Fuck poachers, don't get me wrong, but fucking hell, I wish people had the same kind of energy when it came to billionaires, who are literally responsible for the deaths of millions of humans (by virtue of hoarding so many resources as well as creating and maintaining a system that relies on exploitation and suffering to benefit them and only them).
If only society cared about oppressed and marginalised people as much as it does about cute animals.
Society doesn’t care about cure or endangered animals
That's bullshit.
I'd agree that not enough people care, but significantly more people care about cute endangered animals than they do marginalised and oppressed human beings.
It doesn't take a study to see the difference in attitudes and engagement (though studies have been done, feel free to invest your own time looking them up).
The fact that you've responded to me to focus on the animals but not on the people my comment is actually about is a perfect illustration of my point.
The fact that you’ve responded to me to focus on the animals but not on the people my comment is actually about is a perfect illustration of my point.
That's all a narrative you created in your head. Besides, many of the same solutions that would protect endangered species would also protect marginalized people. You're trying to make this into a Trolley Dilemmas for some reason. Who do you think are the ones buying dick powder made form Rhino horns?
Wow, watch me get down voted by all the redditors flooding the site. Wish they would take their bootlicking back where they came from if they enjoy the oppression so much
What opinion? The only reason any piece of gun legislation has ever passed is to keep minorities and poors from arming themselves against oppression. That's fact.
Reddit is a bootlicking hellscape of do nothing liberals who want dasy government and mommy corporate to keep them safe and busy.
While I like the idea of every poacher being neutralised, I also understand that the "poach police" may intentionally/inadvertently kill innocents with their blanket immunity; plus many poachers may be poor af hired-guns that aren't the actual source or root cause for the market, and may not dent the trade at all... Hope I'm wrong.
I also understand that the “poach police” may intentionally/inadvertently kill innocents with their blanket immunity;
Is there any evidence that that has been happening? (This article is from 2017, and it mentions "more than 20" poachers being killed in 2015, but doesn't mention any non-poachers being killed, which it seems it would have, given it's talking about the downsides.)
While I agree that taking the fight to the people financing the poaching, reducing the number of poachers - and providing a very clear disincentive for other "poor af" hired-guns to take up the mantle - could still help.
Personally, I don't think any implied sanctity of human life extends to people who are killing endangered animals for profit.
I know a well-connected resort liaison in South Africa. This is what happens on game reserves with predators/scavengers, nature has a way of cleaning up the evidence.
It is important to note here how well-indoctrinated the US and Europe are to "point the finger" and absolve responsibility...
We don't refer to stuff as "deforestation," we call it "urban planning" or "development."
We don't talk about "poaching," we just accept that farmers and the agriculture industry finds natural predators inconvenient, so we allow them to kill off coyotes, foxes, mountain lions, etc.
We have just as many people doing similar, but for some reason we're only taught to lose our minds over conservation elsewhere, in the places where the US intentionally destabilizes (with Europe) to keep prices low for us. After all, it's what our economies are built upon: ruin everywhere, so we can call ourselves the heroes for killing off indigenous folks to areas just for the crime of living and wanting things to feel fair.
Well articulated. We can't absolve people of responsibility just because they are poor, unless we absolve them of all responsibity and treat them like children, and put the ones who have no caregivers in a foster care system. I'm fairly certain nobody wants that.
Yes, I am aware poverty is not something you can just wish away, but they know what they're doing. Same as the people illegally cutting down forests in Eastern Europe. They're also poor but they're also assholes. They also have a penchant for shooting people who try to stop them. Pretty sure them rhino poachers would do bad stuff to anybody getting in their way as well.
Actually they tried the normal way, where they didn't shoot and asked the poachers to surrender / tried to arrest them. But the rangers would get shot and the animals would continue to get poached.
Seeing this as a problem, a new executive order / law was passed allowing shoot at sight orders at national parks / protected zones.
Poaching has reduced, the number of rangers getting shot has reduced. The number of poachers getting shot has reduced (they don't wanna fuck around anymore).
Murder is bad, but humans are the problem. And humans being stupid chaotic creatures, it often devolves in to dirty things like killing. You can say all you want about right and wrong but this is a messy situation and this is the solution they have been forced in to using, after trying the peaceful method for years
Poverty hardly justifies crime. It is a cause not a justification. They are still poachers doing illegal hunting for protected animal on protected land. Also poaching is rather lucrative, even if the government raises income 200% poaching will still stand out.
