Petition you can sign over Cecil's murder

Here is the petition...

  https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petit ... e-zimbabwe

You'll need to verify your signature by going  to a link in your in box that will then verify it..

They already have enough signatures to get recognition of the requested extradition of the accused, but the more we pile on, the more we make a huge statement about how we all feel about this trophy hunting garbage. If these animals are theirs to have the right to kill then they are also ours to have the right to preserve and protect and seek justice and vindication and change. The animals are as much ours as anybody's..

However they shouldn't even be under that sort of judgement.. They should be considered sovereign....


Paul

pleverington wrote:Here is the petition...

 https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petit ... e-zimbabwe

You'll need to verify your signature by going  to a link in your in box that will then verify it..

They already have enough signatures to get recognition of the requested extradition of the accused, but the more we pile on, the more we make a huge statement about how we all feel about this trophy hunting garbage. If these animals are theirs to have the right to kill then they are also ours to have the right to preserve and protect and seek justice and vindication and change. The animals are as much ours as anybody's..

However they shouldn't even be under that sort of judgement.. They should be considered sovereign....


Paul

I like your thinking!

Your link is not correct.  This should work:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petit ... e-zimbabwe

aolander wrote:Your link is not correct.  This should work:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petit ... e-zimbabwe

My bad....thank you Alan...

Thanks so much guys for this petition.  I signed it and posted it on Twitter and Facebook.
(moderated)

Robert

Not to get picky here, but to call the illegal killing of Cecil the lion a "murder" is not right and may lead to credibility problems for using that term in this situation. Murder refers to human vs human killing.
Peace
P

Paul Fusco wrote:Not to get picky here, but to call the illegal killing of Cecil the lion a "murder" is not right and may lead to credibility problems for using that term in this situation. Murder refers to human vs human killing.
Peace
P

Aw but if one feels that the life of an animal is every bit as equal to the life of a human and that we all share this planet equally then it would be murder. But your correct if you only want to consider the exact dictionary definition. But words fail us constantly as far as accurate representatives of things. Again it depends on  if one wants to look at this through anthropocentric eyes or bio-centric eyes. I think judging by the hurt and outrage expressed by the world over this the word murder aptly describes the level of intensity people are feeling right now. People certainly don't react many times when a human is murdered to the extent they are reacting to this so I think that says something.

Yes, I guess I'm guilty for using the word murder for it's effect, but that is exactly how it feels. In that context I'm going to stand behind it's use in this case. Because it does mean killing another human by a human.

Paul

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/cecil ... ed-n404336

The person who leads the organization that oversees these safaries is "labelling" it murder. And I do want to be very clear that this is murder.

Robert

I originally joined this site to learn more about nature photography and bird photography in particular. Over the past few years there had been a noticeable trend toward more emphasis on environmental issues. Even the guidelines for this particular forum state: Please keep discussions on topics relevant to nature photography. Perhaps we all need to take a step back and consider what we want NatureScapes to be. There must be many other places to express opinions on the environmental issues of the day.

...a noticeable trend toward more emphasis on more environmental issues.

In case you havent noticed, the title of this particular forum is Environment, Conservation and Ethics.
So, the sublect of this thread is completely consistent with the theme of the forum.

Once again, the moderators need to step in to prevent this poster from hijacking the thread.

John

pdschu wrote:I originally joined this site to learn more about nature photography and bird photography in particular. Over the past few years there had been a noticeable trend toward more emphasis on environmental issues. Even the guidelines for this particular forum state: Please keep discussions on topics relevant to nature photography. Perhaps we all need to take a step back and consider what we want NatureScapes to be. There must be many other places to express opinions on the environmental issues of the day.

Paul, I understand where you are coming from, but as John rightly points out, if you actually read the heading of this section of the forum it does say 'conservation and ethics' along with environment.

You cannot have nature without a natural world and that includes environment, you cannot have animals and birds without some manner of conservation of the same and finally in photography as well as any love of nature you cannot exclude ethics.

Wouldn't you agree at least in principle that the killing of this beautiful creature was a gross violation of ethics and a giant step backwards in animal conservation  - seeing as how his progeny will cease to exist?

Finally, yes, there may be other places to rant about the environment, but, as far as I know, this is the ONLY photography forum where there is any kind of discussion on issues other than gear and technique, which is why I for one love this place. 

