HomeHuman to cat relationshipsport huntingTwo women who enjoy killing animals with a bow and arrow

Comments

Two women who enjoy killing animals with a bow and arrow — 136 Comments

  1. As to Woody, aka a million stupid monikers, I have only one main thing to say:

    QUIT FEEDING THE TROLLS, folks.

    You’re losing anyone who wants to have any useful or serious discussion by enabling all this ridiculous disruption to occur. And that ends up REDUCING the support for Tiger or other animals we want to see justice done on behalf of. Trolls aim to upset others, so why would anyone want to encourage their sick psychoses in the world? Let them become so leper-like that they do away with themselves instead.

  2. I appreciate Lee, as a hunter herself, weighing in here, and wish THOSE kinds of hunters would put a lot more effort into fighting against the trophy hunters and other so-called ‘sport’ hunters. Better yet, I wish they’d all just stop killing animals because I still can’t agree with the rationalizations or end results.

    The only time I could even begin to imagine killing any animal myself (as a food source), would be if I were in some unfortunate and likely very rare situation where I was was starving to death, still wanted to live, and there were no non-poisonous plants, seeds, grains, etc. to eat instead, and no potable water either. Even then, I’d most likely first try and find an already-dead (but not rotting) animal (or insects) to eat if I had to. I liken the experiencing of real sorrow upon an animal’s death and yet in the same breath SQUELCHING that INITIAL and innate, spiritually “core” response, to Temple Grandin’s same defeatist stance. As Jeffery Masson critiqued, β€œshe can never take the next step to questioning what she does…One moment of true insight, when she cried, was quickly stifled by a dumb clichΓ©. It is an argument used by many people who become very annoyed if you say that we wouldn’t want our children born into a world where they would be murdered, no matter how humanely or painlessly, after having lived for just a few months or years…Dr. Grandin never asks the only relevant question here: Is it right to do this at all?”

    Listen, if you killed me, then thanked me for UNwillingly giving up my life to you, your gratitude doesn’t whimsically and magically ABSOLVE you of taking my physical life away. And were I still living, I’d be GD FURIOUS at you for doing so! For all you know, I had family who were then going to grieve and suffer, and maybe even die TOO (if they were dependent upon me for their own sustenance), all because you killed ME. Basically, I’d be screaming, “how DARE you?!?!”

  3. As a woman hunter, I take offense to having to share that title with these two hunters. No animal on this planet has a natural defense against any of man’s shooting weapons. There is nothing courageous about killing animals for sport.

    Shame on trophy hunters!!! Their only interest is the trophy and NOT the meat.

    The only reason to kill is for survival and self-defense. Killing kitty-cats NEVER falls into either category.

    My family eats what ever I have harvested and each time I feel extreme sadness for the loss of a life, after which I give thanks to God for providing my family with meat. I have NEVER killed for pleasure. I only take the shot if I am absolutely positive it will be a quick kill. I loathe those who allow the animal to suffer a lengthy death. There have been many animals that walk away because I do not have a clean shot at them; too many to count.

  4. I think the point is being missed entirely. This so-called vet killed her neighbor’s cat for “fun.” Many say the cat didn’t die right away; meaning he suffered. Hunting for necessity is not what she did. Hunting for sport was not what she did. Killing her neighbor’s cat IS what she did! As if that isn’t bad enough- she callously bragged about it on FaceBook.
    So anyone- male or female- who hunts and eats the meat, or tans the hide, or whatever- that’s totally up to you (while I don’t particularly care for hunting as a “sport).
    The point remains- Lindsey, in particular, took an oath to help animals. She then killed a domesticated animal who belonged to her neighbor. In addition, she was the cause of his suffering. THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE! Hunt wild animals if you want to hunt. But killing a domesticated neighbor’s cat is criminal and needs to be dealt with criminally.

      • Au contraire mon idiot! (I presume “idiot” is the same in both English and French so as not to confuse the idiots.)

        There is so much RIGHT with what she did on so many levels.

        Not to mention, that she was within her LEGAL rights to destroy that cat (owned or not). Why do you never comment on that? Surely your self-professed history of being involved in legalities would find that interesting. But no, you are afraid to approach it from that point of view because it would reveal you for what you truly are — a poseur.

        • It is a felony to kill a cat in the manner she killed Tiger. Stop ranting and read up on Texas law. Oh wait-you already did! Breaking the law in Texas has already landed you in hot water before. I have an idea! Offer your legal services to Kristen.

          • WRONG!