Poverty does justify crimes. When you need to eat, killing a rhino not so bad.
I hate this mentality where poverty crimes are evil but any rich guy destroying the lives of millions of people through financial schemes or to make a better profit are considered almost like good guys. This is completely fucked up.
So if they are poor and eradicating a species off the face of the planet, then they should get a pass? They have the equipment and skills to hunt non-endangered animals which would provide food for themselves and their family. Excess meat could likely be traded or sold. Poaching is not a crime of necessity.
You are using 2 different analogies that contradict each other. The poachers are cultivating a product, similar to poppy and coca plants, not the street dealers, and the wealthy are the buyers / "users".
My point is that the forest laws and forest departments in India are set up to criminalise tribals whatever they do. Most of the rules date to the British era, when the government wanted to protect game animals from the tribals and farmers. So when tribals, who have been hunting boar and other common animals for thousands of years, are suddenly told that hunting for food is a crime, they have no option but to break the rules. Now they have a choice - keep hunting boar and deer every week and risk arrest each time, or kill a rhino and get enough money to last a few years. If we could relax the laws on hunting common species, I expect to see rhino poaching go down automatically. Some Indian states have more liberal hunting laws (for tribals) than others, and in those places you do see reductions in human-animal conflict.
If you don't want to take my word for this, or would like to read more, I would suggest the last two sections of An Ecological History of India by Prof. Madhav Gadgil and Ram Guha.
I am happy to take your word for most of it, but it does not change my view. I am completely in favor of identifying and taking steps to remediate the underlining cause of all forms of crime rather than simply punishing violators. That being said, the hubris that an individual, or group of individuals supercedes the survival of an entire species is repugnant to me. I have no sympathy for anybody that actively contributes to the the extinction of another species (except mosquitos).
The one point of your argument that I do question is the "kill a rhino and get enough money to last a few years" claim. While I have not looked into the details in India, as I understand it, poachers in Africa can make roughly the equivalent of an average 1 month salary for killing 1 rhino. If, in India, they make enough money to last a few years than either poachers are almost exclusively first timers, which seems highly unlikely to me, or they are doing it for greed rather than survival, which would negate your argument of the restrictive hunting laws.
There is a broad spectrum of crimes, from stealing an apple to mass murder other people. When you decide to steal food from the supermarket to feed your family it is justified. Hunting... I don't know... deer or hogs is justified so they can feed their family. But picking a very lucrative business and say you are doing it coz of poverty is kinda fucked. Just for clarity: I'm not agreeing with gunning these people down.
Idk, do they? I don't think vegans care about animals' opinions (that they don't have bc they're animals)
This is about reducing unnecessary suffering. The animals you mentioned hunt out of necessity. We have alternatives that don't require hurting other beings.
Counterpoint: animals may very well have thoughts on this, but we will likely never know because there is not a common ground for exchanging thoughts between [an overwhelming majority] of species.
I can't quantify the number of times I've seen animals hunt others out of what amounts to an observed potential of either instinct or boredom: it may seem contrite, but domesticated cats hunting mice.
They will play with mice, toy with them when the mice are clearly half-dead, and stop playing with them out of boredom when the mice can no longer move. Almost for sport. This is an observed behaviour that may be a byproduct of their domestication, but it gives credence to the fact that its not all for survival.
I'm not justifying the hunting of animals for profit; I am in the camp of thought that its a horrible practice. The same goes for hunting endangered animals. However, to hunt animals for food is not an unjust practice. That's how we homo sapiens get a good amount of protein (though I do concede that there are also plenty of other ways to do so). It is historically encoded into human existence.
AFAIK cats cats play with their prey not for fun but in order to tire it out.
I think that cruelty and sadism are human inventions and we inflict them on animals on an industrial scale. I believe this comes from hierarchy and domination present in our society, not from instinct.
How long do any of you idiots upvoting this think it'll be until these (so-called) "rangers" start selling rhino horn themselves? That is... if they haven't already and this is really just them clearing out the competition?
No. You are. This meme demonstrates how easily first-worlders will slavishly applaud fascist terrorism in the third-world as long as you wrap it up in green capitalism first.
