Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48

Thread: Fox turns tables on man with intent of killing it.

  1. #1
    Regular Member lil_freak_66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mason, Michigan
    Posts
    1,811

    Fox turns tables on man with intent of killing it.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_809921.html

    "According to Reuters, the hunter approached the fox after wounding it, intent on killing it with the butt of his rifle.
    However, the two ended up getting into a tussle, and the fox managed to trigger the rifle, shooting the hunter in the leg."
    not a lawyer, dont take anything i say as legal advice.


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558
    Gods idea of what goes around comes around.
    -I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you screw with me, I'll kill you all.
    -Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    Marine General James Mattis,

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    6
    I eat sleep and breath hunting. I hunt for meat so i hunt every thing from small game like rabbitt and tree rat up to moose. The only way i would finish some thing off by busting it in the head, would be because i had no other means. Even then i would be danged if i would use my rifle. Now if he is say... a trapper who makes some side money with furs. I can see him not wanting another hole in it. Yes trappers some times do shoot animals when they chance apon them.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mississippi/Tennessee
    Posts
    102
    It's possible it was hunting it for the hide, in which case he was trying to save as much of the hide as possible. But maybe not, since people generally just trap them and then put a .22 to the head. Foxes are small, seems like a good jab with a rifle butt would do the job quickly and humanely as long as its done right.

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Didn't Hufinton Post put up an anti-OC rant a little while back?

    I'm thinking the link and clicks just adds to their income potential from advertisers.

  6. #6
    Regular Member lil_freak_66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mason, Michigan
    Posts
    1,811
    point of the story...unload if your gonna butt it!
    not a lawyer, dont take anything i say as legal advice.


  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mississippi/Tennessee
    Posts
    102
    Trappers don't trap for sport, the do it for extra income, or in some cases, their primary income. You definitely can't expect them to make any money by hunting them the way sport hunters hunt. A bullet to the head from 3 feet is far more humane than taking a crack at a deer from 150 yards and hoping you get a vital hit. Do you eat meat? A bullet to the head is certainly more humane than electrocuting an animal unconscious, then cutting the main artery and letting it bleed to death, as is done with beef in the U.S.

  8. #8
    Regular Member XD40coyote's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    woman stuck in Maryland, ,
    Posts
    709
    If you are luring/baiting it headfirst into a trap, that sounds like using a cubby or running pole set with a bodygripper which is designed to KILL the animal. So in that case, the animal should already be dead. You are from Maine, and it is legal to use small bodygripper traps that way for ermine, marten, fisher, mink, and raccoon.

    The other methods of trapping utilized in north america are snares/cable restraints, foothold traps, and box or cage traps. Use of foothold traps ( aka "steel jaw leghold") on certain animals was employed for research, relocation, and restocking where that specie had been exterpated many years before ( before modern game laws). The list includes lynx, fisher, timber wolf, red wolf, Mexican wolf, coyotes, and river otter. All captured with the trap the animal activists villify to no end, yet these animals were able to be released with minimal injury.

    Trapping is the #1 way to capture certain animals- you just can't be lucky and find a fisher and then dart it for a relo prodject. Would you shoot muskrats swimming in water(possible ricochet)? You can trap more raccoons in one night with much much less effort than running your coon hounds around in one night ( though running the hounds can be quite exciting). So if wildlife management is your goal, you choose trapping for certain species. Removing excess amounts of these plentiful to overpopulated animals, helps the habitats and the remaining animals be healthy. Many of them can also be pests to poultry and livestock, and sometimes killing dogs and cats. Coyotes are a major PIA for some farmers and to many suburbanites. Foxes tend to be a poultry killer. There is a marten species that does extensive damage to people's cars in central europe! Raccoons are all around pests, getting into attics and barns and being plain destructive, and going after poultry, as well as being a main killer of wild ducklings and bunnies.

    As to dispatch, if you have a live holding trap you can opt to use blunt force trauma to the head, stunning the animal by a blow to the muzzle to render unconcious and then crushing the lungs by standing on the chest ( works very well on fox), or shooting it ( recommended for coyotes, raccoons, badgers, and possums). For wildcats ( bobcat and lynx) you can easily and quickly choke them down with a snare or catchpole.

  9. #9
    Regular Member OldCurlyWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    912
    One thing those who have complained about the hunter not shooting the fox and trying to club it instead have not addressed is: where he lives. Belarus. Ammunition is not inexpensive nor is it easily available.
    I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do those things to other people and I require the same of them.