            No crime of any sort was committed. The cat had no evidence of it being owned by anyone at the time of the killing. And even if it was, the most that she could be fined was the value of that cat — about 2-cents on today’s market, if lucky. According to Texas law, it is perfectly legal to kill a cat to stop it from destroying all the native wildlife on anyone’s land (just one of many reasons you can LEGALLY shoot someone’s trespassing vermin cat). This is also true in every state. Whether you want to believe it or not. It might be worded differently in each state’s laws, but that is the overwhelming law everywhere. You can’t just cherry-pick those bits of laws out-of-context and convince yourself that it is illegal. That’s just plain self-deceptive, manipulative and completely psychotic.

            Pay particular attention to the sections pertaining to, “It is a defense to prosecution …” Meaning, that those animal cruelty laws are not applicable in those instances. She was perfectly within her legal rights. I hope they have excellent lawyers. They’ll own anyone who has tried to destroy their lives.

            Texas Law

            Sec. 42.092. CRUELTY TO NONLIVESTOCK ANIMALS.

            (a) In this section:

            (1) “Abandon” includes abandoning an animal in the person’s custody without making reasonable arrangements for assumption of custody by another person.

            (2) “Animal” means a domesticated living creature, including any stray or feral cat or dog, and a wild living creature previously captured. The term does not include an uncaptured wild living creature or a livestock animal.

            (3) “Cruel manner” includes a manner that causes or permits unjustified or unwarranted pain or suffering.

            (4) “Custody” includes responsibility for the health, safety, and welfare of an animal subject to the person’s care and control, regardless of ownership of the animal.

            (5) “Depredation” has the meaning assigned by Section 71.001, Parks and Wildlife Code.

            (6) “Livestock animal” has the meaning assigned by Section 42.09.

            (7) “Necessary food, water, care, or shelter” includes food, water, care, or shelter provided to the extent required to maintain the animal in a state of good health.

            (8) “Torture” includes any act that causes unjustifiable pain or suffering.

            (b) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:

            (1) tortures an animal or in a cruel manner kills or causes serious bodily injury to an animal;

            (2) without the owner’s effective consent, kills, administers poison to, or causes serious bodily injury to an animal;

            (3) fails unreasonably to provide necessary food, water, care, or shelter for an animal in the person’s custody;

            (4) abandons unreasonably an animal in the person’s custody;

            (5) transports or confines an animal in a cruel manner;

            (6) without the owner’s effective consent, causes bodily injury to an animal;

            (7) causes one animal to fight with another animal, if either animal is not a dog;

            (8) uses a live animal as a lure in dog race training or in dog coursing on a racetrack; or

            (9) seriously overworks an animal.

            (c) An offense under Subsection (b)(3), (4), (5), (6), or (9) is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is a state jail felony if the person has previously been convicted two times under this section, two times under Section 42.09, or one time under this section and one time under Section 42.09. An offense under Subsection (b)(1), (2), (7), or (8) is a state jail felony, except that the offense is a felony of the third degree if the person has previously been convicted two times under this section, two times under Section 42.09, or one time under this section and one time under Section 42.09.

            (d) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:

            (1) the actor had a reasonable fear of bodily injury to the actor or to another person by a dangerous wild animal as defined by Section 822.101, Health and Safety Code; or

            (2) the actor was engaged in bona fide experimentation for scientific research.

            (e) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (b)(2) or (6) that:

            (1) the animal was discovered on the person’s property in the act of or after injuring or killing the person’s livestock animals or damaging the person’s crops and that the person killed or injured the animal at the time of this discovery; or

            (2) the person killed or injured the animal within the scope of the person’s employment as a public servant or in furtherance of activities or operations associated with electricity transmission or distribution, electricity generation or operations associated with the generation of electricity, or natural gas delivery.

            (f) It is an exception to the application of this section that the conduct engaged in by the actor is a generally accepted and otherwise lawful:

            (1) form of conduct occurring solely for the purpose of or in support of:

            (A) fishing, hunting, or trapping; or

            (B) wildlife management, wildlife or depredation control, or shooting preserve practices as regulated by state and federal law; or

            (2) animal husbandry or agriculture practice involving livestock animals.

            (g) This section does not create a civil cause of action for damages or enforcement of the section.

            Out of all those many reasons that you can legally kill someone’s trespassing vermin cats for them, I just love this one most of all …

            (e) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (b)(2) or (6) that:
            (1) …
            (2) the person killed or injured the animal within the scope of the person’s employment as a public servant or in furtherance of activities or operations associated with electricity transmission or distribution, electricity generation or operations associated with the generation of electricity, or natural gas delivery.

