The victims of Ricky Gervais

fizzypish

rob316 wrote: »

Whatever about anything else, but killing a giraffe? They must be one of the least threatening animals in the world.

I read before that a kick off of a giraffe can disembowel a man/lion/ whatever it kicks. Dangerous bastards, KILL EM ALL..... *blood lust subsides

suicide_circus

Horrible gowl of a woman

Dog of Tears

rob316 wrote: »

Whatever about anything else, but killing a giraffe? They must be one of the least threatening animals in the world.

Bullsh;t.

If giraffes ever got their hands on the weapons they'd wipe us out without a second's thought.

catallus

They're basically evolved dinosaurs. Very dangerous.

"Even being in a vehicle does not guarantee your safety"

Maniacs is what they are.

ohnonotgmail

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

It sickens me that some people see hunting as a sport. I understand that a cull is needed sometimes, but killing animals for fun, in my opinion, is sick and twisted.

so if they are miserable while doing it then it is ok?

bjork

catallus wrote: »

They're basically evolved dinosaurs. Very dangerous.



"Even being in a vehicle does not guarantee your safety"

Maniacs is what they are.

What will we watch on youtube if they are all killed? They're not just for hunters amusement

Macavity.

But Simon Swinton tweeted: “Kill her and let's lay next to her.”

LOL. Some people.

The Diabolical Monocle

Time to Karlify:

There were this woman right, an' she were out 'unting in the Jungle and killed one of them 'orses with the really lonGH necks and that.

Anyway ... she's ad 'er photo taken next to it and they put the photo on the internet an that.

Turns out right; Simon Cowell seen it an 'e was dead angry, so he gets a plane to the jungle right.... kills 'er and has 'is photo taken next to her dead body ... as like a warning an that.

LorMal

catallus wrote: »

They're basically evolved dinosaurs. Very dangerous.

"Even being in a vehicle does not guarantee your safety"

Maniacs is what they are.

Giraffes. Some neck.

conorhal

bjork wrote: »

Is she a "Victim" > She styles herself as "Extreme huntress">Did it only occur to her now she might face criticism?

So death threats are 'critisism' now?

Macavity.

catallus wrote: »

They're basically evolved dinosaurs. Very dangerous.

"Even being in a vehicle does not guarantee your safety"

Maniacs is what they are.

Aggressive bastards.

ScumLord

Zombienosh wrote: »

sorry there but a giraffe.........that's the equivalent of me punching kittens in the face.... how can someone feel proud of that?

The thing is though these are managed parks, if you let the giraffes breed uncontrolled by a predator, they start to hurt the ecosystem around them, which will lead onto further problems around the area.

When they reintroduced wolves to yellowstone park in the US, it fixed eroding river banks. That's the kind of effect one animal can have on an ecosystem.

Nicolas Cage wrote: »

Hunting wild animals with a gun is cowardly. Hunting them with a big stick that she sharpened herself using a stone might earn her some respect in my eyes.

Hunting them with a big stick is only going to make the animal suffer. Have you ever seen an elephant killed with spears? It takes a long time.

smash

ScumLord wrote: »

The thing is though these are managed parks

Kind of makes it worse because they're not even wild animals really. And she's not exactly hunting them because their location will be relatively known.

Junkyard Tom

To have the words 'hunter' and 'sport' remotely associated with these creeps is an affront to the animal kingdom. A frog catching a fly on its tongue is more of a hunter than any one of the weirdos.

ohnonotgmail

smash wrote: »

Kind of makes it worse because they're not even wild animals really. And she's not exactly hunting them because their location will be relatively known.

just because it is a managed park does not mean the animals are not wild???

smash

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

just because it is a managed park does not mean the animals are not wild???

