Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 8 votes

David Booth Hunts Goat


  • Please log in to reply
333 replies to this topic

#271 Tru_Knyte

Tru_Knyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,355 posts
  • Joined: 25-December 05

Posted 16 October 2012 - 07:43 PM

As long as he's eating the meat I don't see what the problem is.
  • 0
Posted Image

#272 Colonel D

Colonel D

    K-Wing Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 04

Posted 16 October 2012 - 08:45 PM

How about the fact that he is overpaid, under performing.

overpaid 3rd liner who has not reach his potential. As it seems he lacks the stuff between the ears to reach it.

guy seems to be a bit of a basket case. nothing to do with hunting. just doesn't seem to be playing with a full deck.

the fact that he has pissed off close to half the fans doesnt help him out either, guys on the bubble with me just for his crappy play, this just make me want to drive him to the airport myself.

Defend him or roast him, this board is divided. One thing we can all agree on is that we are canuck fans and this city wants a trophy and booth did little and does little to help us to get it.

Trade him.
  • 3

#273 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 16 October 2012 - 08:49 PM

So why is hunting for pleasure immoral exactly? Booth isn't wasting the meat. "Because he could get food elsewhere" seems like a pretty arbitrary standard. "Because the animal feels pain" is just projecting your own emotions onto the animal and sympathizing with them--emotions don't make logical arguments.

I'd love it if you could give us a nice, solid logical argument backing up your main assertion since you've repeated it several times under the presumption it's true. Appealing to emotionalism isn't going to cut it.


You want me to explain to you the immorality of killing something for pleasure? It's kinda self-evident.

You don't believe that animals feel pain? You don't believe that it's immoral to cause a living thing pain for one's pleasure?

Again, these things are self-evident, which is why they aren't argued. Perhaps you haven't thought about it, but I'd ask you to.

It's not emotionalism....it's morality..something that all members of civilized society abide by, inherently, because moral differentiate between what's 'wrong' and what's 'right'.
  • 3

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#274 CanucksSayEh

CanucksSayEh

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,325 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 12

Posted 16 October 2012 - 09:02 PM

Booth is a bada$$ and was one of the only glimmers of hope vs the Kings. Looking forward to a big season from him.
  • 0

#275 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 16 October 2012 - 09:05 PM

*
POPULAR

You don't believe that animals feel pain? You don't believe that it's immoral to cause a living thing pain for one's pleasure?


If I recall correctly, I remember you posting how much you enjoyed bacon back in the "Bacon Shortage" thread. Remember bacon is not an essential food, it is not needed for survival, you eat it because it gives you pleasure.
So that would mean that you're okay with slaughtering a bunch of pigs (as long as somebody else kills them for you) so you can have the pleasure of eating bacon.
The amount of hypocrisy in some of your posts is astounding.

Edited by Jagermeister, 16 October 2012 - 09:07 PM.

  • 7
Posted Image

#276 Moonshinefe

Moonshinefe

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,039 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 11

Posted 16 October 2012 - 09:58 PM

You want me to explain to you the immorality of killing something for pleasure? It's kinda self-evident.

You don't believe that animals feel pain? You don't believe that it's immoral to cause a living thing pain for one's pleasure?

Again, these things are self-evident, which is why they aren't argued. Perhaps you haven't thought about it, but I'd ask you to.

It's not emotionalism....it's morality..something that all members of civilized society abide by, inherently, because moral differentiate between what's 'wrong' and what's 'right'.


I'm pretty sure animals feel pain, sure. At least the ones relevant to this post, I guess it's debatable with say microscopic organisms and such. I just don't necessarily think something is self-evidently immoral if it causes another living thing pain. To be honest I'm just playing the devil's advocate, I doubt I'd take pleasure in hunting (I've never been besides fishing). The thing is, some people feel differently, and it's pretty hard to change their minds without a logical argument. I don't think it's my place to tell others that they can't do it, either.