            When all else fails, just say that you couldn’t fart whenever their cat was around. It was interfering in “natural gas delivery”! It would be perfectly legal according to the law. Methane is methane! According to the vagueness of that law, it does make it perfectly legal. Methane is often used to heat with and cook with, recognized as a valid bio-fuel. There’s more than one way that methane is “delivered” — sometimes naturally and in small quantities. When telling others about this I think I’ll call it the “Fallen-Felonious-Feral-Feline-Fart-Defense”. πŸ™‚

            You might also find it interesting … that according to those laws, if it is eventually determined that that cat did have an “owner”, then the “owner” can be fined and convicted under several of those animal-cruelty laws. πŸ™‚ This is precisely why all animal-neglect, animal-abandonment, and animal-endangerment laws exist on the books in every county of every state to stop fools from killing their own domesticated-species pets. Sometimes landing in jail for years for doing so.

            • I wonder if “Elisa”/”Irish” has started to comprehend why all her “Examiner” articles are being censored from any replies. Guess what: lawyers are using her articles to pursue her for legal recompense for slander and libel. LOL Run Elisa, Run! πŸ™‚ Ooops, it’s too late. ROFLMAO!

              • No I voluntarily close the comment section on the majority of my Examiner articles. And the person named Reality Bytes who threatened a 7 year old boy is the one who should worry about lawyers. The mother is ready to press charges.

                  • I close them myself on the majority of the articles. The only ones I really have trouble with I’ve sent you a new article to do. They’re by Animal_Proponent and Reality Bytes. You have to understand most of my Examiner writing is on cats and dogs needing out of the shelter or rescues needing help after they pull a cat or dog out of the shelter. Comments aren’t really necessary on those. I just don’t have time to go back in to every article where those two fools are spouting gibberish. It’s easier just to close the comments to everyone. I wish I could remove them on a comment by comment basis but its all or nothing.

              • Oh dear Woody, only you uses “ROFLMAO”. And to suggest that Elisa can be sued for defamation because of what she writes is laughable. Absolutely laughable. It would never happen. Firstly, what she writes is not defamatory in anyway and secondly, there are millions of examples of defamation on the internet particularly on Facebook and no one does a thing about it because it is impractical due to legal costs and damages would be miniscule. The whole thing is unworkable. The internet giants accept that.

            • You are wrong again and I believe it can be proved she committed a crime: Firstly none of the defenses apply apply. Secondly, vets have stated that the cat was not dead when the photo was taken. This means she tortured the cat which is obviously a crime.

              Woody don’t ever use the word “psychotic’ again on this site, please. Just stop it.

    • She didn’t shoot that cat “for fun”. She destroyed it so it wouldn’t skin-live and gut-alive thousands of innocent animals and all their offspring that would starve to death or never be born. Destroy any 1 free-roaming cat = save the lives of countless 1,000’s of animals from being tortured to death by that 1 cat. If you can’t wrap your brain around that simple equation in how to prevent the suffering of animals, then it would explain the childish tactics you use in editing the names of others, more immature and ignorant than kindergartners.

      • Just stop, Jimbo. Nobody cares or reads your rants anymore but newbies. Get on with your sad, lonely life.

        • The only people who don’t care are those who promote the existence of free-roaming cats who torture to death all other animals, including torturing to death their own cats. No stray cat dies of old-age you know.

          Self-deceptive much?

          Why all you animal-torturing cretins are not locked-up in prison for life yet is anyone’s guess.

      • Thank you so much for all your rants! Now I know who to look for in my website’s comments. Thanks again for allowing me to know who to block in my comments! I can’t wait to get started!

    • Exactly! And she appeared very happy in killing Tiger. THEN she said she was awesome. Every time she opens her mouth she sticks her foot in it. I’m not surprised she hasn’t granted any interviews about what she did.

      • Of course she was happy. Thinking about all the THOUSANDS of animals that would no longer be skinned-alive and disemboweled-alive by that one stray cat. You just don’t get it, do you. Kill ANY stray cat by ANY means will stop the senseless torture of thousands of native animals that actually belong here.

        That’s okay. As long as you keep throwing your cats in front of cats, guns, and loaded bows & arrows, you get to whine how all your cats are being LEGALLY destroyed so you get attention for your own miserable self. Because that’s what this is really all about — if you don’t throw cats where they will be legally destroyed, however could you get attention in life? Nothing else on earth would give you the attention you demand. So you use your cats like little animal-sacrifices to manipulate everyone for that attention that you so desperately crave. Kill some more cats for attention for yourself. I’ll just laugh even more.

          • It is hard for me to get it into my head what it must be like to have a genuine threat of an outdoor cat being harmed by a person. In the UK it does happen, of course. There are several well publicised examples annually but this type of risk to cat health appears to be greater in the USA or perhaps it is just talked about more in the USA.

        • the THOUSANDS of animals that would no longer be skinned-alive and disemboweled-alive by that one stray cat

          Gross exaggeration and stupid. There is no evidence that cats do this. Hunting of prey by domestic cats is greatly exaggerated and cats don’t skin animals alive. People do though in China! – for the cat meat market. Charming humans.

