On another good forum about African Hunting there was another thread regarding Mark Sullivan. I have never posted about Mr. Sullivan before but the dialogue I was reading really struck me. So I posted a reply. At the request of others, I am setting up the situation and re-posting my reply. This is all I will say on the subject of Mark Sulivan.

To set the stage, a post began with the Caption 'Listen to these disgusting words by Mark Sullivan.' There was a video attached. The sound quality is poor but with a wounded Buffalo right in front of Mr. Sullivan and the hunter you can clearly hear Mark Sullivan say "We can shoot him right now or we can let that Buffalo decide how it's gone die".

After far too many people defended Mark Sullivan - here is the post that I was asked to reprint.

It has been some time since I last posted on [accurate Reloading]; I have been too busy hunting. I have been fortunate to hunt around the world. No place is, in my opinion, more exciting than Africa. And while every hunt that I have been on in Africa has been exciting, nothing comes close to dangerous game hunting. I hope that through stewardship, conservation and education, game management continues to improve, more countries open up to sport hunting and the 'golden days' of African safari hunting are still ahead of us.

What does this have to do with Mark Sullivan - everything. It takes tremendous time and effort to promote the conservation benefits of sport hunting. Millions of dollars, countless man-hours and a proven record of success will eventually result in more space for hunters throughout Africa and around the world.

But anyone who knows anything about marketing, media or politics knows that 1 negative incident will outdraw the attention of a thousand success stories. As they say in the media 'if it bleeds - it leads.' In the proverbial sense, Mark Sullivan 'bleeds.' He loves the attention - and that is fine.

But he also puts his clients in mortal danger. As someone who has been fortunate enough to hunt the Big 5, and who has had the unfortunate experience of being charged, I can definitively say that it is an uncontrolled situation. I have seen a cape buffalo take 5 shots into the vitals and still get up and come from less than 10 feet. I have seen a bullet to the brain put that animal down - in fact, I have done it. But it was terrifying and I could very easily have missed that grapefruit size target and been killed as a result.

I have also witnessed some of the best shots out there miss for no apparent reason at animals the size of buffalo at 20 yards broadside. It happens. Guns fail - it happens. A slight miss and the consequences of Mark Sullivan's choices will be fatal.

First and foremost, it will be horrific for the family and friends of the deceased. After that, the negative press, well supported by the video library and volumes of print about Mark Sullivan's hunting style will tarnish the reputation of every safari hunter out there. The public will not differentiate between Mark Sullivan and any one of the hundreds of other professional hunters who put the safety of their clients and staff first and foremost. Nor will they distinguish between Mark Sullivan the hunter and you or I.

Dangerous game hunting will be vilified. Its conservation efforts ignored, if not altogether thwarted. The reams of published works and countless hours of video depicting exciting, challenging and conservation minded sport hunting by guys like Boddington, Carter, Shocky and others will be ignored; the sensationalism of Mark Sullivan's work will be all that we see. And as people call upon the governments to curtail dangerous game hunting in the name of safety - we will all be crying foul at one rogue hunter.

That won't happen - one person cannot have that type of impact - right? You are wrong. Mark Sullivan already has that kind of impact - that is the very reason we keep seeing thread after thread about him - because of the impact.

But hunting is secure because of its conservation success, right? Not in Kenya - where the largest Ivory in Africa is now gone forever. But that was then, right? No. Botswana closed most of the Okavango Delta to sport hunting in 2009 in favor of ecotourism. And that was notwithstanding the well documented status of elephant overpopulation in that country. It will not take much for governments to follow the public whims and American tourist dollars and either support or abolish sport hunting.

For those of you who are like me, and look forward to my next trip as I am on the plane coming home, you need to think very hard about what Mark Sullivan means to your future as a global hunter.

As a group, we must police ourselves. That means reporting poachers, trespassers and people who over harvest game. It means speaking out in support of the sport of hunting and drawing attention to its role in conservation and wildlife management. It also means supporting ethical conduct and opposing unethical hunting practices and treatment of wildlife. Cape buffalo, leopard, lion, elephant, hippo and crocs are inherently dangerous to hunt.

