PETA reveals their new hunter hunting anti-hunting drones.

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Grey Templar**

Ouze wrote:
Grey Templar wrote:
I remember a case where the Police were tracking down some Growhouses and were using Thermal Cameras to see if a house was glowing warmer than normal. The Judge ruled that using a Thermal Camera was a violation of Privacy and so threw out that evidence..

To clarify your comment a little, the ruling was that thermal penetration constitutes a search (and yes, the evidence was tossed). However, the police can absolutely do this legally, they just are required to obtain a warrant as they would with any other search.

Ahh yes, thats what the deal was.

**KalashnikovMarine**

Greenpeace isn't too terrible, they're definitely aggressive but at least they aren't asinine like PETA.

**Grey Templar**

True

**KalashnikovMarine**

Also every Greenpeace minion I've ever BS'd with has been a hunter or been cool with hunting. That alone marks them as a far more sane and reasonable group then PETA because they accept that ceasing hunting would absolutely devastate the ecosystem.

We are the apex predator in these parts. That means we have a certain responsibility to have enough deer and elk steaks a year to keep the populations balanced and healthy.

**Grey Templar**

Greenpeace does have quite a few subparts, some are ok and others are still crazy.

**Ratbarf**

Well they killed our turtle races for no good reason, and for that they cannot be forgiven.

**azazel the cat**

kronk wrote:PETA is not a terrorist organization. The practice Militant Hippyism, which I oppose in all of it's forms. Tossing blood on people wearing fur coats, ramming fishing vessels, etc.

I would consider actions such as arson to be terrorism.

**Sigvatr**

azazel the cat wrote:
kronk wrote:PETA is not a terrorist organization. The practice Militant Hippyism, which I oppose in all of it's forms. Tossing blood on people wearing fur coats, ramming fishing vessels, etc.

I would consider actions such as arson to be terrorism.

They are more of a criminal organization then as they condone their members, or even make them, commit crimes on purpose. Paint on fur, ramming ships etc. is a crime, no matter your intention.

**hotsauceman1**

Since when has PITA rammed ships.

**Monster Rain**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Since when has PITA rammed ships.

You'd think it would bend when pressed against a ship's hull.

I mean, you can bake it into chips, but even then I don't think it would do much damage. You then have to wonder how a middle-eastern flatbread got out on the open sea to begin with.

**hotsauceman1**

Haha. But seriously, i though it was Sea shepards that did that.

**RatBot**

Monster Rain wrote:
hotsauceman1 wrote:
Since when has PITA rammed ships.

You'd think it would bend when pressed against a ship's hull.

I mean, you can bake it into chips, but even then I don't think it would do much damage. You then have to wonder how a middle-eastern flatbread got out on the open sea to begin with.

Welp, now I'm hungry for shawarma. I hope you're all happy.

**Monster Rain**

RatBot wrote:
Welp, now I'm hungry for shawarma. I hope you're all happy.

Happy? This is a serious thread about serious business.

**KalashnikovMarine**

Sharma is srs bsnz guise!

I know PETA's pulled off some fairly extreme shenanigans in the past, and have been associated with extremist groups who HAVE done some jacked up stuff. I don't recall them ramming whalers though.

**MrMoustaffa**

KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Sharma is srs bsnz guise!

I know PETA's pulled off some fairly extreme shenanigans in the past, and have been associated with extremist groups who HAVE done some jacked up stuff. I don't recall them ramming whalers though.

I think he's mixing them up with those guys on animal planet who "wage war" on the Japanese whalers yet pretend they're not breaking any laws whatsoever (not that I'm against what they do, I just think they're going to get someone killed for a stupid reason, like where their "stealth ship" got rammed in half)

**Ensis Ferrae**

MrMoustaffa wrote:
KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Sharma is srs bsnz guise!

I know PETA's pulled off some fairly extreme shenanigans in the past, and have been associated with extremist groups who HAVE done some jacked up stuff. I don't recall them ramming whalers though.

