GoDaddy.com CEO Bob Parsons' Elephant Hunt Sparks Outrage... You got to be kidding

[Robert]

remember there are different branches of the PETA all over and each is run by different people.

With all do respect, I disagree with this statement. This is like saying that some factions of the KKK weren't that bad. PETA is a centralized organization with a concise mission. PETA is a radical organization. I'm sure that some members of PETA are 'nice people', but they choose to be members of a radical organization which supports and promotes violence against human beings.

Lets also remember that PETA promotes 100% animal liberation, including liberation from pet ownership. I assume most of us on this forum are pet owners.

I do not support PETA, but they they get some things done:
"PETA also has given $2,000 to David Wilson, then a national ALF “spokesperson.” The group paid $27,000 for the legal defense of Roger Troen, who was arrested for taking part in an October 1986 burglary and arson at the University of Oregon. It gave $7,500 to Fran Stephanie Trutt, who tried to murder the president of a medical laboratory. It gave $5,000 to Josh Harper, who attacked Native Americans on a whale hunt by throwing smoke bombs, shooting flares, and spraying their faces with chemical fire extinguishers. All of these monies were paid out of tax-exempt funds, the same pot of money constantly enlarged by donations from an unsuspecting general public."

 

[dmmj]

I would choose the person say 99% of the time, I hold most human life higher than I do animals. This question was asked many years ago in a study (not on here) If people had to choose between saving their dog's life over a human's (stranger) life a lot of people chose the dog's sad but scary that some people hold animal life higher than a humans life. I hope the people who choose animals over humans are never put in the position to save my life. Rest assured I would save anyone here over my animals any day of the week, even people I may not agree with all the time.

 

[Robert]

remember there are different branches of the PETA all over and each is run by different people.

With all do respect, I disagree with this statement. This is like saying that some factions of the KKK weren't that bad. PETA is a centralized organization with a concise mission. PETA is a radical organization. I'm sure that some members of PETA are 'nice people', but they choose to be members of a radical organization which supports and promotes violence against human beings.

Lets also remember that PETA promotes 100% animal liberation, including liberation from pet ownership. I assume most of us on this forum are pet owners.

I do not support PETA, but they they get some things done:
"PETA also has given $2,000 to David Wilson, then a national ALF “spokesperson.” The group paid $27,000 for the legal defense of Roger Troen, who was arrested for taking part in an October 1986 burglary and arson at the University of Oregon. It gave $7,500 to Fran Stephanie Trutt, who tried to murder the president of a medical laboratory. It gave $5,000 to Josh Harper, who attacked Native Americans on a whale hunt by throwing smoke bombs, shooting flares, and spraying their faces with chemical fire extinguishers. All of these monies were paid out of tax-exempt funds, the same pot of money constantly enlarged by donations from an unsuspecting general public."

 

[Robert]

remember there are different branches of the PETA all over and each is run by different people.

With all do respect, I disagree with this statement. This is like saying that some factions of the KKK weren't that bad. PETA is a centralized organization with a concise mission. PETA is a radical organization. I'm sure that some members of PETA are 'nice people', but they choose to be members of a radical organization which supports and promotes violence against human beings.

Lets also remember that PETA promotes 100% animal liberation, including liberation from pet ownership. I assume most of us on this forum are pet owners.

I do not support PETA, but they get some things done:
"PETA also has given $2,000 to David Wilson, then a national ALF “spokesperson.” The group paid $27,000 for the legal defense of Roger Troen, who was arrested for taking part in an October 1986 burglary and arson at the University of Oregon. It gave $7,500 to Fran Stephanie Trutt, who tried to murder the president of a medical laboratory. It gave $5,000 to Josh Harper, who attacked Native Americans on a whale hunt by throwing smoke bombs, shooting flares, and spraying their faces with chemical fire extinguishers. All of these monies were paid out of tax-exempt funds, the same pot of money constantly enlarged by donations from an unsuspecting general public."

 

[ChiKat]

Don't believe everything you read, Rob.
The truth about the Roger Troen incident.

We have also provided vigorous defenses for other animal activists, including Roger Troen, a former school teacher who, despite our efforts, was eventually convicted of harboring rabbits who had been stolen from a laboratory at the University of Oregon where grotesque experiments were being conducted.