          • Birds are in more danger from skyscrapers. Gonna go knock down all the buildings in the cities to protect the birds? It’s not the cats that are the danger to wildlife. It’s urban development.

        • interesting, Betty, cuz if im not mistaken cats r incapable of “skinning” anything alive. keeping an animal alive while skinning gives the connotation of doing it 4 pleasure, & u have 2 have higher brain function 4 that…as well as opposable thumbs which cats do not have. raccoons r a vermin-like creature with opposable thumbs, but 2 do THAT, & NOT eat the meat evinces desire, pleasure, cognition, foresight, & knowhow. there is another animal that can b vermin-like that could do THAT…man. WE put value on the skins of animals. we ALSO tend 2 obsess on things WE r interested n. u do tend 2 go on & on about how an animal incapable of skinning, skins so many other “innocent animals”. it does make one wonder about YOU, Betty, cuz we ALL know that when we do something we know 2 b wrong or truly reprehensible 2 another we find ways 2 make it seem less. maybe by calling them something different than what they r, “animals” 4 example. the more i read what u have written(past & present)red flags keep going off n my head. now I havent profiled n a little while so i may b a little rusty, but my gfs former partner from The Bureau, n Texas, seems 2 b interested n u, or someone like u. im sure someone DID mention Texas, right? so since cats cant do what u r so sure they r doing(they can “gut”, etc, but actually skinning something is a little different), 2 thousands of helpless animals no less, & u strongly believe they should b “tossed n front of cars”, correct? is there anything else u might like 2 explain 2 us, like how all this happened, where u saw it, & when. u sound like u really want 2 help stop this from continuing. maybe with more information we could stop it. unless u r simply trolling with the modus operandi of pissing people off & creating problems. so, which is it…Betty? i dont mean 2 offend anyone, & i dont generally “roll” like this, bringing my gfs position up on a comment, but something doesnt add up.

  5. So, Betty, the only ways cats can die are being shot through the head with an arrow while caught in a trap and being restrained and then held up by the shaft of the arrow while still alive, or being hit by a car? First of all, nobody suggested the latter was preferable in any way. Second, and more importantly, if you think those are the only two ways a cat can die, you are not only a sadistic sociopath, but you are also incredibly, unbelievably stupid and ignorant.

  6. I do want to add this article is not to bash hunters who hunt for food. Even those who are in the United States have to admit that they wouldn’t be here today had their ancestors not hunted for food. From the time of the Mayflower until the mid 20th century, hunting to feed the family meant survival. A lot of the early settlers died of malnutrition. I don’t hate hunters. I have a lot of friends who hunt. I’d just prefer a camera instead of a gun when facing a deer.

    My grandmother came from such a poor area in NC that possums would be trapped and fed for a week before being used as food.

    • Meant to add vegetarians to the above comment. Now being a vegetarian is a choice and a lifestyle. Back when the U.S. was being settled by immigrants, vegetarians most likely didn’t exist. Not eating meat meant starvation. There are enough historical references out there where those who lived in past centuries around the time of the Revolutionary War and Civil War where they talk about game being scarce and people starving. But they didn’t go out killing just to kill. And trophy hunting didn’t exist.

      • Pay people to cram more dead animals into bags, boxes, and cans of “cat food” for you while you gleefully deny that you are promoting and paying for others to kill animals for you. Vegan? LOL

  7. I almost wish I could get into the minds of these people to understand a desire to kill animals for fun. I can’t hit a bird with my car without crying. What a sad life they must leas!!

    • I have exactly the same problem. I can’t understand where the pleasure comes from in shooting animals. It is bizarre to me. I believe it is a caveman throwback (2 million yrs ago when hunting was for a purpose) and the people who sport hunt and enjoy it are acting out their primeval instincts and have not developed emotionally or intellectually enough to banish those ancient instincts, If I am correct sport hunters are stupid and ignorant and it should not be allowed because governments should not pander to ignorant people.

      • I disagree. People who hunt for pleasure are not wired properly. You can not teach empathy for others, nor can you teach compassion. Whenever I have a successful hunt (which is probably one time in 20+ outings), I feel great sadness and cry because I have taken a life. It does not get easier with time. I do not get numb to the feeling. I do, however, pray to God and ask for forgiveness and give thanks for being given food for my family. Hunting is not supposed to be for joy, only survival. The joy is sitting in the stand and watching nature all around me. I really enjoy watching the birds and squirrels. One afternoon, I watched a pair of raccoons climb up a dead tree and jump to a neighboring tree. They were really cute and I could hear them chatter at times.

  8. Isn’t it nice to know that Michael would rather that a cat be hit by a car, drag itself into a gutter, and lie there in a ditch suffering to death for days. Because an instant death with an arrow through its brain is too difficult for him to grasp and accept. (While he gleefully munches on his ham sandwich and opens a tin of cat-food that was created from animals that suffered to death.)

