Dont buy swarovski if you love animals

[Hedge Witch]

I can't stop looking at this thread either.

Just goes to show what a controversial (the nicest word for it I could come up with) species we really are

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by Jason Green

It wasn't my opinion or my thoughts, more a response to you saying that it's hypocritical of him/her owning something that can kill. We don't know anything about the 'weapon' whatsoever, yet there you were saying s/he was a hypocrite.

that's not entirely so jason - we know that it is a firearm (or perhaps an airweapon) because squeek said so

whether his weapon itself is capable of killing an animal is irrelevant - because virtually without exception all the companies who make low powered air guns or rifles also make high powered airguns or rifles that can be used for hunting.

this is also true of those who make the amunition, and the sighting systems (whether telephoto , red dot or dioptre)

thus he is recomending that people not buy from swarvoski because they make items that can be used for hunting , but at the same time continuing to do buisness with a company who make guns/amunition which can be used in hunting - that is what seems a little hypocritical

[Hedge Witch]

This thread is a wind-up, right?

[pressld2]

Originally Posted by Hedge Witch

This thread is a wind-up, right?

I strongly suspect so, Hedgie, from the thread title onwards...

Dave P.

[Hedge Witch]

Oh praise the Lord!

Thanks Dave, I was starting to find it quite disturbing

[tcvarlh]

It does make the theory of a 'co-operative' gene look a little silly, most folks are contentious and self-opinionated, which in nature is a very smart survival trait I feel.
I see the OP poster’s meaning, but by the same initial logic, please, all of you with anything Japanese should sling it into the garbage, after all the Japanese hunt and kill more whales than any other nation and whale meat is a favourite foodstuff in Nippon. Cars, bikes, electro’s : Nintendo's, TV’s, mp3's, the list is endless.
I have always been an admirer of those souls of Green Peace, saving the planet, doing a bit for the environment by tearing across the oceans and seas of this world in a diesel powered ship, the exhaust of which poisons the water in which the whale’s food lives and breeds. How much diesel does it take to save one whale? We have to make the calculation. By the same fact, the production of one pair of binoculars that allow a Twitcher to spot and record some transient rara avis, also allows the Gamekeeper a clean shot at the stag he hunts and an instant death to said stag.
Whether we like it or not all things tie to each other.
The OP was made I think as a reaction to knowledge that shocked. Later posts became a little vitriolic. Two minutes of thought would have calmed both. Youth is allowed to err, how else would it become older and wiser. But youth must also think before decrying and declaiming against that of which it knows naught.
An aside:
I say I love animals but I have often thought I was lying to myself. What I really love is the sensation observing an animal produces. Maybe I should say I have sympathy and empathy for the creature, perhaps even kindness towards it. The beast that makes me shudder with disgust or horror, or wrinkle my nose at its smell or outlook is also an animal. When my animal is sick and in pain I have it euthanized, ‘to put it out of misery’, when my relative is in the same boat I make sure the relative is pumped full of drugs and given the best treatment I can provide. I love my relative. But in truth I love my selfish desire for the continued existence of that relative more. And I say I love animals! Do I? Love is the incorrect word and very sloppy thinking.
H

Originally Posted by Hedge Witch

I can't stop looking at this thread either.

Just goes to show what a controversial (the nicest word for it I could come up with) species we really are

[Dan Salter]

Hey people, dont buy or even yearn for a Porsche as they once made tractors that could have been used to feed animals to fatten them up for eating? or maybe used to plough up un-improved grassland.......or am i just being UTTERLY RIDICULOUS too?

And to be honest not everyone views swarovski around the same way as you....personally i would be happier to see a thread that said:

'People...dont buy any swarovski optical equipment, bins, scopes, sights etc because i have just found out they also make those utterly awful and naff crystal puppies and stuff that your nana has in her cabinet'...i rest my case.

Swarovski to me = optics! not the other way round....i try and forget the other side to the company. They are responsible for ruining many a good front room or tasteful interior just as much as, quickly, humanely and accurately killing a few animals for feeding families.

[tcvarlh]

Just to put Swarovski into perspective, in 2005 they completed and opened the WWF Haringsee (Lake Haring) raptor station. They have on-going projects too. Working with the RSPB and Lapwings, a Ramsar site and World Heritage Site, - Keoladeo National Park, - the Colorful Puffleg Project/Colombia, - built an Observatory on the Ebro delta/Spain, - helping with the Houbara Bustard project/Fuerteventura, - the Stork project/WWF Austria, - the breeding lake Srebarna/Bulgaria, - the 300 hectare island Karsiborska Kepa/Poland. One that is of particular interest to me as I help release 8 of these magnificent birds Bearded Vulture/Alps Hohen Tauern Austria, extinct in Austria since 1980, - the Black Rhinoceros/Namibia survival project, - the "Migratory Bird Conservancy" USA, - the Hornbill project in Thailand, - the EAGLE 72 in Sweden.
Apart from the silly crystals they also employ 23,000 folks in their Tirolit Werke making flooring stones, building stone etc.
They also pay fees for every photo taken by people and sent to them when used in any publication which is more than can be said of many competitions.
Yes, they are expensive admittedly, but yer pays yer money and takes yer choice. Swarovski are NOT the only Optical company to make weapon sights. Most do! But not many of these plough profits back into wildlife!
H
PS. Swarovski also helped 30 non-austrian Schoolkids who had been robbed of tickets, money, clothes, their bus had been taken by two Serbian morons and crash-driven into Germany. They, from Company money paid for and equipped these kids for the rest of the holiday. Provided them with the transport needed, and interpreter (me) for the duration of their stay. I had met the 'Geschaftsleiter' in a bar after finishing teaching a course, and he, noticing I was English, told me the problem and asked if I would help. If the company had not been so responsive those kids would have lost their holiday and had to travel back home, as it was a wonderful time was had by ALL.
H

[squishy]

Originally Posted by pressld2

I strongly suspect so, Hedgie, from the thread title onwards...

Dave P.

oh thank god...

if we had nothing to do with anyone who has ever made anything that is used to hurt animals/people, we would be living in caves.

shame eeyore stepped out, his posts were very good (though i hardly blame him, i don't think i'll be revisiting this thread)

[hank]

In the original post, Squeek explained his position. I didn’t particularly agree with the logic of it, but it also described the feelings of a compassionate person who cares about wildlife.
Jason’s post #11 summed it up.
But in good old WAB fashion, everyone and his dog is now queuing up to slate and discredit Squeek.
This thread has run its course. Now let’s go and pick on someone else.