The sport is in confronting that dangerous situation, keeping calm, making the right decisions and when the shot presents itself, making the best shot possible for the most human kill possible. When that does not happen, there should be no dispute about what is the ethical thing to do. It should be to follow up your own shot, or allow your PH to do it for you if you cannot. The goal must be a quick and human kill.

The mere fact that Mark Sullivan even asked a question at the time that he did condemns him to unethical hunting practices. There was a wounded animal in front of at least 2 armed hunters, one of whom created the situation in the first place. The only appropriate action at that point in time was to shoot the already wounded animal. There should not have been anything to debate.

What that video demonstrates is narcissism, not sportsmanship. That kind of behavior has no place in the ethical hunting community. SCI recognized that and so did the government of Tanzania - who withdrew Sullivan's concession rights.

Anyone who has looked down the barrel at one of the dangerous 7 with the intent of taking the animal him or herself should loath Mark Sullivan for what he has done and what he might yet do to our passionate sport of dangerous game hunting.

Good gawd... beat that dead horse into rasberry jam why don't ya?

Lest you will find plenty of support and cheers on this subject here on AR.

Next we'll be hearing MS is chums with Mugabe with world domination in mind, head of the rhino poaching mafia while staying one step ahead of the law-dogs hot on his trail while pocketing millions from boner craving Koreans, all the while running a high dollar/top shelf brothel out of the top floor of the Sea Cliff hotel in Dar. All this of course all while still providing the world with his hunting videos showing his prowless with a DR in tight spots with wounded DG.

Blah.

Let me get ma rope!!
.........................................................
Do you think we could just put humorous or attempted humourous posts in here?? That would be nice...

Mark Sullivan has done enough damage to hunting to the extent that even SCI, which normally sticks its head in the sand, kicked him out.

He knows absolutely nothing about being a professional hunter.

If he did, then his actions have proven beyond any doubt what an utter failure he has been.

He deserves whatever bad publicity he gets.

Stop trying to impose your values on others
Get off your high horses and go do your own hunting. If you don't like his style then don't watch.
All these threads do is serve up perfectly presented arguments for the greenies. If I wanted to rip hunting apart I would come here because all the research is done for me. They just pick it up and serve it to the world.
If you got nothing good to say then do us all a favor and shut up.

quote:

Originally posted by Vlam:
Stop trying to impose your values on others
Get off your high horses and go do your own hunting. If you don't like his style then don't watch.
All these threads do is serve up perfectly presented arguments for the greenies. If I wanted to rip hunting apart I would come here because all the research is done for me. They just pick it up and serve it to the world.
If you got nothing good to say then do us all a favor and shut up.

I don't remember appointing you to watch what anyone should and should not post here.

So may be you should follow your own advice?

quote:

Originally posted by Cleathorn:

As a group, we must police ourselves. That means reporting poachers, trespassers and people who over harvest game. It means speaking out in support of the sport of hunting and drawing attention to its role in conservation and wildlife management. It also means supporting ethical conduct and opposing unethical hunting practices and treatment of wildlife. Cape buffalo, leopard, lion, elephant, hippo and crocs are inherently dangerous to hunt.

Oh brother... And just who is going to be the police? The Moral Majority? Just how is that going to work?

No way do I want someone who feels morally superior telling me what I must or must not do in the field - or anywhere else for that matter. If it is legal and within the values my dad taught me long ago, I will do as I please, watch what I please, and hunt as I please.

Later Cleat

Where is MS these days?

Hunting....


Brett

quote:

Originally posted by Vlam:
Stop trying to impose your values on others
Get off your high horses and go do your own hunting. If you don't like his style then don't watch.
All these threads do is serve up perfectly presented arguments for the greenies. If I wanted to rip hunting apart I would come here because all the research is done for me. They just pick it up and serve it to the world.
If you got nothing good to say then do us all a favor and shut up.

Ian, for the record, I agree totally with your comments.

quote:

SCI recognized that and so did the government of Tanzania - who withdrew Sullivan's concession rights.

