Huntin' With The NRA

[Paladin]

When was the last time you heard Africa referred to as "the Dark Continent"? Didn't that rather unfortunate phrase fall out of style about the same time that "child-like natives" did?

I would have thought so until this Sunday morning, when I was channel-surfing and came across an outdoors show on ESPN2 called "Under Wild Skies," a production of....NRA Sports. After a solemn printed warning that the show would include "impact shots," (so much nicer than "high-powered bullets ripping through the vital organs of animals"), it was announced that today's hunt would take place on the "Dark Continent," with the quarry being cape buffalo. I was just settling in to watch all this with a sort of horrified fascination, when it turned out that the hunter was none other than Wayne LaPierre, Big Daddy of the NRA himself. I switched the TV off and went to collect the Sunday paper at that point.

Anybody surprised that the NRA higher-ups still think of Africa as "the Dark Continent"? Me neither.....

[flvegan]

1. Watching the shooting and killing (not "hunting") of animals

strikes me as odd. I've heard the arguments...how "hunting" is a chance to get back to nature, to fill a freezer with meat. It's respectful. So how is watching the slaughter of animals any of those things?

Maybe it is just the joy in the glory of being the winner in an unfair fight, or lavishing in the gore of a decimated creature.

[bperci108]

4. Apparently you aren't too familiar with the Cape Buffalo...

Syncerus caffer is by far the most dangerous game animal in Africa.

Unless that twit LaPierre came in an armored personnel carrier, I'm afraid that the odds were stacked in favor of the Buff.

[flvegan]

5. By "game animal" you mean trophy, right?

It also appears that they are most dangerous to those that would be hunting them. I also fail to see any odds stacked in favor of an herbivore over a man (or men) with high power, long range weaponry.

[bperci108]

13. Probably for a rich asshole like La Pierre, yes.

AFAIK, most of these safari-type guys don't (and likely can't) take the bulk of the meat home with them.

But I bet the locals, the guide and his family eat quite well for a good while.

As far as how dangerous the cape buffalo is, more than a few writers have chronicled what happens when an ignorant/foolhardy/untrained hunter crosses one.

Only the largest of calibers can be used, and ranges are within a stones-throw. So the hunter has to get within feet of the animal.

And that herbivore weighs as much as a truck and has large horns, huge hooves and is quite hard to kill, especially when pissed off and fueled by adrenaline.

Most casualties are stomped to death. I've seen one picture of a European hunter taken back in the 50's or 60's that wounded a buff and then went walking into the brush looking for it. There was a large, churned up circle of mud and grass and what looked like clothing where the buff has literally ground this guy up into goo.

The only identifiable human parts were a boot with the stump of a foot, a head with several inches of spine attached and a bit of blonde beard visible. The rest was a mess of blood, mush and sinews.

If you don't like, or approve of hunting, fine.

Personally, I don't agree with trophy hunting of any kind, as I believe it to be ethically wrong from a conservationist and environmentalist standpoint.

But African hunting does bring some needed revenue and jobs to a very economically depressed area and the money helps restore wildlife and habitat.It also helps prosecute poaching and regulate habitat destruction repairing decades of damage from a time when no one cared about such things.

[Retired AF Dem]

61. When it comes to hunting dangerous game how is it an unfair fight?

The animals have the advantage when it comes to speed, strength and senses. Does having a firearm make it an unfair advantage? Sorry but when it come to hunting Cape Buffalo, the big cats among others the rifle just evens up the playing field.

[Squatch]

2. I was just watching a show on hunting Red Stag in NZ...

absolutely beautiful countryside and absolutely beautiful animals. They seem to have a very effective game management program, as the deer were very well developed and plentiful. I've already told my wife that I'm going to start saving for a hunting trip down there, to which she replied "only if you take me."