    How “humane” of you Michael. It’s okay that all other animals must suffer for your enjoyment in life — a cat not even being any kind of requirement of humans being alive, just your enjoyment, no other reason — but cats should never die or suffer. Right? You don’t realize how hypocritical and insane that makes you?

    • dont worry i wont resort 2 name calling or insults about ur person since i can honestly say i dont know u from a hole n the wall, but i gotta say this, Betty. i like how u just pick & choose little disparate bits & pieces & weave them together any way u feel like it try 2 prove ur point. the fact that u believe what ur saying is a laff n & of itself. u remind me of Tipper Gore back n the 80’s/90’s when the PMRC tried, unsuccessfully, 2 prosecute rock bands 4 the stupidity of others. here u r pulling things out of context just like they did. i find it funny, which is good cuz i needed a good laff. thx

  9. Ms Lyndsey did NOT provide a “quick and clean” death for Tiger the cat, even though he was shot at close range. He clearly was not dead when that infamous photo was taken.

    Support her actions all you like, but that only compounds my belief that you share her sociopathic tendencies.

    • You have no evidence that that cat was shot at close-range, nor that that cat is still alive. It is clear that you have never had to kill an animal with your own hands. A metal shaft of the arrow could be inducing electrical impulses into the cat’s nerves that would have made that cat hold its legs in the position it was in that photograph. You’ve never seen any movie were a human will sit-up on the examination table hours after its death? I think you want all animals to suffer, otherwise you wouldn’t entertain such absurdities. But then, if you let cats roam free, that’s a proved case — you want all animals to suffer to death from your free-roaming cats.

      • When a human corpse sits upright hours after the death of that person (not an “it” by the way), that is due to rigor mortis – nothing to do with electrical impulses.

          • Lee: I wasn’t sure if Betty Louhoo aka Woody was referring to zombie films at first πŸ˜‰ but in real life it happens when the muscles and joints which became relaxed upon death, then stiffen and contract in the hours following death.

            • Michele, you may have used a different email address causing the software to no longer recognise you, leading to moderation of your comment! Sorry for that long-winded explanation.

      • That’s why I’ve never stated the cat is definitely still alive in the photo. Several people were angered by that, but I’m not a veterinarian. Several vets have seen the photo and said Tiger was still alive due to how his legs were held and his mouth was closed, saying a dead cat would have an open mouth.

      • This woman was not admirable. We do not like thinking that the poor cat was still alive- we are appalled that it appears that the poor cat was still alive. This “veterinarian” didn’t do this to protect native species she did it because for some sick reason she thought it was fun. If you think free roaming cats and feral cats can’t have good lives then you truly are ignorant. It also doesn’t appear that it was a quick, clean death which wouldn’t matter anyway because for one thing this cat didn’t deserve to die and for another he was someone’s much loved pet.

    • He clearly was not dead when that infamous photo was taken.

      This is one of the most shocking aspects of this grizzly tale. This is a vet. What an attitude. It is extraordinary.

      • And yet, you still have no proof that that is true. But you WANT to think it is still alive. That’s the grisly part — how your mind works to entertain that idea and won’t let go of it. Perhaps a visit to a psychologist is in order.

    • Those who have studied the photo believe 1)Tiger was caught in a trap before being shot 2)Tiger was shot at close range 3) Tiger was not dead when the photo was taken judging by the paws and mouth. What Lindsey did was also ILLEGAL.

        • I didn’t notice the hind leg until someone brought it to my attention. Hard to take your eyes off the arrow through the head to notice anything else.

          • Even the pink of the cat’s belly could account for that color of reflected light on that portion of the cat. But you so want to envision cats that are bloody and suffering, so you jump to the most extreme imaginings possible to entertain cats in torment and suffering. That speaks tomes more about your mentally-ill thought processes than any photograph of a dead cat.

  10. You’ve never met a veterinarian that wasn’t also an avid hunter and practiced all methods to LEGALLY and HUMANELY hunt all other animals? Her shot being testament to her skill and desire to make it a quick and clean death. Or has that escaped your pea-brained, psychotically pavement-brained, bambi-cartoon-educated, cat-licking sensibilities?

    If you truly care about the well-being of animals, then destroying ALL free-roaming cats is the most humane thing to do of all options available (even for the cats themselves).

    Destroy any one free-roaming invasive-species cat = save the lives of thousands of native animals. That’s the TRUE suffering-animal equation. Saving those native animals from being tortured to death by being disemboweled-alive or skinned-alive and left to suffer to death, or their offspring left to starve to death after the parents are killed or after cats have destroyed all of their ONLY food-sources — and all done to NATIVE animals that actually belong here by just ONE invasive-species cat.

