions. Or bears.

[ 28. July 2015, 20:53: Message edited by: no prophet's flag is set so... ]

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

I have to say that Ricky Gervais is an arrogant dickhead most of the time, but his raising of awareness of this, and shaming of those shitpiles who insist of shooting big game for fun is fantastic.

These are beautiful and rare creatures. To kill them just for "sport" shows a disregard to all living things, for the planet, for our own humanity. I wouldn't want him anywhere near my teeth, because I want someone who considers that I might be valuable, despite being old and stupid.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

Good to be reminded that Minnesota, like anywhere else, has its complete bastards.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

What gets me is that you only get in trouble if you kill a favourite lion.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
What gets me is that you only get in trouble if you kill a favourite lion.

I share your cynicism. Countless animals are killed every year for sport, which to me represents the utmost depravity. Maybe the killing of Cecil will bring more people round to that way of thinking.

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

Sometimes animals need to be killed, because we've fucked up their environment so much, that's the only way to mimic what would have happened.

Sometimes, if an animal needs to be killed, it looks like a good way to provide much needed funds for conservation and management if someone pays through the nose for the opportunity to kill it.

That's the metric in a lot of African reserves. They don't have the money to pay for the anti-poaching operations or for education programmes or for shipping excess animals out of the reserve to less populated areas, if they don't give permits to a few very rich hunters and essentially line up the animals they need culling in front of the rifle sights.

A fool and his money are soon parted, while the real work goes on under vast skies and in isolated communities. I'm not saying there isn't a better way, but at least it is a way.

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

This is the purpose of shame -- to make it known to all that You Should't Do This. I hope that the fate of this dentist inspires lots of people to not go hunting for trophies.

Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on :

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
I don't agree with trophy hunting. It's like porn.
Here's some from Canada.

Hunting for the table is another thing entirely, and no-one poses for photos. No-one eats lions. Or bears.

I ate some bear meat back around 1980. It wasn't as good as beef.

Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on :

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Hunting for the table is another thing entirely, and no-one poses for photos. No-one eats lions. Or bears.

Demonstrably false assertions are common enough here to be ignored altogether, but concise groups of three like this are remarkable!

[ 29. July 2015, 00:22: Message edited by: romanlion ]

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

There are many First Nations in northern Canada which depend on wild meat to live. That's merely factual. It's for the table. It's not sport, it is for survival. The Yellowknives (NWT, Canada) for example have a fall hunt for 50-60 caribou.

Yes, some people do eat bear, but it's not usual to do so.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

To the west, the Porcupine caribou herd is shared with Alaska, about which there is more info than others. About 1700 of these caribou are killed for food by people each year from that herd. And they would say, as it was in the beginning, is now, and will be for ever.

There's a vast difference in subsistence hunting by traditional peoples than trophy hunting. One info link.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Hunting for the table is another thing entirely, and no-one poses for photos. No-one eats lions. Or bears.
Demonstrably false assertions are common enough here to be ignored altogether, but concise groups of three like this are remarkable!

OK, how about we put it this way? What that pencil-dick dentist did had nothing to do with food and everything to do with ego. Killing an animal that doesn't even walk away is hardly sport. In fact, the whole needing a guide thing reduces it to little more than buying a dead animal.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
OK, how about we put it this way? What that pencil-dick dentist did had nothing to do with food and everything to do with ego. Killing an animal that doesn't even walk away is hardly sport. In fact, the whole needing a guide thing reduces it to little more than buying a dead animal.

Exactly.

Posted by Ad Orientem (# 17574) on :

I have real difficulty understanding what pleasure can be derived from killing an animal just for the sake of a trophy. It's not quite right. I can understand hunting for meat, killing only as much as you can eat, but not that.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
I have real difficulty understanding what pleasure can be derived from killing an animal just for the sake of a trophy. It's not quite right. I can understand hunting for meat, killing only as much as you can eat, but not that.

I understand the concept. But the reality can be very lacking. Guided hunts mean squat, even if one accepts the premise of modern hunting. It is like cheating at solitaire and bragging about winning.

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

I could not bring myself to read the linked story, but each time I read through this thread I think of this movie, Secondhand Lions

Posted by Erroneous Monk (# 10858) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:

A fool and his money are soon parted...

But isn't this an absolutely classic example of wealth gravitating to those who don't make good use of it?

Imagine having that kind of money - $50,000, £30,000 - and the best thing you can think of to spend it on is killing something.

Posted by Erroneous Monk (# 10858) on :

And with all the stuff in the news right now about AI, wouldn't one use of it be to create bots that simulate the random movements of animals in the wild, seek cover, react to sound, smell, movement etc. People can then go to landscaped ranges and shoot them, if that's the only way they can feel good about themselves.

Waste of tech, obviously, but better than wasting beautiful creatures.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

You see, the thing about dentists is that they've been allowed to get out of control. Sure, when their numbers are in balance with their habitats, they are a useful part of a balanced ecology. But in the USA they've been allowed to expand out of all proportion to what the habitat can bear. They've become predatory, and there are many well-substantiated reports of dentists descending on communities and subjecting people to unneccesarily excessive dental treatment for which they charge fees way in excess of what they require for survival.

So I'm suggesting a way of bringing this menaace under control and, at the same time, allowing lions to experience the primeval thrill of the hunt. A lot of lions nowadays live in zoos or on reserves where they have lost touch with their hunting instinct. We want to help them reconnect with that. For a suitable fee, we'll bring lions to Minnesota and allow them to hunt- effectively cull- a carefully limited number of dentists in controlled conditions, thereby restoring balance both to natural habitats and to the lions' own sense of who they are. Everyone's a winner!