I should correct you though--"it's morality..something that all members of civilized society abide by"--that is certainly wrong. A lot of people don't follow the rules.

Edited by Moonshinefe, 16 October 2012 - 10:01 PM.

  • 0

#277 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,056 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 16 October 2012 - 10:05 PM

Speaking of Nietzsche:

The whole attitude of "man versus the world” man as world denying principle, man as the standard of the value of things, as judge of the world, who in the end puts existence itself on his scales and finds it too light - the monstrous impertinence of this attitude has dawned upon us as such, and has disgusted us, we now laugh when we find, "Man and World" placed beside one another, separated by the sublime presumption of the little word " and "!



Man is not separate from this world....he is part of it, and with the gifts he's been given, one could dare say he was ordained, or at least tasked to be its steward and not its usurping destroyer.


Nice.
Usurping destroyer = self destruction.
  • 0

#278 Mountain Man

Mountain Man

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 386 posts
  • Joined: 18-January 12

Posted 16 October 2012 - 10:09 PM

So....

How bout his cowboy hat?

Edited by Mountain Man, 16 October 2012 - 10:09 PM.

  • 0
virtus junxit mors non separabit.

Hockey season must be back on, the crazies are coming out again....


#279 Avicii

Avicii

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,363 posts
  • Joined: 02-July 07

Posted 16 October 2012 - 11:09 PM

He can go diarrhea in a public pool for all i care.

If he can learn to pass and get stronger on his feet then i'm happy
  • 1

Posted Image


#280 sirwilliam

sirwilliam

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,002 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 06

Posted 16 October 2012 - 11:25 PM

If I recall correctly, I remember you posting how much you enjoyed bacon back in the "Bacon Shortage" thread. Remember bacon is not an essential food, it is not needed for survival, you eat it because it gives you pleasure.
So that would mean that you're okay with slaughtering a bunch of pigs (as long as somebody else kills them for you) so you can have the pleasure of eating bacon.
The amount of hypocrisy in some of your posts is astounding.


I wouldn't say Sharp's hypocritical per se, more that he holds a different definition of 'for pleasure' than you do.

But for the record I agree with you Jagermeister, we have copious forms of plant protein, and a balanced vegetarian diet is far healthier in just about every way. IMHO, people eat meat because they enjoy the taste, 'for pleasure', not because it's strictly necessary.
  • 0
Posted Image

#281 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,679 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 16 October 2012 - 11:46 PM

Common sense - most people use theirs when they know they're getting under people's skin....especially if some of those people are the very fans who buy tickets to see you play. The problem for me is that, in reviewing DB's Twitter feed, it seems that he enjoys the fact that he riles others up as much as the hunt itself. He boasts about losing followers every time he tweets and, at times, almost mocks those who do find the pictures disturbing vs considering their take on things (there are 2 sides to this). So it's not so much that he hunts, it's the attitude surrounding the whole thing.

So if you're truly a hunter because you love to hunt, eat what you kill and simply don't care what others think - fine. As stated, I have family members on this side of things. But to have a defiant, in your face attitude about it is something else. The ego does seem to come into play a bit and that's a contributing factor in assessing likeability.

Lay low, do your thing, post your pictures if you must but, if confronted, try to at least show a little empathy to those who are sensitive to these things. Personally, I don't see much of that....

David Booth owes us no apology but, in that, we also don't owe him our undying support (just because he's a Canuck). I've been labeled a bit of a homer (with good reason), but do base my support of the players on their overall attitude as well as their hockey skills. So this one's a struggle for me....

Hopefully, they'll get back on the ice soon and he'll light 'em up and give me reason to sway to the other side. But so far, not so much....

(and I hear there's a charity game in town....he's obviously got his aim down to a fine art in hunting....maybe time to get on the ice with his brothers and work on his on ice shot instead of proving his point out there, in the wild?)