I'm glad they include a disclaimer warning the viewer that they may see some video that many would rather not watch. I have been a hunter for many years and do not care for impact shots, but I realize that in order for the animal to die, the bullet/arrow has to impact its vital organs at some point. A number of hunting programs only show the hunter pulling the trigger then cut to the hunter posing with the downed animal.

Here's a reply to a letter written to Outside Magazine:

"So let's start with South Africa. As you know from your previous trip, the weather at the tip of the Dark Continent can vary wildly, from the cool, icy fog of Cape Town to the sun-baked veldt of interior."

Link

Now, what, exactly was your point? Or, did somebody just piss in your Cheerios this fine Sunday Morning (after all, how can you not be happy today? USC finally got beat!)

[StraightDope]

44. "USC finally got beat!"

Indeed! Good for my beloved Mountaineers!

GO WVU!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. Boys with guns. Killing is fun.

[OwnedByFerrets]

6. Any "trophy" killing is barbaric. Period.

[Squatch]

7. Sez you.

[ThatsMyBarack]

8. For the record....

....huntin' & killin' for fun ain't pro-life!

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mediacenter]

10. The term

"Dark Continent" is not racist.I have no doubt that the NRA has it's share however...

[Squatch]

12. I agree.

I have read countless travel, adventure, and editorial articles which describe Africa as "The Dark Continent". As a Westerner, it speaks to that continent's mystery and allure. Frankly, Africa is high on my list of places to visit *because* of descriptors such as "Dark Continent".

[Squatch]

11. What a wonderful indictment of a significant portion of DUers.

Including yours truly.

Thanks, Lefty Mom. I never knew I was a racist "with issues".

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DenaliDemocrat]

26. Have you ever done it?

Do you eat meat? I hunt or catch all of our protien up here in Alaska. It feeds me and my family. It is natural, not barbaric, cruel...whatever.

What do you prefer? Going to the store to purchase some sterile, cellophane-wrapped, dye and hormone injected piece of animal flesh? Do you not realize that something had to die for you to eat this flesh? Are you that far removed from your natural surroundings that you fail to realize that if you eat meat, something must die? Do you feel superior because you don't actually kill the animal?

I am no fan of hunting strictly for the horns, but anyone who eats meat and is anti-hunting is a huge hypocrit.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

27. She's a vegan. nt

[LeftyMom]

29. 1. It's hypocrite.

2. "I am no fan of hunting strictly for the horns, but anyone who eats meat and is anti-hunting is a huge hypocrit." (sic) I agree with this.
3. I'm vegan.

[DenaliDemocrat]

31. Well.....

Since we are playing the "I'm superior" game

1) I am a research toxicologist, and your physiology from your teeth to your digestive enzymes is designed to eat meat. Being a vegan doesn't make you superior...it makes you malnourished.

2) I think that your lifestyle choice is unhealthy, and as a parent, irresponsible. I hope you don't force your children to eat that way. Their developing bodies need the fats and protiens from meat.

3) Fanatacism to ANY degree smells like trouble in my book. Cheney is a sicko for shooting 100 pen-raised pheasant in one day, on the flip side, people who won't eat any meat and are vocally against people who do have issues as well.

[LeftyMom]

33. I am healthier now than I ever was as an omnivore

My food allergies are much less of an issue, I haven't had any of my once-debilitating IBS symptoms in years, I no longer need my prescription iron supplement, I went from needing my inhaler at least twice daily to not bothering to renew my prescription after having one expire unused, my skin is much nicer, my energy level improved... I'm not alone, I spent this past weekend hanging out with 30 other vegans (some of whom have not consumed an animal product in two decades) and all were healthy, energetic and happy people. I suppose that's why the American Dietetic Association and Dieticians of Canada say a vegan diet is a healthy option.

Those who know him will tell you my child is remarkably healthy (he hasn't had so much as a snotty nose in years,) smart as can be and a bit big for his age. Obviously being vegan has done him no harm. I find it interesting that you assume it has when you don't know him and certainly haven't examined him. Remote diagnosis didn't work out so well for Dr Frist, I'll remind you.

