President Bush pardons man convicted of killing bald eagles 6

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   hipifreq Posted 9:34 am
   02 Dec 2008

   Not news...While it is interesting that he pardoned the guy, I don't think it really climbs way up on the anti-enviro scale. Now, if he had intentionally killed the other animals, then I think it would be news, but it was all just a stupid thing the guy did not some wanton destruction.

   Permalink

2. 

   Wolverine Posted 4:18 pm
   02 Dec 2008

   Not News?Excuse me, but he purposely killed coyotes.  No excuse for that, even though coyotes are not endangered.  And poison?  No excuse for that, either.

   Permalink

3. 

   caniscandida Posted 4:24 pm
   02 Dec 2008

   The issue is huntingand the idiocy and sense of entitlement that so many hunters display, not environmentalism.  In fact, this ex-felon was a sort of twisted, lumpen-environmentalist, who wished to strengthen the survival chances of a new population of wild turkeys in his vicinity, by killing off coyotes:
   http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/30/washington/30pardon.htm ....
   For this man, the bitterest part of his sentence was the confiscation of his collection of hunting guns.  Which dumbfounds me.  It remains a source of deep confusion to me, to discover yet again that I share the citizenship in this great republic with such gun-fetishists as this misguided creature.

   Permalink

4. 

   nattydad Posted 11:58 am
   03 Dec 2008

   So now he gets them back??Obviously, this is a person that has poor judgement and cannot be trusted with dangerous things. But now he can get guns again! Hooray!
   What an a$$hole.

   Permalink

5. 

   Dutchboy777 Posted 3:07 am
   09 Dec 2008

   That's pretty nasty.How was he an 'a$$hole'?  While poison might not be the ideal way of killing coyotes, it was effective.  And it saved the wild turkeys.  There is not pleasing most environmentalists.  If he had allowed the wild turkeys to die off, would then call him an 'a$$hole'?  The answer is, yes.

   Permalink

6. 

   Dutchboy777 Posted 3:11 am
   09 Dec 2008

   Wrongly convictedGood.  He should not have been convicted in the first place.  I am a strong believer in the protection of endangered species, but he never intended to hurt any eagle.  It was an accident and he was not negligent.

   Permalink