    It appears that this admirable veterinarian understood this. While all the other scum-of-the-earth veterinarians gleefully rub their hands together thinking about their bank-accounts — just waiting for someone to bring in the next almost-dead road-kill cat or loser in a TNR territorial battle so they can line their pockets with cash from almost-dead and suffering cats from criminally-negligent pet-owners.

    • Oh dear, you really are Woody in drag! The “cat-licking” phrase gave it away. Sorry Stevenson, you can’t hide it because your poison leaks out of you all the time.

      • It has become a common phrase. Nobody knows what to call cat advocates that throw their cats into traffic or willingly let their cat drink antifreeze in a gutter. They most certainly are not cat-“lovers”. There’s no better term to use today than cat-licker.

        • Yes, if there is one phrase that is his trademark it is “cat-lickers”. It comes from a video of about four years ago of a woman licking her cat. She was an odd woman. He got the idea from her.

          • Ooops, still wrong. Still spewing lies. Like that’s any surprise. When you get it right I’ll be the first to tell you. Try the name “Rumpelstiltskin”, see if that gets you any closer to the truth for once in your abysmally deceptive and lying misinforming should-have-never-been-born life. πŸ™‚

    • I have met other veterinarians who hunt for food for their family. Unfortunately it’s a way of life in the south. But they don’t go around shooting barn cats then posting it on Facebook. They’re either intelligent enough not to kill a cat or intelligent enough not to brag about it on social media.

  11. Isn’t what all ranchers and farmers do, is “raise” animals for slaughter? Implications of a relationship with herds of cattle/sheep, seems to be stretching that word a bit.

    Is anyone here presently or previously a farmer/rancher with a “relationship” to their livestock, raised for slaughter? (or for sale?) I could use the Dictionery to describe relationship, but it’s “implied”.

    • I think you missed the point. Bring up an animal from infancy to adult devoid of any ability to acknowledge it is anything but future meat or material is disturbing as demonstrated by comparing it to the cats death. I imagine most farmers respect their livestock….that did not portray that

  12. As far as Betty is concerned…….The Hunter became the Hunted. I hope for one brief millisecond a little empathy and insight gets through to differentiate between necessity and killing for the sake of killing. Oh and for the record, bragging about raising an animal from birth then to slaughter it is immoral. Especially when using the term “raised”. that implies a relationship…and those go both ways too

    • yeah, that whole “raise to hunt” thing smacks of an older relative that cares 4 a child & then molests them after having “groomed” them 4 that purpose. any animal one “raises” & then hunts will never give them the “sport” they crave. their blood-lust will never b satisfied because the animal trusts their hunter giving said “hunter” an unfair advantage, which makes the whole “hunting for sport” moot as there is no sport in hunting an animal that wont run or fight back(not that i agree with “sport hunting” in ANY way).

  13. Lol cant imagine how good that was to see after a of night of answering emails about Tiger and his followers. First thing when I wake up! Thank you.

    • Thank you for creating this Facebook group. I just signed the petition to ask China and Korea to stop boiling dogs and cats, while keeping them alive by scrubbing their fur off, so they’re flesh is fresh for Dog and Cat Torture Soup. They are also beaten if they struggle or bite. The picture will stay in my mind for a long time. I signed and shared, and asked other to do the same.

      I hope everyone on POC goes to your FB page, and signs and shares.

  14. While I personally don’t hunt I live in a very rural poor area of Maine and I know plenty of families that rely on the yearly deer hunting season to augment their winter supply of food for their family. I find nothing wrong with this. If you kill something to provide food for your family that’s just a matter of survival. What I can’t understand is killing for the supposed joy of it, how can anyone enjoy killing another living being? Why even do it if it’s not for the purpose of providing food for your family? I’ve walked in the woods and found carcasses of deer with just the head and maybe a hindquarter gone, what a waste of 1) a beautiful animal and 2) meat that some family would have put to good use. Totally senseless!

        • Thanks for the input. If they are in fact hunting for pleasure and take pride is showing off their trophy then I detest them and they are insensitive sh*ts as far as I am concerned.

          • Right on! If you are hunting just to supply you and your family with food then why stick pictures of yourself with the dead animal on Facebook and in the local newspaper? Why stick the head of the poor creature up on your wall? I despise opening the newspaper and seeing pictures of people holding up dead animals.

            • I don’t like trophy hunting either. It is shameful and a disgrace to those who feed their families with their harvest. I don’t feel the need to post pictures of my harvests on line, but don’t see too much to be upset about with those who do. On the other hand, bragging about your kill and only being interested in the trophy is wrong and needs to stop. There are too many starving people in this country who could use that meat. I have never met a kitty cat who was capable of demolishing the foundation of a house, destroying machinery, killing humans, or anything else that justifies self-defense killing. Obviously, kitty cats fall into the trophy category and that is wrong.