Are You sure...

quote:

Originally posted by mboga biga bwana:

quote:

SCI recognized that and so did the government of Tanzania - who withdrew Sullivan's concession rights.

Are You sure...

Obviously not, but who needs to be sure about something to post it on AR???

Brett

quote:

Tanzania - who withdrew Sullivan's concession rights.

Still hunting in spite thereof.

"Concession rights" through a sub-lease maybe or booking his clients through an outfitter?

Saeed
No one appointed me as anything. But if you really care about hunting so much then how about moderating your one sided bashing that you reserve for your pet hates. Paying to host a forum does not exclude you from having to think before you write. You are responsible to us as hunters to do so as you have single handedly supplied the international press with a platform that is now regularly used to bash hunting, hunters, the related people and places, the societies that protect that.
If you really want to protect the future of hunting then make this a sign in only i.e. no public viewing before consent website.
You are obviously bitter about Sullivan and SCI, we know that thank you for your input, now give it a rest.
If we wanted we too could take cheap shots at what you call hunting. To my mind you are not a hunter at all, more of a harvester who likes the challenge of shooting at long range. The very ideal you are supporting in taking a huge bag of anything that moves whilst on safari is actually reminiscent of the butchering era that contributed to far more damage to the hunting world. Your daily updates read like something out of a 19th century diary with some slapstick laurel and hardy to go with it. Hardly the pinnacle of hunting, yet you like the soap box dont you.
It could easily be argued that you are a far greater threat to hunting than is Mark Sullivan. Hell when they start tying you in to the members of the Royal families of several emirates that shot up that reserve in Tanzania and were abusing the locals you are going to be a regular donkey for anyone to pin a tail on.
You know if I started a thread to bash you and who you are every 2 weeks and kept on feeding it with any of the theories i may conjur up that week then you too could become hunting pariah and would attract as much negative press as Sullivan.

By and large you tend to provide some very balanced content, but in some of it you are simply banging away with your personal viewpoints, none of which you have ever been able to substantiate.
Regards
Ian Blakeway

quote:

Originally posted by Vlam:
Saeed
No one appointed me as anything. But if you really care about hunting so much then how about moderating your one sided bashing that you reserve for your pet hates. Paying to host a forum does not exclude you from having to think before you write. You are responsible to us as hunters to do so as you have single handedly supplied the international press with a platform that is now regularly used to bash hunting, hunters, the related people and places, the societies that protect that.
If you really want to protect the future of hunting then make this a sign in only i.e. no public viewing before consent website.
You are obviously bitter about Sullivan and SCI, we know that thank you for your input, now give it a rest.
If we wanted we too could take cheap shots at what you call hunting. To my mind you are not a hunter at all, more of a harvester who likes the challenge of shooting at long range. The very ideal you are supporting in taking a huge bag of anything that moves whilst on safari is actually reminiscent of the butchering era that contributed to far more damage to the hunting world. Your daily updates read like something out of a 19th century diary with some slapstick laurel and hardy to go with it. Hardly the pinnacle of hunting, yet you like the soap box dont you.
It could easily be argued that you are a far greater threat to hunting than is Mark Sullivan. Hell when they start tying you in to the members of the Royal families of several emirates that shot up that reserve in Tanzania and were abusing the locals you are going to be a regular donkey for anyone to pin a tail on.
You know if I started a thread to bash you and who you are every 2 weeks and kept on feeding it with any of the theories i may conjur up that week then you too could become hunting pariah and would attract as much negative press as Sullivan.