Expert testimony in that trial revealed that the rabbits had not been the only animals to suffer in that lab: A number of monkeys had died after 14-hour brain surgeries; animals had been strapped by research staff to a table and photographed with bottles of beer in their mouths; and cats were being blinded and forced to perform frightening tasks, such as balancing over a drum filled with water. Although Mr. Troen was found guilty of receiving “stolen goods,” the presiding judge declared that, after hearing the evidence, he felt ashamed to call the University of Oregon his alma mater.

I don't know about the other events you listed, but it just goes to show there are two sides to every story. I would have supported Roger too.

eta: Sorry for the thread hijacking

 

[Robert]

Don't believe everything you read, Rob.
The truth about the Roger Troen incident.

We have also provided vigorous defenses for other animal activists, including Roger Troen, a former school teacher who, despite our efforts, was eventually convicted of harboring rabbits who had been stolen from a laboratory at the University of Oregon where grotesque experiments were being conducted.

Expert testimony in that trial revealed that the rabbits had not been the only animals to suffer in that lab: A number of monkeys had died after 14-hour brain surgeries; animals had been strapped by research staff to a table and photographed with bottles of beer in their mouths; and cats were being blinded and forced to perform frightening tasks, such as balancing over a drum filled with water. Although Mr. Troen was found guilty of receiving “stolen goods,” the presiding judge declared that, after hearing the evidence, he felt ashamed to call the University of Oregon his alma mater.

I don't know about the other events you listed, but it just goes to show there are two sides to every story. I would have supported Roger too.

eta: Sorry for the thread hijacking

What I've read is that Roger Troen was involved in criminal activity. The courts supported that claim. YOUR quote supports that claim. PETA used tax exempt donation money to help defend him. What am I missing here?

I would also caution not to believe everything you read. PETA is a radical activist group that supports violent action against humans, and the majority of the money that they collect under the guise of "helping animals" is used to fund these violent crimes. They are not, and have never been, a group of nice animal lovers trying to help animals.

In my opinion, this is not the type of organization that should be applauded or defended by anyone who values life. (Human and non human animal life.)

 

[terryo]

"What I've read is that Roger Troen was involved in criminal activity. The courts supported that claim. YOUR quote supports that claim. PETA used tax exempt donation money to help defend him. What am I missing here?

I would also caution not to believe everything you read. PETA is a radical activist group that supports violent action against humans, and the majority of the money that they collect under the guise of "helping animals" is used to fund these violent crimes. They are not, and have never been, a group of nice animal lovers trying to help animals."


We could argue about this all day. It all comes down to what we each believe in and why. When I was younger I myself have been involved with and done radical things to save animals from horrendous conditions, and I would do it all over again. I have seen tapes of these events, and underground tapes of what these animals had to endure in the name of science in the hands of sadistic people who enjoyed inflecting pain. They were actually laughing...saying "Awww does that hurt?" Radical? Against the law? You bet!! These things are all a matter of opinion. I respect your opinion, even though I disagree with it.
As far as being against the law. How many here have licenses to own and collect your animals? I'm sure not everyone. Everyday I see things that are against the law.....every day. Sad, but this is the world we live in now.
Like I said...we can't all agree, but we should agree to respect each other's opinions.

 

[Madkins007]

Oh, boy! PETA is going to after a rich schmuck who did not break any laws and is just one doofus doing this out of thousands! I am so relieved. Now the elephants will be safe.

 

[Candy]

And if you do that Mark then who wins? The idiots that think it's manly to go and kill off innocent animals? Those people did not look like they were starving to me and I would never keep my account with anyone who did this for his so called "Vacation Time." Kalina and others like me are the type of people who make people aware of what's happening out there so don't try to stop us from doing that by making telling them that they'll make themselves sick by being activists for it. More people should become involved and then disgusting people like this guy wouldn't be flashing their so called "Animal Prizes" around. To bad the elephants didn't get the chance to turn on them in the dark, that's the way I see it.

1. Who wins? Tell me who is loosing first. I know that it reduces the number of elephants, but apparently the government in that area has decided that there are enough elephants to support some hunting, but who (as in a human) is loosing in this scenario?

2. Killing innocent animals is what ALL predators do, and like it or not, humans are a predatory species. It is your opinion that we should not. You are certainly welcome to hold an opinion, but the flip side of that is to respect the opinion of others- and I don't see a lot of that in this sort of discussion.

