I agree with the sentiments you made. I probably would expand on that topic a bit.

Hunting tradition is part of human civilization and history and for good reasons. We are omnivores and that means also meat and there are many cultures who use it or used to use it as a rite of passage for manhood. Today in the modern world things are somewhat different, I agree. There is no need in terms of meat supply to hunt, although there are disrupted habitats where there is too much elk or wild boar and not enough other natural predators which damages the ecosystem , so unless we want to introduce tigers and wolves, sometimes hunting serves that purpose. And elk and wild boar are not endangered species like rhino or tiger.

I am not for killing as sport for selfies, but I'm not against any kind of hunting period. There is still time and place, method and reasons where it can be argued its part of human culture, and it is important to not lose that tradition. When tigers or lions outnumbered humans, and we could not defend ourselves, they would not do us the favor of not killing us on moral grounds. So there is still situations where hunting is not mindless bloodshed but can serve a deeper purse of connecting with are primal nature and where animals have a fighting chance.

The lefty envoromentalies and those telling us to eat synthetic meat are more than happy to kill humans in the name of their religion to kill any kind of independence from the state , so I'm not interested in moral lesson from Bill Gates and Jeff Bazos and Klaus Schwabs of the world.

That being said, I agree with you that there are those who kill not for any other reason than to show a selfie with a dead animal on Instagram and Facebook. And pay to be equipment with trackers and long range rifels and kill endangered elephants or lions on safari. I'm very much against that, just as I am against fake hypocritical environmentalists who pretend to care for animals while pushing for communism. The real heros are rarely heard about, the anti poaching volunteers, the various farmers who are dead poor and can barely feed a family but don't go and kill equally starving elephans that destroy their crop. Now that is true sacrifice.

I think its important to take into perspective the role we have in the animal world and the role they have in ours. We can coexist for the most part but in the name of "noble" causes and in the name of "sport hunting" we humans often end up doing more harm than good. What seems to me is missing is not politics but education about animals, their needs and our needs, their nature and ours etc. That is what it missing. There are too many fanatical activists who don't have a clue about the way natural world works or natural history and are driven not by basic realities but by bad ideologies.

Even long time naturalists that I admired and grew up watching my whole forming years, people like David Attenborough ended up as communists and total lunatics, following a religion of "environmentalism". A big disappointment, someone who after so many years of working and filming and writing and learning about animals, in his old age has no better solution than that of Great Thunberg. What a disappointment.

I think powdered horn has been used in traditional Asian medicine in the belief that it can treat ailments ranging from hangovers and fevers to cancer.

Horns are also purchased and consumed purely as a symbol of wealth and social status.

Yeah. Just like Greenpeace, Peta etc. It's essentially a home where communists and other lefty radicals found a new home. Watermelons, green on the outside, and red on the inside.

Just like the whole Climate Change etc. They never solve the problem they claim they are solving and always somehow introduce a bunch of problems they choose to stay blind to. Because they always act from top-down approach. Just like communists. Government always knows best. And soon as money starts pouring in, environmentalists morph into watermelons.

Why I Left Greenpeace

So you are moron right? See I can ask a question no one asked, too. What's your point , comrade?

@Krunoslav yes or no. It's a simple question, and a simple answer. Do you support complete legalization of all drugs?

Your post is about "environmental groups" wanting to ban rhino horn sales, but legalizing it actually kills the poaching industry and reduces crime since it removes the need for a black market.

So, similarly, legalizing all drugs will kill the drug cartels and drug wars, and dramatically reduce crime. Just as ending Prohibition ended the gang wars in the 30s.

So, the question again, are you consistent in your support of the data? Do you support full legalization of drugs to end drug crime, or do you only care when it is about rhinos?

@JacksonNought No I don't support legalization of all drugs as a blanket statement. Because drugs are very different from rhino horns. Your comparison is flawed. Drugs incapacitate the population as can be seen in places where lefties have tried to do it in America. Drugs are also highly addictive and create zombified population by design. As seen in dem run cities in America. Rhino Horns do not do that.