Posted by Drifting Star (# 12799) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
And with all the stuff in the news right now about AI, wouldn't one use of it be to create bots that simulate the random movements of animals in the wild, seek cover, react to sound, smell, movement etc. People can then go to landscaped ranges and shoot them, if that's the only way they can feel good about themselves.

Waste of tech, obviously, but better than wasting beautiful creatures.

I'm not sure that would be good enough to fulfil the Gore Vidal principle here - I suspect it is not only necessary for the man to gain the victory by killing something, but also necessary for it to lose its life. I don't think that destroying a piece of technology would cut it.

I see he has now said he regrets what he did. Well, sort of. "Again, I deeply regret that my pursuit of an activity I love and practise responsibly and legally resulted in the taking of this lion." Might be connected to the suggestion that he may have to face poaching charges.

[Edited because I type too slowly and cross-posted with Albertus, whose suggestion I applaud.]

[ 29. July 2015, 10:19: Message edited by: Drifting Star ]

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

Thank you
[Big Grin]

quote:
Originally posted by Drifting Star:

I see he has now said he regrets what he did. Well, sort of. "Again, I deeply regret that my pursuit of an activity I love and practise responsibly and legally resulted in the taking of this lion."

I know. I mean, isn't life crap? You go out and responsibly and legally shoot an arrow at a lion and, whaddaya know, you end up killing it! Bummer, eh- what were the chances of that happening?

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Thank you

quote:
Originally posted by Drifting Star:

I see he has now said he regrets what he did. Well, sort of. "Again, I deeply regret that my pursuit of an activity I love and practise responsibly and legally resulted in the taking of this lion."
I know. I mean, isn't life crap? You go out and responsibly and legally shoot an arrow at a lion and, whaddaya know, you end up killing it! Bummer, eh- what were the chances of that happening?

I think the key word in his comment is "this". He's not sorry that a lion was killed, just that it was this specific lion.

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
You see, the thing about dentists is that they've been allowed to get out of control. Sure, when their numbers are in balance with their habitats, they are a useful part of a balanced ecology. But in the USA they've been allowed to expand out of all proportion to what the habitat can bear. They've become predatory, and there are many well-substantiated reports of dentists descending on communities and subjecting people to unneccesarily excessive dental treatment for which they charge fees way in excess of what they require for survival.

So I'm suggesting a way of bringing this menaace under control and, at the same time, allowing lions to experience the primeval thrill of the hunt. A lot of lions nowadays live in zoos or on reserves where they have lost touch with their hunting instinct. We want to help them reconnect with that. For a suitable fee, we'll bring lions to Minnesota and allow them to hunt- effectively cull- a carefully limited number of dentists in controlled conditions, thereby restoring balance both to natural habitats and to the lions' own sense of who they are. Everyone's a winner!

*Snort*

Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :

Under the Idiots With Guns category, I prefer this story where the macho predator dies and the trigger happy gunman goes to jail. This happened in Florida but I noticed The Daily Mail had the full story first. (And you guys don't like them.) [Devil]

Idiots.

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Thank you

quote:
Originally posted by Drifting Star:

I see he has now said he regrets what he did. Well, sort of. "Again, I deeply regret that my pursuit of an activity I love and practise responsibly and legally resulted in the taking of this lion."
I know. I mean, isn't life crap? You go out and responsibly and legally shoot an arrow at a lion and, whaddaya know, you end up killing it! Bummer, eh- what were the chances of that happening?
I think the key word in his comment is "this". He's not sorry that a lion was killed, just that it was this specific lion.

I read that in the paper this morning and the thing that struck me as odd was that he used the word "taking" and used it twice. Not "hunting" or "shooting" or "killing", but "taking", as if that makes it sound less offensive, as if it was a perfectly ordinary thing to do. "Sorry I took your lion."

And it took about 40 hours for the poor creature to die.

Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:

Imagine having that kind of money - $50,000, £30,000 - and the best thing you can think of to spend it on is killing something.

It would buy a lot of beer.

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :

There's quite a bit you could do with that kind of money. Including live on it for a while when your dental practice closes down, as it now looks likely to do.

Sky news article

Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :

I'm needing some really expensive dental work done soon, you're welcome to drag me behind a truck through his neighborhood.

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
I could not bring myself to read the linked story, but each time I read through this thread I think of this movie, Secondhand Lions

Secondhand Lions is an underrated movie.

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :

Apparently this is only the latest in a list of 43 'hunts' boasted of by the dentist.

I can't quite see how shooting, but not killing, an animal in a protected game reserve qualifies as 'hunting' - perhaps the dentist's definition of the word is different from the rest of the world.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

Professional ruin my arse. He can move to East Bumfuck, Mississippi, where he will be a megastar hero. Of course few people in East Bumfuck can afford to go to the dentist, so he might have to settle for a less opulent dwelling.

Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on :

It occurred to me this afternoon that his killing of the lion is just another form of willy waving - "Look how masculine I am; I killed a lion."

Yeah, very good. But I notice that he took care not to get caught in the act - why use a crossbow? Because it's silent and doesn't draw attention to itself. Trouble is, it doesn't necessarily kill either. As has been said, Cecil was tracked for a further 40 hours before he was finally shot with a rifle to finish him off. I am beginning to suspect that our well-beloved dentist was rather more aware of what he was doing that he has been prepared to admit.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
You see, the thing about dentists is that they've been allowed to get out of control. Sure, when their numbers are in balance with their habitats, they are a useful part of a balanced ecology. But in the USA they've been allowed to expand out of all proportion to what the habitat can bear. They've become predatory, and there are many well-substantiated reports of dentists descending on communities and subjecting people to unneccesarily excessive dental treatment for which they charge fees way in excess of what they require for survival.