By and large you tend to provide some very balanced content, but in some of it you are simply banging away with your personal viewpoints, none of which you have ever been able to substantiate.
Regards
Ian Blakeway

Congrats sir for the courage to tell the Emperor he has no clothes.

quote:

Originally posted by Vlam:
Saeed
No one appointed me as anything. But if you really care about hunting so much then how about moderating your one sided bashing that you reserve for your pet hates. Paying to host a forum does not exclude you from having to think before you write. You are responsible to us as hunters to do so as you have single handedly supplied the international press with a platform that is now regularly used to bash hunting, hunters, the related people and places, the societies that protect that.
If you really want to protect the future of hunting then make this a sign in only i.e. no public viewing before consent website.
You are obviously bitter about Sullivan and SCI, we know that thank you for your input, now give it a rest.
If we wanted we too could take cheap shots at what you call hunting. To my mind you are not a hunter at all, more of a harvester who likes the challenge of shooting at long range. The very ideal you are supporting in taking a huge bag of anything that moves whilst on safari is actually reminiscent of the butchering era that contributed to far more damage to the hunting world. Your daily updates read like something out of a 19th century diary with some slapstick laurel and hardy to go with it. Hardly the pinnacle of hunting, yet you like the soap box dont you.
It could easily be argued that you are a far greater threat to hunting than is Mark Sullivan. Hell when they start tying you in to the members of the Royal families of several emirates that shot up that reserve in Tanzania and were abusing the locals you are going to be a regular donkey for anyone to pin a tail on.
You know if I started a thread to bash you and who you are every 2 weeks and kept on feeding it with any of the theories i may conjur up that week then you too could become hunting pariah and would attract as much negative press as Sullivan.

By and large you tend to provide some very balanced content, but in some of it you are simply banging away with your personal viewpoints, none of which you have ever been able to substantiate.
Regards
Ian Blakeway

Mark Sullivan asside, talk about cussing a man in his own livingroom...................!

IMO,which means nothing to anyone but me, I was always taught that if you don't like the host simply don't go to the party!

I'm not saying Cleahorn, Vlam, and/or Saeed have no right to their own opinions, the rest of those on both sides of this so-called DISCUSSION, However, simply because one member of the list owns the website doesn't negate his opinion. I fail to see how telling some that maybe he should follow his own advice, solicits the outburst above.

IMO, the threads that somehow morph into a street fight do far more damage than agreeing or disagreeing with a particular PH's hunting practice. Debate that is manned by angry outbursts accomplishes nothing positive, and only shows the people who are neither hunters, nor anti-hunters, that both sides are nothing more than gang-bangers, or bar fighters, and the debate looses all credibility to the truths and falsities of the discussion.

This site would benefit greatly with some moderation, as [ 0 ] exists. Some of the comments generated at times are, well, they don't do any good for the reputation of this site, or the membership as a whole. Which everyone knows when a mild disagreement flares its ugly head, it usually turns into gutter rhetoric within minutes.

Just my .02

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:

Mark Sullivan asside, talk about cussing a man in his own livingroom...................!

IMO, which means nothing to anyone but me, I was always tought that if you don't like the host simply don't go to the party!

Mac, I have always viewed your posts with great respect. You are a fine statesman, and if I may, a leading reason this site is as informative as it is.

This is the one time I have a cause to disagree with you. If we do not question leadership, we become sheep-like. You know what happens to sheep.

Not much I can do personally on a larger level, such as the two socialists we vote into the senate. But on a personal level, I can accomplish much when not succumbing to group-think. I can and do make a difference in my family, scout troop, and church groups. Those impacts can ge greatly diffused if I blindly agree with "leadership".

Another good point raised by Vlam is that our host has a much greater responsibility to the contributors, and the public. Too many posts conforming to a point of view just because of who said it. I will take a stand and think for myself. Vlam's post will definitely put the spot light on that perspective.

A cogent, dissenting point of view is a very useful tool. I hope to see more.

Happy Thanksgiving to all!

I think it's more about trying to maintain good manners and a degree of decorum.

Sure, it's sometimes easy to go a bit over the top and I reckon Ian's comments were over the top (to say the least) and my guess is if and when he thinks about what he posted, he'll regret not trying to be at least a bit more polite if not a lot more polite in the way he phrased his comments....... in other words, he might regret getting into turbo-tongue mode.

If we maintain good manners and a degree of decorum then I reckon the moderation level is just fine as it is..... at least here.

I reckon being moderator of some of the forums would be a really enjoyable job but the Political forum might be another matter.

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
Where is MS these days?

Just getting back from another successful season in Tanzania.....

As ususal, Shakari displays good sense and wisdom. Let us all think before we write, speak or act, and consider the impact on our beloved sport.

