I hit a stork once. It was maybe the worst shot in the history of golf, we're talkin Van de Velde awful. 40 yards left never rising more than 15 feet. Caught the poor fella on his foot while perched on a cypress stump in a pond. I felt AWFUL. I can't imagine the mindset of someone intentionally trying to hurt a bird with a golf shot. And at five bucks a pop for a ProV, this must have been a fairly expensive hunting trip. A fine is worthless as punishment. This muppet will lose $1,500 on the first hole of Wednesday's practice/gambling round at the next event. You have to take what is valuable to him for punishment to make a difference. I suspect with Isenhour that is time; time from his circuit rounds, time away from his family. How about making him shag balls at a public driving range sans armored scooper-cart? Put a helmet on 'em and sell buckets-o-balls donating the profits to some wetland conservation until the fine is raised. Ready. Aim.......
Well, now I've heard it all! Anyone who thinks that this is just the killing of "some bird" and it's no big deal, is wrong. It is one thing to hit a bird by accident, but too repeatedly hit, drive, golf balls, one after another at this Harmless, beautiful, bird is just plain WRONG PEOPLE!!!! We, who enjoy the beauty of the complete golf course, all birds and sounds included, find this Wrong. I am purposely refraining from saying what I truly feel and want to write about this @#$hole. If the PGA has any balls at all, they will pull this idiot's card and disqualify him for the rest of this year. This is really sending the, "wrong message" in a world of so many, so called, caring people if the PGA does nothing, or just fines him. I believe all living things deserve to LIVE on this planet! Shame on you, John Henry Isan@#$hole, or Tripp. AND WHO would really want to watch this guy on video anyway. What a LOSER!!!!
Couple points: 1) I've hit people on the golf course and the only uproar caused was laughter. I've also been hit and man, it's not that funny. 2) In all honesty - I have a problem with hitting a hawk, but not a seagull. If that makes me a hypocrite, so be it. Hawks are way cool. I suppose what I'm getting at is there is a sliding scale of cruelty. Therefore it's not quite like Michael Vick from a cruelty perspective. 3) Again in all honesty - I'm sure he didn't intend to kill the hawk, but I'm sure he intended to hit it. It's just one of those spur-of-the-moment opportunities. Bunch of lads together having some drinks and these occurrences can happen. Fess up, apologize and pay the piper - there isn't any other recourse, nor is there much of a defense for acting like a jerk. 4) It's secretly an impressive feat. 5) I would suggest it's criminally immature behaviour. 6) His parents should pay a fine for naming him Tripp. What kind of an asshole name is that? "Tripp - yes, that's with two 'p's so y'all don't confuse it with the actual event." I can't stand these sort of fuckwit pseudo-creative uses of the English language. Sorry - peeve alert. I don't think the PGA should do anything. Let's not totally loose our cool, here. If the PGA decides to suspend him for a tourney or two as punishment for having their association mentioned in the same article as the words "hawk killer" then so be it. But let's maintain a little sanity.
4) It's secretly an impressive feat. "Mein Gott, Josef, twenty million! I only killed sechs and I had to leave my own country to do it!"
Not to quibble, but he calls himself Tripp. His given name is John Henry Isenhour III. Not that that's a lot better. And I've heard that nickname on other people before.
This jamoke probably didn't have any intention of hitting or killing the red-shouldered hawk. My guess is that his ego couldn't let sanity prevail over his actions. He was the main subject in the filming of a television show. He probably felt he needed to prove his worth for the show by purposely trying to hit the hawk after he failed miserably in his first attempt (just a hunch, not based on fact). The guy is a fucking idiot. There were cameras and witnesses to his now regrettable actions. Isenhour has committed a crime. I think the PGA has an obligation to investigate this matter further and take action in order to demonstrate they don't support this behavior on a golf course. He should have to stand atop the shag cart at the local driving range while wearing wings and a beak for his punishment.