Prohibition in the 30's was flawed because it tried to ban all alcohol in all context, when social drinking habits existed for generations. In other words it did not let the market decide it tried to control the market and like all government top down attempts it was a failure because government can fuck up a cup of coffee.

Drug problem in America for example got worse when? When the government declared "war on drugs". But let's not forget that it made it legal for Big Pharma to be the drug dealer, doctors the drug pushers and CIA has been dealing with drug cartels for a long time, even brought drugs and distributed it in America. Also FDA is corrupt to the core, so they approve all kind of pills and drugs to be prescribed, marketed and distributed to consumers.

In essence, when it comes to drugs in America, the government dwarfs the cartels in damage it does by its policies. Take the "vaccines" and how governments are working with Big Pharma to force populations to take experimental injectables, paid by the taxpayers for something that is not needed for most of the population and of questionably efficacy for those that are in the risk groups. Now imagine if markets were left to take care of it and all government did, was to make sure there are no corruption and monopolies but instead free market capitalism. It would solve most of the problems. Just like with the rhino horns.

When it comes to other kinds of drugs, that probably is not a good idea since the drugs are designed to create addiction. And that is not like experimental "vaccines" or rhino horns or even alcohol. So the comparison would be a faulty one.

Unfortunately for comrades such as yourself you don't understand how free market capitalism works, highly addictive drugs are not the same as buying furniture or tooth brush for obvious reasons. But anytime free market capitalism was left to do its thing the invisible hand always did a better job than anything ever done by governments and central planing. What America has in many markets is not free market capitalism , its fascism or corporatism or what communism becomes, where governments are protecting large corporations in order to establish monopolies and keep them. Big Pharma, Big Tech, Big Money, Big Media etc. Quite clear they are paying the government to keep them as monopolies in America and in many other countries. That is not free market capitalism.

To sum it up, no I am not for legalization of all drugs for obvious reasons that they are designed to make its users junkies. And no one should want junkies around for obvious reasons. But for lefty reasons Portland and Los Angeles and San Francisco keep on collecting Junkies. Does not go well for the city. So anyone interested in safe , clean and productive society would not be for legalization of all highlight additive drugs because they zombify the population. Rhino Horns do not do that. So you can't really compare the two.

Now if wanted to legalize drugs but make sure that users are informed and its only prescribed by ethical and trained professionals and for genuinely medical reasons, then that is a different story. And indeed this is how it used to work back in teh day when American was not as bad as it is today. What changed? Government failing to do its job, as per usual. It protected big pharma, it outlawed all other forms of medical treatments and it allowed and even encourage the use of it with no supervision by people who understand the potency and usage of medical drugs. In other words the government got in bed with big pharma to become drug dealers bigger than any cartel. But just to make some money on the side, US government was happy enough to do deal with Mexican Cartels as well. One thing government didn't do, is protected the wellbeing of its citizens, because it treated them as consumers not citizens with ability to make decisions for themselves. Just like its doing now during CCP virus era.

@Krunoslav so you only care about sticking it to environmentalists, but ignore the overwhelming data that says legalizing drugs would dramatically reduce cartels and drug crime. Because you have a bias against drugs. And you apparently don't support freedom, because it offends your personal morals.

Got it. Nice to see you haven't changed, and are still a humungous hypocrite. Nothing but throwing out buzzwords like Communist and Comrade and bringing up China.

@JacksonNought "the overwhelming data that says legalizing drugs would dramatically reduce cartels and drug crime."

What data?

@Krunoslav

[partner.sciencenorway.no]

Just as valid as your hypothesis on rhino horns. But of course you only care about "owning libs" and not actually reducing crime.

@JacksonNought "Illegal drugs are pushed out of the market when a country legalizes marijuana. Much crime disappears. This is the finding in a new study on legalization of medical marijuana in the United States. "

Hmm. I'm not sure if that is correct, for several reasons. First off all crime in states that legalized marijuana is not exactly gone down, has it? Take West Coast for example. Not really low on crime states, are they? I wonder why that is? Hmm.

Medical Marijuana is an oxymoron, invented by those who promote it. Medical marijuana has nothing to do with medicine. Its a way to say we want to be in drug trade but want to make it sound less bad.

