Wristshot
Contributor
Two comments on these issues:
1) On my visits to Norway, I ate whale meat a couple times, and it was delicious. My Norwegian friends were very clear on the fact that the whales eaten were not endangered, and that the whale meat was highly regarded by many. Gosh it was tasty when cooked by Marit! The Norge government limits the take partially to ensure a healthy population, and based on the annecdotal information included here, it seems to be working.
2) In response to ssra30:
On a related "food for thought": If I intentionally, and with malice aforethought, shoot someone in the head with a gun, with every intention of killing them, then why is the penalty so significantly diminished if a) my bullet is one millimeter off to the side, b) an ambulance arrives quickly c) some great surgeon manages to miraculously save the victims life. Why shouldn't the penalty for legitimate "attempted murder" be the same as the penalty for completion of said murder? I don't have an answer, it is just something I wonder about sometimes.
Wristshot
1) On my visits to Norway, I ate whale meat a couple times, and it was delicious. My Norwegian friends were very clear on the fact that the whales eaten were not endangered, and that the whale meat was highly regarded by many. Gosh it was tasty when cooked by Marit! The Norge government limits the take partially to ensure a healthy population, and based on the annecdotal information included here, it seems to be working.
2) In response to ssra30:
Actually, in some places in the USA, if you murder someone because of the color of their skin or their sexual preference, then that is "more of a crime" than if you just simply murdered them for money. I think that is ludicrous, but that is just my opinion. Murder is "wrong enough" that I don't see the need to increase the penalties like that. Of course that's just me, and I eat whale.ssra30:Morally and legally, killing someone who is mentally retarded with IQ of 30 is no less a crime than killing a genious with IQ 200.
On a related "food for thought": If I intentionally, and with malice aforethought, shoot someone in the head with a gun, with every intention of killing them, then why is the penalty so significantly diminished if a) my bullet is one millimeter off to the side, b) an ambulance arrives quickly c) some great surgeon manages to miraculously save the victims life. Why shouldn't the penalty for legitimate "attempted murder" be the same as the penalty for completion of said murder? I don't have an answer, it is just something I wonder about sometimes.
Wristshot