So I'm suggesting a way of bringing this menaace under control and, at the same time, allowing lions to experience the primeval thrill of the hunt. A lot of lions nowadays live in zoos or on reserves where they have lost touch with their hunting instinct. We want to help them reconnect with that. For a suitable fee, we'll bring lions to Minnesota and allow them to hunt- effectively cull- a carefully limited number of dentists in controlled conditions, thereby restoring balance both to natural habitats and to the lions' own sense of who they are. Everyone's a winner!
*Snort*

are we allowed to [Axe murder]

in hell?

Posted by Beenster (# 242) on :

It's not just the demise of one lion, tho. The protracted and clumsy killing of Cecil will result in the death of his 12 cubs, as the new head of the pride will kill them in order to claim the lioness. article here

Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on :

Millions of people donate their money to charities whose purpose it is to try to protect endangered wild animals, while others lure the animals away and cash in from lowlife like this who want to kill them, and the species become more endangered....

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Beenster:
It's not just the demise of one lion, tho. The protracted and clumsy killing of Cecil will result in the death of his 12 cubs, as the new head of the pride will kill them in order to claim the lioness. article here

That'll be another 12 x £35,000 then or £420,000.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Beenster:
It's not just the demise of one lion, tho. The protracted and clumsy killing of Cecil will result in the death of his 12 cubs, as the new head of the pride will kill them in order to claim the lioness. article here

Jesus God. [Disappointed]

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Good to be reminded that Minnesota, like anywhere else, has its complete bastards.

Minnesota Not- So- Nice.

Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:

And it took about 40 hours for the poor creature to die.

Yeah, that's the thing that gets me - he wasn't even competent enough to kill it himself. How on earth did he think it was going to make him look big and clever?
I also understand he has a conviction for illegally killing a bear and trying to cover it up by moving it into a permitted hunting area. If that's the case, why is he allowed to hunt at all?

[ 29. July 2015, 20:08: Message edited by: Stumbling Pilgrim ]

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

There is an awful lot on social media about "of you care about a lion in Africa, but not a migrant in Calais". I don't think they are exclusive - in fact, I think they are connected.

Someone who feels entitled enough to go and try to kill a lion in this way has no regard for wildlife. Like so many of the other trophy hunters, it is their own ego that they are doing this for - they feel that they have a right to shoot and kill beautiful animals for "fun".

It is the same sort of arrogance and entitlement that treats other people like cattle, that cares about them only for their own benefit. It is the same sort of attitudes that mean people work for their own benefit, against others.

It seems that, rather than learning to live more in harmony with our world, we are living less so. That, for me, is the biggest tragedy, because that is what will destroy my grandchildren.

Oh, and whoever was running the River Duff twitter account today needs a slap. They also don't get it.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Apparently this is only the latest in a list of 43 'hunts' boasted of by the dentist.

Yes, but see, the first 42 didn't involve him killing an animal that people had given a cute name. He just killed regular, unimportant animals that social media hasn't heard of.

The Guardian article that's been linked to says this is the 24th animal to be a collared animal wrongfully killed. Somewhere out there are 23 other hunters grateful that they hit some uninteresting beast instead of Cecil.

My social media criticism wouldn't be "you care about a lion in Africa, but not a migrant in Calais". It would be "you care about Cecil, but not about a nameless lion in Africa".

[ 29. July 2015, 23:36: Message edited by: orfeo ]

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
My social media criticism wouldn't be "you care about a lion in Africa, but not a migrant in Calais". It would be "you care about Cecil, but not about a nameless lion in Africa".

So what? If that's what it takes to wake people up in order to speak out, that's what it takes. If the alternative is for them just to continue not caring, then having lions with cutesy names is a great idea. Let's name more of them.

[ 30. July 2015, 02:17: Message edited by: mousethief ]

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

We could. But interestingly the effect seems to be lost if you hand out too many names. Human beings generally have names and it doesn't prevent them from becoming faceless non-entities. It's distinctiveness that makes you worthwhile, and if every lion has a name then a named lion is no longer distinctive.

EDIT: It just struck me, while the Ship announced the name of the thread that I was posting this on, that the thread title names the lion but not the person who killed the lion. And I freely admit to not recalling his name without looking it up. He is merely "the Minnesota dentist" who did a particular thing. Hmm.

[ 30. July 2015, 02:44: Message edited by: orfeo ]

Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :

Moderately wealthy people paying to uselessly end the lives of charismatic megafauna is fairly deplorable, though the collective prioritization of this is not without its own awkward skewed-ness in the biases of societies. The global decline in coral and pollinators is probably several orders of magnitude more dire, but good luck getting any of those wee critters named and caught up in an internet meme.

Want to know what bothered me more, animal-wise on the internet this week? This video. It's an orangutan motioning to kiss and rub the belly of a pregnant lady through the glass divider. To most people, apparently, it's adorable. To me, this is a being who 1) is capable of recognizing a person as being pregnant, 2) conceptualizes it in such a way as to have functional empathy, and 3) is kept in a box for viewing.

I mean, honestly, look at this big guy and tell me he's less of a person than Donald Trump.