As for Cartels losing money from legalization of marijuana, ha. Yeah. They rob the legal growers in states where its legal and sell it twice as much in states where its not legal and now they don't have to smuggle it across the boarder from Mexico or someplace, they have it in USA already.

‘Our intelligence tells us, and all indications are (drug cartels) are going to move in if they haven't already,’ Tom Gorman, director of the Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, told USA Today.

In 2012 the Mexican Competitiveness Institute issued a report saying that Mexico’s cartels would lose as much as $1.425 billion if Colorado legalized marijuana.

The organization also predicted that drug trafficking revenues would fall 20 to 30 percent, and the Sinaloa cartel, which would be the most affected, would lose up to 50 percent.

Faced with such losses, the violent cartels could force their way in as black market wholesalers or simply rob pot dispensaries, which take only cash and have not been able to establish accounts with banks because of lenders' fears of violating federal laws.

Most of the pot was being smuggled primarily to Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Texas and Wisconsin, the report said.

Marijuana often is sold for twice as much on the black market in states where it is not legal.

‘You have a very desirable product with 48 other states that are potential customers. My God! What a market that is,’ said Gorman.

[dailymail.co.uk]

As for pot smokers yeah that is wonderful for the civil society. Just look at the states that legalized it, its a disaster zone. So I'm not sure what gave you the idea that legalization of drugs, especially marijuana and various hard drugs is a good idea or that I support it. If you are going to make dumbass accusations like that, at least get your arguments in check.

Heroin, cocaine etc as you suggested "legalization of all drugs" is not the same as market as rhino horns market. Not by a long shot.

But to entertian your accusation, the context was also different on supplying fake horns cheaper and in larger quantity to provide copycat versions so real ones would be too much of cost to get. After all teh black market also wants to make money.

Now that is something that is done among drug dealers, in case you didn't know. Drug is often not the same quality and not as pure, but its cheaper and for some users is enough. So some drug dealers will flood the market with cheaper less potent and less pure drugs, in order to compete on the drug market making demand for pure high grade stuff less so. Similar to rhino horn bussines, but this is not government legalization , this is free market among drug dealers. That is how markets works they create competition and that drives the prices down and quality up. When goverments or enviromentalits get involved and try top down approach they screw up everything.

@Krunoslav all I see is you making excuses and ignoring data because of your opinions on drugs. But you don't care when it comes to rhinos. Again, because you only care about being anti-environmentalist.

@JacksonNought BS. Make a counterargument not accusation, comrade.

@Krunoslav

Medical Marijuana is an oxymoron, invented by those who promote it. Medical marijuana has nothing to do with medicine. Its a way to say we want to be in drug trade but want to make it sound less bad.

Your bias is too much. I already provided you data. You rejected it because of you bias. Anything else I provide will be dismissed with you calling me a Communist. What is the point?

@JacksonNought That date is what I was commenting on and yes medical marijuana is an oxymoron. Its like saying that you are having sex to protect virginity. But considering people who talk about medical marijuana are either those selling it, or those using it, and they somehow never find any downsides to it, calling it "medical marijuana" is an insult to common sense. Maybe Californians can look into something called neurosis if they still remember what that is.

I call you communists because you defend communists in the majority of your posts. If you are not one yourself and don't see the problem of communist ideology, then you are by definition a "useful idiot". I can use that term if it makes you feel better.

And for the record I'm not rejecting drug legalization out of some misplaced bias, but out of common sense and clear evidence that it brings nothing but misery and destruction to those that try it. I'm sure you will find sympathy for antifa and BLM and junkie types as you seem to always defend them for some strange reason, I don't have any sympathy for avoiding responsibility followed by sheer stupidity demonstrated by junkies and stoners.

@Krunoslav

Medical marijuana is used to distinguish between medicinal usage and recreational usage. Using it to treat chronic pain or glaucoma - medicinal. Using it just to get high - recreational. Once again, your personal biases make you criticize it and dismiss the facts. No different than other "moral police" who want to ban marijuana for all purposes.