If the problem is that he's trolling on Twitter, isn't it time to take a page from CDC rules and to ignore the poster? Booth posts stuff onto Twitter - it's his medium and isn't censored by Canucks mgmt (and shouldn't be). His posts aren't anything offensive - we see dead animals all the time in spiders, flies, roadkill, and Discovery Channel. Also, Twitter's an opt-in system where you decide to follow the users you want. Don't want to read up on Booth? Then hit the unfollow button. AFAIK, his off-ice behaviour doesn't carry to his on-ice behaviour, and as a fan, that's all I need for reassurance.

It's not like he's Patty Kane at a college party, or Byfuglien at the buffet line. It's Booth hunting.

As for his recent activities?

https://twitter.com/...382754876624897

Only time I'll say I'm thankful for the lockout. Thanks @D_Booth7 for skating with us!

https://twitter.com/...382944979267584

Thanks @D_Booth7 for coming out and skating with our team and working out!! #inspiration

https://twitter.com/...359850805899264

Had the honor of skating with Vancouver's @d_booth7 tonight #suchabeauty

https://twitter.com/...384068524249088


Boy them girls kicked my butt out there tonight! Thanks for teaching me a few things @booth_rachael and the rest of Ceaser girls


It's not NHL-calibre linemates, but it's better than whatever Chris Higgins and Mason Raymond are doing (no coverage at all of them).

Edited by debluvscanucks, 19 October 2012 - 04:29 PM.

  • 0

#282 16ToWin

16ToWin

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 103 posts
  • Joined: 06-September 12

Posted 16 October 2012 - 11:54 PM

If I recall correctly, I remember you posting how much you enjoyed bacon back in the "Bacon Shortage" thread. Remember bacon is not an essential food, it is not needed for survival, you eat it because it gives you pleasure.
So that would mean that you're okay with slaughtering a bunch of pigs (as long as somebody else kills them for you) so you can have the pleasure of eating bacon.
The amount of hypocrisy in some of your posts is astounding.


110% Agree..
  • 0
Home honey,.I'm high

#283 16ToWin

16ToWin

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 103 posts
  • Joined: 06-September 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:23 AM

I wouldn't say Sharp's hypocritical per se, more that he holds a different definition of 'for pleasure' than you do.

But for the record I agree with you Jagermeister, we have copious forms of plant protein, and a balanced vegetarian diet is far healthier in just about every way. IMHO, people eat meat because they enjoy the taste, 'for pleasure', not because it's strictly necessary.


People eat meat because they like the taste? I'm pretty sure "Man" has eaten meat since "he" started walking upright... Just because it has been political incorrect these last 30 years with the"hippy crowd" doesnt make it any less of a viable option... I like meat.. I hunt,I fish.... hell, when i am bored, i bring my 12gauge out and i murder a few cabbages in my garden...(not kidding,quick salad).
..Sharpshooter.. i catch and release myself... but what do you do when you hook a fish in a bad way?? throw it back? You have fished for sport!
  • 1
Home honey,.I'm high

#284 hudson bay rules

hudson bay rules

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,386 posts
  • Joined: 03-November 10

Posted 17 October 2012 - 01:23 AM


  • 0
I love rock and roll, just put another dime in the juice box baby.

#285 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,948 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 17 October 2012 - 06:19 AM

You're grasping at straws, yes. I have to sift through what you're posting because you tend to want to move away from the argument surrounding Booth, and go into moral equivalency of natives, and fishing, and cows at meat farms, and forest fires, and your bonding experiences with your brother, and lord know what else, because you can't actually defend the charge that Booth is a trophy hunter who kills animals for pleasure.

What you try to do is use false equivocations, anecdotes about your personal experience, conflate my argument with unrelated historical anecdotes of catch and release fishing that I did, though i'm not sure how that gets Booth off the 'hook' for what he does, and in order to think you're actually making any sound points you try to level the immoral playing field instead of actually addressing the argument regarding the immorality of trophy hunting.