While I deplore the unnecessary death of any living creature, I too can't equate this action with Michael Vick's. I think a fine, a little probation, and some length of suspension would be commensurate to the crime. I don't believe that he had thoroughly thought out all the ramifications of the results if he did get lucky enough to hit it. It was a stupid choice, and let's remember that everyone of us has made a stupid choice or two during our lifetimes. Besides, rcade was absolutely right- this incident will be an albatross around this guy's neck for the rest of his life, and will have much more effect than increased punishment. I did think hard about posting this story. I have played a lot of golf and though I have hit trees, carts, houses and other assorted obstacles, to the best of my knowledge I have never hit a bird or animal. I was intrigued that anyone, even a professional, could have this kind of control. Its one thing to be abble to hit a relatively large object like a putting green from a couple of hundred yeards, but its quite another story to hit such a small target at that altitude and angle. I was also intrigued that any professional athlete would be stupid enough to engage in this activity given the recent events with Vick. All the more so since the crowd of technicians and tv people did little or nothing to intervene. I think that there was more than one person present who didn't see birds in the same light as dogs. I'm disgusted that after having said nothing during the event, the observers are now attempting to distance themselves from the growing firestorm, and trashing Tripp in the process. I also considered the possibility of getting the PETA drive by hits like fireguy13 who will register long enough to post their propaganda before moving on to the next animal related post. So, my apologies in advance to the dedicated spofi community and the moderators if this thread gets out of hand.
wait wait wait. so since he was brought up on the same chage as Vick he is the same.. WOW Before i have my little rant, what this guy did was way wrong. i would never be for the killing of balh blah blah but to compare the two because the charge is the same. thats nuts. Rape: I could be 18 with a 17 year old girlfriend and if we have sex, that could be a rape charge. is that the same as drugging someone tying them up and raping them. ITS THE SAME CHARGE. Born Icon is that the same?
irunfromclones: So, my apologies in advance to the dedicated spofi community and the moderators if this thread gets out of hand. Debo270: Rape: I could be 18 with a 17 year old girlfriend and if we have sex, that could be a rape charge. is that the same as drugging someone tying them up and raping them. ITS THE SAME CHARGE. Born Icon is that the same? No apology needed.
He calls himself an "animal lover" who owns three cats. Apropos of pretty much nothing, down here cats kill more native birds than all golfers in the world combined. Sorry - now back to your regular programming.
To equate this with what Vick did is crazy talk. Vick's case involved the deliberate, systematic, on-going torture of multiple animals. It also involved interstate transport of the animals, and illegal wagering on the fighting of the animals. This case involves a guy hitting a few golf balls at a bird. No discussion on the relative value of the animals is needed. Also, Vick acted like he had done nothing wrong, Isenhour was immediately remorseful. Rape: I could be 18 with a 17 year old girlfriend and if we have sex, that could be a rape charge. is that the same as drugging someone tying them up and raping them. ITS THE SAME CHARGE. Born Icon is that the same? First, the consensual act you describe would be charged as Statutory Rape, but not at the ages you list...no state in the US would charge an 18 year old for having sex with a 17 year old. But, thanks for working sex into this thread!
"He calls himself an "animal lover" who owns three cats." Perhaps he was out hunting for his cats' dinner?
As I said before, the guy's an asshole but he isn't Vick. Fine him, give him a butt load of community service along the lines of having to clean out an aviary at a local zoo. The PGA should stay out of this. I've eaten red-shouldered hawk....it tastes like a cross between bald eagle and whooping crane.
While this is loathsome, it's certainly not in the same category as Vick, though it does warrant punishment. I'd be willing to bet he's only remorseful because he's now facing charges.
If he was that good, he would see me every weekend on the course. But give me a break hitting a bird from 70yds, it was an accident. I'm not saying he wasn't trying to hit the bird, but actually hitting the bird was an accident.
So you freaks think if you kill an animal with a car you should be punished? Or is that an accident? Either way the animal is still DEAD.
I'm not saying he wasn't trying to hit the bird, but actually hitting the bird was an accident. Logic = fail.
So you freaks think if you kill an animal with a car you should be punished? Or is that an accident? Either way the animal is still DEAD. I want you as my defense attorney if I ever kill anyone. Just don't call the jury "freaks" and we'll do fine.
Phosphoric acid is right on. (see several posts back) It's an intentional accident ;*) Maybe if you hit a couple buckets of balls you get one hit with a short iron. Intentionally driving a ball hard enough to kill the poor beast the size of a moving bread box at 75 yards is......well, it's an incredible and unfortunate shot but true. It aint like he pulled a .22-250 out of his bag and pounded the poor bastard. Now that would get even me going. He got stupid. I forgive.
I think if you intentionally kill an animal with a car you should be punished. Or if you intentionally kill an animal with a golf shot. *freak*
He drove at it with his golf cart. Either it didn't move or it came back to the general area. It was being noisy. Let's see...... making a lot of noise and not wanting to move from its location. Sounds like it was trying to mate, and Tripp was in his/her territory. Do hawks mate in Florida in December. I can't believe you people are calling it an accident. He accomplished what he was trying to do. That is no accident. The results are not what he wanted, but it was no accident. And to the Seagull hater, man what an irritatating species of bird. Almost as bad as chickens(see Juan Marichal, Pedro Martinez thread), but they are protected scavengers, and help to keep our beaches clean. And they taste like chicken!!!!