    Politicians should serve two terms, one in office and one in prison.(borrowed from RioKid)

  10. #10
    Regular Member lil_freak_66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mason, Michigan
    Posts
    1,811
    my problem with him butting it is...YOUR SUPPOSED TO UNLOAD FIRST!
    not a lawyer, dont take anything i say as legal advice.


  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over run with mud(s)
    Posts
    791
    Quote Originally Posted by Claytron View Post
    So one cruelty justifies another? Cool. That must be why we live in such a wonderful, living world!

    You are also incorrect about trapping, its not doen ONLY for extra income or food. Look on youtube, theres no shortage of videos where dudes brag and gloat about trapping animals and how fun it was to leave it there until it starved or how much it squirmed when they beat its head in.

    we are long past the point in this country where people need to hunt for food so hunting has become less of a survival activity and more of a sport or hobby. People go out and get thousands of dollars in gear so they can wait, pretty much invisible, in some blind way up in a tree to take a pot shot at a deer and hit it right in the ass or something, track it down and stop it to death so they can have a manly story to pass around the lunchroom at their 12 dollar an hour factory job.

    Some people just enjoy hurting and torturing other living things and unfortunately, there are too many ****** irresponsible hunters who do it "just for fun".


    And as far as trapping animals for extra income, i dont agree doing it for pelts. If you trap animals and dispatch them with respect and use the intelligent brain that nature gave you and sell the meat and people survive off it then thats great. But beating somethings head in until its unconcious and then standing on its chest to crush its lungs just so some rich skank in california can have a foxfur coat is the kind of thing that makes everyone involved seem like lower life forms.

    Think about it, people stand on something thats living and breathing, and feels pain, to crush its chest and kill it in a horrible way so that someone can wear a pretty coat for a few months before they give it away and buy a new one.
    Are you sure you aren't from Kaliforiea? You sound just like the uptight snobs that control things down there.

    You are using the antis loqic. "A few people do it so it must be bad". Same thing they say about gun control.

    See here is the thing, since people have moved away from being hunter/gatherers (for the most part at least) and we have become industrialized, that creats a burden on the animal kingdom. No one killing them means too many of them and the start to die from starvation, malnurishment, and all sorts of diseases.

    By managing the amount of animals in an area at a given time through both sport hunting and sport fishing the department of fish and game can help ensure that there is an appropriate number of animals in a given area. This helps to lead to prolonged lives, healthier lives and a more diverse animal population.

    So tell me again how is sport hunting bad for the animals?
    "And shepherds we shall be, for Thee, my Lord, for Thee.
    Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, that our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command.
    So we shall flow a river forth to Thee and teeming with souls shall it ever be.
    E nomine Patri, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti."


    "If the rest of the world says: 'War,' I can only say: 'Very well. I do not want war, but no one, however peaceable, can live in peace if his neighbor intends to force a quarrel.'" - Adolf Hitler...

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mississippi/Tennessee
    Posts
    102
    Quote Originally Posted by Claytron View Post
    So one cruelty justifies another?
    I never said that, it's just a fact of life that both happen and both are necessary for our survival. I only advocate killing animals in the most humane way possible. Beating one over the head repeatedly or intentionally shooting it in the wrong place is inhumane. A hit in the head hard enough to kill it or knock it unconscious or shooting it in a vital area is humane. It's as simple as that.

    Not sure what part of the country you live in, but where I'm from people hunt to save money on meat. $.50 in ammo can supply a family with enough meat for several days.

    There is no difference between killing animals to sell the meat and killing them for the fur. You'll either kill them for the meat or you'll sell their fur to buy things you need (i.e. food, which includes meat). Trapped animals are generally not killed inhumanely. A .22 to the head (for smaller mammals) is about as instant and painless as it gets.

  13. #13
    Regular Member XD40coyote's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    woman stuck in Maryland, ,
    Posts
    709
    Claytron, did you bother to read my post at all?

    Ask away. Here at OCDO, a genuine trapper, me. So ask me whatever you want. Yes a FEMALE TRAPPER. I'll tell you all the nuisance animal stories too. I can post pics of mange covered foxes too if you like. Should I tell you about the sick raccoons?

    Did you know that animal activists and the Brady Bunch are the same genus? It's like the short tailed and long tailed weasel, but they are both weasels nonetheless.

    I suppose you buy into the animal rights idiots' junk they spew up there in ME. The lynx worth 300.00 on the Quebec side is some sort of god on the ME side.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over run with mud(s)
    Posts
    791
    Quote Originally Posted by Claytron View Post
    Funny how you bring up pests as your counter argument yet i believe i said i dont have a problem with people trapping PESTS but still think it should be done humanely as possible while still taking care of the problem efficiently.