The animals are kept in an enclosed park and are fed regularly. The park might be acres and acres in size but they're still enclosed and are still fed by staff. It's a whole lot different than venturing out into a jungle or something.

ohnonotgmail

smash wrote: »

The animals are kept in an enclosed park and are fed regularly. The park might be acres and acres in size but they're still enclosed and are still fed by staff. It's a whole lot different than venturing out into a jungle or something.

well giraffes dont live in the jungle but that is by the by. acres and acres? surely you mean thousands of acres?

fizzypish

smash wrote: »

The animals are kept in an enclosed park and are fed regularly. The park might be acres and acres in size but they're still enclosed and are still fed by staff. It's a whole lot different than venturing out into a jungle or something.

Maybe calling it a reserve will clarify this. The "park" could be hundreds of thousands of acres. I really doubt the animals are fed.

FunLover18

conorhal wrote:

So death threats are 'critisism' now?

It's a criticism of the fact that they're alive

smash

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well giraffes dont live in the jungle but that is by the by. acres and acres? surely you mean thousands of acres?

Like I said "or something" because there's more than just giraffes there.

fizzypish wrote: »

Maybe calling it a reserve will clarify this. The "park" could be hundreds of thousands of acres. I really doubt the animals are fed.

It doesn't really matter about the size of the park. The animals are fed and the park co-ordinators usually know where the animals are located. Louis Theroux did a special about big game hunters in which the lions were fed regularly so they don't eat the other animals in the reserve. People then paid to go and hunt the lions.

bjork

conorhal wrote: »

So death threats are 'critisism' now?

Yeah, becasue the twitter threats really stopped Kony and brought back those girls. It's twitter ffs.

Edgarfrndly

ScumLord wrote: »

The thing is though these are managed parks, if you let the giraffes breed uncontrolled by a predator, they start to hurt the ecosystem around them, which will lead onto further problems around the area.

She's not shooting the giraffe and proudly posing next to it's lifeless body for conservation efforts. She's doing it because she gets a kick out of shooting animals. It takes a real sociopath to kill another living creature for your own amusement.

Basically, her getting likes on a facebook picture is more important than the life of a giraffe. That's what it pretty much boils down to.

ohnonotgmail

smash wrote: »

It doesn't really matter about the size of the park. The animals are fed and the park co-ordinators usually know where the animals are located. Louis Theroux did a special about big game hunters in which the lions were fed regularly so they don't eat the other animals in the reserve. People then paid to go and hunt the lions.

well these were giraffes. i doubt they were throwing out bales of hay to them every day. and they are most definitely still wild animals.

fizzypish

smash wrote: »

Louis Theroux did a special about big game hunters in which the lions were fed regularly so they don't eat the other animals in the reserve. People then paid to go and hunt the lions.

Fair point and I believe it too. Is it right or proper or ethical? I don't know. Personally, I don't get it. Hunting doesn't interest me but my personal opinion is that if some lad/lass gets their jollies on shooting an animal and is willing to pay money that will benefit the species, let them at it. Is it cruel? From the human perspective its perceived cruel but natures cruel anyway. Not that I'm trying to make an excuse on natures cruel grounds. Just my tuppence worth.

ohnonotgmail

Edgarfrndly wrote: »

She's not shooting the giraffe and proudly posing next to it's lifeless body for conservation efforts. She's doing it because she gets a kick out of shooting animals. It takes a real sociopath to kill another living creature for your own amusement.

Basically, her getting likes on a facebook picture is more important than the life of a giraffe. That's what it pretty much boils down to.

its a giraffe that would have been culled anyway. the money they pay for the hunt (and it is a LOT of money) goes towards conservation. The meat goes to the locals in most cases.

smash

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well these were giraffes. i doubt they were throwing out bales of hay to them every day. and they are most definitely still wild animals.

I'm not sure if you're defending her or arguing just to be pedantic about whether or not it's a wild animal. It's a wild animal, but not in the same sense as a lot of others in that it's docile and non threatening. It's like going to your local park to shoot the ducks in the pond. Except it's a species with a continuously decreasing population in the wild.

davmol

people mentioning its ok its for consumption-well i dont eat rhino and i certainly dotn eat giraffe so thats BS.

Hunting animals is for cowards.