The only thing these privatised death-squads you call "rangers" are doing is waging unrestricted warfare on impoverished brown people while (at best) doing absolutely nothing to hinder the mass-slaughter of wild life or (at worst) simply monopolizing it for their own profit - but you get your "eco-friendly" revenge-porn in exchange, so everything's cool, right?
I actually don't disagree with your general point, but the idea (and the fact that your fist thought was) that the rangers will turn around and start poaching rhinos themselves seems like a really odd argument to be making if your aim is the capitalists who create and uphold the industry in the first place.
E: like, you focusing on the rangers is exactly the same as other people focusing on the poachers - neither are in charge and both are there making money for people who would never get their hands dirty.
I'm Indian, although I live hundreds of kilometres away from the place in question. My very first thought was that these rangers are going to kill innocent people and frame them as poachers. My second thought was that at least a few of them might start poaching themselves.
I hope I'm wrong, maybe this is one of the few such programmes that actually works out, but the history of the Indian forest department does not inspire much confidence. The Forest department was created by the British to protect game from local people, and even today far too many officials treat the indigenous tribals as enemies, rather than as allies in conservation.
If you think I'm being too cynical or melodramatic, you are welcome to read articles and books by Indian ecologists, historians and conservationists such as Madhav Gadgil, Ullas Karanth and Ram Guha.
that the rangers will turn around and start poaching rhinos themselves
None of this is difficult to understand - it's no different than the right-wing death squads the US trained to fight their little "War On Drugs" suddenly and not-so-mysteriously ending up the biggest players in the drug-smuggling business.
Who did you think these "rangers" work for? They are pigs - that's what they are. And like all pigs, profiting from the illegal things they are (supposedly) "preventing" is merely one of the unspoken but universal perks of the job. As long as their violence serves the capitalists that wants to exclusively loot and pillage natural resources, everybody in power will turn a blind eye. And it's not just the trade in animal parts - don't be surprised when it's discovered that these privatized goon squads being lauded in the media for their (supposed) "anti-poaching" activities take their orders from multi-national mining corporations or companies that want to exploit local populations as cheap labor.
Fuck poachers, don't get me wrong, but fucking hell, I wish people had the same kind of energy when it came to billionaires, who are literally responsible for the deaths of millions of humans (by virtue of hoarding so many resources as well as creating and maintaining a system that relies on exploitation and suffering to benefit them and only them).
If only society cared about oppressed and marginalised people as much as it does about cute animals.
Society doesn't care about cute or endangered animals. The rangers represent a minority.
That's bullshit.
I'd agree that not enough people care, but significantly more people care about cute endangered animals than they do marginalised and oppressed human beings.
It doesn't take a study to see the difference in attitudes and engagement (though studies have been done, feel free to invest your own time looking them up).
The fact that you've responded to me to focus on the animals but not on the people my comment is actually about is a perfect illustration of my point.
That's all a narrative you created in your head. Besides, many of the same solutions that would protect endangered species would also protect marginalized people. You're trying to make this into a Trolley Dilemmas for some reason. Who do you think are the ones buying dick powder made form Rhino horns?
My man! (y)
do you eat animals?
Only rhino burgers or long cooked stews made from endangered animals
shark fin stew, mmm one of my favorites!
Incredible. Even PITA migrated during the great Reddit exodus.
Great rebuttal lmao
Your attitude is the only real reason for any gun control in America.
Yes - the rich and powerful don't want those they oppress and exploit to rise up against them.
Wow, watch me get down voted by all the redditors flooding the site. Wish they would take their bootlicking back where they came from if they enjoy the oppression so much
What the fuck are you on about?
His down votes must be because of redditors, so he doesn't even CARE what they think! 😭
If you really don't know, then you probably can't understand. If you're being ironic, you missed and hit moronic.
Well it's hard to grasp someone's point when they don't actually articulate it.
Bro, your opinion is like the majority of reddit are you high?
What opinion? The only reason any piece of gun legislation has ever passed is to keep minorities and poors from arming themselves against oppression. That's fact. Reddit is a bootlicking hellscape of do nothing liberals who want dasy government and mommy corporate to keep them safe and busy.
Oh I'm not mad, just saw the instant emotional response to a simple statement of fact and it felt like I was back in the centrist circle jerk again.
Yeah it's whatever. I'm not here looking for friends, especially not in a meme community.