DAM Brice,
do you know the man(Steve) good sense and Steve's name in the same sentence is a oxymoron Like military intelligence and unless Susan has figured out a way to beat wisdom into him his might be missing a few bricks from that load too

quote:

Originally posted by Vlam:
Saeed
No one appointed me as anything. But if you really care about hunting so much then how about moderating your one sided bashing that you reserve for your pet hates. Paying to host a forum does not exclude you from having to think before you write. You are responsible to us as hunters to do so as you have single handedly supplied the international press with a platform that is now regularly used to bash hunting, hunters, the related people and places, the societies that protect that.
If you really want to protect the future of hunting then make this a sign in only i.e. no public viewing before consent website.
You are obviously bitter about Sullivan and SCI, we know that thank you for your input, now give it a rest.
If we wanted we too could take cheap shots at what you call hunting. To my mind you are not a hunter at all, more of a harvester who likes the challenge of shooting at long range. The very ideal you are supporting in taking a huge bag of anything that moves whilst on safari is actually reminiscent of the butchering era that contributed to far more damage to the hunting world. Your daily updates read like something out of a 19th century diary with some slapstick laurel and hardy to go with it. Hardly the pinnacle of hunting, yet you like the soap box dont you.
It could easily be argued that you are a far greater threat to hunting than is Mark Sullivan. Hell when they start tying you in to the members of the Royal families of several emirates that shot up that reserve in Tanzania and were abusing the locals you are going to be a regular donkey for anyone to pin a tail on.
You know if I started a thread to bash you and who you are every 2 weeks and kept on feeding it with any of the theories i may conjur up that week then you too could become hunting pariah and would attract as much negative press as Sullivan.

By and large you tend to provide some very balanced content, but in some of it you are simply banging away with your personal viewpoints, none of which you have ever been able to substantiate.
Regards
Ian Blakeway

Don't pull on Superman's cape, don't spit into the wind, don't mess around what Big Saeed.

quote:

Originally posted by Jack D Bold:

quote:

Originally posted by Vlam:
Saeed
No one appointed me as anything. But if you really care about hunting so much then how about moderating your one sided bashing that you reserve for your pet hates. Paying to host a forum does not exclude you from having to think before you write. You are responsible to us as hunters to do so as you have single handedly supplied the international press with a platform that is now regularly used to bash hunting, hunters, the related people and places, the societies that protect that.
If you really want to protect the future of hunting then make this a sign in only i.e. no public viewing before consent website.
You are obviously bitter about Sullivan and SCI, we know that thank you for your input, now give it a rest.
If we wanted we too could take cheap shots at what you call hunting. To my mind you are not a hunter at all, more of a harvester who likes the challenge of shooting at long range. The very ideal you are supporting in taking a huge bag of anything that moves whilst on safari is actually reminiscent of the butchering era that contributed to far more damage to the hunting world. Your daily updates read like something out of a 19th century diary with some slapstick laurel and hardy to go with it. Hardly the pinnacle of hunting, yet you like the soap box dont you.
It could easily be argued that you are a far greater threat to hunting than is Mark Sullivan. Hell when they start tying you in to the members of the Royal families of several emirates that shot up that reserve in Tanzania and were abusing the locals you are going to be a regular donkey for anyone to pin a tail on.
You know if I started a thread to bash you and who you are every 2 weeks and kept on feeding it with any of the theories i may conjur up that week then you too could become hunting pariah and would attract as much negative press as Sullivan.

By and large you tend to provide some very balanced content, but in some of it you are simply banging away with your personal viewpoints, none of which you have ever been able to substantiate.
Regards
Ian Blakeway

Congrats sir for the courage to tell the Emperor he has no clothes.

You may want to check the mirror yourself.

quote:

Originally posted by SINNER:
This site would benefit greatly with some moderation, as [ 0 ] exists. Some of the comments generated at times are, well, they don't do any good for the reputation of this site, or the membership as a whole. Which everyone knows when a mild disagreement flares its ugly head, it usually turns into gutter rhetoric within minutes.

