Bear Speared

[TrapJack]

The caliber comment, the killing the animal with a spear is twice as fast as arrow comment, the couldn't have died immediately comment, the tradition comment and the pig sticker comment. All of those comments at the time is a criticism of spear hunting. Now you are saying you were commenting on his statements. Ok. Sure. If you say so...

It's clear you're not willing to listen to anything anyone says, or maybe simply not capable...
so i will respond to ONE of your points, and then i'm moving on, it's not worth my time to point out every way you're wrong with regards to everyone of my statements, one example should suffice in representing the general idiocy you're spouted.

so let's use the first point you brought up, caliber.

"Not to mention, I got 24 inches of penetration on that bear causing more damage and trauma to the bear than any arrow/broadhead/bullet combination could ever cause."
- There are plenty of gauge/caliber options that would cause more damage and trauma than this did. His statement is BS.

FIRSTLY, you said "Now you are saying you were commenting on his statements. Ok. Sure. If you say so..." ACTUALLY i was CLEAR about that form the beginning, i even ended my FIRST point with "his statement is BS"
Reading comprehension... what a chore...

now tell me what about my statement was anti spear? all i did was defend guns as "not inferior" to spears, as he had stated... how is defending guns, the same as hating on spears? want another hint??? it's not the same at all!

Have a great day... i don't have anymore time for your warped view, you sound like Hillary... it's a waste of time...

[Dythbringer]

It's clear you're not willing to listen to anything anyone says, or maybe simply not capable...
so i will respond to ONE of your points, and then i'm moving on, it's not worth my time to point out every way you're wrong with regards to everyone of my statements, one example should suffice in representing the general idiocy you're spouted.

so let's use the first point you brought up, caliber.

"Not to mention, I got 24 inches of penetration on that bear causing more damage and trauma to the bear than any arrow/broadhead/bullet combination could ever cause."
- There are plenty of gauge/caliber options that would cause more damage and trauma than this did. His statement is BS.

FIRSTLY, you said "Now you are saying you were commenting on his statements. Ok. Sure. If you say so..." ACTUALLY i was CLEAR about that form the beginning, i even ended my FIRST point with "his statement is BS"
Reading comprehension... what a chore...

now tell me what about my statement was anti spear? all i did was defend guns as "not inferior" to spears, as he had stated... how is defending guns, the same as hating on spears? want another hint??? it's not the same at all!

Have a great day... i don't have anymore time for your warped view, you sound like Hillary... it's a waste of time...

You want an explanation about your comments. You state there are plenty of options which (you actually use that) would cause more damage and trauma than this did. This statement implies to the reader it is your opinion that a spear is inferior to firearms. You want to speak about my reading comprehension, let's try to work on your writing skills shall we?

You don't want to continue the debate. Fine. Your choice. No one pointed a gun at your head to join the conversation.

You want to take a parting shot likening me to Clinton. Your choice as well. Good form by the way. When someone doesn't agree with you, take your ball and go home. Off you go.

[Gilroy]

Why do you think I have lost the plot comparing the two of them?

R.Well the Maasai go out into the African bush which is hot and full of other dangerous animals and track and hunt down very dangerous lions and even alert them to their presence.This is after tracking them for up to 10 hours.You cant really compare that to this bear hunter throwing his spear at a baited bear.The Maasai have a good chance at getting killed,I,am pretty sure this guy had a back up armed hunter near by.



They both use spears to kill the animal and that is one of the main reasons why people are upset about this.

R.Yes they both use spears but people are upset because the bear was set up to be killed so apparently no useful reason other than the excuse for meat.Always a poor excuse for hunters to use in this day and age, but I digress , the Maasai engage in this hunt to keep down the number of lions killing their cattle.Even although they have access to the internet as is evident from their link they do not film and broadcast their hunts for the world to see,maybe they are smarter than your bear hunter or more media savy.LOL



You still haven't answered the question though: why is it ok for the Maasai to use a spear and not this guy? Make sure you judge both hunts with the same criteria. The bear hunter is going to eat the bear, the Maasai don't.

R.For the above mentioned reasons and in addition the Maasai probably know that a lion is a poor choice of meat,just like coyote hunters dont eat their coyote meat.(SOME EXCEPTIONS)
The bear hunter used a bait to attract a bear (not illegal or unethical), the Maasai use bells to get the lions to attack them (harassing the animal).

R. The bells don,t exclusively attract the lions they use other methods including tracking.The main difference to me is that the bear hunters methods are more cowardly than the Maasai warriors,this is without dispute.


The bear hunter uses a superior version of the Maasai spear and is just as effective with it as the Maasai lion hunters. So if you are going to condemn the hunting of one animal with a spear, best be ready to condemn all spear hunting (and spear fishing).