I think he's mixing them up with those guys on animal planet who "wage war" on the Japanese whalers yet pretend they're not breaking any laws whatsoever (not that I'm against what they do, I just think they're going to get someone killed for a stupid reason, like where their "stealth ship" got rammed in half)

Wasnt that Greenpeace?

**Ouze**

MrMoustaffa wrote:
I think he's mixing them up with those guys on animal planet who "wage war" on the Japanese whalers

I concur, but, well, no reason to split hairs, and demand "factual accuracy", right? They're all terrorists!!1!

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
[Wasnt that Greenpeace?

No, Greenpeace was the ram-ee at several points, but not a ramm-er. That was someone else . And, frankly, not friends of Greenpeace either.

There was a collision that I found, but I'm not sure I'd call it a ramming - it looked like an accident rather than intentional, as Sea Shepherd does.

**Dreadclaw69**

Ouze wrote:
No, Greenpeace was the ram-ee at several points, but not a ramm-er. That was someone else . And, frankly, not friends of Greenpeace either.

There was a collision that I found, but I'm not sure I'd call it a ramming - it looked like an accident rather than intentional, as Sea Shepherd does.

They were the bombees too, thanks to the French
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_Rainbow_Warrior

The sinking of the Rainbow Warrior, codenamed Opération Satanique,[1] was an operation by the "action" branch of the French foreign intelligence services, the Direction Générale de la Sécurité Extérieure (DGSE), carried out on 10 July 1985. It aimed to sink the flagship of the Greenpeace fleet, the Rainbow Warrior in the port of Auckland, New Zealand, to prevent her from interfering in a nuclear test in Moruroa.
Fernando Pereira, a photographer, drowned on the sinking ship. Two French agents were arrested by the New Zealand Police on passport fraud and immigration charges. They were charged with arson, conspiracy to commit arson, willful damage, and murder. As part of a plea bargain, they pleaded guilty to manslaughter and were sentenced to ten years in prison, of which they served just over two.
The scandal resulted in the resignation of the French Defence Minister Charles Hernu. . .

Sinking of the ship
Agents had boarded and examined the ship while it was open to public viewing. DGSE agent Christine Cabon, posing as environmentalist Frederique Bonlieu, volunteered for the Greenpeace office in Auckland. Cabon secretly monitored communications from the Rainbow Warrior, collected maps, and investigated underwater equipment, in order to provide information crucial to the sinking. After the necessary information had been gathered, two DGSE divers beneath the Rainbow Warrior attached two limpet mines and detonated them 10 minutes apart. The first bomb went off 11:38 P.M., creating a large hole about the size of an average car. Agents intended the first mine to cripple the ship so that it would be evacuated safely by the time the second mine was detonated. However, the crew did not react to the first explosion as the agents had expected. While the ship was initially evacuated, some of the crew returned to the ship to investigate and film the damage. A Portuguese-Dutch photographer, Fernando Pereira, returned below decks to fetch his camera equipment. At 11:45 P.M., the second bomb went off. Pereira drowned in the rapid flooding that followed, and the other ten crew members either safely abandoned ship on the order of Captain Peter Willcox or were thrown into the water by the second explosion. The Rainbow Warrior sank four minutes later

**dogma**

KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Also every Greenpeace minion I've ever BS'd with has been a hunter or been cool with hunting.

I used to work for them, and my experience was similar. In general the organization is fine with hunting, as it is a conservation group, not an animal rights group.

Well, it is now.

**Bullockist**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Since when has PITA rammed ships.

This post made me laugh, I don't know if the typo was intentional or not, but i think it sums up PETA well.

**KalashnikovMarine**

dogma wrote:
KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Also every Greenpeace minion I've ever BS'd with has been a hunter or been cool with hunting.

I used to work for them, and my experience was similar. In general the organization is fine with hunting, as it is a conservation group, not an animal rights group.

Well, it is now.

That's what really hacks me off about PETA, they're all about the environment and animals, but they don't know the first thing about what they're talking about, especially when it comes to wildlife. That their shelters have some of the highest kill rates in the country adds to the sad irony of it all.