The Smoking Gun has the police report.
I once hit a member of the greenskeeping staff with a golf shot. The hole was a 135 yard par 3. The greenskeeper was operating the sprinkler controls to the left of the green. He acknowledged me on the tee. I struck a crisp, high, but left 8 iron that headed directly toward him. I yelled the appropriate "fore", but he could not follow the flight of the ball. It struck him dead center in the chest and he hit the ground like a sack of potatoes. It knocked the wind out of him and he was genuinely stunned for several minutes. After just five minutes it was already forming a very large, mean purple bruise on his chest. Even a relatively short shot like mine, by comparison, can really cause damage. Golf balls are hard. As close as spectators are to tee boxes at pro golf events, it's amazing that more aren't severely hurt. Based on the reaction of the fellow I hit, can you imagine someone thirty yards off the tee being beaned by an errant drive? It's not a laughing matter.
#1-EVERYTHING is a laughing matter. As long as it doesn't happen to me. #2-Hawk tastes like chicken. Really. So does spotted owl and bald eagle. #3-When Tripp says that he is an animal lover, it's not how you think. He wants to have sex with them. #4-Nice job TV crew. Remind me to not go into battle with a bunch of spineless twits like yourselves. #5-Golf balls is hard.
Even a relatively short shot like mine, by comparison, can really cause damage. Golf balls are hard. As close as spectators are to tee boxes at pro golf events, it's amazing that more aren't severely hurt. Based on the reaction of the fellow I hit, can you imagine someone thirty yards off the tee being beaned by an errant drive? You mean like this? This is an accident.
I think this one is more appropriate when talking about how good pros are with their accuracy and distance control.
Wow, we have some idiotic responses to an idiotic story about, well, an idiot. That said, I always thought hawk was a little stringier. You know, like duck.
Rape: I could be 18 with a 17 year old girlfriend and if we have sex, that could be a rape charge. is that the same as drugging someone tying them up and raping them. ITS THE SAME CHARGE. Born Icon is that the same? Please stop! Is it too far-fetched to compare two individuals that have been charged with cruelty to animal? Maybe, maybe not. Ok, Vick was a complete asshole to do what he did but so was this guy. He took matters into his own hands when this hawk would not fly away. He felt that hitting golf balls towards it would scare it away but he was wrong. The hawk only moved closer and Tripp felt this would prove to be a better opportunity to once again hit golf balls at this bird. I only compared the two because they both proved to be asshats in the end and for people to just brush it off as if to say, "Eh, it's just a bird" is wrong. That's almost saying that Vick thought the very same thing, "Eh, it's just a dog" but we all know what he got out of it, now don't we? I'm the last person to ever try to preach to someone but does it seem as if we are all becoming desensitized to these sort of things? Killing animals, no matter how big or how small of a creature is just wrong and if caught committing these acts, that person should be held accountable.
does it seem as if we are all becoming desensitized to these sort of things? I'm gererally the last one also who will look for reasons and excuses for certain attitudes and behaviors, but the desensitization you speak of, in my mind, is due in large part to media, movies, video games, and other forms of popular culture. Killing is an accepted part of so much TV, and popular movies are often ridiculous. I don't play video games, but what I saw some kids playing recently just floored me. It was killing and destroying people, animals, whatever, just for the heck of it. Parents shouldn't allow it, obviously, but most probably don't even know what's going on! There's a lack of accountability on the creators and producers of this crap, and when pressed on the issue they try to spew some canned response about their values actually being in the right place. Bullshit. It's money-driven and nothing else. People, especially more and more generations of young people, can't spend a significant amount of time being inundated with killing of all sorts and then be expected to show any compassion for, in this case, a bird. It's sad and will probably only get worse.
Ok, as a video game enthusiast, I can see where your going with this but I can't blame the video gaming culture as the sole reason behind this desensitization issue unless you're talking about Duck Hunt from the original Nintendo as to what set off Tripp. Your right on about these games being "money-driven" but in this day & age, what isn't? What bothers me is that people are quick to blame movies, television, video games and/or music as being the reason why they decided amongst themselves to become a menace to society instead of just taking responsibilty for their actions. I love playing Grand Theft Auto and cannot wait until GTA IV comes out but that doesn't mean that I'll carjack another vehicle 'just because' or go out of my way to beat up a pedestrain walking across the street. People, IMO, should just take responsibilty for what they do in life and stop making excuses after the fact.
I was actually of the opinion that, for the most part, people's treatment of animals, particularly those that are endangered, was better than in the past. This moronic incident notwithstanding. It would be interesting to see some sort of facts that would back up the position that humanity as a whole is becoming more cruel in regards to the treatment of lesser species. I don't claim to be a naturalist or anything, but where I live, you see more bald eagles, osprey, deer, moose, cougar etc. than when I was younger. In part, my thoughts would be that this is due to heightened awareness of animals whose populations are threatened, and the stiffer penalties that are normally incurred when someone kills or harms them. Increased media attention makes us all more aware when someone like Tripp or Vick do such a horrible and cruel thing, but I don't necessarily buy into the notion that there is some great desensitizing going on with society. If anything, I think people are softer than ever.
I don't play video games, but what I saw some kids playing recently just floored me. It was killing and destroying people, animals, whatever, just for the heck of it Of course, all the studies of this issue have shown 0 correlation and some studies suggest the stress relief has a calming effect, but carry on. Remember that awful era of kids jacked up on funny books running riot? Me either, but that didn't stop the media and politicians from acting. There have been a zillion things that were going to turn kids evil (rock and/or roll, jazz, etc.); so far none of them have, but it's an easier explanation than accepting people have the capacity for evil in them.
So, enjoy THIS type of killing, for entertainments sake, but make sure you're appalled with this type. I guess we just have to follow the throngs of media to the next tragedy, because they'll let us know what type of killing should negatively impact us. As for the studies you refer to, please. I work with kids and families who fit this profile, and I wish they'd be included in some of these studies. Calming effect? Maybe I'll suggest these kids play these games next time they're acting up. So play this game, kill everything that is in your path, but make sure you give a shit about any endangered species that's senselessly killed. Carry on.
dyams, you do understand that the only things getting "killed" in a video game are pixels? I'll bet Tripp hadn't even played Halo before he went on his spree on the golf course. It was probably all that manga he reads.
You completely missed the point, dyams. There's a big difference between watching Rambo on the big screen and acting like you're Rambo in the real world by blowing someone's head off. Just because I like to play games that may have violence in them doesn't mean that I'm not aware of the violence in the world and am oblivious to it. I may not be a tree hugger (no offese to you tree huggers out there) but I love life as much as I love to be entertained. Real world violence is just not entertaining to me though.
We were talking about the DESENSITIZATION of individuals to the killing of various forms of life, not about kids (and others) becoming killers themselves. You're the one who brought up that idea, BornIcon. I try to agree with your point, and you say I'm missing the point. You tell me your theory on desensitization regarding these issues, then. As for the pixels stuff, THX, I understand this just fine. You may want to go around and ask the 6 and 7 year olds who play these games their views on it.
Tripp Isenhour did a stupid thing, then realized it and obviously, regretted it. The story seemed to say that everyone was having a big ol' hoot of a time until the bird was hit. This was stupidity, not desensitization.
Why do I have to ask the kids about the video games they play? Wouldn't it make more sense to ask THE PARENTS why they let their kids play a video game that is clearly labeled MA for mature? Again, the real issue is to whom responsibility should be assigned. This has zero to do with the above article. Video games, X-Men comics, or Coltrane had nothing to do with Tripp being an ass.
This has zero to do with the above article. Video games, X-Men comics, or Coltrane had nothing to do with Tripp being an ass. We're talking about something a bit more complex now, THX, so if it's too strenuous for you, move on to something else. I'm not talking about "Tripp the Ass" anymore. BornIcon made the comment, I'm the last person to ever try to preach to someone but does it seem as if we are all becoming desensitized to these sort of things? I'm offering potential reasons why individuals are becoming more desensitized to the killing of things, that's all. You're struggling with that. And I already mentioned the idea many PARENTS don't know which games their kids are buying, and don't watch them when they're on their computers. That's just the way it is.
dyams, I'm not in disagreement with your opinions on desensitization, I am in disagreement with your opinion that someone that plays violent video games cannot be appalled by actual violence in the world. Maybe I misread what you wrote but the way you posted it, to me meant that you think that people that play these games are desensitived to real world violence and that's what I was disagreeing with.
Is there a reason that you are being insultive, dyams? Perhaps if reasonable discourse is impossible for you to participate in without resorting to talking down to me, you should move on to something else. Allow me to clarify my position on the subject: People aren't becoming more desensitized to violence any more now than in years past. If you can offer any real, tangible proof to the contrary, I would welcome it. And try to be less condescending, as you will find that your arguments will better bear weight.
Please guys, can we just have positive dialog without it becoming a war of words. This, to me is actually interesting to see how someone views the video game community. I know that it's off topic but the point of desensitization is clearly relavant in this subject.