If you want to be a 'hunter' then go out against a rhino or lion with your bare hands and try kill it otherwise you are a coward hiding in the bushes with a gun.

ohnonotgmail

smash wrote: »

I'm not sure if you're defending her or arguing just to be pedantic about whether or not it's a wild animal. It's a wild animal, but not in the same sense as a lot of others in that it's docile and non threatening. It's like going to your local park to shoot the ducks in the pond. Except it's a species with a continuously decreasing population in the wild.

I dont think you know what the words docile and non-threatening mean. and it is a species with a continuously INCREASING population in managed parks. Hence the reason for the culls. The population is only decreasing in places that are not managed.

ohnonotgmail

davmol wrote: »

people mentioning its ok its for consumption-well i dont eat rhino and i certainly dotn eat giraffe so thats BS.

Hunting animals is for cowards.

If you want to be a 'hunter' then go out against a rhino or lion with your bare hands and try kill it otherwise you are a coward hiding in the bushes with a gun.

the locals are happy to eat giraffe. Should they not be allowed to because it offends your ethics?

ScumLord

smash wrote: »

Kind of makes it worse because they're not even wild animals really. And she's not exactly hunting them because their location will be relatively known.

They are essentially wild but managed by the people running the reserve. The fact they're in an enclosed area, which protects them from poachers as much as anything. They have to be managed though, if you don't cull a species it unbalances the ecosystem of the tiny reserve.

These reserves are conservation areas, there are very real and practical reasons for killing some of the animals.

Saipanne

catallus wrote: »

Ricky Gervais is not a funny man.

No, that's you. He has amassed millions of pounds, fans and awards due to the fact that he has a good sense of humour. You have achieved nothing, other than a few 'thanks' on a regional forum.

smash

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I dont think you know what the words docile and non-threatening mean.

Yes I know what it means thanks. But let me explain what I mean... it's not an animal that will charge to kill and eat you when it sees you. I guess you're just being pedantic about everything in the thread then.

ohnonotgmail

smash wrote: »

Yes I know what it means thanks. But let me explain what I mean... it's not an animal that will charge to kill and eat you when it sees you. I guess you're just being pedantic about everything in the thread then.

man eating giraffes? you must be having a giraffe.

but seriously they are as likely to attack you as any giraffe living in the "wild". they are not docile. the are not domesticated.

Panrich

What a hunt!

http://hollywoodlife.com/2013/11/20/ricky-gervais-melissa-bachman-twitter-rant-hunting-lion/

jackofalltrades

Edgarfrndly wrote: »

She's not shooting the giraffe and proudly posing next to it's lifeless body for conservation efforts. She's doing it because she gets a kick out of shooting animals. It takes a real sociopath to kill another living creature for your own amusement.

Basically, her getting likes on a facebook picture is more important than the life of a giraffe. That's what it pretty much boils down to.

According to her she was asked to do it.
She said that the Giraffe was close to death, she originally planned not to kill and Giraffes while in Africa.
The meat was eaten by the locals.

So it looks like she wasn't doing it just for the craic.

ohnonotgmail

Saipanne wrote: »

No, that's you. He has amassed millions of pounds, fans and awards due to the fact that he has a good sense of humour. You have achieved nothing, other than a few 'thanks' on a regional forum.

thats him shown.

Badly Drunk Boy

simonw wrote: »

It's not necessarily "Oh, the poor giraffe", so much as the smiling selfies though

Does anyone know what a selfie is anymore? If a photo is possibly taken by a phone, it's deemed to be a selfie nowadays. Yer wan in the photo doesn't have any photographic equipment. Neither does the giraffe. Therefore, it's not a selfie.

This hurts me more than the sight of a sometimes noble, elegant animal being posed after its murder. (Of course, giraffes can also be awkward, gangly-looking yokes...)

smash

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

man eating giraffes? you must be having a giraffe.

but seriously they are as likely to attack you as any giraffe living in the "wild". they are not docile. the are not domesticated.

But how likely is an unprovoked giraffe attack in the wild? They seem to be the kind of animal that's quite content to leave people alone if they're left alone in return. Unlike say, a lion.