    Also funny hwo you either dont realize or dont care to acknowledge the many animals brought close, or all the way, to extinction by hunting and poaching.

    Didnt we used to have white buffalo or something? We probably did dude. DID.

    We SHOT the white out of them.
    Never once did I use the word pest. I did however bring up over population being a great threat to animals of ALL kinds, which you conveniently ignored. I also specifically stated that because people (read "natives") were no longer hunting them for subsistence then there is a possibility for overpopulation.

    I also did not say that extinction has not happened in the past.

    The key thing to remember though is that was 50-100 years before people even thought of something like a department of fish and game and hunting licenses and bag limits and kill reporting and game management.

    There is a reason for these things as they allow for a normal sized population of various species within a certain area. Enough so they can procreate but not too much to where they no longer have resources.

    I am not saying the system in place right now is perfect but if you love animals so much would you rather see them die a quick painless death or see them waste away to nothing through a slow and painful process due to lack of sufficient resources?
    "And shepherds we shall be, for Thee, my Lord, for Thee.
    Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, that our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command.
    So we shall flow a river forth to Thee and teeming with souls shall it ever be.
    E nomine Patri, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti."


    "If the rest of the world says: 'War,' I can only say: 'Very well. I do not want war, but no one, however peaceable, can live in peace if his neighbor intends to force a quarrel.'" - Adolf Hitler...

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    White buffalo are genetic anomalies. They are not a breed or a species. They still exist.

  16. #16
    Regular Member XD40coyote's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    woman stuck in Maryland, ,
    Posts
    709
    Well Claytron ...


    issue 1: animals starving in traps or gnawing legs off

    These are old animal activist stand bys. Sure maybe this was common in 1821, but then again you don't make your 1.00 per beaver (in 1821 dollars) if the beaver gets loose or eaten by a scavenger. An Indian might have stolen it from your trap though. It may have been common in 1901 too, but I'd bet a trapper back then was very much looking for some money, and you can't make money from a skeleton or a paw. We can even examine 1979 when a red fox could get you 75.00. Lots of yahoos were around in 1979 from what I hear, so this is likley where the activists get their dirt. However when fur prices tanked about 1985, only the REAL trappers kept at it. Just like with law abiding gun owners, they did and still do abide by the trapping laws. I'm not sure what is with the youtube yahoos- I haven't seen these myself. I've watched some trapping stuff on youtube but didn't see any messed up paws or animals that starved to death. Heck, even I am on youtube discussing coon trapping methods. I came across a bit off a video set for traps4kids.com, of which I volunteered to be filmed.

    Simply put- inhumane activities are uncommon among furtrappers as a whole, just like those who open carry tend to not threaten to shoot innocent people.

    issue 2- hunting and wildlife #'s

    The extinctions refered to were mainly 100 or more years ago. The ones occuring more recently or of animals in great threat of it today, are from poaching and habitat loss, and mainly in countries without the resources to really heavily combat the problem. Now some of these countries have allowed only sport hunting and controlled culls, and this actually keeps poaching down because locals get paid well enough to be guides and trackers, and their villages get the meat. This keeps out the incentive to poach among the locals, which was what a large part of the poaching problem was in the past. The sport hunters pay huge amounts of money to take a small amount of game. Part of the money goes towards better managing the land for the benefit of the animals, and keeps habitat loss down as well.

    Modern hunting in north america is heavily regulated. If the state game managers notice a problem, they can increase or decrease the bag limits and season lengths. Most hunters abide by the regulations. Poachers are not well liked, and there are game officers out there doing what they can to curb it. Due to modern game management there are more whitetail deer in the US than there were in 1600. Wild turkeys came back with a bang, beavers are now overpopulated on most of their range, and black bears are thick in #'s. Coyotes are now taking up the role of wolves that used to exist in the east. Game animals are a nuisance nowadays, that is how plentiful most of the species are.

    issue #3- white buffalo

    These are a rare genetic anamoly, always have been. On the issue of bison in general, don't worry, they are doing well these days. Not overpopulated by any means, but they are fine. Bison ranching is a hot thing now too.

  17. #17
    Regular Member XD40coyote's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    woman stuck in Maryland, ,
    Posts
    709
    I do know that animal activists have infiltrated Maine, probably including turning hunters against trappers and trappers against houndsmen, so you could just be hearing malarky and BS. Or maybe there are alot of trashy folk up there? The trappers I know in PA sure don't seem that way.