If you want to discuss that, great, but the rest is essentially muddying the waters.

Let me get you back on track.

Booth is a trophy hunter. His primary motivation is to seek a trophy as it provides him with pleasure to kill many different animals in order to acquire different trophies. Eating meat is secondary and inconsequential to the argument about the immorality to his primary motivations.

Go ahead, argue on his behalf now.......or are you going to continue to internalize my argument of his motivations as somehow the motivation of every hunter ever or present who are motivated differently?


I've given you info regarding factors of the mountain goats life. I'm sorry you fail to understand how fighting forest fires has affected the mountain goats food supply. You seem rather stuck on that one and I've already explained it twice. Just as you seem to be stuck on the term trophy hunt. Which doesn't mean cut off it's head and leave the carcass behind.

YOU brought up natives and how moral they are. I pointed out that they actually took trophies themselves and celebrated successful hunts. Yet I'm grasping at straws? It would indicate they took pleasure in it. Just as I'm sure you took pleasure in torturing your fish and likely had a big smile on your face as you held up your successful catch. Yet Booth is immoral because he smiled for a photo after a successful hunt.

I've questioned where the moral line is. You are not a vegan nor a vegetarian, so I question where the moral line is for killing animals. Which is why I brought up cows and pointed out if you eat meat, something died. What makes Booth immoral, while you, another meat eater is moral? Yet you won't answer that.

I told you about my brothers trophies. How seeing the one in particular brings back a good memory. That's really the point of the trophy. It's a reminder of that successful hunt. Similar to a souvenir from a vacation. I've never been a fan of hanging a head on my wall myself, but I do get why it's done.


Booth is doing nothing legally or morally wrong. Of course he's happy he got his goat. Why wouldn't he be? He put in the work and was successful. He keeps trophies from his kills, as has been done in various cultures for thousands of years, and he eats the meat. So where's the moral dilemma? I don't see it.


You have chosen Booth's motive for yourself. Have you asked Booth about his motives? If not how can you claim to know what his motives are? I'll make some of my own guesses here. He's not new to hunting. He likely started out hunting using a rifle. He likely had several kills using a rifle. He wanted a greater challenge and took up bow hunting. He again wanted a greater challenge and started to hunt trophy quality game. I say his motive is the challenge. Hence hunting with bow and choosing more difficult game.

Bottom line: Trophy hunting is really nothing more than being selective in your kill.

Edited by Baggins, 17 October 2012 - 06:20 AM.

  • 3
Posted Image

#286 ice orca

ice orca

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,274 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 10

Posted 17 October 2012 - 06:39 AM

Haha i think booth likes to pwn CDC love him or hate him he gets people talking.
  • 0

#287 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,948 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 17 October 2012 - 08:54 AM

You don't believe that animals feel pain? You don't believe that it's immoral to cause a living thing pain for one's pleasure?


So you are immoral for causing a fish pain just to have the "pleasure" of having a look at it. Are you not also immoral for eating any form of meat by your standard? After all, an animal died for your dining "pleasure". Or is that moral because you didn't do the killing yourself?
  • 0
Posted Image

#288 mbal23

mbal23

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,665 posts
  • Joined: 02-May 11

Posted 17 October 2012 - 05:09 PM

You want me to explain to you the immorality of killing something for pleasure? It's kinda self-evident.

You don't believe that animals feel pain? You don't believe that it's immoral to cause a living thing pain for one's pleasure?

Again, these things are self-evident, which is why they aren't argued. Perhaps you haven't thought about it, but I'd ask you to.

It's not emotionalism....it's morality..something that all members of civilized society abide by, inherently, because moral differentiate between what's 'wrong' and what's 'right'.