The Corinthian

It's not every day you read a thread full of clueless opinions on animal behaviour or conservation, and apply their middle-class, suburbanite, Western morality to places that they probably couldn't even point to on a map. All in the pursuit of 'saving' animals, while tucking into factory farmed produce that would make hunting look humane in comparison.

Giraffes aren't the ones in need of a cull, TBH.

ohnonotgmail

smash wrote: »

But how likely is an unprovoked giraffe attack in the wild? They seem to be the kind of animal that's quite content to leave people alone if they're left alone in return. Unlike say, a lion.

a lion? Lively brown furry things with short stumpy legs and great long noses. I don't know what all the fuss is about, I could tame one of those. They look pretty tame to start with

smash

jackofalltrades wrote: »

According to her she was asked to do it.
She said that the Giraffe was close to death, she originally planned not to kill and Giraffes while in Africa.
The meat was eaten by the locals.

So it looks like she wasn't doing it just for the craic.

She wasn't asked to proudly pose with the kill for multiple photos and smile for the camera though.

ohnonotgmail

smash wrote: »

She wasn't asked to proudly pose with the kill for multiple photos and smile for the camera though.

should she have done a sad face instead? would that have been ok?

Shenshen

I'm not outraged at her hunting animals in Africa - people do that here, too, after all.
And it's good to know that the populations in the reserves are managed, that this raised money for further conservation efforts, that the meat was consumed by locals. All of these facts are definitely good to know.

What I find personally disturbing though is this notion that she enjoys killing so much, she'll pose with the body (corpse? What's the correct English term?) afterwards, with a big smile on her face.
THAT is something I can't get my head around, try as I might.
I know it used to be done everywhere, I'm aware of all those old black-and-white pictures of a handful of people posing in front of mountains of dead animals they've just killed. I just had kind of assumed that most civilised humans had gotten past the point where inflicting pain and killing is regarded not only as a thrill, but as something to brag about.

Guess I was wrong again.
This doesn't make me angry, it just makes me incredibly sad. And rather worried.

smash

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

should she have done a sad face instead? would that have been ok?

Should she not have gloated about it in the first place?

I'd say no, she shouldn't have.

Dog of Tears

smash wrote: »

They seem to be the kind of animal that's quite content to leave people alone if they're left alone in return.

You wouldn't survive 10 minutes in the giraffe enclosure in Dublin zoo before you'd be torn to shreds.

Panrich

The Corinthian wrote: »

It's not every day you read a thread full of clueless opinions on animal behaviour or conservation, and apply their middle-class, suburbanite, Western morality to places that they probably couldn't even point to on a map. All in the pursuit of 'saving' animals, while tucking into factory farmed produce that would make hunting look humane in comparison.

Giraffes aren't the ones in need of a cull, TBH.

And yet the 'hunters' in question are products of that same society that you decry here.
It's not local hunter gatherers that are at work here. It's mostly rich fat western f*ckers and their molls with enough money to play out their fantasies with guns.

smash

The Corinthian wrote: »

It's not every day you read a thread full of clueless opinions on animal behaviour or conservation, and apply their middle-class, suburbanite, Western morality to places that they probably couldn't even point to on a map. All in the pursuit of 'saving' animals, while tucking into factory farmed produce that would make hunting look humane in comparison.

Giraffes aren't the ones in need of a cull, TBH.

Your condescending, obnoxious attitude never ceases to amaze me.

DoYouEvenLift

Would hunt poachers/10

ohnonotgmail

smash wrote: »

Your condescending, obnoxious attitude never ceases to amaze me.

he isnt wrong though

The Corinthian

Panrich wrote: »

And yet the 'hunters' in question are products of that same society that you decry here.

So what? I wasn't defending her or expressing my respect for her. I was expressing my contempt for those here.

It's mostly rich fat western f*ckers and their molls with enough money to play out their fantasies with guns.

As opposed to poor fat western f*ckers, who care?

smash wrote: »

Your condescending, obnoxious attitude never ceases to amaze me.

Alas, you don't surprise me at all.