Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

exboyfil

(18,371 posts)
3. Maybe he doesn't have the dollars to keep paying
Fri Jul 31, 2015, 03:20 PM
Jul 2015

them. Do we know if it is their decision or his decision.

Also they may felt that they had nothing else to contribute. The damage has been done, and it is best to let the fire burn out. Some actions by the dentist may have a tendency to indicate guilt. In addition to the potential criminal possibilities, I wonder if the park has a potential tort against him for damages.

Actually what I read indicates that this was almost legal. The only thing missing was a specific license on the property in which he shot the lion. Apparently luring the lion out of the park is allowed.

The whole concept of luring what effectively is a pet to be killed is really sordid, but it goes on everyday. My dad had a hunting preserve that leased a portion of his land. The preserve owner took my brother and me around to show us the land prior to our sale of the land to him. I asked him about these cute little sheep that were being fed from a trough. He indicated that hunters paid money to come shoot them. Needless to say I was horrified. I could see harvesting deer on the property, and he ran wild pigs which are definitely a challenge, but these little things.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»PR Firm hired by killer o...»Reply #3