  15. Hmmm… Betty LouLoo to Betty Kuckoo…looks like Woody got a sex change. He lost his woody.

    Yeah, I know, that was a cheap shot but I took it anyway.

  16. I am NOT laughing at her and many other people are not laughing at her either. your assumption is baseless. your ad hominem attacks on her show that you feel threatened and you probably feel threatened because you know you’re defending sociopathy. I don’t use leather. I don’t eat dead bodies of other animals and I am NOT naturally a hunter and a killer so speak for yourself don’t assume you speak for everyone. many people are like me.

  17. I do have a few terms for these “hunter types”. I refer to them as:
    (1) “Farts” … just a useless, by-product that comes out as a noxious gas..from an asshole!
    (2) “Shits or Turds” (also a useless item)from the body that comes out as excrement because they(it) are “WASTE”. They smell and look like shit…because THEY ARE SHIT. And the best place is a toilet bowl where they need to be “flushed away”.
    (3) Inbreds ..because if you ever take a look at their pics..they often are so damn ugly..I’m amazed they post pics of themselves. How they do it without the camera breaking..boggles the mind.
    (4) Intellectual imbeciles (can’t help thinking of the “Epsilon-Semi Morons..from the book “Brave New World”). Except they’re not even that smart!
    (5) The “all superior who are inferior”.. egomaniac. Who think the world wouldn’t get by without them. I believe they will be truly disappointed..if we ever reach the center of the universe and they discover they are not in it.

  18. well, Ole Betty got one thing right. I’m a laughing. I’m laughing at someone preaching about courage and not hiding. When they don’t have the courage to use their real name or are hiding behind Internet anonymity while trying to prove his cock is bigger than everyone else’s simply because they can kill something with no feelings

    • Actually this kind of stuff usually comes from very tiny cocks, who feel inferior and need to over-compensate by violently dominating a vulnerable animal, or other human with a cock “extension”, usually a big gun.

      It seems that women who do this have been taught by “hunt for pleasure” fathers or other men who may have a need to compensate for feelings of inferiority. It would take some research to look into the actual family background. Although this concept is apart from those who are actually mentally deranged sociopaths who take pleasure in hurting, maiming and killing. (Those with no family hunting history)

      • I find it intriguing that so-called “animal rights” zealots are ALWAYS obsessed with any imagery of human male genitalia — often the very first thoughts of theirs that they feel the need to, and are compelled to, project to the world. Why is that?

        I surmise it is because anything with male genitalia has avoided being near these unwanted cretinous fools throughout their whole sad, sorry, and meaningless lives. (And with very very good reason. LOL) They are obsessed with thinking about what they can never ever have in life.

  19. Oh wait, I get it now. You are too immature and spineless to kill animals for your own purposes, so you send out your cats to do your killing for you. Now it makes sense. Little girls hiding behind your cats. LOL

    • Betty are you the infamous Woody in drag πŸ˜‰ ? You sound like him. Your comment is idiotic to be perfectly honest. These two women kill animals for pleasure, you fool. Cats kill prey for survival. There is a difference but obviously you can’t recognise it.

        • LOL! Exactly, Elisa. I like screwyloo too!
          Long ago, we suspected that he was a cross dresser. In actuality, he just can’t let go of being run out of Galveston. He lost everything that he felt was important. He had given guided tours, spent time in the Everglades, and was admired by bird lovers. Now, he lives a mundane, boring life in Florida.
          He’s a lonely, bitter old man now. His only entertainment is battering cat lovers. He, truly, believes that cats are supreme verim of the earth.
          He write that he believes M

        • LOL! Exactly, Elisa. I like screwyloo too!

          Long ago, we suspected that he was a cross dresser. In actuality, he just can’t let go of being run out of Galveston. He lost everything that he felt was important. He had given guided tours, spent time in the Everglades, and was admired by bird lovers. Now, he lives a mundane, boring life in Florida. He’s a broken man.

          He’s a lonely, bitter old man now. His only entertainment is battering cat lovers. He, truly, believes that cats are the supreme verim of the earth, since he felt that they sought to destroy his precious birds. I am presuming that they were plovers.
          He writes that he believes Michael needs a psychologist. He is in desperate need of a psychiatrist, who is the only mental health professional that can prescribe psychotropic medications. He would be much more cordial doing the “Thorazine Shuffle”.

            • Didn’t hear the word “vermin” so I’m not positive. Or do you have a vermin blocker on your software πŸ˜‰

              • He’s unmistakable. I know him like the back of my hand.
                He was such a coward that he ran from Galveston with his tail between his legs. He was humiliated in his community.
                He lives in Florida now in a very modest home in a decent neighborhood where people have no idea about this sociopath at all.