[ 30. July 2015, 06:04: Message edited by: RooK ]

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :

quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
I mean, honestly, look at this big guy and tell me he's less of a person than Donald Trump.

We keep Donald Trump in a box for viewing as well, don't we?

(I wouldn't bet any money on either 1 or 2 from seeing that video. Furthermore, 1 and 2 can be "instinctive", of course. And while I generally agree that 3 is atrocious, not just for animals that we find easy to humanise, zoos are nowadays often a last holdout against extinction...)

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Darllenwr:
why use a crossbow? Because it's silent and doesn't draw attention to itself.

More like "because you have to get much closer to the prey than with a gun, and therefore it's a greater challenge and test of skill".

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:
Originally posted by Darllenwr:
why use a crossbow? Because it's silent and doesn't draw attention to itself.
More like "because you have to get much closer to the prey than with a gun, and therefore it's a greater challenge and test of skill".

He was not using a crossbow, but a (modern) hunting bow, I believe. Going up alone against a lion with bow and arrow does require skill, strength and courage - whatever else one might say about that. However, I assume the guy had several people with high-powered rifles backing him up. At which point all this becomes glorified target practice providing a fake adrenaline rush...

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

Yup. Going face to face with a spear and no back-up: I can see, in a way, what that would be about. But this is really and literally only a step or two up from shooting fish in a barrel.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

BTW this is what Baden-Powell had to say on the subject in Scouting for Boys over a century ago (quote OK- it's in the public domain):

quote:
“....as you get to study animals you get to like them more and more. You will soon find that you don’t want to kill them for the mere sake of killing. Also the more you see of them the more you see the wonderful work of God in them.
All the fun of hunting lies in the adventurous life of the jungle, the chance in many cases of the animal hunting you instead of you hunting the animal, the interest of tracking it up, stalking it and watching all that it does and learning its habits. The actual shooting the animal that follows is only a very small part of the excitement.
No Scout should ever kill an animal unless there is some real reason for doing so, and in that case he should kill it quickly and effectively, to give it as little pain as possible.
In fact many big games hunters nowadays prefer to shoot their game with the camera instead of the rifle which gives just as interesting results....”

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

Amen Baden-Powell [Overused]

Posted by Erroneous Monk (# 10858) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:

quote:
Originally posted by Beenster:
It's not just the demise of one lion, tho. The protracted and clumsy killing of Cecil will result in the death of his 12 cubs, as the new head of the pride will kill them in order to claim the lioness. article here
Jesus God.

But then the human race has previous for mum's new boyfriend killing previous partner's child. [Frown]

Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :

I had no idea dentistry was so lucrative.

(Last visit to the dentist I made, I paid about €60 for check-up, scale and polish and X-rays. Standard rates, reimbursed 100% by the Social Security and my mutual fund. Oh yes I lurve me some pinko Commie-leftist socialised healthcare.)

Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :

The guy is a worthless overcompensating dickless bag of shit.

IngoB is spot on - how many guys with guns were standing around while this asshole "hunted"? Who set up the bait to lure the prey to where it could be "legally" killed? And who chased the animal for two days so that dickweed could enjoy killing it? That's not hunting.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

Dentists are outside of public funded health care in Canada. Terribly expensive. A check up is about $350, with cleaning adding another 225. Extraction of teeth is about 1200 per tooth. Fillings easily 600 to 1000.

They have reported that of health care personnel dentists have the highest suicide rates....

Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on :

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Dentists are outside of public funded health care in Canada. Terribly expensive. A check up is about $350, with cleaning adding another 225. Extraction of teeth is about 1200 per tooth. Fillings easily 600 to 1000.

They have reported that of health care personnel dentists have the highest suicide rates....

That's a lot higher than we pay here.

I've heard that before about dentist suicide rates. It seems it has to do with folks dreading them and such.

Posted by Piglet (# 11803) on :

It seems to me that the only justifications for killing an animal are (a) eating it; or (b) stopping it eating you.

As I understand it, neither applied to Cecil.

I suspect there wouldn't be a world-wide wailing and gnashing of teeth (sorry!) if this bloke joined the ranks of suicidal dentists.

Posted by North East Quine (# 13049) on :

I lurve my dentist.

[Axe murder]

Check up - £28.
Filling - no idea
Extraction - £150
Root canal - £200.

Update on dentist's King Charles spaniel, two small sons, unwell mother-in-law and latest holiday - free.

Both the North East offspring (21 and 19) still get free dentistry because they're still in full time education.

My dentist wouldn't hurt a fly.

Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :

I once wrote my dentist a check for $10,000, it was almost exactly what I earned that year. That was 1989, the cost of surgery plus bridge work has probably doubled since.

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
I once wrote my dentist a check for $10,000, it was almost exactly what I earned that year. That was 1989, the cost of surgery plus bridge work has probably doubled since.

That is fucking nuts. You could have flown to the UK, gone private, stayed in a hotel while you were here, and flown back home again with change in your pocket.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

Hungary's the place for good cheap dentistry, apparently (or was about five years ago). Used to have an NZ colleague who, not being able to use NHS dentistry, regularly used to fly there to get his teeth looked at.

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:

They have reported that of health care personnel dentists have the highest suicide rates....

Looks like this geezer needn't bother about suicide. ISTM anything the masses regard as diabolical, which then goes viral on the NET, pretty much makes someone like him a dead man walking.

£28 pound for a check-up in NE Scotland? That's remarkably consistent, I paid that exact sum yesterday for the same in Cornwall.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

I know, we get hosed. One of my daughters had to had braces on her teeth. The office puts everyone on a monthly payment plan for 4 years. All told, it was just more than $11,000.