    Other than that, you have shown you are just plain an a-hole by the way you explode with the animal rights sounding BS coming out of you ( skinning animals alive?), so I see no reason to try a civil debate with you anymore. BTW stunning a fox with a blow to the head and standing on the chest is actually a pretty quick death for the fox. A helluva lot better than them dying of mange ( which they do all time where I am), parvo, rabies, or canine distemper.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Fort Collins CO
    Posts
    34
    well I've been trapping for 7 years now, my daddy has been trapping for 50 years and my grandaddy trapped for close to 70 years.
    and we all have yet to have an animal gnaw its leg off, and hitting it with a club is as quick if not quicker than shooting it in the head.
    and leg hold traps barely hurt the critters at worse a sore paw for a few days when we release them.
    we check the traps everyday and nothing starves to death.

    so next time you decide to condemn something that you know nothing about,
    either learn about it and base your decision of the truth or
    let it be and mind your own damn business!

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Claytron View Post
    Any stats about how trapping has affected the mating habits of el chupacabra?
    Fixed.

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Claytron View Post
    strawmen extraordinaire on this forum, i am not against hunting or OCing( not sure at all why you brought that up) and im not even against trapping if its done properly and not by some ******* ready to leave a bunch of animals to starve to death. In your world of internet fact checking that might not exist, but in my world of hearing, what i presume to be true, accounts of people doing it themselves, it does exist.
    Fixed.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Claytron View Post
    You are also incorrect about trapping, its not done ONLY for extra income or food.
    Fixed.

  22. #22
    Regular Member OldCurlyWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    912

    Claytron

    Have the moderators removed it yet?

    I don't like bigoted idjiots.
    I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do those things to other people and I require the same of them.

    Politicians should serve two terms, one in office and one in prison.(borrowed from RioKid)

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Claytron View Post
    using up that much forum space just to "get back at me" seems a bit childish doesnt it?
    Pot, kettle. Kettle, pot.

  24. #24
    Regular Member OldCurlyWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by Claytron View Post
    If by "it" you mean the stick up your rear then apparently not.

    I dont like old stubborn fools.
    I am stubborn and obviously older than you, but I am not the fool.

    Nice try. Given about 40 or 50 years you might just make barely competent at delivering insults.
    I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do those things to other people and I require the same of them.

    Politicians should serve two terms, one in office and one in prison.(borrowed from RioKid)

  25. #25
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Claytron View Post
    As witty and trendy as that comment is, it really doesnt hold water (pun intended) seeing as how you posted three or four comments right after one another which seems to be a little overdoing it, as compared to my one comment towards you.

    Lets also keep in mind that the only reason i corrected you is because you felt it important enough to correct someone ELSE and give THEM a hard time for it. Play your little games all you like i understand this forum is your internet-home and you dont like outsiders, thats fine.

    I just dont see the point of picking out a completely random person who was trying to contribute to the thread and pointing out to everyone how they have mispelled something. How petty and low can you be dude?
    You have a very hard time with reading comprehension.

    As I have made clear now on multiple occasions:

    1. The fault I identified was not a simple misspelling, but was a failure to appreciate the difference between two easily confused, but different words.

    2. This fault was notably ironic in the context in which it appeared, which was a statement about the preferability of homeschooling.

    Its observation is actually noteworthy: advocating homeschool while making fundamental grammatical errors, like failing to appreciate "their" vs "they're", negatively affects the argument one is trying to make.

    I made a simple observation of the error, and pointed out the irony. I did so not to ridicule, but to help the individual express her opinion in such a way so as to achieve maximum credibility. I did so politely, and we continued on the thread topic in friendly discussion. You are the only one who saw a need to drag the issue out into other threads, days later.

    That was truly petty: following me around, looking for a single-character transposition, and worthlessly pointing it out.

    There is a critical difference that you simply cannot grasp: In the first case, the error directly reflected upon the credibility of the opinion being given. In the second case, it was a typo which had no effect on the credibility of my argument.

    So, whereas I helped a person (potentially) strengthen the credibility of her position and her expression of it, you engaged in trivial, trifling pedantry, to make a point which is invalidated by the incorrect equation of the one scenario with the other.

    So, I think it was more charitable than you deserve to imply that ours were equally puerile acts. Yours was clearly the more childish, all the more so for its lack of understanding and appreciation of context and subtlety.

    And, yes, it was thoroughly enjoyable singling out three of your errors in a row, all in separate posts. And yes, it was appropriate. Once or twice wouldn't have properly reflect the ridiculous nature of your misguided campaign.

    That's the last word you're going to get out of me on this. It's time to eye95 it, both of us.


    Edit: eye95 gets it:

    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    The absolute height of rhetorical irony is the ubiquitous "Your an idiot!"
    Last edited by marshaul; 03-15-2011 at 11:45 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •