Crocodile Hunter Dies
09.03.06I can’t believe this. Steve Irwin died. And by a stingray no less! That is a cryin shame. After watching him handle them gators the way he did… I figured thats how he’d get off this rock. But it was a blasted sting ray! That is a travesty. Crikey is right.
Update » Steve Irwin was completly anti-hunting, anti-fishing, and a anti-gunner. But in the end, he was shot by natures bullet. a stringray barb.
You know, that was a cryin’ shame for such a passionate bloke to carke-it in such a manner, I feel sadness at his passing and a great deal of compassion for his Wife, children and Father BUT it must be said someone who was so reckless in their disregard to the danger that wild animals possess was lucky to last as long as he did. It serves as a sober lesson on the perils of voyeuristic wildlife TV to which he ultimately was the master and martyr.
Let it also be noted he was viciously anti-hunting and anti-sport-fishing; also although a liberal conservative vehemently anti-gun too.
# September 5th, 2006 at 2:19 amgood guy, dastardly luck. he will be missed. I feel for his wife and kids. as stevil pointed out though, given his lifestyle, it was bound to happen.
# September 5th, 2006 at 6:09 amI never knew he was an anti-gunner. thats too bad as well.
# September 5th, 2006 at 9:07 amOch, he was anti-gun because he was anti over-hunting. I think we can all agree that shooting other animals into exstinction isn’t a nice thing to do.
# September 5th, 2006 at 7:55 pmThere is a massive differance between trophy hunting near-extinct animals and hunting/harvesting a sustainable natural resource beyond it’s carrying capacity.
# September 5th, 2006 at 9:05 pmIt seemed he was either unable or unwilling to make a differentiation between the two.
# September 5th, 2006 at 9:06 pmI love how Simon feels the need to justify a position he agrees with by inserting words and assumptions that were never said or suggested.
Steve Irwin was animal rights. He wasn’t anti-over hunting. WTF is that? Did you just make that up? Either you’re pro or anti. Pro meaning that you are a conservationist in everyway. Not a poacher. There’s a huge difference between a hunter and a poacher.
Everyone I know who has ever hunted, or does hunt has never been “Lets blow em up till there gone!!”
Only a non-hunting ignoramous would assume so. If it wasn’t for hunters, there woulden’t be much conservation. They are the biggest conservationists I know. More so than any loud mouth politician, desperate for a vote.
And it’s because they want to preserve the tradition of sport hunting. Believe me, if deer went extinct, it would be the hunters who would miss them more than any bleeding heart crybaby liberal who has never even seen a deer close up unless they hit it with their car.
c’mon simon. spare us the bullsh-t. I expect more out of you.
# September 5th, 2006 at 9:53 pmAs one of my teachers put it: “you can run with scissors only so many times before you stab yourself in the eye.”
Wonder if he got one last ‘Crikey’ out.
# September 6th, 2006 at 5:42 amYou know what I think is bullsh-t Chad? You write a nice tribute to a great person, and then you find out that he didn’t like hunting (Gosh! That’s a surprise considering he was a naturalist!) and then go “oh well, never mind then” as if that negates all of his other virtues and accomplishments.
“Update » Steve Irwin was completly anti-hunting, anti-fishing, and a anti-gunner. But in the end, he was shot by natures bullet. a stringray barb.”
I suppose you mean to imply that there was some sort of poetic justice in his death because he was anti gun? “serves him right, damn gun grabber!” Now you may try to tell me that your “Update” was not intended to diminish the original tribute but that, my friend, is bullsh-t.
Steve Irwin deserves to be judged by his terrific career as a naturalist, entertainer, etc. not by his views on your favorite political issue. That may be one of your most passionate political convictions, and the focus of the site, but it is not appropriate to attach a paragraph to an article about Steve Irwin saying that he was anti gun and was killed by “nature’s bullet”. Steve Irwin was not an anti-gun political activist or something, he was a naturalist. And, as you originally wrote, his death is surprising and a shame. it has nothing to do with his views on guns. shame on you for dragging that issue into it.
And concerning deer - in Maryland and much of the east coast, we have huge, out of control, deer populations. Why? Because all of their natural predators have been hunted to death or near death as pests. The ecosystem around here was definitely messed up by hunting. Am I saying that you or hunters like you are personally responsible for this sort of thing. Absolutely not. I have no doubt that you hunt in a responsible manner and love nature, etc. but not everyone conducts themselves in such a manner. If I had to guess, I’d say that’s why Steve Irwin doesn’t like hunting.
(Note: Nowhere here did I say that because some hunters are irresponsible, that guns or hunting should be banned. I dont think that. But I can understand why Steve Irwin would be disturbed by the effects of irresponsible hunting.)
# September 6th, 2006 at 10:35 amSimple Simon said: “And concerning deer - in Maryland and much of the east coast, we have huge, out of control, deer populations. Why? Because all of their natural predators have been hunted to death or near death as pests.”
By “natural predators” do you mean, God-fearing, young, traditional, family-oriented real men with balls that enjoy firearms and hunting… I’m sure they are increasingly rare in Maryland and are regarded by the elites as “pests” and hunted out-of-existence where possible by the Government, leftist politicos, state schools and the media.
# September 6th, 2006 at 10:55 amExactly. While the average Washingtonian lobbyist can slay a full grown male buffalo at 300 feet with his Blackberry stylus, firearms aptitude is surprisingly rare!
# September 6th, 2006 at 11:35 amCrikey! Ding! Ding! Ding! to your corners boys!
# September 6th, 2006 at 5:21 pmsuch a fuss over such a silly issue. I’m sure Mr. Irwin wouldnt want folks fighting over what he did and did not believe in. so lets just push the politics aside and just honor the man as he was shall we? a seemingly great guy, wonderful husband, loving father and educator of wildlife. His life came to a bittersweet end doing what he loved. end of story.
“so lets just push the politics aside and just honor the man as he was shall we? a seemingly great guy, wonderful husband, loving father and educator of wildlife.”
I absolutely agree. That’s why I thought it was inappropriate and slightly disrespectful to even mention his views on guns.
# September 6th, 2006 at 9:29 pmI’m not dimminishing my original tribue. I still like the guy, and I enjoyed his show. Even though I didn’t exactly watch it all the time.
After Stevil alerted me to his animal rights activism, I did some more research on the guy, and took a distaste to his politics.
And it is his politics that made his death so ironic.
If he was just some guy who didn’t care if you or I went out and hunted, or if he wasn’t preachin animal rights, then his death woulden’t be so ironic.
my discovery of his politics doesn’t make me hate the guy.
and i do still feel for his wife and family. obviously.
# September 7th, 2006 at 9:07 amOK, not to belabor the point, because is Liz says, this is kind of unimportant, but the irony of his death comes from the fact that he spent years and years dancing around, wrestling, etc. extremely dangerous animals. But in the end, he was killed by a stingray, which are very rarely lethal, and certainly would not make it onto one of Irwin’s own “most dangerous animals” lists. He went on the fatal underwater shoot only because the weather wasn’t good enough to shoot more dangerous animals - this was a “soft” shoot for a kids show.
That’s the irony. The man’s nickname was “the crocodile hunter” so everybody figured he’d be killed by a crocodile or a poisonous spider or snake - something suitable “vicious”, but he was killed by a punt stingray.
and I don’t think the stingray’s tail is commonly thought of “nature’s bullet”.
# September 7th, 2006 at 1:08 pmI’m pretty sure I never said that stingray tails are commonly thought of as “natures bullet”. I could be wrong though, let me scan over my words again. Nope, don’t see it. Hmm.. maybe you ment to say barb. But no, even then I never said that barbs were commonly known as natures bullets. I just happened to call it that. So, what was the relevance of that comment?
# September 7th, 2006 at 3:43 pm“But in the end, he was shot by natures bullet. a stringray barb.”
stingray’s barb + nature’s bullet = a pretty bad analogy.
# September 7th, 2006 at 4:41 pmare you getting a little off from the arguement? now you want to make a fuss about a not-so-amazing comparison i made?
I’ve already told you why I think his death is ironic. im not gonna play the “repeat my stance” over and over.
# September 8th, 2006 at 9:22 amhe was a legend bruv
# September 12th, 2006 at 4:22 am