I, for one, fully support this development.
While I like the idea of every poacher being neutralised, I also understand that the "poach police" may intentionally/inadvertently kill innocents with their blanket immunity; plus many poachers may be poor af hired-guns that aren't the actual source or root cause for the market, and may not dent the trade at all... Hope I'm wrong.
Is there any evidence that that has been happening? (This article is from 2017, and it mentions "more than 20" poachers being killed in 2015, but doesn't mention any non-poachers being killed, which it seems it would have, given it's talking about the downsides.)
While I agree that taking the fight to the people financing the poaching, reducing the number of poachers - and providing a very clear disincentive for other "poor af" hired-guns to take up the mantle - could still help.
Personally, I don't think any implied sanctity of human life extends to people who are killing endangered animals for profit.
So just out of curiosity, which one of these crimes voids "sanctity of human life"?
American police
ICE says otherwise.
We could reduce the numbers of Nazis like this as well. All in favour?
Aye
Have them poached for their horns and tusks? 🤔
The lower horn of those Nazis is worthless, it barely counts as an aphrodisiac.
Not even L'rrr would touch the stuff
This will go, just fine
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/O_q12qYrCN0
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Ought to disable Piped bot til it's fixed. The videos don't play. Google API shenanigans.
Eh I always upvote him anyway, he’s working the best he can!
What if I told you that's what the Nazis did to people they didn't like..
Ohh wow you are very smart
Oh were not simping for Nazis on Lemmy any time soon. Twitter is that way -->
Now compare the reasons why for not liking them
They did breathe as well, what's your solution to that?
If we don’t protect the planet, it will kill us.
See: recent orca war.
Orca what?
Orcas have been attacking boats recently. Or it’s been reported more recently. Either way, they’re taking back their (wet) streets.
see: the farming industry
Begun, the rhino wars have
Poacher poachers poaching the poachers?
No, because they have a license to hunt poachers.
[Bollywood version of James Bond theme song]
Is this like the gramatically correct Buffalo-sentence?
Ah, the Hogwarts Legacy approach
Average Hogwarts student: Charms homework is so difficult, but later we're going to prank that annoying ravenclaw by putting slugs in his hat lol.
HL Protagonist: If I can group these goblins and dark wizards together, I can kill a dozen of them with a single killing curse. Excellent!
This would become my full-time job if I ever became independently wealthy.
Reverse poacher rhino bbq birthing
I know a well-connected resort liaison in South Africa. This is what happens on game reserves with predators/scavengers, nature has a way of cleaning up the evidence.
It is important to note here how well-indoctrinated the US and Europe are to "point the finger" and absolve responsibility...
We don't refer to stuff as "deforestation," we call it "urban planning" or "development."
We don't talk about "poaching," we just accept that farmers and the agriculture industry finds natural predators inconvenient, so we allow them to kill off coyotes, foxes, mountain lions, etc.
We have just as many people doing similar, but for some reason we're only taught to lose our minds over conservation elsewhere, in the places where the US intentionally destabilizes (with Europe) to keep prices low for us. After all, it's what our economies are built upon: ruin everywhere, so we can call ourselves the heroes for killing off indigenous folks to areas just for the crime of living and wanting things to feel fair.
Check yourself. This isn't "the way"
Well articulated. We can't absolve people of responsibility just because they are poor, unless we absolve them of all responsibity and treat them like children, and put the ones who have no caregivers in a foster care system. I'm fairly certain nobody wants that.
Yes, I am aware poverty is not something you can just wish away, but they know what they're doing. Same as the people illegally cutting down forests in Eastern Europe. They're also poor but they're also assholes. They also have a penchant for shooting people who try to stop them. Pretty sure them rhino poachers would do bad stuff to anybody getting in their way as well.
no, fuck murder.
Don't get me wrong, fuck poachers, but murder is never the solution, it just breeds escalated violence.
Actually they tried the normal way, where they didn't shoot and asked the poachers to surrender / tried to arrest them. But the rangers would get shot and the animals would continue to get poached.
Seeing this as a problem, a new executive order / law was passed allowing shoot at sight orders at national parks / protected zones.
Poaching has reduced, the number of rangers getting shot has reduced. The number of poachers getting shot has reduced (they don't wanna fuck around anymore).
Overall it has increased peace.