PS DU has a lot of healthy vegans. Playing the "veganism is unhealthy" angle generally results in a lot of snickering here.

[DenaliDemocrat]

37. Nope

You are only making observations, nothing measured, nothing scientific, simply observation and I doubt you kept records (maybe you did?). Your experiment has no controls, no p-value, is not a blind study, etc.

Furthermore, your "recoveries" could certianly all be mental due to you convincing yourself you are better...happens all the time.

As for your child, hogwash. Children need meat for healthy development of bodies and brain. Chosing to do that to yourself is one thing, putting your child in that position is quite another.

PS As for the Frist comment, apparently you don't like being judged, but have no problem sitting in judgement of others???

[Paladin]

38. Do They Have Any Mirrors Up There In Alaska?

Try reciting your last sentence about judgment and being judged, and then take a look in a mirror. Report findings soonest.

Thanks for making things so entertaining.....

[DenaliDemocrat]

40. Any who judged first?

And said that hunting was barbaric, the NRA was racists, etc. etc. etc.??

It is the ani-gun crowd that is the reason the democrats have lost the south, don't win in the west, and continue to lose election after election.

Truth be told, I don't give a damn what Lefty Mom feeds her kid, it's her kid, she can deal with whatever comes up due to diet. I don't give a damn what you think of some stupid show on TV.

What I do give a damn about is the anti-gun sentiment here on this thread, and those that espouse it. Our Bill of Rights has the Second Ammendment for a reason. Now you can argue that it is not for private ownership...whatever. The bottom line is that our founding fathers thought having some sort of army armed to fight government corruption was necessary.

I will continue hunting, owning guns, NOT sending money to the NRA (because they are pretty kooky). If you are gay, I will support your right to marry, not be descriminated against, and support Lefy Mom's choice to feed her kids what I consider an improper diet.

I do this NOT because I am a vegan or gay, I do this because I am a DEMOCRAT, and I believe that people should have the freedom to live their lives without government messing with them, EVEN IF I DON'T AGREE WITH THEIR LIFESTYLE MYSELF! I AM A DEMOCRAT!

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

41. Being gay isn't a lifestyle. It's a life.

Glad to see you support equal rights even if you don't "agree" with my "lifestyle."

[Irreverend IX]

47. I think he was talking about veganism wrt "lifestyle." nt

[LeftyMom]

39. I have records on the asthma issue

I was participating in a study at the time, so there are in fact meticulous records of my rescue inhaler use, and it plummeted when I went vegetarian and I haven't needed it once in the four years and change since I went vegan. While IBS does not lend itself well to record keeping (I suppose somebody less squeamish than me could chart the frequency and consistency of their stools, but I'm not about to try it,) I do know that my use of OTC meds for digestive upset is a mere fraction of what it was. I actually had a box of Immodium AD expire on me a few months back, something that would never have happened on my previous diet, when I went through a box every few months in order to be able to work and function.

Finally, I'm not basing my opinion based only on the experience of myself or the many vegans I know. You neglected to address the opinion statements of those better qualified to address the issue: major organizations of dieticians approve of vegetarian and vegan diets. For children too:

"Vegan diets can easily meet the nutritional needs of the growing child. Most of the nutritional concerns and issues vegetarian families have are exactly the same as for all other families. The scientific literature shows a positive relationship between vegetarian diets and reduced risk for several chronic diseases and conditions, including obesity, coronary artery disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and some types of cancer (16)." - Carol M. Coughlin, RD of the American Dietetic Association's Vegetarian Nutrition study group

[flvegan]

49. You might as well give up, LM...

the "research toxicologist" has spoken. Obviously along with advanced study in pharmacology/toxicology, the poster has advanced study as a dietician or nuritionist (2 things that most doctors, scientists, et al don't know shit about, as they don't study it).

I'll just sit here being malnourished as stated...