**hotsauceman1**

They think that companion animals are inducted slaves that cannot be saved.
Serious about that to, they think that since a domestic dog cannot live by itself and it doesnt belong to humans in any way, it should die.

**Grey Templar**

Not all domestic dogs are helpless in the wild either. Otherwise Feral Dogs wouldn't be a problem.

**Bullockist**

I'm sure PETA think that nature is a wonderfully happy place where everything is happy and nothing starves, or gets killed, or optionally as roosters can do , bonks something to death.

Nature isn't a happy place and if a hermit crab can wear a shell I sure as hell can wear a fur coat.
Sometimes i think we should listen to farmers and hunters about wildlife they seem to have more realistic views of what really happens in the wild.
I am also heartened by greenpeaces' new attitude, it seems much more relaxed and logical, I might have to actually read what they write now. Thanx to the person that posted the link to the sea sheapard/greenpeace article.

If domestic pets get killed because they cannot live without humans or human society, where do humans stand in PETAs agenda?

**azazel the cat**

Bullockist wrote:If domestic pets get killed because they cannot live without humans or human society, where do humans stand in PETAs agenda?

Quite low, I'm afraid.

There is no part of PETA that isn't fraught with fraud, hypocrisy and stupidity.

**KalashnikovMarine**

I've always wanted to drop PETA activists into the middle of the Yukon territory (during summer! I'm not a monster... mostly) or remote Alaska/Montana, and just kinda "let'em go" shall we say. Come back with an aircraft rigged with FLIR in a week or two and see how many are left. See how good your hippy gak does with a Grizz, Kodiak or pack of wolves bearing down on you. Or even worse... an angry moose.

**CptJake**

KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I've always wanted to drop PETA activists into the middle of the Yukon territory (during summer! I'm not a monster... mostly) or remote Alaska/Montana, and just kinda "let'em go" shall we say. Come back with an aircraft rigged with FLIR in a week or two and see how many are left. See how good your hippy gak does with a Grizz, Kodiak or pack of wolves bearing down on you. Or even worse... a horny moose.

**Ouze**

azazel the cat wrote:
There is no part of PETA that isn't fraught with fraud, hypocrisy and stupidity.

Yeah - you know, I defended their right to do their stupid drone plan earlier in this thread; but I just want to make 110% clear that I in no way endorse anything PETA does. Or anything about PETA. They are just a notch above the Westboro Baptist Church, in my opinion, and similarly situated - I'd respect and defend their right, within our legal limits, to do the awful, reprehensible things they do - without particularly liking the message or mission.

**Bullockist**

Ouze wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:
There is no part of PETA that isn't fraught with fraud, hypocrisy and stupidity.

Yeah - you know, I defended their right to do their stupid drone plan earlier in this thread; but I just want to make 110% clear that I in no way endorse anything PETA does. Or anything about PETA. They are just a notch above the Westboro Baptist Church, in my opinion, and similarly situated - I'd respect and defend their right, within our legal limits, to do the awful, reprehensible things they do - without particularly liking the message or mission.

Living in a country that doesn't do the whole free speech thing i sometimes wonder at the value of it when people are respecting others rights to make ridiculous statements.
The only good thing PETA and westboro could do is have a a cage match to the death, i would pay to see it.

CptJake coming from a country that doesn't have mooses (moosi- how the hell do you pluralise moose) I have to really thank you for putting the idea of a horny moose on a rampage into my sick little mind. I'm now wondering if there is an amusing video of a moose mounting a small car.

**Kovnik Obama**

Bullockist wrote:
Nature isn't a happy place and if a hermit crab can wear a shell I sure as hell can wear a fur coat.

I'll take issues to that comparison. Hermit crabs salvage the empty shells of sea snails, you kill up to dozens of advanced mammals for a single luxury item you could manufacture with synthetic replacement. Sometimes, those animals are even skinned alive to cut down on the cost of euthanasia.

Hell, the simple fact that you lowered yourself to the level of a crustacean should be enough to tell you that your analogy is problematic.