Just my .02

Fortunately for those of us living in the US "Moderation" is left to the individual. As the gentlemen above have stated, The owner of the site may speak as freely as anyone else and is not censoring rhetoric or fact but allowing the individuals to read and write what they feel they must. It is for the rest to decide on their own what they shall accept.
Frank

quote:

Originally posted by Cleathorn:
On another good forum about African Hunting there was another thread regarding Mark Sullivan. I have never posted about Mr. Sullivan before but the dialogue I was reading really struck me. So I posted a reply. At the request of others, I am setting up the situation and re-posting my reply. This is all I will say on the subject of Mark Sulivan.

Cleathorn you were sucker punched by those forums members. They knew a storm would be spawned.

As you've seen anything on MS brings out the most guttural of responses, coming from folks who on most subjects are in good agreement and mostly respectful of different opinions on other issues.

But not on an MS subject.

That says alot by itself.

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:

Don't pull on Superman's cape, don't spit into the wind, don't mess around what Big Saeed.

Dogcat - nice to be first in the suck up line. How's the view from there?

My point is, I do not agree with some of host's posts. Particularly when repeatedly accusing MS of either unethically or illegally conducting hunts and not supporting these allegations with any proof.

I especially find group think on "popular" authors objectionable. But it is easier to let other's do the thinking for you, right DC?

Unfortunately sometimes I sense these days that pandering and kowtowing are viewed as being synonymous with being courteous and respectful.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Unfortunately sometimes I sense these days that pandering and kowtowing are viewed as being synonymous with being courteous and respectful.

Yes, a thread on MS produces both pandering and slandering.
Interestingly, both occur regardless of pro or con on MS's hunting ethics.
Isn't the forum great, any intellectual capacity can participate...from ZERO to whatever.
Like other MS threads this has run its predicted course.

Have a great Thanksgiving.

quote:

Originally posted by Jack D Bold:

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:

Don't pull on Superman's cape, don't spit into the wind, don't mess around what Big Saeed.

Dogcat - nice to be first in the suck up line. How's the view from there?

My point is, I do not agree with some of host's posts. Particularly when repeatedly accusing MS of either unethically or illegally conducting hunts and not supporting these allegations with any proof.

I especially find group think on "popular" authors objectionable. But it is easier to let other's do the thinking for you, right DC?

Sorry. I am no suck up. I come from a place where you show courtesy for the person providing you a venue to exercise your right to be rude. Courtesy is disagreeing without becoming disagreeable.

If I am invited to dinner and I accept the invitation, then I courteously mind my tongue if the food is not to my liking. If you want to invest in hosting this type of forum - fine, do it. However, I suggest you take your disagreements from the "personal" nature and stick to facts.

Saeed quotes and states facts as he sees them. MS is cancer to the hunting industy as are rhino poachers and others that disobey the laws of the country they are in. MS has demonstrated a wanton disregard to ethics and "norms". When Saeed says that SCI has tossed him for his antics, then you can be sure he was tossed for good reason. MS has no real defenders here. Who has stepped up and said that what he does is right? Not me. None of 7 PH's I have hunted with condone his work or ethics.

So, to turn on your benefactor shows bad manners and a lack of appreciation for what you have been given. You can disagree without being petty or a name caller.

quote:

Originally posted by Vlam:
Saeed
No one appointed me as anything. But if you really care about hunting so much then how about moderating your one sided bashing that you reserve for your pet hates. Paying to host a forum does not exclude you from having to think before you write. You are responsible to us as hunters to do so as you have single handedly supplied the international press with a platform that is now regularly used to bash hunting, hunters, the related people and places, the societies that protect that.
If you really want to protect the future of hunting then make this a sign in only i.e. no public viewing before consent website.
You are obviously bitter about Sullivan and SCI, we know that thank you for your input, now give it a rest.
If we wanted we too could take cheap shots at what you call hunting. To my mind you are not a hunter at all, more of a harvester who likes the challenge of shooting at long range. The very ideal you are supporting in taking a huge bag of anything that moves whilst on safari is actually reminiscent of the butchering era that contributed to far more damage to the hunting world. Your daily updates read like something out of a 19th century diary with some slapstick laurel and hardy to go with it. Hardly the pinnacle of hunting, yet you like the soap box dont you.
It could easily be argued that you are a far greater threat to hunting than is Mark Sullivan. Hell when they start tying you in to the members of the Royal families of several emirates that shot up that reserve in Tanzania and were abusing the locals you are going to be a regular donkey for anyone to pin a tail on.
You know if I started a thread to bash you and who you are every 2 weeks and kept on feeding it with any of the theories i may conjur up that week then you too could become hunting pariah and would attract as much negative press as Sullivan.