Nature photography cannot exist without the issues we discuss here and thus, IMHO it is entirely relevant to talk about them. 

Regards,

Pradeep

pleverington wrote:

Paul Fusco wrote:Not to get picky here, but to call the illegal killing of Cecil the lion a "murder" is not right and may lead to credibility problems for using that term in this situation. Murder refers to human vs human killing.
Peace
P

Aw but if one feels that the life of an animal is every bit as equal to the life of a human and that we all share this planet equally then it would be murder. But your correct if you only want to consider the exact dictionary definition. But words fail us constantly as far as accurate representatives of things. Again it depends on  if one wants to look at this through anthropocentric eyes or bio-centric eyes. I think judging by the hurt and outrage expressed by the world over this the word murder aptly describes the level of intensity people are feeling right now. People certainly don't react many times when a human is murdered to the extent they are reacting to this so I think that says something.

Yes, I guess I'm guilty for using the word murder for it's effect, but that is exactly how it feels. In that context I'm going to stand behind it's use in this case. Because it does mean killing another human by a human.

Paul

Yes, Paul. I understand the emphasis that using the word "murder" attempts to bring to the situation. And, I agree that the incident is egregious and barbaric. But it should be described in a manner that is fitting to the circumstance. The word murder implies that the lion has human attributes, which it does not. I am not saying that the lion should not be respected or be perceived to be a lesser entity. In fact I believe that people should give Cecil, the lion, the utmost respect for what it was - a superb and powerful creature. A creature that did not have firearms or razor-sharp broadheads at his disposal. It is a terrible end for Cecil, but this incident raises the level of attention that should be put on trophy hunting. Cecil is not the only adult male lion in his prime, a strong and dominant animal, that meets the end like this. Other lions also have prides with cubs that are put at risk almost every time the dominant male and protector, gets removed from the population. A lion population that is less than 30% what it was just 40 years ago. 
So, using the word "murder" is counterproductive, IMO, because it is not accurate and can be interpreted as sensationalism. There is no need for sensationalism in this case. The incident is absolutely egregious on its own merits.

P

pdschu wrote:I originally joined this site to learn more about nature photography and bird photography in particular. Over the past few years there had been a noticeable trend toward more emphasis on environmental issues. Even the guidelines for this particular forum state: Please keep discussions on topics relevant to nature photography. Perhaps we all need to take a step back and consider what we want NatureScapes to be. There must be many other places to express opinions on the environmental issues of the day.

The post will stay - I think the issue is relevant to the preservation of nature, without which there would be no nature photography.

We welcome you to still learn about nature and bird photography and avoid this forum if you don't wish to read about these sorts of issues. That's why we title the forums by subject matter.

Paul Fusco wrote: ... A lion population that is less than 30% what it was just 40 years ago. ...

CORRECTION:
This sentence should read ... A lion population that is less than 15% what it was just 40 years ago.

P

Paul Fusco wrote:

pleverington wrote:

Paul Fusco wrote:Not to get picky here, but to call the illegal killing of Cecil the lion a "murder" is not right and may lead to credibility problems for using that term in this situation. Murder refers to human vs human killing.
Peace
P

Aw but if one feels that the life of an animal is every bit as equal to the life of a human and that we all share this planet equally then it would be murder. But your correct if you only want to consider the exact dictionary definition. But words fail us constantly as far as accurate representatives of things. Again it depends on  if one wants to look at this through anthropocentric eyes or bio-centric eyes. I think judging by the hurt and outrage expressed by the world over this the word murder aptly describes the level of intensity people are feeling right now. People certainly don't react many times when a human is murdered to the extent they are reacting to this so I think that says something.

Yes, I guess I'm guilty for using the word murder for it's effect, but that is exactly how it feels. In that context I'm going to stand behind it's use in this case. Because it does mean killing another human by a human.

Paul

Yes, Paul. I understand the emphasis that using the word "murder" attempts to bring to the situation. And, I agree that the incident is egregious and barbaric. But it should be described in a manner that is fitting to the circumstance. The word murder implies that the lion has human attributes, which it does not. I am not saying that the lion should not be respected or be perceived to be a lesser entity. In fact I believe that people should give Cecil, the lion, the utmost respect for what it was - a superb and powerful creature. A creature that did not have firearms or razor-sharp broadheads at his disposal. It is a terrible end for Cecil, but this incident raises the level of attention that should be put on trophy hunting. Cecil is not the only adult male lion in his prime, a strong and dominant animal, that meets the end like this. Other lions also have prides with cubs that are put at risk almost every time the dominant male and protector, gets removed from the population. A lion population that is less than 30% what it was just 40 years ago. 
So, using the word "murder" is counterproductive, IMO, because it is not accurate and can be interpreted as sensationalism. There is no need for sensationalism in this case. The incident is absolutely egregious on its own merits.

