“You would need a heavy-duty rifle,” according Jim Lansdale, co-founder of the Gulf Coast Bigfoot Research Organization (GCBRO). “I would suggest a 30-aught-six or better; .458 or something like that. Maybe a seven-mag’. But it’s all shot placement and you’d have to shoot him in the head. You can’t body-shoot him. They’re too big.” [Jim Lansdale; Gizmodo]Disgusting Lansdale has spent a lot of brain energy figuring out just what weapon will do the job.
Skeptic and debunker Benjamin Radford gives his reason why those, like myself, are against killing a Sasquatch:
"To them it’s not just like killing an armadillo or an elk—it is a symbol of purity.” [Benjamin Radford; Gizmodo]I'd like Mr. Radford to know that I wouldn't kill an armadillo (who does that?) or an elk. While some do -- hunters who kill elk in order to provide food for their family -- I choose not to do so. It's not because I believe Sasquatch is "pure", I have no idea. It simply is not right to do so. In this I am very adamant.
I have not seen a Sasquatch, though I have had a couple of odd experiences related to Sasquatch. I know a lot of individuals who have seen Bigfoot. I believe it exists. To me it doesn't matter if it's "pure" or almost human, or human like, or even human, or, 'simply' an animal. No reason to kill it. None.
None.
Nope.
Not one good reason.
At. All.
Having said that, I will make a qualifier here. While I doubt Bigfoot are psycho-beings killing humans willy-nilly, as Lansdale believes, (because, after all, those of us who are NO KILL are "bleeding hearts", which tells you a lot about Lansdale's mindset and political values) if an animal -- human or non -- is coming at me to eat me for lunch, then yes, I'd defend myself.
But I'm not going out to look for a being with the single minded purpose of killing one.
No comments:
Post a Comment