Murder is bad, but humans are the problem. And humans being stupid chaotic creatures, it often devolves in to dirty things like killing. You can say all you want about right and wrong but this is a messy situation and this is the solution they have been forced in to using, after trying the peaceful method for years
Endangered-animal lives are much more precious to me than humans-who-are-willing-to-murder-endangered-animals lives, so I disagree.
I am more alluding to the risk of collateral
What a great way to gun down any random civilian without proof of any wrongdoing. Just say they were poaching!
It's not murder, it's legal punishment. The poachers use gun violence against rangers, so it's a reasonable escalation.
Maybe if they had a system where people weren't so damn broke then dangerous work like poaching rhinos wouldn't be so attractive.
That would be a better way.
I mean, these guys are doing this to pay their bills because they see no better options.
Poverty hardly justifies crime. It is a cause not a justification. They are still poachers doing illegal hunting for protected animal on protected land. Also poaching is rather lucrative, even if the government raises income 200% poaching will still stand out.
Yes, no matter how rich you are, sleeping under a bridge is illegal and immoral ! Shoot on sight !
Poverty does justify crimes. When you need to eat, killing a rhino not so bad.
I hate this mentality where poverty crimes are evil but any rich guy destroying the lives of millions of people through financial schemes or to make a better profit are considered almost like good guys. This is completely fucked up.
So if they are poor and eradicating a species off the face of the planet, then they should get a pass? They have the equipment and skills to hunt non-endangered animals which would provide food for themselves and their family. Excess meat could likely be traded or sold. Poaching is not a crime of necessity.
What if we shoot the wealthy people buying the horns instead? Wouldn't that be better? I think so.
It's like fighting drugs by arresting the last guy in the chain selling the stuff in the street.
But it's always easier to blame and punish the poor guy at the end of the food chain.
You are using 2 different analogies that contradict each other. The poachers are cultivating a product, similar to poppy and coca plants, not the street dealers, and the wealthy are the buyers / "users".
The problem is that under Indian law, hunting non-endangered species such as deer and rabbit is just as illegal (most of the time).
And if they were hunting non-endangered species for food, then I would be outraged by a lethal response, but that's not the case here.
My point is that the forest laws and forest departments in India are set up to criminalise tribals whatever they do. Most of the rules date to the British era, when the government wanted to protect game animals from the tribals and farmers. So when tribals, who have been hunting boar and other common animals for thousands of years, are suddenly told that hunting for food is a crime, they have no option but to break the rules. Now they have a choice - keep hunting boar and deer every week and risk arrest each time, or kill a rhino and get enough money to last a few years. If we could relax the laws on hunting common species, I expect to see rhino poaching go down automatically. Some Indian states have more liberal hunting laws (for tribals) than others, and in those places you do see reductions in human-animal conflict.
If you don't want to take my word for this, or would like to read more, I would suggest the last two sections of An Ecological History of India by Prof. Madhav Gadgil and Ram Guha.
I am happy to take your word for most of it, but it does not change my view. I am completely in favor of identifying and taking steps to remediate the underlining cause of all forms of crime rather than simply punishing violators. That being said, the hubris that an individual, or group of individuals supercedes the survival of an entire species is repugnant to me. I have no sympathy for anybody that actively contributes to the the extinction of another species (except mosquitos).
The one point of your argument that I do question is the "kill a rhino and get enough money to last a few years" claim. While I have not looked into the details in India, as I understand it, poachers in Africa can make roughly the equivalent of an average 1 month salary for killing 1 rhino. If, in India, they make enough money to last a few years than either poachers are almost exclusively first timers, which seems highly unlikely to me, or they are doing it for greed rather than survival, which would negate your argument of the restrictive hunting laws.
There is a broad spectrum of crimes, from stealing an apple to mass murder other people. When you decide to steal food from the supermarket to feed your family it is justified. Hunting... I don't know... deer or hogs is justified so they can feed their family. But picking a very lucrative business and say you are doing it coz of poverty is kinda fucked. Just for clarity: I'm not agreeing with gunning these people down.
Yes, this is why financial crimes and financial crime laws don't exist in rich countries!! Oh...
Could this method be used to reduce illegal homelessness too ?
Death penalty for being poor? Psychopath.
For being unprofitable, which is even worse !