R.Again the rational for approving the Maasai is that they have less choice and have traditionally hunted this way for centuries and the GENERAL PUBLIC (voters) GET THIS.What they don,t get or approve of is what this bear hunter did and then showed it of.

As your causalities comment, do we stop hunters from bowhunting Grizzlys, moose, black bear, wolves, etc from the ground? All of those animals can easily kill a human being (or at least put a hurting on them). So you comment of "someone might get hurt" doesn't apply, no one lives in a bubble. You hunt that way for that species, you take your chances.

R.Absolutely agree you take your chances so lets hope the next time we see this character is on the hot African plain,with bells on,sweating it out over a 10 hour hunt,with just a spear in hand,avoiding all the other animals that might kill him.Then he throws his spear at an ALERTED big male lion,that decides its not turning tail and we get to see the results.

No problem for the antis or most of the other viewing audience as the wounded lion tears him apart on camera,everybody has a good chuckle and says in unison,serves his right.

[MikePal]

5 out of 8 complaints in your initial post complain in one form or another about his use of the spear.

You state there are plenty of options which (you actually use that) would cause more damage and trauma than this did. This statement implies to the reader it is your opinion that a spear is inferior to firearms. You want to speak about my reading comprehension, let's try to work on your writing skills shall we?

I'm going to agree with Dyth..nothing personal, but your original post was written in a way that suggests that your were against the use of a spear over other weapons of choice.

It isn't hard to draw the conclusion,it's wasn't a comprehension issue.

[Dythbringer]

Why do you think I have lost the plot comparing the two of them?

R.Well the Maasai go out into the African bush which is hot and full of other dangerous animals and track and hunt down very dangerous lions and even alert them to their presence. This is after tracking them for up to 10 hours. You cant really compare that to this bear hunter throwing his spear at a baited bear. The Maasai have a good chance at getting killed,I,am pretty sure this guy had a back up armed hunter near by.

Have you watched this video? He states it is just him and his spear. No armed backup. It doesn't matter if the Maasai tracks them for 20 minutes. They still use a spear. People aren't mad he killed a bear or that it was over bait. They are mad because he used a spear. Hunting a lion in Africa and hunting a bear are different. However, these two hunts use the same tool to kill the animal and the world is mad that the bear was killed with a spear while nothing is said about killing a lion with a spear.

They both use spears to kill the animal and that is one of the main reasons why people are upset about this.

R.Yes they both use spears but people are upset because the bear was set up to be killed so apparently no useful reason other than the excuse for meat.Always a poor excuse for hunters to use in this day and age, but I digress , the Maasai engage in this hunt to keep down the number of lions killing their cattle.Even although they have access to the internet as is evident from their link they do not film and broadcast their hunts for the world to see,maybe they are smarter than your bear hunter or more media savy.LOL

If we aren't hunting for meat, why are we hunting then? Again, people aren't angry about it being over a bear or baiting. They are angry he used a spear. The government of Alberta isn't changing the laws of baiting over this. They are changing what tools hunters can use. This isn't about bait, it is about the spear. But no one is using the terms barbaric and archaic when the Maasai use a spear, they use the terms tradition and lifestyle. If you read the website, they engage in this hunt as rite of passage, bravery and personal achievement. Go to youtube, there are videos showing the Maasai hunting lions with a spear.

You still haven't answered the question though: why is it ok for the Maasai to use a spear and not this guy? Make sure you judge both hunts with the same criteria. The bear hunter is going to eat the bear, the Maasai don't.

R.For the above mentioned reasons and in addition the Maasai probably know that a lion is a poor choice of meat,just like coyote hunters dont eat their coyote meat.(SOME EXCEPTIONS)

Again my point is about how hypocritically this guy is being judged by the world when there are others who use the exact same tool to do the job.

The bear hunter used a bait to attract a bear (not illegal or unethical), the Maasai use bells to get the lions to attack them (harassing the animal).

R. The bells dont exclusively attract the lions they use other methods including tracking.The main difference to me is that the bear hunters methods are more cowardly than the Maasai warriors,this is without dispute.

This thread isn't about whether the bear hunter's hunting method (baiting) is cowardly. It is about him using a spear and his actions afterwards. All of my points were to show the only thing you can judge these two hunts is the fact they use a spear and if one type of spear hunting gets a pass, then the other one should as well.

The bear hunter uses a superior version of the Maasai spear and is just as effective with it as the Maasai lion hunters. So if you are going to condemn the hunting of one animal with a spear, best be ready to condemn all spear hunting (and spear fishing).

