941 words
Animal Poachers Should Be Executed
In 2009 the largest deer killed in North America was killed by a poacher in Ohio. After the killer was caught, he was fined over $1,500 and had a restitution fee of over $23,500 imposed upon him. He also lost his hunting privileges for life. Unfortunately, this incident was not the first for this individual. He had ten prior convictions for violating various wildlife laws and had even served time in jail for some of his offenses.
Man has been a hunter for almost half a million years. In the early part of his evolution, the practice of killing animals was necessary to provide sustenance — food and clothing — for his survival. And even in the present time — and even with a history of hunting certain animal and bird species to extinction — I believe that hunting should be allowed under a carefully and strictly imposed system of rules enforcement (one of which being that no predators — bears, wolves, lions, tigers, etc. — should be hunted at all). To a large degree, hunters are conscientious people with a great awareness and respect for the environments that support their chosen game. But there is another side to the activity which is very, very sinister — something that is a tremendous blot on the character of homo sapiens. That activity is poaching.
The man has a lot of evil and odious behaviors, but one of the worst has to be animal poaching. Poaching goes on on every continent in the world, and no creature whose demise can’t be translated into money in the pocket of some soulless killer is safe from its effects.
In North America, black bears are being slaughtered so that their gall bladders can used in what Asians superstitiously call “medicine.” Other bear body parts, such as paws, are also taken. In Africa, rhinoceroses are being hunted to extinction solely for their horns, and the animals’ horns are even being taken from those unfortunate creatures long dead and stuffed and exhibited in museums.
The recent economic boom in China has fueled a rapid increase in poaching which is driving many African animals to the brink of extinction. In fact, the Chinese are particularly implicated in the wanton slaughter of wildlife around the world to fulfill every phony “need” from sexual stimulation to “gourmet” dining on the likes of tiger testicles.
The very thought that the Chinese need aphrodisiacs is obscene in and of itself, because the last thing that Earth needs is more Chinese having more sex to create more Chinese.
Money, as usual, is behind this whole foul enterprise. There are many thousands of dollars to be made in the illegal trade of animal parts. Rhino horns have been sold for as much a $200,000. The powder ground from them can bring as much as $45,000 per pound. Ivory from elephants, both African and Asian, is also in high demand. And like the horns of rhinoceroses and the gall bladders of bears, the ivory from elephants and walruses is not a real necessity. It is used only to manufacture such non-essential items such as jewelry and other ornaments.
This killing epidemic is occurring solely because of the self-centeredness of man, a self-centeredness that is completely at odds with man’s true (and miniscule) position in the overall natural order.
Among animals, man does have the unique ability to either destroy or preserve nature, but he is not the overlord or steward of nature that he so vainly claims to be. Rather, he is simply a part of nature. And when considering the beauty of natural landscapes such as the Grand Canyon, which reduce even the greatest of mankind’s architectural achievements to pitiable trivialities, or to just begin to comprehend the complexity of ecological systems which dwarf man’s greatest technological endeavors, it is easy to see what a small player man is in the true scheme of things.
Strict rules should also be enforced against all unnecessary animal killing. Whaling is an essentially anachronistic activity, given modern technologies which make the old uses for it (e.g., lighting from oil, food from blubber) unnecessary. There can be no more excuses for this behavior, whether a claimed economic benefit, some “part of a culture” (the excuse used by some Native Americans to continue to kill whales), or the supposed necessity to supply material for “traditional medicines,” which are in fact nothing more that quackery born out of the ignorant superstitions of unevolved humans.
There is no longer any tolerable reason at all for the needless and wanton destruction of any part of our natural environment, be it oceans, forests, water supplies, or animal life. It’s long past time to put an end to any grievous assault on nature. And the punishments for violators should fit the magnitude of their crimes. Poachers shouldn’t be fined and, in extreme instances, jailed. They should be executed. When they are, the message will get out, and the practice will stop.
And while this proposed solution might seem drastic, there are indeed some more enlightened countries that have already taken the proper stance on this issue. In 2002 a group of Wyoming conservationists were given “shoot on sight” orders to deal with Sudanese poachers who were decimating the wildlife in the Central African Republic. And in 2007 the Indian State of Assam issued its enforcers “shoot to kill” orders against Rhinoceros poachers.
That’s right. Here is an instance where Africa and India are more evolved than the so-called “superior” West. Well, it’s time to correct that. It’s time for the United States to catch up and to not just take a similar stance, but to lead on the issue.
Source: http://www.gpsjr.com/
22 comments
Yes the Chinese should not be allowed to fund the extinction of species. That being said, their ancient system of Herbalism is one of the most advanced systems of medicine on Earth. They know it works and pretending it doesn’t is silly and wont disuade them.
If they want rhino horns so bad as to pay 200,000 for them, why doesn’t someone start raising rhinos for profit?
The idea of raising rhinos solely to lop their horns off, leaving them deformed, only to earn a profit by selling them to Asiatics sounds pretty awful to me.
I’ve always been curious. Doesn’t horns or tusks grow back or once they are cut off (not out) they are always that way?
“raising rhinos solely to lop their horns off, leaving them deformed”
The South African government may also decide to remove the horns of its rhino population living in the wild, so as to remove the incentive to kill them. ( source )
Personally, if I was born with a horn on my nose, dead center in my field of vision, I would be relieved to have it removed.
Maybe Chinese Herbalism is advanced, but I’m not aware of any herbs that are derived from animal parts.
And as for raising rhinos for their horns, the thought of raising any animal so that it can be slaughtered to provide aphrodisiacs to humans is obscene, and such practices should be banned — with the death penalty for violators.
I can see why we should shoot poachers to protect endangered animals like tigers and pandas, given how desparate their situation is. But if it is something like shooting a deer, that seems a little extreme to execute someone. And are whales endangered? I can see why we should ban commercial whaling. But as long as whales are not endangered, let the Inuit kill them in their traditional ways.
I have to agree that poachers of rare animals should be liable for execution themselves because jeopardizing the order of life is a serious business.
I also have a low opinion of hunters but I suspect that they are being set up for ridicule and are part of the process of demaning the European. After all, what self respecting hunter would shoot a caged animal or have to call in a rescue helicopter when he gets lost in the woods. The pussys!
And after a traditional whale hunt a number of years ago off the coast of Washington or BC I now have the same low opinion of traditional Indians on their traditional hunts in their traditional sunglasses and traditional high powered rifle. It made the Indian hunters look as silly as the Texan canned hunters. And as for badger baiting and for what professional football players do with their dogs leaves me speechless.
On the other hand I have been led to believe that Ducks Unlimited have done a tremendous job of increasing the number of ducks and improving local habitats so I suppose a compromise is possible.
IF you consider the white Race something of sport, if you will, animals, even cattle, if you will, then this article, seen in THAT light, makes a great deal of sense. Almost too much sense, for some.
A story could be written describing how, say the victims of the Witchita Massacre, or Channon Christian and Chris Newsom, were seen as prey for the predators, operating our of season and without a license – for now.
Suddenly, the title, “Open Season on Poachers,” offers a compelling alternative for us. A companion piece, “Open Season on Predators,” presents itself.
“Hunger Games” is being made into a movie, you know.
Notice something about the hunted, in the book AND the movie? Racially, I mean? I know you do!
The genocide of the White Race, the de facto choice for all government policies, must be dealt with in an a quietly effective manner, all done, of course, in an “apple-pie, strictly legal, sort of way.” (HT: Jim Giles)
What’s In YOUR Future” Focus Northwest!
No need to start raising “rhinos for profit”. For every wild animal-based herbal cure, there is a substitute from the plant world. I know of practitioners of “traditional” [it’s not all that traditional as you may think, though] Chinese Medicine who refuse to have anything to do with animal pieces. Of course, most of them are White. Also, White patients with any awareness won’t have anything to do with these ridiculous “medicines”, either. They only began to be used long ago because the animals were available and then they couldn’t stop.
I’m not a hunter or anything, but I don’t see why poaching should necessarily be forbidden provided it’s within limits, not excessive, and doesn’t endanger species.
The author also argues against any “unnecessary killing” of animals. Does he advocate vegetarianism then, considering that caloric needs don’t necessarily require meat? What about plant life?
No, I don’t advocate vegetarianism. Nor am I against the controlled killing of animals which can be classified as invasive species, like feral house cats.
how about hunting for sport or food?
honus, I’m not against legitimate hunting for food, as long as it’s done with strictly enforced controls. As far as “hunting for sport,” I don’t think that the sport of shooting should necessitate the killing of an animal. One’s shooting skills can be honed quite well with targets. (And then those skills can later be applied towards hunting for food — or for self-defense — should the need arise.)
Justin, I’m not against fishing for food or for catch and release, even though (as you said) the latter activity often results in casualties. I am against the taking of fish “out of season” or if they are endangered.
Remember that my article is about poaching. It is not meant to cover the complete topic of man’s killing of his fellow earth inhabitants.
hunting for sport is not the same as target shooting as any man who has engaged in the activities can tell you. nor is it simply about honing one’s shooting skills for food or self-defense later. i don’t see why it should be prohibited if it’s moderate and doesn’t endanger a particular species. the justification against it seems to be some mushy, leftist, hedonistic one – the activity causes the target animal’s nervous system to send electric signals to its brain that makes it feel bad, and this also makes me feel bad, therefore it is bad. naturalism isn’t simply some vulgar, hedonistic philosophy that tests everything against an ill-defined, subjective “need”.
honus, I appreciate the difference between shooting at targets and shooting animals, as I have done both. But when I say “honing the skill with targets” I don’t mean going to a range (God, I hate ranges!) but rather walking in the wilderness with a rifle and picking off targets — like a rock on the side of a hill on the opposite wall of a canyon — of spontaneous conjuring. Just pick it and — quick! — hit it. If you still feel the need for an animal’s participation, you can always put a shot near a beast without hitting it. I’ve done that plenty of times.
If you can hone your shooting skills in this manner, you’ll be well suited to harvest game should the need ever arise.
(But frankly, if you still feel the need for an actual kill, be my guest. As long as you’re not poaching, I won’t have a problem with it.)
The same goes doubly for those who inflict cruelty on animals or neglect pets and livestock in their care. Excrement to be expelled from the social organism.
Kerry, I don’t have a reference handy but from time to time I read in the MSM that child molesters and criminals of a sadistic nature usually start out being cruel to animals so your suggestion is not that far out.
Sadly, some animal lovers take in too many rescue animals and lose control of the situation and are unable to ask for help because of the repercussions. Perhaps if the SPCA set up a call line for people in a losing situation some benign cruelty to animals could be prevented.
Do rhino horns grow back? If so, the rhino wouldn’t have to be killed to get the horn. If anyone objects to this, fine as long as they are a vegetarian. That’s why I respect Savitri Devi – she’s a fanatic but utterly consistent and followed her beliefs in daily life. She didn’t believe in slaughter houses or zoos. She would be against domesticating anymore species I’m sure.
White Nationalists may want to consider giving copies of Savitri Devis ‘Impeachment of Man’ to left-wing green eco-types as a form of racialist entryism:
‘It puts forth a pro-vegetarian, anti-vivisectionist, biocentric, and misanthropic conservationist point of view. It does so within the context of Devi’s pro-Hitler and pro-Nazi political views, and devotes space to anti-Semitism and denouncing Jewish dietary practices.’
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Man
George, what is your position on fishing? I have never really cared about hunting, but I do like to fish. I almost always practice catch and release. Unfortunately, there are sometimes casualties (swallowed hooks etc.).
Please see my response to your question in the reply to honus, above.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.