Psycho killer, qu'est-ce que c'est? Fu fu fu fu, fu fu fu fu

(translation: what is that?)

Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on :

Standard NHS dental charges though these days it is hard to find an NHS dentist (I have one and he is lovely). But his private charges aren't that much more. Cleaning costs £40 privately at his practice.
My recent extraction was free as he referred me to the community dental centre as it was a difficult removal.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

God Almighty, O that You would come down from the heavens and smite all those who would make this a place to discuss the cost of their teeth.

Didn't take long, did it? So much for maintaining the rage about the pointless death of animals, most of you have decided that your wallet is more interesting.

Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on :

I was in quite a spot about 18 months ago with a wisdom tooth going bad on me and no insurance or cash to speak of.

As it happened a local church did a charity dental thing for probably thousands of people. It took about 14 hours but they snatched not one but two wisdom teeth free of charge.

It was a minor miracle for me at the time, and my employment situation improved dramatically not long afterward. So last Christmas I sent them an anonymous thank you letter and donation roughly equivalent to the cost of the extractions.

Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :

Having my cat's teeth cleaned is going to cost me somewhere between $1,5000 and $3,000. I don't believe my vet is into big game hunting, though. Maybe psycho dentist should do community service by cleaning puppeh and kitteh teeth at the SPCA.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

That actually isn't such a bad idea. At least give the guy some tangible education in empathy.

I gotta say it, as disgusting as I find the whole matter, what is happening on Yelp isn't giving me any better view of humanity than this douche did. Not only are they forcing the Yelp admins to delete hundreds of duplicate posts a day, but they are now calling it obstruction of free speech. Because, you know, even if they left up five pages of "reviews" sounding off on this guy's ethics(which they have), if they didn't let the other 150 pages stand, they are enabling a murderer.

Jimmy Kimmel has it right--go ahead and sound off, but then express your outrage in the form of a check to the wildlife preservation fund. Picking on a bunch of code monkeys at a review site helps nothing.

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
What gets me is that the poor old lion was lured out of its sanctuary to be murdered. Because it wouldn't have been legal to kill it inside but once it was out, "fair game".

The luring was apparently done not by the dentist (he wouldn't know how) but by the locals who had to come up with a lion. I don't know if failing to find a lion would have resulted in having to refund the $35,000 or just in getting a reputation for failing to deliver that would quickly kill their business. Either way, they were under strong pressure to not care how they got a lion, and possibly believe "the only sin is getting caught." Whoops, they got caught.

If a couple dozen other collared lions have been killed, luring is perhaps a common way to finding a lion to satisfy the client's need to kill. This time they lured the wrong (from their viewpoint) collared lion. The "right" collared lion to lure would be one with no name/reputation.

I wonder what will happen to the dentist. Most people have real short memories. His life could be back to almost normal in a few months? And then on to the next "hunt"?

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

This is America. He will lose a few lefty patients, but will quickly become a darling of the right-wing gun nuts, who will see him as a martyr being persecuted by the liberal media (and yes, piling on the yelp reviews, publishing his address, etc. doesn't help counter that narrative). He'll pick up enough right wing patients drawn to his celebrity to more than replace the lefty ones who leave. And he might pick up a couple of high-ticket speaking engagements where all he needs to do is strut around with his gun.

[Help]

Posted by North East Quine (# 13049) on :

There is now a "Dentists for Lions" group fundraising for LionAid.

Posted by sharkshooter (# 1589) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
What gets me is that you only get in trouble if you kill a favourite lion.

And in other news, the abortion pill was approved for sale in Canada this week.

Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
That actually isn't such a bad idea. At least give the guy some tangible education in empathy.

I gotta say it, as disgusting as I find the whole matter, what is happening on Yelp isn't giving me any better view of humanity than this douche did. Not only are they forcing the Yelp admins to delete hundreds of duplicate posts a day, but they are now calling it obstruction of free speech. Because, you know, even if they left up five pages of "reviews" sounding off on this guy's ethics(which they have), if they didn't let the other 150 pages stand, they are enabling a murderer.

Jimmy Kimmel has it right--go ahead and sound off, but then express your outrage in the form of a check to the wildlife preservation fund. Picking on a bunch of code monkeys at a review site helps nothing.

Seriously. Why do people have to take things so far that I end up feeling sorry for the bad guy. He was a heartless idiot. He thought he would be admired for his macho skills and instead he now knows he is hated by thousands. He has lost his business and his standing in the community. That's enough now.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
What gets me is that you only get in trouble if you kill a favourite lion.
And in other news, the abortion pill was approved for sale in Canada this week.

I don't know exactly what connection you're trying to draw, but if you make it clearer there seems a fairly good chance I'm going to tell you to fuck off.

Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on :

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
This is America. He will lose a few lefty patients, but will quickly become a darling of the right-wing gun nuts, who will see him as a martyr being persecuted by the liberal media (and yes, piling on the yelp reviews, publishing his address, etc. doesn't help counter that narrative). He'll pick up enough right wing patients drawn to his celebrity to more than replace the lefty ones who leave. And he might pick up a couple of high-ticket speaking engagements where all he needs to do is strut around with his gun.

Time will tell. I don't know anyone who kills animals for the hell of it, just to get a stuffed head on a wall. I do see a lot of deer heads, but the deer meat is eaten.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

Looks like there's trouble brewing in the UK for someone who killed an "anonymous" lion: link. Warning: link contains some potentially distressing images.