And plants don't feel pain? If you took time and looked into it you would find that plants also have emotion and feel pain and can even sense when your going to cut it. Is that not worse since it can't even run and your attacking the poor immobile plant. How can you justify hurting something that unlike an animal can't even protect itself? You sicken me... That's like killing a crippled animal. Or do you think plants just cut and package them selves to go to the store. Morals are a cripple for society. They make people irrational and weak.
  • 0

#289 kurtis

kurtis

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,397 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 06

Posted 17 October 2012 - 05:27 PM

Nice kill.
  • 0
Posted Image

#290 TotesMagotes

TotesMagotes

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,273 posts
  • Joined: 29-November 07

Posted 17 October 2012 - 08:33 PM

I can't fathom how anyone can be a meat eater and at the same time criticize the moral ethics of hunting.

This should be an eating meat vs not eating meat argument if anything. If David Booth consumes what he kills i have no problem with it what so ever. In my opinion it's a much more pure way of eating meat, as we have seen with the latest beef recall, which is the biggest recall in Canadian history.

Slaughtering animals in a massive plant like XL as fast as they possibly can, they're just asking for a disaster. Animals being disembowelled and butchered for production in the same place....think about that for a second.

Now if David Booth was a poacher, then that's a whole other story.
  • 1
Posted Image

#291 sirwilliam

sirwilliam

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,002 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 06

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:30 PM

People eat meat because they like the taste? I'm pretty sure "Man" has eaten meat since "he" started walking upright... Just because it has been political incorrect these last 30 years with the"hippy crowd" doesnt make it any less of a viable option...


Yeah, absolutely we eat meat because we like the taste! Our ancestors didn't have an alternative, but today we have a wide variety of food to eat, and lots of options. We don't have to eat meat... in fact I'd say we're healthier not eating it at all, but that's just my 'hippy' opinion.

Actually, it's not even a recent thing. In India the Buddhist population has lived without meat since ancient times. We are omnivores.
  • 0
Posted Image

#292 nowhereman

nowhereman

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,032 posts
  • Joined: 09-October 06

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:03 AM

You want me to explain to you the immorality of killing something for pleasure? It's kinda self-evident.

You don't believe that animals feel pain? You don't believe that it's immoral to cause a living thing pain for one's pleasure?

I was unaware that David Booth was out in the natural world torturing goats like some blood-crazed Dhameresque madman.

I highly doubt Booth gets his kicks out of actually taking the life of another living creature and it's fairly presumptuous (as well as downright ignorant) to assume that he gets some sort pleasure out of causing another living thing pain.

Edited by nowhereman, 18 October 2012 - 12:05 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#293 Pistachios

Pistachios

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,863 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 12

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:04 AM

And plants don't feel pain? If you took time and looked into it you would find that plants also have emotion and feel pain and can even sense when your going to cut it. Is that not worse since it can't even run and your attacking the poor immobile plant. How can you justify hurting something that unlike an animal can't even protect itself? You sicken me... That's like killing a crippled animal. Or do you think plants just cut and package them selves to go to the store. Morals are a cripple for society. They make people irrational and weak.


I don't know where to begin with this. First, you don't have the facts right. Plants don't feel pain. At least not like we or most sentient non human animals do. They are not sentient beings i.e they lack the prerequisite neurophysiology (nociceptors and brain) and psychology (e.g. mental life) to experience anything. Second, if plants are subject to pain in a very general sense (whatever that is), then that pain is very different than the pain we or other non human animals experience. Thirdly, morality is important. It gives us reasons for caring. And it is rational to act ethically. If you see a drowning child, the reasonable thing to do is save them if you can. The weak thing to do is miss-characterize something you obviously have no clue about.
  • 0

G4fSut.gif


#294 Pistachios

Pistachios

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,863 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 12

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:15 AM

I'm pretty sure animals feel pain, sure. At least the ones relevant to this post, I guess it's debatable with say microscopic organisms and such. I just don't necessarily think something is self-evidently immoral if it causes another living thing pain. To be honest I'm just playing the devil's advocate, I doubt I'd take pleasure in hunting (I've never been besides fishing). The thing is, some people feel differently, and it's pretty hard to change their minds without a logical argument. I don't think it's my place to tell others that they can't do it, either.


