The Palmer case seems to me a lot like the Zimmerman self defense shooting.

Every body even some so called pro firearms and pro self-defense supporters.

Jumped all over Zimmerman before the facts of the case was fully known.

When reality the case against Zimmerman was fuel by the anti gun and anti self-defense media and the left.

Zimmerman was found to be fully justifiable in his actions. But still suffers the consequences of his actions.


Has the same happen to Mr. palmer.

I will take the under on that bet.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
I will take the under on that bet.

Excuse me I don't under stand the phase taking the "the under"

I don't have a comment on the merits of the comparison but, in both cases, sophisticated PR efforts drove the media narrative. If anyone thinks the Cecil story spread organically, you are naive.

Yup

It "appears" that Palmer MAY have had a permit. If so, he is probably not guilty of anything other than poor aim. Others may be, but PROBABLY not him.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
The Palmer case seems to me a lot like the Zimmerman self defense shooting.

Every body even some so called pro firearms and pro self-defense supporters.

Jumped all over Zimmerman before the facts of the case was fully known.

When reality the case against Zimmerman was fuel by the anti gun and anti self-defense media and the left.

Zimmerman was found to be fully justifiable in his actions. But still suffers the consequences of his actions.


Has the same happen to Mr. palmer.

Zimmerman is a damned head case. He has two domestics since his acquital. He finds trouble.

He could have done well for himself as a spokeman for 2nd amendment and CCW issuse.

So post trial don't feel bad for him. He has created his own problems.

Jeff

I agree with you Jeff. However, I think if any of us endured whatnot endured , it would change us. He gained pounds from the stress

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
It "appears" that Palmer MAY have had a permit. If so, he is probably not guilty of anything other than poor aim. Others may be, but PROBABLY not him.

There's no telling at this point because the media will only continue to whip up the frenzy with conflicting info.

This whole sordid affair is another prime example of the media trying to sensationalize a story for their own profits. How many times do we have to endure a "scandal of biblical proportions" only to learn a number of months later that the facts point to a story 180 degrees different from the original?

I have a number of non-hunting acquaintances ask me my opinion on the lion fiasco.

My response is simple, "Until I know all the facts, I don't have an opinion, only speculation and conjecture, just like everyone else".

However, if the facts support that this hunt was conducted illegally, those involved should be charged with poaching. If the client was duped by the PH and outfitter, then additional charges of fraud and theft of services should be brought against them, as well as a defamation of character lawsuit for the damage done to the clients reputation and business.

However, this hoopla isn't about an illegal hunt. It's an effort to put sport hunting and trophy hunting on trial in the court of public opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by gsganzer:

I have a number of non-hunting acquaintances ask me my opinion on the lion fiasco.

My response is simple, "Until I know all the facts, I don't have an opinion, only speculation and conjecture, just like everyone else".

Pretty much my answer as well but I also add that...

1) Baiting is the standard accepted legal means of hunting Lion in Zim.

2) Archery is legal in Zim.

3) Shooting a collared animal is legal.

Then I point out the media has twisted those three facts pretty freely in their presentation so that is all the more reason to wait for the real information to raise to the surface.