THX, the tone of my comments had to do with you saying, "This has zero to do with the above article." BornIcon brought up an idea, and I followed up on it with my opinions. Would you prefer several dozen more "Tripp is an Ass" or "He's just like Vick" or maybe the comparison to rape comments? I get annoyed when someone tries to mandate how a conversation needs to transpire. People's emotions regarding this issue, and why they feel the way they is a much deeper subject than some second-rate golfer hitting a bucket of balls at a bird. I apologize.
And........scene. I'm not needed in this discussion. Have fun, ya'll!
Soooo......apology accepted, I guess.
People's emotions regarding this issue, and why they feel the way they is a much deeper subject than some second-rate golfer hitting a bucket of balls at a bird. I apologize. That's some apology. I'm lost as to how you sticking your fingers in your ears and declaiming people are being desensitized is a higher level of discourse than what came before in the thread. Suggesting that THX ought to talk to 6 and 7 year olds probably just came across the wrong way, but it did sound like a belittling of his opinion.
I've played more than my fair share of videogames. I've blown up, shot up, chopped up, and smashed all sorts of shit. That said, it has in no way desensitized me to violence and mayhem than had I not played the game. I fully understand the reprecussions that come from enacting what goes on in videogames in real life. Like it was stated above, there are several studies that show little to no correlation between videogame violence and real life violence. There may be examples of kids who were fucked up and videogames got blamed for their problems, but they are in no way the norm.
I think the whole discussion does kind of come full circle, though. It seems clear that Isenhour didn't mean to hurt or kill the bird...which may seem paradoxical when, clearly, he did mean to hit those golf balls, and clearly, he knew that being hit with a golf ball can cause injury. But slapstick is a lot older than modern-day videogames -- it goes all the way back to Punch and Judy shows, if not before, and so I think you can make the argument that humanity has a long history of portraying violence in an unrealistic way, where the consequences are laughs all around. Those who claim that modern-day kids (or adults) are desensitized to violence, when they refer to people living in industrialized countries who do not encounter violence in their daily lives, are using the wrong word, I think. You cannot become desensitized to something that you never truly experience, after all -- but you can become detached from it, and fail to really understand it.
Which is why I can't prevent the SNL "Nerf Crotch Bat" skit from rolling in an endless loop in my head. (and from the makers of Crotch Bat - new Nerf "Nerf"! - not for use with crotch.)
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.
Well, there's clearly tons of good points still to be made in this thread, isn't there.
it goes all the way back to Punch and Judy shows, if not before Violence as entertainment goes back to the Romans. Gladiator, anyone? So, I guess we should send ol' Tripp to the coliseum. Anybody got any lions?
You want to know what really desensitizes you to violence and death? The military. And they're on TV every night, dyams. They're in video games, too. And movies, and newspapers, and magazines, and on the interwebs! My God man, they're everywhere, aren't they?
I'm lost as to how you sticking your fingers in your ears and declaiming people are being desensitized is a higher level of discourse than what came before in the thread. Again, another member brought up the idea of people being desensitized. I gave my opinion on what he brought up and never even claimed what I was talking about had to do with video games, movies, etc. turning people into killers, only that it impacts how they feel when they hear about someone else either killing someone or something, or someone being killed. Big difference. That's some apology. I wasn't apologizing for my opinions. I was only apologizing because I did get a little pissy because someone came up with the "This has nothing to do with the story" line again. That bothers me. In my estimation, that person is acting as the judge of how the discussion should go, and if it relates to the story or not. Another person said, "Lets move the fuck on and talk about sports." Those comments bother me. As for the military, people have become desensitized to that, too. When the conflicts in Iraq, etc. began, all casuaties were viewed as horrendous. As time went on, and the death tolls mounted into the thousands, people seemed to get accustomed to it.
I'm getting desensitised to this thread.
Luckily for you there are many others to choose from.
so, on the course today...a couple of migrating ducks (my assumption, they could certainly be locals) waddle onto the green of a par 3. My fellow players and I debated for all of three seconds before we hit away. Does the fact that we were actually playing the game as opposed to hitting at a bird in a tree change anything? We still deliberately hit at a bird. We felt justified. One, the odds of us hitting the green were low, hitting a duck on the green even lower. Two, people eat duck all the time. For what it's worth...apologies never should be accompanied by a qualifying statement.
What has impressed me least about this thread has been the distinct lack of birdie/eagle-based humour. dviking - it all depends on whether or not the ducks invited you to play through.
dviking, them hawks is mighty tasty.