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

53. Yeah...you and your malnourished 18" biceps.

:rofl:

[LeftyMom]

54. I'm too tired to type anymore anyhow

;)

[Paladin]

34. I'm Declaring You The Winner Of The "I'm Superior" Game

Hands down.....

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

35. ...

:spray:

:rofl:

[flvegan]

45. No, now you're playing the "I don't know what I'm talking about" game.

Your #1 and #2 smack of lack of education, and broad-brushed summary that YOU cannot back up.

[LeftyMom]

55. You just think that because your brain needs animal protein

Lord knows the rest of you looks malnourished. :rofl:

:*

[brentspeak]

32. As someone who can't stand the NRA, your accusation is outrageous

"The NRA fu**ers are racist"

There are who knows how many thousands of NRA members in the USA, most of whom are official members simply because they quickly filled out a short form when they bought something at a gun store. The NRA administration, leadership, and their rabid corps of volunteer activists are a bunch of meatheads (though not necessarily racists, but I'm sure some are); all the other thousands and thousands of members vary widely in their political views (with the majority definitely tilting right), and it's safe to say only a minority fit that stereotype you're referring to.

I hate the NRA -- do a search of my posts on the subject. I hate their agenda, how they do things, etc. But there's many thousands of decent members of that organization, as squatch points out.

As for hunting -- it's not something I would do myself, but if you want to make generalizations about hunters, you should talk to Democrats like Howard Dean, who's an avid hunter (among many other Democrats). Is Howard Dean a "pathological, right winger"?

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LeftyMom]

16. My argument is not that "hunting" leads to racism

My argument is that the subjugation of humans and the subjugation of animals are closely akin in their causes, not that an effect of one, "hunting," causes an effect of the other, racism.

Evidence shows us that having a weapon for home defense is a poor solution, that it's more likely to be involved in violence in the home than to prevent it. Proliferation of individual gun ownership and the resultant surfeit of easily stolen weapons (made more difficult to trace and recover thanks to the NRA) helps to arm the very criminal element you fear. Also, I find it odd that you claim that racial politics made no difference in your decision to purchase a gun, and in the very next sentence you point out a racial group you believe to be an increasing factor in criminality. Unsurprisingly, this is the very group the media is currently using as their boogieman, which kinda makes my point.

[mediacenter]

20. I would like

to see that evidence...

Evidence shows us that having a weapon for home defense is a poor solution, that it's more likely to be involved in violence in the home than to prevent it.

[LeftyMom]

25. Sure

Sorry it took a few minutes, my power and thus my internet connection is a bit buggy this morning.

Guns increase chance of death by homicide, especially for women: http://www.upenn.edu/ldi/issuebrief8_8.pdf

Guns pose great risk to children in the home: http://www.usa.safekids.org/content_documents/Firearm_facts.pdf

Guns more likely to harm residents than criminals: http://www.ichv.org/Statistics.htm

"A gun in the home is 4 times more likely to be involved in an unintentional shooting, 7 times more likely to be used to commit a criminal assault or homicide, and 11 times more likely to be used to attempt or commit suicide than to be used in self-defense."

-A Kellerman, et al. Journal of Trauma, August 1998; Kellerman AL, Lee RK, Mercy JA, et al. "The Epidemiological Basis for the Prevention of Firearm Injuries." Annu.Rev Public Health. 1991; 12:17-40.)

[mediacenter]

46. Nope

Guns that are secured don't harm anyone. Am I to believe that a normal person becomes a homicidal maniac after bringing a gun into the house?

A person that is predisposed to violence should not have a gun to begin with....

[LeftyMom]

52. Don't argue with science.

Years and years and years of data, all backing up the same conclusion: On a large scale it's many times over more dangerous to have a gun in the home than not to have one. Anybody who tells you otherwise wants to sell you a gun, a membership or a canidate, or has bought into the bullshit of somebody who does.