By and large you tend to provide some very balanced content, but in some of it you are simply banging away with your personal viewpoints, none of which you have ever been able to substantiate.
Regards
Ian Blakeway

OUCH !!

It is always wise to flip the coin over and have a look at the other side.

Ian, you make some very valid points that are not lost on all of us.

quote:

Originally posted by bobgrow:

quote:

Originally posted by Cleathorn:
On another good forum about African Hunting there was another thread regarding Mark Sullivan. I have never posted about Mr. Sullivan before but the dialogue I was reading really struck me. So I posted a reply. At the request of others, I am setting up the situation and re-posting my reply. This is all I will say on the subject of Mark Sulivan.

Cleathorn you were sucker punched by those forums members. They knew a storm would be spawned.

As you've seen anything on MS brings out the most guttural of responses, coming from folks who on most subjects are in good agreement and mostly respectful of different opinions on other issues.

But not on an MS subject.

That says alot by itself.

I do not feel suckered, I am dissappointed. And that is far worse.

Cleathorn.............do not despair. What happened in this thread was predictable. I have yet to see any thread anywhere on MS that did not digress into a verbal brawl.

Years ago this would not have been the case, but attitudes have changed and I, like you, have not changed with the times. A good friend classifies us as dinosaurs.

Quite simply, we have to get use to the fact that hunters as a whole now have the mindset that if ones actions when hunting are in fact 'legal' then by virtue of that fact, the actions are also moral and ethical.

"This site was started by a group of shooters, whose interests include hunting, target shooting and plain plinking. The idea was to share what we have learned from hunting, reloading, gunsmithing and any other shooting related ideas. We are not affiliated to any company involved in the shooting and hunting sports. So what you will find here are our actual experiences, good or bad. If you have any interesting ideas, or if you have come across anything you think might be of interest to other fellow shooters, please consider sharing it with us, we would love to hear from you."
Vlam, you may not have seen the above.
Peter.

Cleathorn,

I, for one, could have gone the rest of my life without hearing about your opinions of MS. I formed my own as regards his style many years ago. I do not feel it necessary to share them other than to say, as I have in the past, that I would never choose to hunt with him. I have met him and expressed directly to him my concerns with his method and his vids; perhaps you should consider that avenue as opposed to your post?

Why you were inclined to post your opinions is beyond me, and I doubt that you were, in fact, encouraged "At the request of others..." to regurgitate your post here on AR. And if you were, then those "others" have too much time and too little to do. I wonder how many "others" there truely were?

Where are you from? You did not enter a location in your profile. In reading all 14 of your AR posts, I admit to being confused about who you are and how long you have been hunting Africa and what motivation you would have to make such a post on Thanksgiving day.

I have only met the man once, and never seen his video's. All I know is what I have heard. What I can say is I was interested in his "operation" and tried to talk to him at a show, and he appeared somewhat uninterested in me, as if I was bothering him(maybe I was?). I assume he thought I was not in the right tax bracket to hunt with him. Not a good way to promote your self I felt.

I am curious as to the strong feelings about his hunting ethics, so maybe I should watch some?

His sister or something works for my airline, and he was from the Phoenix area. Someone told me he was moving to Iowa or something.

Apparently he is moderately successful in promoting his hunts?

That is the extent of my knowledge. Sorry to hijack, just curious.

Forget Mr. Sullivan for a moment. This business of conflating "legal" with anything else is giving me a headache. Again.