3. Don't tell me to get more involved.
a.) You have no idea what I am involved in. I put a lot of time and money in several causes, some animal related. To assume that just because I am not with you on this one, I must be an uncaring jerk that does not care about issues is just plain wrong of you. Shame on you for making such an arrogant assumption. Shame on you!
b.) Real activists choose their battles and fight them in the real world. Posting a video and telling is all to get mad about it does very little to actually fix anything. It is like fighting AIDS by wearing a ribbon. Good for you- you have an opinion. The important thing is to ACT on that belief in a way that makes a real difference for that issue.
Let's use Japan as an example. For all practical purposes, posts like the OP here are showing videos of the tragedy and trying to get is all to feel sorry and emotional. A REAL activist would be posting info on what we can do to REALLY help- links for donations, for example. I rarely see that in these posts.
You may say that your 'actions step' here is to take business away from GoDaddy. OK, that punishes the hunter, but how does that help the elephants you claim to be supporting? Or the problems the villagers have living with the elephants?

4. 'Too bad the elephants don't get the chance to turn around in the dark'? I can admire the empathy you have for the animals, but this does not show a lot of empathy for humans. Why would it be OK for the elephant to kill the human but not the other way around?
I think this sentence said a lot about you, Candy, and the kind of person you are.

Gee Mark let me turn this back around on you, shame on you for saying that one sentence will tell you what I'm all about. I thought that you were more intelligent then that, but maybe I'm wrong. You say to know about your cause, but can you tell me what does anyone on here know about these people, probably not much, that's what. I dare to make the comment that very few even watched this video and if they did I would like to know what kind of crop that was that the elephants were stomping on? Can you also tell me what happened two years ago in this village or even 5 years ago in this village and if they've always had problems like these, no you can't. This idiot films a video of killing a innocent animal just doing what it does naturally and nobody has the intelligence to question any of it. There are other ways to deter elephants away from areas did anyone research how to do this before they pulled their guns out, no they didn't. That's obvious by watching the video. Reread what I said Mark, "More people should get involved." Did you see your name personally written in this comment. Am I supposed to know you that well that I think you would take this to heart? If you did then maybe you have something else to think about. Real activists would post for donations, are you serious? Then they would just say (like they always do) that we're just trying to get the money and not fight for the cause. If you don't understand what I mean then try reading Laura's thread about the dog that was abused and needed a new home. Whenever any activist organization brings up money (like Peta) they always fall back on "Their just trying to get money again." Well Duh! How would they run without any support funds? And about helping the elephants by taking the humans away, the only thing that I can say to that is if the humans were not there we would have one more elephant in Africa today. I don't post things for people to blinding follow what is said, that would be up to you to now find out if I'm right or not. I'm talking about facts here not emotional opinions. People need to ask their own questions and don't just believe what you are told. Just because you think someones opinion is not right does not mean that it doesn't have merit to it. They just might see it differently and in different times in our lives so do we. Throughout our lives we change our thought patterns and we hopefully tend to grow both in intelligence and hopefully empathy and emotionally, this is why it's called growing up. I will not stand back and watch animals be brutally killed for one mans ego. This is who I am Mark, so don't pretend to know me either just by what you read. I will not apologize to anyone for standing up for what I believe in where animals are concerned, or children or anything else that I feel needs my help and I certainly will not turn a blind eye to it just because others have insults and think that they can intimate with that instead of real facts. And wearing a ribbon for a cause is a good thing because it makes people ask questions Mark and that's where it all starts!

---

PETA gets things Done.. this is one of the ways:
http://articles.sfgate.com/2005-06-23/opinion/17379611_1_peta-s-web-animal-cruelty-dead-animals

Careful who or what you support...

Please Laura repost this as it didn't come through and I'd like to read what you posted.



Oh, boy! PETA is going to after a rich schmuck who did not break any laws and is just one doofus doing this out of thousands! I am so relieved. Now the elephants will be safe.
Mark, in Nebraska. Librarian of the Tortoise Library, helping keepers raise healthy Red-foot and other tortoises.


Mark, I don't even know how I would post a comment to this kind of post. Wow! All I could say is it starts with one step. I've got to admit though I'm really surprised at the childish way this is written.

 

[Candy]

Oh, boy! PETA is going to after a rich schmuck who did not break any laws and is just one doofus doing this out of thousands! I am so relieved. Now the elephants will be safe.

Wow Mark that is very immature comment from you. Haven't seen this side yet. Very interesting though.

 

[Candy]

Oh, boy! PETA is going to after a rich schmuck who did not break any laws and is just one doofus doing this out of thousands! I am so relieved. Now the elephants will be safe.

Mark I don't even know how to comment on this post. Wow!

 

[Candy]

Oh, boy! PETA is going to after a rich schmuck who did not break any laws and is just one doofus doing this out of thousands! I am so relieved. Now the elephants will be safe.

Mark I don't even know what to say to this kind of a post, wow!

 

[B K]

It’s easy to insult and call people names when you don’t know them and will ever meet them.

 

[Laura]

(Yesterday 02:13 PM)Laura Wrote:
PETA gets things Done.. this is one of the ways:
http://articles.sfgate.com/2005-06-23/op...ad-animals

Careful who or what you support...

Please Laura repost this as it didn't come through and I'd like to read what you posted.

worked fine for me by clicking on the link: i just googled PETA kills animals etc.. ang get all sorts of stuff. Not all legit.. but lots is..

Read more: http://www.tortoiseforum.org/Thread...ge-You-got-to-be-kidding?page=4#ixzz1IP3qUpkr




DON'T BE FOOLED by the slick propaganda of PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. The organization may claim to champion the welfare of animals, as the many photos of cute puppies and kittens on its Web site suggest. But last week, two PETA employees were charged with 31 felony counts of animal cruelty each, after authorities found them dumping the dead bodies of 18 animals they had just picked up from a North Carolina animal shelter into a Dumpster. According to the Associated Press, 13 more dead animals were found in a van registered to PETA.



The arrest followed a rash of unwelcome discoveries of dead animals dumped in the area. According to veterinarian Patrick Proctor, the PETA people told North Carolina shelters they would try to find the dogs and cats homes. He handed over two adoptable kittens and their mother, only to learn later that they had died, without a chance to find a home, in the PETA van. "This is ethical?" Proctor railed over the phone. "I don't really think so."

This is not the first report that PETA killed animals it claimed to protect. In 1991, PETA killed 18 rabbits and 14 roosters it had previously "rescued" from a research facility. "We just don't have the money" to care for them, then PETA-Chairman Alex Pacheco told the Washington Times. The PETA animal shelter had run out of room.

The Center for Consumer Freedom, which represents the food industry, a frequent target of PETA campaigns, released data filed by PETA with the state of Virginia that shows PETA has killed more than 10,000 animals from 1998 to 2003. "In 2003, PETA euthanized over 85 percent of the animals it took in," said a press release from the lobby, "finding adoptive homes for just 14 percent. By comparison, the Norfolk (Va.) SPCA found adoptive homes for 73 percent of its animals and Virginia Beach SPCA adopted out 66 percent."

The Center's David Martosko considered PETA's hefty budget -- reportedly, $20 million -- and many contributions from well-heeled Hollywood celebrities, then figured, "PETA has enough money in the bank to care for every unwanted animal in Virginia (where it has its headquarters) and North Carolina."

PETA prefers to spend donations, apparently, not caring for flesh-and- blood animals entrusted to it but on campaigns attacking medical researchers, meat-eaters or women wearing furs. It is as if PETA prefers the idea of animals to animals themselves.

Why does PETA kill animals that might otherwise find a home?

 

[kimmer]

Here is a link with a statement from a conservationist in Zimbabwe about Elephants and the recent publicized killing of a bull by CEO Bob Parsons.
http://aol.it/frhP2j

Zimbabwe's premier conservationist, a 62-year-old man who says he's endured assassination attempts for trying to preserve wildlife in one of Africa's poorest and most repressive countries, can't watch the video showing Bob Parsons, the billionaire CEO of GoDaddy.com, shooting and killing an elephant.

"I've seen so many of the atrocities against elephants and other wildlife here that it sickens me to the bottom of my soul," Johnny Rodrigues, chairman of the Zimbabwe Conservation Task Force, told AOL News today on the telephone from Harare.

"But I have read what Parsons said, and he is totally misinformed about what is going on here. I wish he knew the truth."

Parsons, whose video sparked outrage when it circulated Thursday, is shown shooting a bull elephant on a recent hunting trip in Zimbabwe and then posing triumphantly next to the carcass. He called the animal a "problem elephant" that was in a herd attacking local crops and houses.