[Irreverend IX]

56. That "information" comes from the long-since-debunked Kellerman study.

See this page for details:

http://www.jpfo.org/doctors-epidemic.htm

[LeftyMom]

57. I'd take a peer-reviewed study over a gun ownership group

Anyhow, there were plenty of other links provided, from other sources.

[Irreverend IX]

62. Other sources, huh?

Let's take a look at some of Wiebe's primary sources...

Sloan JH, Kellermann AL, Reay DT, et al. Handgun regulations, crime, assaults, and homicide: a tale of two cities. N Engl J Med 1988;319:1256–62.

Kellermann AL, Rivara FP, Somes G, et al. Suicide in relation to gun ownership. N Engl J Med 1992;327:467–72.

Kellermann AL, Rivara FP, Rushforth NB, et al. Gun ownership as a risk factor for homicide in the home. N Engl J Med 1993;329:1084–91.

Oh my! Kellerman's springing up all over the place. And here's a thorough explanation of some of the flaws in Kellerman's study:

"Kellerman took homicide data from three different counties from August 1987 to August 1992. These counties surrounded Seattle (co-author and medical examiner, Donald Reay"s jurisdiction), Memphis and Cleveland. He then investigated each homicide case to see what lifestyle factors it had (drug-use, renting/owning). The proper thing to do would have been to use a random sample of people who may, or may not have been involved in a homicide. Having found the "case", Kellerman now finds a "control" nearby who supposedly shared the demographics but did not have a homicide in the household.

Here is where everything goes to hell in a handbasket. First, Kellerman was only able to get 388 valid cases out of 1860 official reports but only 316 matched controls. Such a small sample is prone to wide statistical variations absent an agenda such as Kellerman et al. It would be interesting to see why, exactly, Kellerman decided to drop so many cases from the study--but none of the analyses that I have read were writtenread were written after 1996. Again, homicides whether lawful or not are included along with suicides. And even "police" was listed as a category in the "Offender" column.

What Kellerman found was that in the homicide homes, 71% of the victims had high rates of criminal activity which agrees with other studies which find that 75% of murderers and 75% of cop killers are adults with long felony histories.. Hardly something that would compare to the rest of America. No, the gun didn't do it. The nature of the criminal did. Criminals killing criminals.

The study never made an effort to decide whether the person being killed was an intruder --OR--whether the gun which may or may not have been present was actually used. And since Kellerman's study shows that 71% of the homicide victims were killed by people whose relationship to the victim indicates that the killer did not live in the victim's house--and presumably brought his own weapon, if any, with him. All Kellerman asked was, "In this household where a homicide was committed, was there a gun, any gun, in the house?" Nothing more."

So legitimate self-defense incidents and even police actions were lumped in with murders, and 71% of those victims had high rates of criminal activity. Looks like gun ownership is pretty safe for people who aren't muscling in on someone else's drug turf.

And I do hope you're aware that correlation does not equal causation. And that it's very possible to twist the scientific peer-review system to support an agenda. For more info on that, look up the Ricaurte MDMA study, which arrived at the conclusion that "Ecstasy eats holes in your brain" through a combination of error and fraud.

And if you're hungry for more peer-reviewed research, try reading Gary Kleck's article on defensive gun uses:

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html

[mediacenter]

21. How

Did the NRA make weapons more difficult to trace?

[LeftyMom]

28. Let's see:

They opposed ammo identification in CA (link: http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/15490696.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp )
They oppose efforts to track which gun dealers sell guns to criminals (link: http://www.rcfp.org/news/2003/0602hr2275.html )
They oppose efforts to communicate between law enforcement agencies almost any information about gun crime trends or specific guns used in crimes ((link: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/290196_kerlikowske27.html )
They oppose effective interstate background checks (link: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/02/28/MN40941.DTL )
They oppose record keeping after completion of background checks (link: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/02/28/MN40941.DTL )

Need I go on?