P

Paul I'd be willing to bet money that you yourself feel that Cecil was murdered. I know it in fact. You give it away in the way you describe him and how he was killed. I'm reading past the words  ....and that's the point  isn't  it? Read past the words themselves. ....

It is one thing to say Cecil was murdered...it's another to say the trophy seeking idiot was a murderer.

If you asked most people they would say it was murder.

Words are just tools and no one tool does all the jobs....

In the context of this case using the word murdered to describe what happened to Cecil is instantly recognized and embraced by almost everyone to describe the complete and frustrating loss of what they feel. I submit, without saying your wrong in your points, in this case it is not only warranted, but also very productive in activating the world to taking action against at least to ending the trophy hunting madness, to even looking at any travesty that abuses animals so that a few people can pander to their sicknesses or twisted and delusional beliefs.

Whether you see it or not the world is outraged and had enough of these wack jobs. Everywhere I go people know of the story of Cecil. What's that say?? Like maybe the guys that killed Cecil stabbed right into the hearts of every kind and caring person on this earth who wants nature, wants the animals, the insects, the whales, the rhinos and elephants to mention but a few. This is personal... Cecil represents something inside of all of us  and his taking just pulled the rug out from under us and we are all reacting like never before. Enough...enough...enough....

So yes...not just me... but the world feels as if they have lost and have been losing everything they love  that is near and dear---just as they would feel about the murder of a sister or brother ......... it feels the SAME!!!!!!!!

Using the word murder expresses this properly, nothing short  of it will. And everyone knows by definition it's not murder, but because there simply is no other word to describe what they feel, then we(I) use what is at their(my) disposal.

It's not sensationalism at this point. No one is by use of words trying to make something out bigger than what it actually is by using demonizing language. This killing of Cecil feels like murder to almost all across the world and like I said it expresses a very deep fundamental personal kind of reaction from them.

It will not harm the cause because of reasons I have sited.

I stand behind my use of the word murdered.

I still understand and agree and know what your saying though. In other cases you would be more spot on. Not here I feel.

Paul

pdschu wrote:I originally joined this site to learn more about nature photography and bird photography in particular. Over the past few years there had been a noticeable trend toward more emphasis on environmental issues. Even the guidelines for this particular forum state: Please keep discussions on topics relevant to nature photography. Perhaps we all need to take a step back and consider what we want NatureScapes to be. There must be many other places to express opinions on the environmental issues of the day.

Schumacher, your correct, we are evolving. We, because we are in the field all day trying to get a great photo, are all seeing and experiencing the full width and breath of the natural world like very, very, few others on the planet do. We see things including the losses and harm to nature unlike 99% of the people on Earth. We are unique in this regard, we are special. And we are being called upon for higher purposes because of our more sublime consciousnesses.

So yes the site is evolving, but no it does not mean it's a bad thing. The entire purpose of our endeavors is the nature itself.

The site will change as time goes by, as well it should. Without that change, it will fizzle and die out as it falls behind the rest of the universal collective mind.

The site must always maintain a reflection of us. So far it's doing a fair job...

Your request to me sounds more like an evocation of the rules so as to silence those who do not agree with you. Say anything you will, but that is how I'm reading you....


Paul

Dear Paul and Paul : Stop the discussion please - there is no need to continue. I agree murder is Human/Human by defenition but that does not lessen the impact of the killing of an animal for sport. So PLEASE just agree to disagree on the definition.

Also Paul L. I do not need further clarification on why this post will stand. I posted enough. The problem with carrying things on and on is it just gets out of hand and escalates and goes off the topic. The post is about a petition. Let people read it, decide for themselves and move on. Do not make this a soap box platform with each post to go on and on about your personal view of the world  - if that sort of thing continues we will have to figure out other ways to run this forum because this is not productive in any way shape or form other than to cause specifically heated debate.

Thread closed - I think we have exhausted the purpose of this post - sign the petition if you agree with it.