Some villagers, sporting GoDaddy caps, are also shown in the video carving up the dead elephant and eating the meat, as AC/DC's "Hell's Bells" plays on the soundtrack.

Parsons brushed off criticism in interviews and said that only a few animal rights groups like PETA were upset.

The villagers "are on the brink of starvation," he told CBS News. "They need their crops and need to eat. Elephants are not endangered and probably there are too many of them. A lot of people are up in arms about this. Their hearts are in the right place, but they don't understand the situation. If they'd go on one of my trips to Zimbabwe, they'd understand."

But Rodrigues, who grew up on a farm in Zimbabwe, said hunters like Parsons don't understand the level of government corruption in the country, how it's led to the collapse of the economy and how it's affected the wildlife.

AOL News spoke with Rodrigues about the plight of elephants in a country that was once a top destination for tourists who could enjoy wildlife protected by strong environmental policies -- but has deteriorated under an increasingly lawless regime.

AOL News: Bob Parsons said killing the elephant was justified because there are too many of them in Zimbabwe and they're attacking farmers and their crops who have no way of getting rid of them. True?

Johnny Rodrigues: No. For one thing, the government deliberately inflates the number of elephants so they can allot a certain number to be killed. Last year they said 500 elephants could be killed. They say there are 100,000 elephants. From what I have found, the figure is more like between 30,000 and 35,000. They lie about the number so they can allow hunters to kill them. They use the income generated to pay the wages to the park staffers and to keep the parks running because they have no money. The villagers don't see a penny. [Park authorities] just sell them the meat.

Illegal poaching occurs all over Africa. How is the situation different in Zimbabwe?

The problem in Zimbabwe is the guardians of the wildlife are the perpetrators. We're the only country in Africa that shoots game to pay wages to national park guardians and ration meat to their staff. It's sick. You wouldn't tolerate it. Zimbabwe is the only country where some of the park guardians are politically connected and don't care about the animals. They're the ones benefiting economically from their killing, even though they are the ones who are supposed to protect them.

Are elephants actually killed in the national parks?

They are not supposed to be, but they are. The government uses claims that elephants are destroying crops and attacking villagers to allow them to be hunted in national parks and safari areas.

Why are the elephants coming into villages and threatening the farmers?

Elephants are the most traumatized animals in Zimbabwe. They are being shot even in supposedly safe areas. Elephants travel in family units, and when one of their loved ones are shot and killed, the rest of the family remembers and they are traumatized and they will attack. They are very intelligent animals with phenomenal memories. When they see humans now, they remember.

What do they remember?

They remember it is humans who have caused all their stress, who have taken away their family members. They either attack or run away when they see a vehicle. It's very sad because we could co-exist. But humans, especially in Africa, are encroaching on land reserved for the animals, and the animals are running out of land.

What would you say to Bob Parsons if you could speak to him?

I would tell him he is supporting a terrible system that is not helping the poor people on the ground. Coming here with all his wealth for these unethical hunts and killing elephants is not helping anyone. It's perpetuating a horrible cycle in this country of traumatized animals and desperate people. And by telling them to eat meat the way he did and giving them his caps is like treating them like slaves.

What would you tell him about the bull elephant he killed, based on what you know about them?

Elephants are all part of families. The bull elephant Parsons killed has a family. It's the same as a robber coming into Parsons' house and shooting him in front of one of his kids. Parsons should look at some of the incredible research on elephants and elephant family behavior. He'd be shocked. Elephants are among the smartest, most sensitive animals alive.

How many elephants were there, say 100 years ago in Zimbabwe. Do you even know?

There were at least 700,000 to 800,000, but there's no comparison to today. They roamed all over. Man has totally encroached on their territory.

Can you report illegal poaching crimes to officials in Zimbabwe?

You will see some illegal poaching in Zambia, say, but it is a country with law and order. The authorities will do something about it. Here when you bring in a dossier of documents about illegal poaching to the attorney general, nothing happens. Even if you get to see a police investigator once, you'll never see them again. They disappear. It's what happens when there is no democracy and a breakdown of law and order.

People get killed in Zimbabwe for speaking out. Why do you take the risk?

It's very dangerous, but I've been exposing what's going on in this country for 12 years. I have death threats and attempts on my life. Strange things happen here to people like me.