The overwhelming facts agree with your original post - take away the illegal nature and profitable black market for items, and the criminal activity surrounding it is reduced. This includes rhino horns and drugs. If you make drugs freely available and put common-sense regulations on them (similar to alcohol) then you won't have cartels making billions off of shipping drugs across the border. You will have more regulation and less overdosing and death. But of course you don't care about this, you have some moral objection to drugs so you dismiss all the facts. Just as you do with sex work and trans rights.

No one I defend is a Communist. You just label anyone to the left of theocracy as a Communist.

You seem to blanket label marijuana users as junkies and stoners. I guess you can then label all gun owners as murders and bloodthirsty, hm?

@JacksonNought a) people had chronic pain since the Stone Age and still do and don't use "weed" to get by. If you need to get high to stop feeling pain, that is a) not a free ride because you get high and then you want more excuses to get high and pretty soon you are hooked on drug regardless of pain. This is well documented problem with opioids and other pain killers. And in the same states where "medical" marijuana is promoted you have an alarming number of stoners, junkies and people hooked to pain killers. Hell there was a whole opioid epidemic problem. But hey Oxycontin was for medical use too.

And if you think that using pain killers is something people can administer themselves in proper dosages and not get addicted easily, I don't know what to tell you. Medical, or recreational usage just means neurotic usage. But that will be our little secret.

"The overwhelming facts agree with your original post - take away the illegal nature and profitable black market for items, and the criminal activity surrounding it is reduced."

When you flood the market with copycats you get lower prices and more competition. Drug markets do that even if they are illegal. When you make the drug trade legal you don't make less junkies you just change the dynamic of the market in terms of supply.

When you flood the market with cheap copycat rhino horns you make it less profitable to hunt the rhinos for their horns, because there is less risk in selling fake horns. Just like in drug trade they chop the drugs to make it cheapr to produce and sell. But what you are missing is that when you make fake horns you don't reduce horn trade, you just provide alternative source of horns, thereby protecting the animals. When you make drugs legal you don't reduce drug trade and you don't get less junkies, you get the same number or more, its just that the supply chain changes accordingly.

If you could make the bunch of cheap drugs that tests the same as same as actual expensive drug, you would not reduce number of junkies. In fact heroin and opioid epidemic in US showed that.

Heroin and Oxycodone pills are practically the same when we look at the chemicals in each and have very similar effects. The only difference is that one is made by doctors, lab technicians and scientists, while the other is made on the street.

People who are misusing Oxycodone may even believe that the price tag per pill, in comparison to heroin, makes it “better” and even safer. Even once the epidemic got worse, it wasn’t until people in the upper middle class were affected that we began talking openly about opioid addiction and the misuse of Oxycodone pills. This all leads to dangerous stigma that makes people assume Oxycodone misuse and addiction is okay to talk about, but heroin addiction is for “junkies” and considered “the worst of the worse.” But what happens when Oxycodone pills aren’t enough, and it leads to heroin addiction? What do we say if there was no surgery that got someone addicted to Oxycodone pills? What happens when you are stealing Oxycodone from your grandma after her surgery?

The problem is that since Oxycodone pills are more socially acceptable, people are more likely to try them, which can lead to Oxycodone or heroin addiction. Did you know, in the 1900’s heroin was marketed by Bayer as “safe.” It was prescribed to children and adults for mild pain until people quickly realized that heroin was not safe, it was highly addictive and dangerous. Many people understood then, this heroin is a dangerous drug, its bad, and now it is a Schedule 1 Narcotic with “no medical use.” If this story sounds familiar to you, it’s because it is what’s happening with Purdue Pharma right now. When Purdue marketed opioid pain pills, like oxycodone, as safe in the 1990’s and began giving it to people with chronic and minor pain, it quickly spiraled into the epidemic we are seeing right now. We found out quickly that these pills are addictive and dangerous. Opioid pills, like oxycodone, are pharmaceutical grade heroin, highly addictive, and often lead to street heroin abuse. Heroin and prescription opioid pills are the same thing.

Same is with "medical" marijuana, its a bad idea that leads to other bad ideas since its not about medicine its about neurosis.

But back to drugs and rhino horns. They are not the same in case you missed it. By making fake horns one can save rhino lives , while the demands for horns remains the same. How the hell are you going to replicate that with drugs? Who are you planing on saving?