"Face the animal on its own terms..."

Sad case being talked about of an American dentist who killed a famed lion for sport.

Given some of the explicit and implied reactions on social media, it does make me feel the necessity of ensuring that folks out there realize that not all gun owners are hunters nor would we all support such an act.  I personally find this act appalling and unnecessary.  I am not a hunter.  I tend more in favor of a quote from the movie Beastmaster:

"Face the animal on its own terms and you will find you are not so very strong."

I am sure there are those who cannot cognitively parse these ideas - that is, that a pro-gun, pro-self-defense person might be largely anti-hunter.  It is really not that complicated and any confusion is ample evidence that they simply do not understand the issues involved for those, like me, who a staunch supporters of the right to self-defense.

1.  First, in general, hunting is no longer needed for subsistence.  That is not to say that some hunters do not hunt for food as opposed to hunting solely to kill and, in some instances, it seems logical that hunting serves a purpose by controlling animal populations.  I cannot claim expertise in such matters, but I am not a hunter.

2. However, in the case of this dentist, this was hunting to kill, ego hunting, trophy hunting of an animal that was not a threat to life, limb, or the eco-system.  This animal had to be lured away from safety to be killed for this person's gratification.

3. Perhaps the most difficult part of this for some people to understand is that, as a 2A supporter, my motivation is specifically to "Face the animal on its own terms".  The animal I am referring to is the human predator who, like this hunter, will take every unfair advantage to ensure that the disparity of force tips in his favor. So, from my perspective, the 2A is about meeting force with equal force, which is completely compatible with existing self-defense law; deadly force is used only in the face of deadly force.

4.  In the end, this "too-wealthy-and-stupid-for-his-own-good" dentist was not a representative of hunters and certainly not gun owners in general.  He was actually much more like the active shooters in Louisiana or Colorado, in that he went looking for a victim, capitalized on a situation where his prey was defenseless, and was able to create an environment where he had overwhelming superiority of force, to commit a heinous and barbaric act.

One can only imagine how this story would be presented differently had he been forced to "meet the animal on its own terms" just as each of us who go armed for self-protection would hope to do in a darkened theater or school hallway. I imagine the reaction would have been one of horror that he was killed by this vicious animal, sad interviews with his spouse and children, friends and colleagues, much like gun control enthusiasts react when a law-abiding person successfully defends herself against such predators - proclaiming loudly how unfair it is to the predator.