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

And no one can say that deer are endangered. You can have all of mine; they ate all the daylily buds.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
That actually isn't such a bad idea. At least give the guy some tangible education in empathy.

I gotta say it, as disgusting as I find the whole matter, what is happening on Yelp isn't giving me any better view of humanity than this douche did. Not only are they forcing the Yelp admins to delete hundreds of duplicate posts a day, but they are now calling it obstruction of free speech. Because, you know, even if they left up five pages of "reviews" sounding off on this guy's ethics(which they have), if they didn't let the other 150 pages stand, they are enabling a murderer.

Jimmy Kimmel has it right--go ahead and sound off, but then express your outrage in the form of a check to the wildlife preservation fund. Picking on a bunch of code monkeys at a review site helps nothing.
Seriously. Why do people have to take things so far that I end up feeling sorry for the bad guy. He was a heartless idiot. He thought he would be admired for his macho skills and instead he now knows he is hated by thousands. He has lost his business and his standing in the community. That's enough now.

I am not quite Christian enough to feel sorry for him-- satisfied, maybe, that karma has hit him good, and we can drop it now--but there are now people freaking stirring up grassroots protests against Yelp itself, merely for saying, "Y'all made your point, can you take this to Huffpost, please?"

That ie bullshit, and bullying to boot. Not of Dr. Killgood, you understand, but of Yelp employees just doing their job.

[ 31. July 2015, 14:05: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Looks like there's trouble brewing in the UK for someone who killed an "anonymous" lion: link. Warning: link contains some potentially distressing images.

Yeah, so I'm a lawyer, but to me when I read in that article that someone says "lion killing is unacceptable", it clearly IS acceptable. To the law of the land where it happened.

(The killing of Cecil, on the other hand, is not acceptable to the law of Zimbabwe.)

Killing animals for sport isn't acceptable to me (use a camera please, or why the hell can't they switch to paintball guns?), but I'm able to grasp that there's a big gap between it not being acceptable to me and treating that unacceptability as some kind of universal truth. The proposition that you might strip someone's title for having engaged in a perfectly legal activity that some people don't like seems rather ridiculous.

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
there's a big gap between it not being acceptable to me and treating that unacceptability as some kind of universal truth

What do you mean? You've clearly never heard of Natural Law. Let me explain it to you in dense walls of text with a bazillion links, and you can't help but agree with me.

Posted by Erroneous Monk (# 10858) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
... someone says "lion killing is unacceptable", it clearly IS acceptable. To the law of the land where it happened.

...I'm able to grasp that there's a big gap between it not being acceptable to me and treating that unacceptability as some kind of universal truth. The proposition that you might strip someone's title for having engaged in a perfectly legal activity that some people don't like seems rather ridiculous.

But we do make some laws with international force, for example the UK Bribery Act says it doesn't matter if you're not breaking the law in the country where you do the corruption. If it would be illegal in the UK, it's illegal. I think the FCPA has similar international reach.

There are some crimes that we've decided not to export. This isn't, yet, one of them.

Posted by Erroneous Monk (# 10858) on :

Incidentally, my dentist shot his own dog. By accident, so he says.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

That post plus your sig are the beginnings of a torrid country song.

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:

Killing animals for sport isn't acceptable to me (use a camera please, or why the hell can't they switch to paintball guns?),

It might be quite amusing to watch someone trying to hit a lion with a paintball marker, but it's still ultimately going to result in a dead lion.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Killing animals for sport isn't acceptable to me (use a camera please, or why the hell can't they switch to paintball guns?), but I'm able to grasp that there's a big gap between it not being acceptable to me and treating that unacceptability as some kind of universal truth.

Isn't that how laws get made in the first place? Enough people find something unacceptable so they make it illegal.

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:

Killing animals for sport isn't acceptable to me (use a camera please, or why the hell can't they switch to paintball guns?),
It might be quite amusing to watch someone trying to hit a lion with a paintball marker, but it's still ultimately going to result in a dead lion.

Depends what you're using in your paint, I suppose.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:

Killing animals for sport isn't acceptable to me (use a camera please, or why the hell can't they switch to paintball guns?),
It might be quite amusing to watch someone trying to hit a lion with a paintball marker, but it's still ultimately going to result in a dead lion.

My first thought was, what are ypu gonna do now that you've attracted the lion's attention? Run away? Hope you run fast."

Camera, really.

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Depends what you're using in your paint, I suppose.

Yes, OK, I was rather assuming that nobody is daft enough to walk around near a lion without some kind of high calibre backup...

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Depends what you're using in your paint, I suppose.
Yes, OK, I was rather assuming that nobody is daft enough to walk around near a lion without some kind of high calibre backup...

Well, dang. That's not much of a sport then, is it? I envisaged teams of paintballers, roaming the savannah, tagging lions and then running away as quickly as possible, hoping that they weren't the slowest in their group...

Posted by Siegfried (# 29) on :

Zimbabwe has requested his extradition. US Fish & Game is trying to find him, but he's gone to ground. Maybe he needs to be lured out now?

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Well, dang. That's not much of a sport then, is it? I envisaged teams of paintballers, roaming the savannah, tagging lions and then running away as quickly as possible, hoping that they weren't the slowest in their group...

Perhaps the lions could be equipped with different coloured raddles, so we can keep score.

quote:
Originally posted by Siegfried:
Zimbabwe has requested his extradition. US Fish & Game is trying to find him, but he's gone to ground. Maybe he needs to be lured out now?