    • Your last name says all we need to know about you, Becky. Now I think I’ll go kill a few domestic cats in the neighborhood for shoes and dinner. Makes sense according to you!

  20. Still trying to wrap your mind around the fact that you were born a meat-eater and hunter, eh? And still trying to grasp the idea that humans have enough courage to personally kill animals that they might eat or use for other purposes, eh?

    Next time you buy a pair of leather shoes, gloves, or belt; I suggest you grab a bow and arrow of flint-spear. Go kill a steer that you raised from birth. Then tan its hide. Maybe then you’ll grow beyond your kindergarten concept of your immature and effeminate world.

    Seriously, have you EVER personally killed ANY animal for ANY of the products that you’ve EVER used in life? I doubt it. Or you’d know better.

    I find it horrendously funny that people like you who have not developed beyond a 3-year-old’s level of emotional and intellectual development would be looked-upon as any form of authority in what the real world is all about. You’re nothing but a laugh for everyone. People who laugh at you, not with you.

    • that humans have enough courage to personally kill animals

      What courage is required to kill a ginger tabby domestic cat wandering around a yard with a bow and arrow? God, you are foolish.

      that they might eat or use for other purposes, eh?

      What purpose is there is breaking the law by killing a domestic cat? What purpose other than pleasure is there is killing lions in canned hunts?

      You are a supporter of hunting. If all sport hunters are as stupid as you I can see why it happens. There is something very unsophisticated in what you say. You are course and you don’t think correctly.

    • Did you even read the article? I think not. You saw my name listed as the write and decided to spout out unintelligent mumbo-jumbo that has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject stated. You are on an entirely different page than the rest of us here, and are very very fortunate Michael approves your sociopathic posts.

      You were probably trying to solve math problems while in English class, since you have the attention span of a flea. Too bad you can’t use your LONG comments for the good of humanity instead of just taking up space.

    • Betty,
      I do not decry hunting in the least, however, KILLING A BARN CAT FOR SPORT? Especially since the barn cat was a neighbors pet, I do not think you can justify that in any way or by any means. It was cruel to hold that cat up on the arrow for a PHOTO TAKEN BY YOUR MOTHER as the animal gasped its last breaths. I have rescued many a cat, dog and more horses than you can count.

      I am a farm girl. I have helped to butcher meat that fed us through the year. I understand what life consists of, but I do oppose the inhumane way the animal/meat industry is handled this day and time. Horse slaughter is one that I especially abhor. I also abhor starving horses, so I understand the need to ‘thin herds’ and maintain the right balance. But the way they are handled in the killing IS inhumane and needs to be changed.

      Not only do I think Kristen Lindsey and her mom should take responsibility for such a heinous act, I think it is time all of us, as humans that occupy our planet, take responsibility.

    • Betty…..You seem to be completely lacking in emotional maturity (as well as logic)yourself!
      The fact that people eat meat, has nothing to do with killing for sport. Having grown up on a farm, where we raised crops and animals as food, as well as being from a family of hunters, I can honestly say that the killing of an animal was never considered “fun”. It was considered a necessary act to feed the family. There was no “sport” in it. I can see being proud of one’s ability to complete this act in a quick and humane manner….but it takes no courage to kill. Being proud of your human “superiority” for using a weapon to kill an animal for “sport” is simply a reflection of your own lack of emotional growth and maturity.

    • Betty kuckoo , you are kuckoo !
      There is no pride in killing something that is not for your dire survival !
      If you are hungry then by all means fish so that you may eat, but to hunt just for the sport of hunting is not acceptable to me.
      We all have our own opinions and you my fellow lady are full of crap !
      And Michael you are a very compassionate , caring man and I appreciate the gentlemen that you are!
      Betty kuckoo …. How would like someone to hunt you down and kill you just for the fun of it? That’s not humanity nor is it acceptable.
      This world needs a lot more love and people animals feel just like we do… They hurt , they get lonely , they need compassion just like we do.
      Please spread more love, and keep the Koo Koo bird out of it !

    • There are so many topics in the news that are arguable and this is not one of them. When you can’t understand intellectually the difference between killing for food and killing for sport, that’s stupidity. If you can’t empathize, that’s a emotional disorder. There’s something wrong with you Betty, not everyone else.

  21. Michael can you correct when Jack’s business was revoked? It was March 11, 1993. Think I’m dealing with fumble fingers tonight.

    • I also agree that it probably had alot to do with their upbringing…but yet it just comes down to that persons morals, because I was brought up with a father whose a regular hunter & he tried to instill these beliefs on me as he did with my older brother. & HAPPY to say I was & am disgusted to see innocent animals run & shot down. So yes & no…so if u never had a heart u never will!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>