Like I said....if there was any reading comprehension here....
Yep, attack the responded and not their argument. The only one here making a huge deal about this is you.
This is my first response:" I'm in Ca where mountain lions are protected, despite needed no protections, so I am not exactly sympathetic toward the cats. But, the fact that the guy knew what he was doing, and had to be aware that his actions were illegal, based on his own statements, really steers my determination on the subject. "
I never said the influence of the of the animal rights group should have never been a factor, but previous to that, the penalty would have been much to lenient. This fact exhibits the courts lack of value for our wildlife, and wildlife laws, which in itself is disgusting. The fact here is that we have a guy (2 actually) that signed up as hunters, and agreed to abide by the laws and regulations of the state they had licenses in; not the laws and regulations of another state. They exhibited gross disregard for the laws and regulation. In doing, they exhibited a complete lack of integrity, ethics, morals. Clearly the guy was fully aware that what he did was not legal. Yes the cat being killed is unlikely to have any significant impact on the cat population. The cats death is fairly insignificant. But that does not lessen the perpetrators lack of integrity. His actions exhibit his moral character, and clearly the guy has a disgusting moral character. Should he be locked up and thrown in prison, probably not. Should he have his hunting rights revoked/suspended, absolutely. Clearly the guy has no restraint, and revoking his hunting rights is an appropriate penalty, unless of course he continues to exhibit disregard for our hunting laws. As such, letting him off with a minor fine simply is not justice.
If you want clarity, just ask, but to attack anyone's comprehension is just plain being an ass.