Being lit on fire, and your screaming in pain is bad. We know this because all things being equal, we know how much we and others dislike being in agony. It makes your life intrinsically worse. That badness, and how it relates to your overall well being, always gives us a reason to alleviate it, if possible, and if no other overriding normative reasons exist.


I should correct you though--"it's morality..something that all members of civilized society abide by"--that is certainly wrong. A lot of people don't follow the rules.


Try being charitable (it's good reasoning). The statement implies an ought or obligation....morality consists of the norms all members of civilized society ought to abide by. Morality tells us how we ought to act.

Edited by SILLY GOOSE, 18 October 2012 - 01:16 AM.

  • 0

G4fSut.gif


#295 Pistachios

Pistachios

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,863 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 12

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:21 AM

If I recall correctly, I remember you posting how much you enjoyed bacon back in the "Bacon Shortage" thread. Remember bacon is not an essential food, it is not needed for survival, you eat it because it gives you pleasure.
So that would mean that you're okay with slaughtering a bunch of pigs (as long as somebody else kills them for you) so you can have the pleasure of eating bacon.
The amount of hypocrisy in some of your posts is astounding.


Perhaps you know what an ad hominen is. In principle, any meat eater could argue in many cases where animals are killed e.g. factory farming animals for food, hunting, rodeo deaths, etc and it wouldn't affect the argument. Validity and soundness do not depend on the speaker. Hypocritical? A bit, for sure. Especially if the speaker rationally believes the conclusions of the argument to be true. Even so, old habits die hard. Richard Dawkins has said a few times that he feels like the uncomfortable conformists with regard to slavery. They knew deep down it is wrong, but couldn't bring themselves to act otherwise. He feels the same way about many current practices involving animals. But we are not slaves to our nature. We have the ability to change what we do.

Edited by SILLY GOOSE, 18 October 2012 - 01:24 AM.

  • 0

G4fSut.gif


#296 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 02:37 AM

How about the fact that he is overpaid, under performing.

overpaid 3rd liner who has not reach his potential. As it seems he lacks the stuff between the ears to reach it.

guy seems to be a bit of a basket case. nothing to do with hunting. just doesn't seem to be playing with a full deck.

the fact that he has pissed off close to half the fans doesnt help him out either, guys on the bubble with me just for his crappy play, this just make me want to drive him to the airport myself.

Defend him or roast him, this board is divided. One thing we can all agree on is that we are canuck fans and this city wants a trophy and booth did little and does little to help us to get it.

Trade him.


I agree the Booth we have at the moment is not much good to us.
However he has some great qualities which if augmented with a better heads up attitude regarding passing and defence he could still be a winner.

Part of his problem is he is to rigid in the pattern of his game. He gets blocked off because of it and doesn't seem to realise that a well directed early pass would allow him more scope to got to the net. More difficult to put right is his seeming lack of awareness regarding his defensive duties. He is too easily passed by opposition late arrivals to the net as if his mind is somewhere else.

The way he plays at the moment, I would rather he was on the 3rd line or traded. If he improves the in the areas I have pinpointed I would like to see him with the Sedins.
  • 0
Kevin.jpg

#297 xereau

xereau

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,189 posts
  • Joined: 14-December 06

Posted 19 October 2012 - 12:34 AM

It seems that nearly all of society has turned into a gibbering collection of ne'er-do-well nanny state loving politically correct half literate computer junkies, each completely ignorant of human history, and each picking and choosing their own little green (anti-human?) cause to save the planet; when in reality it is, in my humble opinion, the spirit of humanity that is in dire needs of saving.

The nihilist hipster personality archetype has been imprinted on several generations now, and its effect could not be more clear -- a hateful, ruthless, narcissitic, and cruel attitude towards the entirety of the human species has crept into the forefront of society.