[mediacenter]

30. Please don't

misunderstand. I am requesting the information so I can discuss this topic with you. I just want to make sure we are on the same page...Thanks for posting it.:hi:

[mediacenter]

42. Excuse me

LeftyMom (1000+ posts) Sun Oct-29-06 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #21
28. Let's see:
They opposed ammo identification in CA (link: http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/154906... )
They oppose efforts to track which gun dealers sell guns to criminals (link: http://www.rcfp.org/news/2003/0602hr2275.html )
They oppose efforts to communicate between law enforcement agencies almost any information about gun crime trends or specific guns used in crimes ((link: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/290196_kerlikowske2... )
They oppose effective interstate background checks (link: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/200... )
They oppose record keeping after completion of background checks (link: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/200... )

Need I go on?

Ammo identification is a huge waste of taxpayers money.To begin with the serial number would identify the gun used, not the person who used it.The technology involved is easily overcome. Who is going to maintain the database?

The gun industry has more regulations than the nuclear power companies. Dealers are required to do a NICS check on every buyer. They are also required to keep track of every weapon that is brought into their store and every weapon that goes out.

[LeftyMom]

48. Identifying the gun used is a step closer to the owner

Sure, it's not the end all and be all of crime fighting, but it would help to link crimes committed with the same weapon and make it easier to match the gun and collected ballistic evidence. It could also point to those who channel legal into the black market, which is probably the NRA's problem as they have opposed other efforts to track gun dealers who habitually sell to criminals.

Linking the bullet to the gun to the person who held it would also be easier if the NRA had not opposed any federal spending to preserve gun purchaser data after background checks.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

17. Err...what do Latinos have to do with anything?

I mean, I understand owning a gun for home protection, but what does the racial background of the "criminal element" have to do with it?

[Possumpoint]

18. Okay

The lack of racial identity in my decision to buy a gun was the point I tried to make. Apparently I did a poor job of conveying it. Sorry, my bad.

[XemaSab]

36. In many areas

it's more expensive to hunt for meat than buy it in the store.

Guns are spendy.

[mediacenter]

43. Not always

There are many firearms available at reduced cost..

[Irreverend IX]

50. There are good hunting rifles just a bit over $100.

I've known poor rural people whose diet contains a lot of venison and rabbit they would never be able to afford otherwise.

[NEDem]

63. actually, I bought my guns to protect my white family from

right wing white people.

And to blast the occasional goose or duck.

You may not like it, but candaian goose is fantastic when roasted.

[Lefty48197]

19. I wish Wayne LaPierre would go hunting with Dick Cheney

.

[mediacenter]

23. He already has

Just sayin'

[Lefty48197]

64. Then he should go again, and NRA's Dick Cheney should get drunk again

... Just mentioning that it was the NRA's VP Candidate that shot somebody in the face.

[Paladin]

24. Upon Reflection, I Should Have Watched More of the Show.....

...just long enough to see if Bwana LaPierre's guide was referred to as a "white hunter." I'll bet this NRA hunting show was the Sunday morning TV equivalent of that old 60's John Wayne movie "Hatari": Nothing but a small bunch of white people with speaking parts, and a few black Africans in the background to make it look like it wasn't shot somewhere outside Palm Springs......

[dollydew]

51. NRA Hunting

I'm a descendant of those from the "Dark Continent". Actually a descendant of slaves from Virginia and Maryland. Last time I looked the sun shines on Africa as well. So what's "dark" about it? This is the 21st century not the 18th or 19th. Where's the mystery with satellite telemetry? The World Wide Web? Google? Cable? Satellite TV? Or as the Bible puts it: The Lord makes the sun to shine on the just and the unjust.

[Paladin]

58. Well Said.

n/t

[dollydew]

59. Thank You

n/t

[Retired AF Dem]

60. I was in Rwanda in April of 94

those were some preatty dark days.

[Jamastiene]

65. Shh, the gweat white hunter is hunting wabbits.

Yes, I find it odd to refer to it as "The Dark Continent." Odd indeed.