RE: Poaching is WRONG!!
Ok, I guess I' m in the minority here concerning the justification of poaching in regards to the specific circumstances surrounding the act. I would testify against a ruthless poacher, but would probably condone the act if it was done for true survival. That' s my stance, so shoot me if you cannot accept it.
Speaking of shooting me, is it wrong to kill a human? Not to downplay the importance of wildlife, but game of any kind are just animals. I may beg to differ at times, but it is said that humans are the " supreme" beings. So, in theory, a human' s life is worth much more than a simple animal' s life.
If a person feels that it is wrong to poach, with absolutley NO tolerance, I would say it' s safe to assume that the person also feels the same way about taking human life. There should be absolutely no tolerance when taking a human life. Nevermind all that self-defense garbage. If a man is about to kill you, then you should kiss your butt goodbye? Why stoop to his level and become a killer. After all, there should be no tolerance when taking a human life, no matter what the circumstance. I for one would have no problem killing a man if he intended to kill me. It' s called survival.
Why is it that there are so many different classifications when it comes to killing a person? You have first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, justifiable homicide (I think), and there' s always the good-ole insanity plea. Why have so many classes? It' s wrong to kill a human, regardless of the circumstances. No tolerance. Right?
Or could it be that the circumstances of an act alter whether it' s right or wrong?