I have posted this before, as have others here on AR. If a person's chosen method of hunting is legal, I have no business criticizing another hunter who does whatever it is for being immoral, or unethical. Doesn't mean I have to do whatever it is, or even approve of it. I do not recall being appointed The Czar of Hunting Ethics.

So, I believe my best method of dealing with such is this: I'll hunt my way, you hunt your way. And I, for one, will STFU about how you choose to do things.

Good hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by LionHunter:
Cleathorn,

I, for one, could have gone the rest of my life without hearing about your opinions of MS. I formed my own as regards his style many years ago. I do not feel it necessary to share them other than to say, as I have in the past, that I would never choose to hunt with him. I have met him and expressed directly to him my concerns with his method and his vids; perhaps you should consider that avenue as opposed to your post?

Why you were inclined to post your opinions is beyond me, and I doubt that you were, in fact, encouraged "At the request of others..." to regurgitate your post here on AR. And if you were, then those "others" have too much time and too little to do. I wonder how many "others" there truely were?

Where are you from? You did not enter a location in your profile. In reading all 14 of your AR posts, I admit to being confused about who you are and how long you have been hunting Africa and what motivation you would have to make such a post on Thanksgiving day.

Curious, you could have gone your whole life without hearing my opinions yet you regularly interact on a social media network that largely consists of opinions (posting more than 1,000 of your own opinions in just about 725 days); and having read the caption of the thread, you obvisouly choose to read it; and then you read about 30 more posts to get to the end; and then you took the time to read the ~14 others I have posted over the course of about 2-3 years; and then, seemingly feeling me enigmatic, questioned my personal atributes, including where I am from.

I must say that I find that particular inquiry very disturbing. Where I live is not remotely relevant to sharing opinions on AR, so why do you need to know?

While being critical of others for having too much time or too little to do, you have the time to post, on average, more than once a day, every day, and when you are seemingly unable to make an effective point using the conventional power of words, you resort to vulgar speech and spend the time to insert crude (actually sophmoric is probably a better descriptor) cartoons to do it for you.

I would say that for some reason you became strangly curious about my opinions. For that very reason I follow an internet tradition of anonimity.

What you know is that I have enough money to buy a decent but not top-shelf double rifle, I had trouble initially getting it to group as tighly as I would have liked, I fixed that with the help of some AR member opinions on shooting big-bore doubles, that I have hunted, at the least, the Big 5, and that I am very generous.

That is more than enough information. I fail to see why you need or would want more information about me; after-all, you really do not care about my opinions anyway - that is what you said, right?

I will indulge you by providing just just one answer to your queries: I posted about MS because I saw a video clip where he and a hunter stood behind a wounded animal, guns to the ready, and instead of shooting, stated for the camera that they could shoot it right then and there or wait for the animal [restate that the hunter wounded the animal to start the affair] to decide how the affair would end. I found that disgusting and unethical.

I strongly belive in the standards of ethical conduct set forth by the very same organizations that you are apparently very proud have life memberships in. Otherwise I see no reason to include your membership affliations in a signature line, right? When someone undermines those standards, those organizations ask their members to speak-up, and to speak-out, to defend our freedomes. And I will speak out. I will speak out when someone spreads anti-hunting rhetoric, when someone questions my private right of firearms ownership, when I know that someone is poaching game and when someone concludes that all dangerous game hunting is done in the manner of MS. Forums such as these are among the social media avalible to us all to share those views. Too speak out less we loose those rights by being among the silent majority while the rogues tarnish the reputation of a global group of ethical sportsmen.

If you disagree with those opinions, feel free to engage in the dialogue that this forum creates and share your own opinions. Opinions about the topic, not the person.

In the end, if you could go another lifetime without reading my opinion on MS, or anything else for that matter, employ the awesome power of the mouse and click onto the next subject of interest to you. But please, stop your little 'Cleathorn' query, it's creepy.

Thanks for your remarks Skyline, we may well be dinosaurs, but in this 'reality,' those dino-attributes are something to be proud of.

What gives? I tried to PM Vlam and it said he is not allowed private messages.. Was he banned too?