R.Again the rational for approving the Maasai is that they have less choice and have traditionally hunted this way for centuries and the GENERAL PUBLIC (voters) GET THIS.What they don,t get or approve of is what this bear hunter did and then showed it of.

We hunted like this for centuries before firearms became mainstream. In fact, our species has much more of a tradition with spears than firearms. As I said in a previous thread, all of the stuff being said about how barbaric and archaic spear hunting is was said when bowhunting was becoming mainstream.

As your causalities comment, do we stop hunters from bowhunting Grizzlys, moose, black bear, wolves, etc from the ground? All of those animals can easily kill a human being (or at least put a hurting on them). So you comment of "someone might get hurt" doesn't apply, no one lives in a bubble. You hunt that way for that species, you take your chances.

R.Absolutely agree you take your chances so lets hope the next time we see this character is on the hot African plain,with bells on,sweating it out over a 10 hour hunt,with just a spear in hand,avoiding all the other animals that might kill him.Then he throws his spear at an ALERTED big male lion,that decides its not turning tail and we get to see the results.

No problem for the antis or most of the other viewing audience as the wounded lion tears him apart on camera,everybody has a good chuckle and says in unison,serves his right.

Again you are confusing the issue here. The issue isn't the bear or the bait, it is the spear. If you think it is, you should start advocating for the removal of the bear hunt.

My comments are in bold.

[Gilroy]

[COLOR=#333333]"My comments are in red."

They should be in red as your whole comparing the Maasai to this character is a "red herring" IMHO.

[COLOR=#333333]"Again you are confusing the issue here. The issue isn't the bear or the bait, it is the spear. If you think it is, you should start advocating for the removal of the bear hunt."

Dont think so the general public are upset at both the use of the spear and the bait.

The whole point your MISSING is that the way the Maasai hunt will continue unabated while this hunters actions have already impacted the hunting community in North America.You can believe this or stay comfortable in what ever way you want to be with your own beliefs.

[Dythbringer]

[COLOR=#333333]"My comments are in red."

They should be in red as your whole comparing the Maasai to this character is a "red herring" IMHO.

[COLOR=#333333]"Again you are confusing the issue here. The issue isn't the bear or the bait, it is the spear. If you think it is, you should start advocating for the removal of the bear hunt."

Dont think so the general public are upset at both the use of the spear and the bait.

The whole point your MISSING is that the way the Maasai hunt will continue unabated while this hunters actions have already impacted the hunting community in North America.You can believe this or stay comfortable in what ever way you want to be with your own beliefs.

Only comparing them because they both use spears to kill animals.

It has to be about the spears. The Alberta government is not scrambling to change the bear baiting laws, they are scrambling to outlaw spears. If it was about the baiting, Notley would be announcing banning baiting. Has statement come from Alberta about baiting? Has any Alberta politician denounced baiting?

Of course the Maasai will continue unabated because of people's perspective of what constitutes barbaric, not because of any real logic. A spear is a spear. If it is barbaric and archaic to use a spear to kill one animal, it stands to reason killing all animals with a spear is barbaric and archaic. But no one is denouncing the Maasai for doing it. It is a marvelous double standard, isn't it?

[jaycee]

I have to go out and get some more [large size ] "popcorn".

[MikePal]

I have to go out and get some more [large size ] "popcorn".

ahhh human bait.....should be outlawed at a theatre

[Gun Nut]

I guess the general public look at this and say its OK because the Masai hunter probably tracked his animal skilfully over miles of bush and used the only tool he can afford to dispatch the animal,which he will skilfully track and recover and is essential to fed or protect for his family.

On the other hand the general public might look at the North American hunter as being engaged in a past time that is not essential,
using a spear and putting the animal through unnecessary suffering,when he could have used a rifle.Taking the animal "over bait" which to the general public is seen as cheating and to top it off the "recovery time" and the fact this hunter does not need the meat to sustain himself.

Also the Masai hunter is probably not going into his mud hut in the evening and posting it worldwide.

OR, in the case of the Masai hunter, he has a limited tool-chest (a spear and a shield) to choose from, unlike the North American hunter, who has a number tools to exact a clean kill, and is govern by a regulated hunt, requiring him to use an appropriate tool (and hopeful have a level of consistence in using it) to do the job proficiently. Also the taking of a lion by a Masai hunter, is seen as a right to passage, and so takes on the mantle of a life and death struggle to prove one's manhood. It's not a quest to provide food for one's table, or trophy rug for one's den. It is a traditional aboriginal rite, an to it, the initiate must bring his short lifetime of training and skill, in order to meet the challenge. His success gains for him, his entry into manhood, and the respect of his tribe.You might only imagine what failure could end up yielding. Once he has gain the respect of his tribe it ends, there is no necessity of making a show of it for a world audience.

You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut