Pro-Kill advocates

[#59]

Appear to have a common denominator.

It isn't "bringing in a body for science" as much as it is about fame, fortune & ego.

That mercenary attitude makes them nothing more than gun-toting rednecks and IMHO a general menace to public safety which needs to be addressed.

Self-defense has nothing to do with their MO.

[#59]

On second thought, their efforts are likely moot as the third white buffalo's appearance is nigh and with the dawn of a New Age, many eyes will be opened.

[Pywacket]

If I had a thin skin, I probably would take offense at your pro-kill posts.  But since I am not thinned skinned,  I won't let your pro-kill post bother me. 

For yours and anyone else's information, I am pro-kill because I want to solve the mystery.  And I believe that you have to have a body to do that.  And I believe the only way to get that body is to go get one.

I don't want the fame, I don't need the money and I already do a pretty good job of keeping my ego in check.

Nobody else that I know of is in it for anything other than solving the mystery, also.

And anybody that says there will be fame and money in it, doesn't know their butt from a hole in the ground.

[Ray Ford]

If I had a thin skin, I probably would take offense at your pro-kill posts.  But since I am not thin[-]skinned, and [since]  I won't let your pro-kill post bother me. 

For yours and anyone else's information, I am pro-kill because I want to solve the mystery.

And anybody that says there will be fame and money in it, doesn't know their butt from a hole in the ground.

 I would like to make a couple of observations.

First, I'm a no-kill person/investigator--except for purposes of defending myself or someone else.  I would hate to know that I had needlessly reduced the population of an already rare and/or endangered species. I have a bias against killing in general.  I never feel good about killing anything--although I do hunt and kill.  (The exception to that is Ticks!)  It especially bothers me to kill something that poses no danger and that I have no use for after I kill it.  I have very little use for people who kill things just to be killing.  I have very little use for people who think that they have to kill everything that moves around them.  (Once, while helping a friend build a horse barn, I saw a guy work for several minutes moving boards and other stuff to uncover a tiny little lizard so that he could stomp it.  I was disqusted.)  However, I have some sympathy for your desire to kill a Bigfoot "to solve the mystery."  Scientists/naturalists regularly take/kill and collect representatives of species for investigation and education.

Second, before I kill one, I would like to know what it is that I am killing.  Is it a primative primate or is it a humanoid?  And where is the line drawn between a primative primate and a humanoid? 

Third, you seem to have strong doubt that killing a Bigfoot would bring a person fame and fortune.  I strongly suspect that we don't know what would happen to a person who killed a Bigfoot.  Murder charges or money?  I think that it is entirely possible that an Oklahoma Department of Wildlife ranger, with the right district attorney and judge, could give someone who shot a Bigfoot some problems.  I recently learned--see my post "Conversation with Game Rangers"--that harrassing wildlife is a crime in Oklahoma.  And I have had it suggested to me that killing anything that is not listed as a game animal could be an offense against the sensibilities of some rangers.  I don't know.  T's.g. is correct to the extent that there are SOME persons out there with big guns, illegal night vision equipment, listening devices, 4-wheelers, and less brains than equipment who are convinced that there is money to be made and fame to be garnered by killing a Sasquatch.  Maybe so.  Maybe not.  Personally, I'm out there because I like being out there in the fields and woods and because I am curious.  Are they really out there?

Thanks for the post.   

 

[Pywacket]

I am not concerned about murder charges for killing an animal.  Especially an animal that the government doesn't even recognizes or claim to exist.  You can go around and around with the argument that it is illegal to shoot any animal that is not in season (that is the Texas law), however, it just comes back to having the law prove that you killed the beast to begin with.

Since nobody saw me shoot the creature, how can I be prosecuted for shooting the booger.

Since we won't have any definite knowledge of what the creature is until we have a body, it is only mindless speculation that it has any human qualities at all. 

As far as fame and fortune.  Well, there may be a certain amount of infamy in some groups, but I doubt there will be much fame for the one that shoots one.

If I want science to have the body, where's the money in that?  Just what does a bigfoot body go for nowadays?

But, this is all just my opinion.  And you know what they say about opinions.    Kind of like butt holes. 

[#59]

I am not concerned about murder charges for killing an animal.  Especially an animal that the government doesn't even recognizes or claim to exist.  You can go around and around with the argument that it is illegal to shoot any animal that is not in season (that is the Texas law), however, it just comes back to having the law prove that you killed the beast to begin with.

Since nobody saw me shoot the creature, how can I be prosecuted for shooting the booger.

Since we won't have any definite knowledge of what the creature is until we have a body, it is only mindless speculation that it has any human qualities at all. 

As far as fame and fortune.  Well, there may be a certain amount of infamy in some groups, but I doubt there will be much fame for the one that shoots one.

If I want science to have the body, where's the money in that?  Just what does a bigfoot body go for nowadays?

But, this is all just my opinion.  And you know what they say about opinions.    Kind of like butt holes. 

Modern forensics pro's would determine the weapon used, etc. and I'd bet ultimately the trigger guy as they do that type of work on a daily basis in putting bad guys away.

As far as market value of a carcass goes, Lansdale had the cockamie idea of extorting $$ millions from the timber companies in exchange for the body...sounds like a fast track to a shovel, blue tarp, two bags of lime & a shallow grave out in the boonies...and not for the SF either!

Besides, since MC had all the clearcutting done to it I'd bet it's been rather quiet thereabouts. 

My concern would be the SF's kin stomping a mudhole in your butthole and then wading it dry. 

[Ray Ford]

Seems like we are obsessed with "butt holes" on this thread--which reminds me of one of my old bosses.

Back in the l960's, I worked as a public information specialist for the University of Oklahoma urban extension office in Tulsa, Oklahoma--which was/is the location of the Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association.  My boss happened to be named Roberts.  Oftentimes, when he would make a trip to another part of the country, he would be asked, since he was from Tulsa, if he were related to Oral.  His stock reply was, "Yes, we're twins: he is Oral and I'm Anal."  You have to be a little bit Freudian to get that.

Lighten up, guys.  I'll bet Bigfeet, or Shadow Folk, whatever they are called and if they are out there, get a kick out of reading some of these Sasquatch sites.

HGLOL!  That signifies, not laughing out loud, but is a command: Hey guys, laugh out loud!

[pattymac]

Lighten up, guys.  I'll bet Bigfeet, or Shadow Folk, whatever they are called and if they are out there, get a kick out of reading some of these Sasquatch sites.

HGLOL!  That signifies, not laughing out loud, but is a command: Hey guys, laugh out loud!
 

Amen Preacher thank you.

[Pywacket]

Modern forensics pro's would determine the weapon used, etc. and I'd bet ultimately the trigger guy as they do that type of work on a daily basis in putting bad guys away.

As far as market value of a carcass goes, Lansdale had the cockamie idea of extorting $$ millions from the timber companies in exchange for the body...sounds like a fast track to a shovel, blue tarp, two bags of lime & a shallow grave out in the boonies...and not for the SF either!

Besides, since MC had all the clearcutting done to it I'd bet it's been rather quiet thereabouts. 

My concern would be the SF's kin stomping a mudhole in your butthole and then wading it dry. 

Modern forensics pro's would have to have the gun to prove where the bullet came from.  I don't have a gun.    And, of course, you are assuming that there would be a bullet in the animal for anyone to examine. 

At no time have I ever heard or spoken with anybody that ever mentioned anything about extortion or making any money from the body of a bigfoot.  Including Mr. Lansdale.  And I wonder why you want to continue to bring up his name with ugly remarks, when you never produce any proof of anything you say?

As far as other bigfoot taking a dislike to me for killing one of them, my experience has taught me that I won't have any problems. 

[#59]

Modern forensics pro's would determine the weapon used, etc. and I'd bet ultimately the trigger guy as they do that type of work on a daily basis in putting bad guys away.

As far as market value of a carcass goes, Lansdale had the cockamie idea of extorting $$ millions from the timber companies in exchange for the body...sounds like a fast track to a shovel, blue tarp, two bags of lime & a shallow grave out in the boonies...and not for the SF either!

Besides, since MC had all the clearcutting done to it I'd bet it's been rather quiet thereabouts. 

My concern would be the SF's kin stomping a mudhole in your butthole and then wading it dry. 

Modern forensics pro's would have to have the gun to prove where the bullet came from.  I don't have a gun.    And, of course, you are assuming that there would be a bullet in the animal for anyone to examine. 

At no time have I ever heard or spoken with anybody that ever mentioned anything about extortion or making any money from the body of a bigfoot.  Including Mr. Lansdale.  And I wonder why you want to continue to bring up his name with ugly remarks, when you never produce any proof of anything you say?

As far as other bigfoot taking a dislike to me for killing one of them, my experience has taught me that I won't have any problems. 

Craig,

Sorry, I forgot you "hunt" with a red willow switch! 

However, as for my comments about Lansdale that (extortion remarks) is exactly what he told us (i.e., woodswatcher, D.G. & myself, et. al.) around the campfire during the "Louisiana Hunt" episode...feel free to check w/them as to the veracity of those comments.

To put things in context, I'm not perfect (last guy that was got nailed to a cross ~2008 years ago) but have always tried to tell the straight of things and the enemies I've made in this realm were because I told the (sometimes ugly) truth of the matter...nothing more, nothing less.

[Prairie Ghost]

To make any new scientific discovery, one has to have a scientific background themselves, be recognized in their scientific field, and have a network of other known scientists.  They also must be published in several scientific journals.