Sponsored Links
What kind of strange things?

People coming around, beatings, being locked up, disappearing for a few months. But somebody has to speak out. I fought for this country in the war, so I feel I have a right to be a voice for the voiceless. I am trying to preserve our wonderful wildlife in this beautiful country. That's more important than anything that happens to me.

Have international wildlife groups reached out to Zimbabwe?

Unfortunately not really. The political situation is so difficult that it keeps people away.

What about those who believe that man comes first and while it's unfortunate that animals suffer, we are more important and this is a bit of a non-issue?

Preserving our wildlife and our flora and fauna is not only part of our heritage in Zimbabwe -- it was also the biggest foreign currency earner. The government is destroying a self-sustaining industry that all the people here benefit from. The communities that live around the wildlife areas benefit from selling their wares. No tourists want to come here and see all this bloodletting and miserable animals.

 

[terryo]

Dishonest Politics and propaganda go hand in hand as usual! Isn't there one place on this earth that we can find an honest form of government? Nope! But let's not break any kind of law, especially one that could help the poor animal's. PETA!!! I can't read any more of this. I had nightmares last night.

 

[dmmj]

Sorry I like living in a society where people follow the law, call me kooky, but I do. What happens when an animal activist decides that aldabraman is abusing his tortoises? or me? or yvonne? does the ends justify the means when it is directed at you? to PETA's most hardcore members we are all abusing animals by keeping pets, so where do we draw the line when it comes to violating the laws? You don't like the law get it changed don't break it, once you do you end up on a slippery slope. PETA's goal is rights for animals and once animals have rights you won't be able to have pets, eat them, see them in zoos, or use their byproducts,I could never belong to an organization whose main goal is to say I can't do something,and I don't see how anyone who has a pet can support an org whose main goal is to take your animals away from you.

 

[B K]

Just think 1000s of tortoise have died and many are still dying in the reptile business. It took many years for us to figure out the proper lighting and nutrition and care to be able to keep them healthy and thriving. What do you think PETA thinks about that, it is only a matter of time before they turn their attention to us. But what do I know I’m one of those Idiot Disgusting people who hunt and take pictures and show’s my friends.

 

[Robert]

"Sorry I like living in a society where people follow the law, call me kooky, but I do......."

"to PETA's most hardcore members we are all abusing animals by keeping pets, so where do we draw the line when it comes to violating the laws? You don't like the law get it changed don't break it, once you do you end up on a slippery slope."

I agree.

If an individual chooses to break the law of the country in which he/she lives, that is up to that individual alone. That person is then responsible for living with the consequesces of those actions, be them legal, moral, etc...

PETA uses tax exempt donors money to defend criminals. PETA, as an organization, considers each and every pet owning member of this forum to be animal abusers. PETA advocates and supports "direct action" which translates into VIOLENCE AGAINST HUMANS. This is an opinion which I do not respect.

- “In the end, I think it would be lovely if we stopped this whole notion of pets altogether.” -Ingrid Newkirk, PETA

- “Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation.” -Ingrid Newkirk, PETA

Like it or not, anyone reading this thread right now is currently using animal byproducts to do so.

I do not, and will not ever, advocate hurting any animal simply for pleasure.

 

[Angi]

I don't think this started as a PETA thing and I didn't see where Candy said it is okay to break the law or bad to hunt. In fact one post talked about the African goverment being corrupt and breacking the law. Maybe I missed it. I think who ever started this thread just wanted to make us aware of what is going on. There is nothing I can do about the killing of elephant in Africa, but being aware of it is not hurting me and maybe someone will see this that can help make a difference. Candy and Kalina feel passionate about animal rights I feel passionate about Sudden Cardiac Arrest in children. So SCA is one of the causes I donate my time to, but I can still learn from them and their posts. I dont post about SCA because this is not a health forum or childrens causes forum. If it was I would post about the things I have done to help prevent SCA. Being part of this forum has changed the way I think about animals. I still don't have a problem with hunting, but I no longer look forward to finding a rattle snake so I can kill it. I am not sure what I will do the next time I find a rattle snake. I used to think rattle snakes were just bad and should all be killed. They used to really scare me. Now I see them as part of nature in a place I move to because I like the open space. I also don't care for PETA. There is also not much I can do to stop PETA, but being aware of the things they do makes me more informed and less of an idiot. Just saying.....