How do you lure a dentist? Trail around some people in expensive clothes with crooked teeth?

[ 31. July 2015, 16:12: Message edited by: Leorning Cniht ]

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Killing animals for sport isn't acceptable to me (use a camera please, or why the hell can't they switch to paintball guns?), but I'm able to grasp that there's a big gap between it not being acceptable to me and treating that unacceptability as some kind of universal truth.
Isn't that how laws get made in the first place? Enough people find something unacceptable so they make it illegal.

Yes, but note the order of those two events.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Depends what you're using in your paint, I suppose.
Yes, OK, I was rather assuming that nobody is daft enough to walk around near a lion without some kind of high calibre backup...

But Cecil wasn't gunned down in the heat of the moment. He died 40 hours later. If shooting a lion with an arrow doesn't cause the lion to attack you in such a way that back-up is required, I'm not sure why we're assuming shooting it with a paintball would.

[ 31. July 2015, 16:39: Message edited by: orfeo ]

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
And while I generally agree that 3 is atrocious, not just for animals that we find easy to humanise, zoos are nowadays often a last holdout against extinction...)

Living in a zoo or a cage is no life at all. As horrible as extinction is, I think it would be more compassionate to let the species go. No more animals should be taken out of the wild for research, display, performing, becoming pets, etc.

Take all the creatures out of the zoos, labs, and other forms of captivity, and give them the best life possible--probably one of those animal rehab and conservation facilities.

Close down all the zoos. Or display only 3D holograms. Maybe have a live feed from cameras in the wild--*if* the cameras, frequencies, etc. won't disturb the creatures.

So let it be written, so let it be done.

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Depends what you're using in your paint, I suppose.
Yes, OK, I was rather assuming that nobody is daft enough to walk around near a lion without some kind of high calibre backup...
But Cecil wasn't gunned down in the heat of the moment. He died 40 hours later. If shooting a lion with an arrow doesn't cause the lion to attack you in such a way that back-up is required, I'm not sure why we're assuming shooting it with a paintball would.

Because the arrow would injure the lion, and it might not be capable of attack. Whereas the paint ball would just piss it off...a LOT.

Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :

Golden Key - have you heard of the Durrell Wildlife Trust or read any of Gerald Durrell's zoo books*? When it was established Jersey Zoo was set up for research, education and conservation, open to the public for entertainment and to raise funds. It holds specific collections to rebuild the numbers of endangered species in captivity for reintroduction in the wild. The organisation works with zoos across the world to develop conservation work. A huge part of the work is ensuring that there is somewhere to reintroduce the animals which gives them a chance to reintegrate, because often, usually, one of the reasons these animals are on the edge of extinction is habitat loss.

* The Stationary Ark is all about zoo conservation and The Aye-Aye and I is one several books about his conservation missions.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Killing animals for sport isn't acceptable to me (use a camera please, or why the hell can't they switch to paintball guns?), but I'm able to grasp that there's a big gap between it not being acceptable to me and treating that unacceptability as some kind of universal truth.
Isn't that how laws get made in the first place? Enough people find something unacceptable so they make it illegal.
Yes, but note the order of those two events.

Please explain.

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

Curiosity Killed--

Thanks for the link. Will check it out, when I have time.

I read a couple of Durrell books--one by George, and one by Lawrence (?)--about their childhood experiences with animals. Good reads.

Posted by Chocoholic (# 4655) on :

It seems his brother has been killed too now. It was thought he'd protect the cubs. Sad for this and all the other animals killed by trophy hunters.

Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on :

Gerald Durrell's brother? Thought they both died ages ago....

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Chocoholic:
It seems his brother has been killed too now. It was thought he'd protect the cubs. Sad for this and all the other animals killed by trophy hunters.

Fuck me. They must really hate those cubs for some reason.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Killing animals for sport isn't acceptable to me (use a camera please, or why the hell can't they switch to paintball guns?), but I'm able to grasp that there's a big gap between it not being acceptable to me and treating that unacceptability as some kind of universal truth.
Isn't that how laws get made in the first place? Enough people find something unacceptable so they make it illegal.
Yes, but note the order of those two events.
Please explain.

People finding something unacceptable can lead to it being made illegal. But there remains a period in between where something being unacceptable to many does not mean it is illegal.

There are many places in the world where hunting for sport is still legal (but with rules, which in Cecil's case were probably broken). There are people who want to ban all hunting for sport. But hunters are required to follow the rules, not the opinions of certain people.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:

quote:
Originally posted by Chocoholic:
It seems his brother has been killed too now. It was thought he'd protect the cubs. Sad for this and all the other animals killed by trophy hunters.
Fuck me. They must really hate those cubs for some reason.

False alarm-- Jericho's collar is still showing normal movement.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
There are many places in the world where hunting for sport is still legal (but with rules, which in Cecil's case were probably broken). There are people who want to ban all hunting for sport. But hunters are required to follow the rules, not the opinions of certain people.

Okay, granted all that. Are people who find this kind of thing morally offensive not allowed to speak out about it? Just because something is legal doesn't mean people have to like it, and doesn't mean they can't speak out against it. I don't understand what point you're making here vis-a-vis this case.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
There are many places in the world where hunting for sport is still legal (but with rules, which in Cecil's case were probably broken). There are people who want to ban all hunting for sport. But hunters are required to follow the rules, not the opinions of certain people.
Okay, granted all that. Are people who find this kind of thing morally offensive not allowed to speak out about it? Just because something is legal doesn't mean people have to like it, and doesn't mean they can't speak out against it. I don't understand what point you're making here vis-a-vis this case.

