From: vanetten@unix.cie.rpi.edu (John S. Van Etten)
Subject: Re: PETA Activities Suspected of Violating FCC Act, Says PPF
Organization: CIE, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 01:59:53 GMT

Robert J Unglenieks writes:

>John S. Van Etten writes:
>>Steve, I've read this at least six times now, and I still think you
>>are somehow serious about this deluded passage.  You've got to be
>>kidding me.  Like most other hunters, I long for the day when the
>>media shows you AR folk for exactly what you *are*, instead of
>>painting you as a bunch of animal lovers and do-gooders.  
>
>John.  There are those of us involved in animal issues that long for the
>day that the media STOPS treating as nuts.  At a local meeting last monday,
>we spent a lot of the time talking about how some of the local groups have
>been treated by the media recently.  We KNOW how we are being perceived and
>that image is not what we are.

That's very interesting.  I get an entirely different perception.  The
fanatical actions of ALF and such are often downplayed.  Also, the AR
movement is often confused with being good for animals, by the media.
Why do you get a different opinion?  Now before you get all excited
about my overstatement of the case, let me give an all too recent
example of this moose meeting that I went to, where the newspapers and
TV people all reported that the ARs were trying to prevent the
"slaughter" of these moose by hunters, and left out the fact that in
trying to stop the DEC from bringing them in, the AR folk were leaving
them there (in Vermont, I believe -- although they only said "New
England") to *starve* to death.  The media also neglected to mention
that any hunting would not occur for several decades, if at all, and
that sportsmans groups were advocating footing the bill to have some
of the animals moved elsewhere, rather than killed, at that time.
This is by no means an isolated example.  Actually, in my opinion,
most of what you AR folk do is not good for the animals, due to the
difference in opinion about the "good of the individual" vs. "the good
of the herd."  You folk will *never* help the herds (and hence the
*greater number* of animals) by stopping hunting of the individuals.
Life just doesn't work that way.  Sacrifices must be made, and correct
management and culling is proven to work.


>>  Imagine what would happen if the
>>media told the American public that, rather than hug bunnies, you folk
>>want to shut down Mickey D's and stop all animal experiments that
>>could cure illnesses such as AIDS or cancer, instead of beating the
>>anti-hunter drums as part of their happy little agenda to disarm the
>>American people (us mean-old-nasty-"assault-rifle"-toting-scum-of-
>>the-Earth-Bambi-killers being a good start on their mission).  
>
>In our local student paper, The Exponent, a group called Americans for
>Medical Progress Educational Foundation ran a full page ad claiming that
>the AR movement is trying to end experimentation on animals to find a cure for
>AIDS (March 31, 1992).  One major part of the ad was a photo of the AIDS quilt
>that was touring the country at the time (the quilt had names of AIDS victims
>on it).
>
>In a letter to the editor from Lisa Catapano, managing director, NAMES Project
>Foundation came this reply to the ad:
>
>    It has come to our attention that some of the Exponent's readers have
>    been confused by an advertisement for Americans for Medical Progress,
>    Inc. that featured a photograph of the Names Project AIDS Memorial
>    Quilt.  The NAMES Project Foundation wishes to clarify that it is in no
>    way affiliated with AMP and does not endorse AMP's position regarding
>    animal experimentation.  In response to our complaints, AMP has ceased
>    all publication and dissemination of this advertisement.  Thank you.
>
>Seems to be one case where an anti-ar group thought it would have allies.....

Let me try to get this straight (and remember I'm an old duffer, so
it's pretty easy to confuse me).  You're saying that you AR folk are
against trying to cure AIDS by experimenting on animals, but it's OK
because some group associated with AIDS doesn't agree with some bunch
of radicals about using lots of animals in experiments?  I only have
one friend with AIDS (excuse the "proof by example") and he says that
he doesn't care how many rats, cats, dogs, monkeys, etc. have to die
if they can cure it before it's too late for him.  He wishes the
guvmint would spend more money on such research.  He also is quite a
bit against hunting and trappinig, although he is not a vegetarian.


>Of course the ad implies that members of the AR movement are not "sane,
>sensitive and thinking" individuals.

I guess this is a clear case of "two out of three doesn't count," eh?
;-)


>>The
>>media will never mention all the good that hunters do in controlling
>>animal populations and helping the environment, since after all we are
>>just a few more ornery old rebels that might poke our shootin' irons
>>out the window and let fly with a volley if "King George's" troops
>>ride into town.
>
>All the good?  Does this include the Hegins pigeon shoot, the prairie dog
>"roundup" in Nucla, CO, spring bear hunting, hunting ranches.....

Of course not, Rob.  I never said it did.  Odd how these "canned hunt"
activities bear such similarities to slaughterhouses, where the
animals are led in for the kill.  Is a pigeon that is shot in more
pain than a chicken that is thrown upside-down into a funnel and has
it's throat slit and then flops around for a few minutes to "get the
blood out of the meat?"  I still think your sights are set on the
wrong targets, although I'm not trying to condone "canned hunting."


>>     But I have to admit that you're right about one thing.  The
>>public is indeed brainwashed on a few issues.
>>
>>John
>
>I'd agree too......
>
>Rob U, is jacklighting an ethical hunting practice?

Two comments.  First, it's illegal here in New York, as in most other
places.  Second, is a deer that is jacklighted and shot going to be
any more dead or in any more pain than than one killed in the daytime?
You've often told me that hunting is not a sport and that the deer
don't have any real chance against a hunter, so why do you consider
this case different?


John

--
******************************************************************************
               John S. Van Etten     vanetten@unix.cie.rpi.edu
       Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute  1000 MIPS GaAs F-RISC Project
       --"If sand didn't irritate oysters, there would be no pearls"--