The belief that the planet, one which has survived hundreds of ice ages, comet impacts, and uncounted other catastrophes, is somehow going to 'die' due to the actions of a single species they themselves are a member of, is at its roots a faith based religion, and nothing more.

The fact of the matter is, there is overwhelming literature, dating back to King Charles II's Royal Society and carrying on right up to the present, of dire warnings of over population and doom and gloom just over the horizon, if we don't 'get rid of those dirty stinking extra humans'. This propaganda, and this is truly all it is, is used to desensitize humanity into accepting attrocity after attrocity, perpetrated by governments on other nations, and often on their own people, all in the name of saving mother earth.

Well, I ask you this -- how about we save humanity? How about people start caring about each other? How about people start respecting the actions and interests of other fellow humans? How about we get our heads around the fact that we are all bombarded daily with anti-human propaganda that is designed to lead us to a desired conclusion; that there are 'too many humans' and we need cull the population?

************************************************************************
Here is a fun fact for you to consider:

If you were to take every single human on earth,

and give each a quarter acre to live on,

that is one full acre per family of four,

and placed them ALL in Alberta Canada,

Alberta would only be 2/3rd's full,

and the rest of the planet would be completely empty of humanity.

************************************************************************

Think about that for a moment, would you?

Now, do you believe the planet is over populated?

Or is it perhaps that you live in a crowded city, packed in like sardines (by design might I add), and given an ILLUSION that there are people everywhere, and that because it is all you can see, in all directions, that this is what the rest of the world must be like?

You have been conned.

You have been deceived.

All in order to desensitize you into accepting mass murder as a possible means of population control. Do YOU want to be first in line for the mass culling? How about your family? No? Who then. You can not have it both ways. Who is it then? The infirmed? The elderly? Nameless faceless people from other continents?

Humanity is in need of a defibrillator.

People need to start caring about others instead of telling them how to live their lives.

=/
  • 1


"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man:
brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds however,the

timid join him; for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."

Mark Twain


#298 NP-4815162342

NP-4815162342

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 488 posts
  • Joined: 20-April 12

Posted 19 October 2012 - 02:13 AM

He's allowed to hunt if he wants, stop crying about
  • 0

#299 debluvscanucks

debluvscanucks

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,650 posts
  • Joined: 19-February 08

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:38 AM

I was unaware that David Booth was out in the natural world torturing goats like some blood-crazed Dhameresque madman.

I highly doubt Booth gets his kicks out of actually taking the life of another living creature and it's fairly presumptuous (as well as downright ignorant) to assume that he gets some sort pleasure out of causing another living thing pain.


Then why the need for pictures? Posing over the dead carcass with a smile from ear to ear? It would seem that there is some pleasure derived from the kill, as anything less would mean simply killing then cleaning/eating the animal. So it's not really ignorant in making this observation - that most who don't "get kicks" out of it also don't celebrate with the need to publish the event. That's the part, for me, that says it is about ego as much as anything.

xereau: you do realize you've gone on a tangent wherein you've used derogatory labels to address society (everyone) then asked us to care about others? You've also, basically, outlined how we should live our lives then asked us not to do the same?

In letting people go about their business they invite us in to comment when they broadcast what they are doing...if they were quietly going about their business, I'd tend to agree more with you. While I do agree with the overall message of your post, caring about all living creatures can likely best lead us down that path. If we're desensitized to a dead animal that some enjoy the beauty and magnificence of, then perhaps we need to start there, in addressing that first? Of course, we do kill animals for food but the underlying need that some have to prove their point with it is what irks some and has us comment.

I may have missed your point (will re-read your post when I have more time to digest it), but that's what jumped out at me.
  • 0

Posted Image


#300 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:42 AM

Then why the need for pictures? Posing over the dead carcass with a smile from ear to ear?


To me he is just sharing with his followers the lifestyle he enjoys.
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.