Well, in the UK case people weren't just speaking out about it, they were demanding that someone have their award stripped from them. They're demanding official sanction for something that isn't officially wrong.

[ 02. August 2015, 05:48: Message edited by: orfeo ]

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

Indeed, wonderful though the Internet is we are seeing more and more the Lynch-mob mentality re-emerging.
Do something you might think is'nt a big deal and before you know it you're being shafted sideways with a RFI by half the World's IT population.

[ 02. August 2015, 11:40: Message edited by: rolyn ]

Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :

quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Indeed, wonderful though the Internet is we are seeing more and more the Lynch-mob mentality re-emerging.
Do something you might think is'nt a big deal and before you know it you're being shafted sideways with a RFI by half the World's IT population.

Really. It's frightening. The lynch-mob seems to have no scale of lynch worthy behavior either. Careers can be ruined over an out-dated no longer PC word, just as easily as over rape allegations.
Whether someone's bad action is tsked and forgotten or results in a month long session of picketing and death threats hinges on how much video we have and the appealing aspect of the victim.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

Much as a deplore the actions of the dentist, I gotta agree. For me, one of the unintended consequences of the pile-on cyber-shaming (which I suppose by participating in this thread I've contributed to in part) is that it turns the villain into a victim-- not just the faux victim of whiny conservatives complaining about "free speech" when people don't agree with them, but a real victim who has suffered real losses sometimes out of proportion with their crime. Which then makes it all the harder to address the real issues at play.

Posted by sharkshooter (# 1589) on :

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
... pile-on cyber-shaming ...

Don't we try to teach our children not to bully people?

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

The Internet was right to get outraged. The Internet was right to name and shame. It was not right to threaten in any way.
This included the Yelp reviews.
The uproar caused by the shooting of Cecil appears to be having positive effect re the hunting of lions.
But it has gone too far re the dentist.
He, however, is not an innocent victim. He is reaping what he has sown. The problem is proportion.
He is receiving more than he deserves.
And the sad thing is, it is being delivered by people who don't really care. We become mobs because it provides a positive affirmation. We belong.
Say you have a cause and wish 100 protestors to march. Ringing people up will prove a long task to find those 100. But put 25 on the street in front of a camera and the other 75 will appear, each with several friends.
The Internet adds ease and anonymity. We get to be part of something with little consequence. The mob multiplied exponentially.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
... pile-on cyber-shaming ...
Don't we try to teach our children not to bully people?

??? Are you under the impression that we only try to teach our children about things that are not a problem ???
[Confused]

*cross-posted with LilBuddah, who explained the issues more succinctly then I did.*

[ 03. August 2015, 17:57: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

Yeah, Lilb's post was spot on.

Cliffdweller, unless you are hitting Yelp every half hour with a dozen or so posts and snarling hatred at the poor saps who keep deleting them, I don't think you have to worry about being one of the perpetrators of mob think.

On the Ship we seem to be discussing the issue proportionately, if passionately. The Yelp situation is like one of those playbacks of the lost crew in "Event Horizon" . Everybody's behavior is less about justice and more about impressing each other. The outrage is not coming from actual injustice, it is about getting some of your shiny net plumage yanked, about how x individual got quoted on Buzzfeed and that mean old copy editor pulled * your* moment of brilliance before John Oliver could quote it.

[ 03. August 2015, 19:32: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Everybody's behavior is less about justice and more about impressing each other. The outrage is not coming from actual injustice, it is about getting some of your shiny net plumage yanked,

Such a powerful tool for positive change and instead of using the tool, we become tools.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

In case you're not already riled up enough, you might like to investigate the photo gallery on this page.

I was particularly taken with the section of that website called "Provider for Christ Hunting Adventure".

According to the itinerary, this includes:

quote:

1.Transfer from the airport to our camp, accommodations, and meals, worship and Christian seminars by local ministers. (You may bring your own to share with us as well). Ground transportation during your Safari.

2. Hunting of 1 Animal to include choice of: Impala, Blesbok, Blue Wildebeest (up-gradable and additional animals available). 15% Seminar Discount will apply to the trophy fees of all plains game animals taken with meat donated. Trophy skins/horn’s/skulls remain yours. (Taxidermy and shipping/dipping is your responsibility. We will facilitate trophy preparation and salting).

3. Minister to the poor at an orphanage and squatters camp with a Christian organization. This will involve bringing your meat to the camps and using your other talents to help the children. Feel free to bring needed items such as candy, clothing sports equipment, and medical supplies. These are always in short supply and greatly appreciated

Good to know these kinds of things exist, I think. [Mad]

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
In case you're not already riled up enough, you might like to investigate the photo gallery on this page.

Oh dear Lord the apostrophe. [Waterworks]

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Oh dear Lord the apostrophe.

If punctuation is the worst thing about that page, then there is a very serious problem.

Posted by Laurelin (# 17211) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
In case you're not already riled up enough, you might like to investigate the photo gallery on this page.

I was particularly taken with the section of that website called "Provider for Christ Hunting Adventure".

I love the expression of the child beneath the charming photo of the white children with their trophy kill. Her face says, so clearly: 'WTF?'

Indeed. [Mad]

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Oh dear Lord the apostrophe.
If punctuation is the worst thing about that page, then there is a very serious problem.

What's really serious is your inability to get people to take you seriously when you want to be taken seriously. It's a serious problem.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0