I don't see any of that among these hunter & pro-kill groups.  In fact, there is no evidence of any higher education.

All they will have is another Minnesota Iceman that nobody wants anything to do with.

[pattymac]

Well said Prarie Ghost!!! Does anyone know how many self proclaimed BF researchers have a background in a science of any type?

I have wondered for a long time Just how harvesting a body with a firearm could truly contribute to science. It seems to me that a dead body is just that a dead body. Okay yea they exist. That doesn't answer any questions about the social aspects of clan/troops. Inter actions or even the critical brain functions. Especially if it is a head shot. It seems delusional to think people claiming they are going to harvest a body for science are realiy not intending to profit from it.

[Ray Ford]

Prarie Ghost,

I'm glad that you and Pattymac brought up the subject of science and research.  I've made some posts around about the inappropriate use of the word "research."  While Graybeard likes the word that is used by this site, "study," I personally think that words such  as "hunting," "observing," "watching"--as in "bird watching," or, at most, "investigating" should be used.  I like the first, "hunting," or the last, "investigating."  We can hunt for Bigfeet and we can, if we are reasonably competent, investigate reports and sightings.  But to talk about researching is, as I have said elsewhere, a little pretentious.

One Bigfoot site--at least one--calls itself a research group.  I posted there a while, and I didn't get the sense that, as a group, their "researchers" were all that well equiped to do proper research as research is normally understood.  And I'm NOT questioning anyone's innate abilities--like intelligence.   

(I thought that I might be the best thing that had happened to their site, and I intended to do nothing but objective posting on the subject of Bigfeet, but, when I questioned the accuracy of a post accusing John Phillips and another man that I know of questionable activity, I was "permanently banned" for "being John Phillips mouthpiece."  I'm not his mouthpiece: just ask him--or me.  In fact, just a couple of days ago I strongly suggested some things to him about certain posts.  But I've been run off by better groups than that site: it is amazing how many churches will engage a preacher to tell them the truth and then fire him for doing so.)

In one post--I've forgotten its exact location--I discoursed on the subject of being an expert.  I mentioned that I had, in the past, characterized myself as an expert on the Book of Revelation, the last book of the Christian Scriptures--of the New Testament.  I didn't do that because I have done university studies on Biblical literature--including the apocalyptic genre.  I did it because I consider an expert on a subject, at one level, to be someone who knows enough about that subject to know that he doesn't know everything that there is to know about it.  I know enough about the Book of Revelation to know that some people who put themselves forward as experts on the book don't know that much about it.  Given the above definition, I consider myself somewhat of an expert on Bigfeet--if there are Bigfeet:  I know enough to know that I don't know very much.

Incidentally, bird watching involves taking a set of binoculars out into the fields and woods, locating somewhere or walking about, sighting birds, recording their type and location....  This might be a good way to start collecting data on Bigfeet--if Biigfeet are out there.  Data collection is an early step in research.

Incidentally again, I have heard people talk about the possibilities that timber companies might not want it known that a rare and endangered species had its abode among their crop of trees.  I can't, at the moment, recall who they were.  I doubt that the extortion thing would work.  I don't doubt that some, or many, Bigfoot hunters are thinking about money.  But, I had one person speak about what "an incredible high" it would be to bag one--to bag something that no one else had ever bagged.  I can understand that--which doesn't mean that I would necessarily shoot a Bigfoot if I saw one.  Shucks, I would get more of a high from seeing one than I could stand.  ("Shucks" is the only thing that we preachers can say along that line.)   

[Ray Ford]

Well said Prarie Ghost!!! Does anyone know how many self proclaimed BF researchers have a background in a science of any type? 

You raise a good question. 

A person doesn't need to have an academic background in science to do research, but he does need to be educated in science. (All education doesn't take place in school.)  There is a method in science and research.  I stated above that data collection is A first step toward research.  Actually, THE first step toward collecting enough information to do research is observation.  As I have said in another place,  it has been my observation that, in the field of Bigfoot research, what is most lacking is observation. 

[#59]

Well said Prarie Ghost!!! Does anyone know how many self proclaimed BF researchers have a background in a science of any type? 

You raise a good question. 

A person doesn't need to have an academic background in science to do research, but he does need to be educated in science. (All education doesn't take place in school.)  There is a method in science and research.  I stated above that data collection is A first step toward research.  Actually, the first step toward collecting enough information to do research is observation.  As I have said in another place,  it has been my observation that, in the field of Bigfoot research, what is most lacking is observation. 

Apparently, all one needs is the 800 # to Johnny Wishbone...Psychic Extraordinairre to devine the location of a BF ready for the "bullet"...of course, you'll be expected to make a contribution to the trust fund for his twin daughters, Monique & Unique.