Vile
Oh no, thin weapon dilivery* accidentally shipped to india instead of sending it to us school kids
It's fixed with "delivery" and "I would rather discuss a wildly different topic".
Get off Lemmy and go back to your elementary school English class?
if you eat animals, your opinion isn't valid
Ooh, gatekeeping for the omnivores and carnivores.
Guess I'm glad that checks notes cats, dogs, owls, cheetahs, and most of the Animal Kingdom don't have thoughts that are valid?
Idk, do they? I don't think vegans care about animals' opinions (that they don't have bc they're animals)
This is about reducing unnecessary suffering. The animals you mentioned hunt out of necessity. We have alternatives that don't require hurting other beings.
I hear you.
Counterpoint: animals may very well have thoughts on this, but we will likely never know because there is not a common ground for exchanging thoughts between [an overwhelming majority] of species.
I can't quantify the number of times I've seen animals hunt others out of what amounts to an observed potential of either instinct or boredom: it may seem contrite, but domesticated cats hunting mice. They will play with mice, toy with them when the mice are clearly half-dead, and stop playing with them out of boredom when the mice can no longer move. Almost for sport. This is an observed behaviour that may be a byproduct of their domestication, but it gives credence to the fact that its not all for survival.
I'm not justifying the hunting of animals for profit; I am in the camp of thought that its a horrible practice. The same goes for hunting endangered animals. However, to hunt animals for food is not an unjust practice. That's how we homo sapiens get a good amount of protein (though I do concede that there are also plenty of other ways to do so). It is historically encoded into human existence.
AFAIK cats cats play with their prey not for fun but in order to tire it out.
I think that cruelty and sadism are human inventions and we inflict them on animals on an industrial scale. I believe this comes from hierarchy and domination present in our society, not from instinct.
Don't read up on dolphins or seals then. Cruelty and sadism exist in other animals. Humans are just better at it.
I mean lions don't have an instinct to control and dominate a herd... Wait.
And cats very often don't eat their prey, they like humans lol for the "fun"...
Eco-fascists unite, huh?
How long do any of you idiots upvoting this think it'll be until these (so-called) "rangers" start selling rhino horn themselves? That is... if they haven't already and this is really just them clearing out the competition?
You're telling on yourself with all that projection...
No. You are. This meme demonstrates how easily first-worlders will slavishly applaud fascist terrorism in the third-world as long as you wrap it up in green capitalism first.
The only thing these privatised death-squads you call "rangers" are doing is waging unrestricted warfare on impoverished brown people while (at best) doing absolutely nothing to hinder the mass-slaughter of wild life or (at worst) simply monopolizing it for their own profit - but you get your "eco-friendly" revenge-porn in exchange, so everything's cool, right?
I actually don't disagree with your general point, but the idea (and the fact that your fist thought was) that the rangers will turn around and start poaching rhinos themselves seems like a really odd argument to be making if your aim is the capitalists who create and uphold the industry in the first place.
E: like, you focusing on the rangers is exactly the same as other people focusing on the poachers - neither are in charge and both are there making money for people who would never get their hands dirty.
I'm Indian, although I live hundreds of kilometres away from the place in question. My very first thought was that these rangers are going to kill innocent people and frame them as poachers. My second thought was that at least a few of them might start poaching themselves.
I hope I'm wrong, maybe this is one of the few such programmes that actually works out, but the history of the Indian forest department does not inspire much confidence. The Forest department was created by the British to protect game from local people, and even today far too many officials treat the indigenous tribals as enemies, rather than as allies in conservation.
If you think I'm being too cynical or melodramatic, you are welcome to read articles and books by Indian ecologists, historians and conservationists such as Madhav Gadgil, Ullas Karanth and Ram Guha.
You're not.
None of this is difficult to understand - it's no different than the right-wing death squads the US trained to fight their little "War On Drugs" suddenly and not-so-mysteriously ending up the biggest players in the drug-smuggling business.
Who did you think these "rangers" work for? They are pigs - that's what they are. And like all pigs, profiting from the illegal things they are (supposedly) "preventing" is merely one of the unspoken but universal perks of the job. As long as their violence serves the capitalists that wants to exclusively loot and pillage natural resources, everybody in power will turn a blind eye. And it's not just the trade in animal parts - don't be surprised when it's discovered that these privatized goon squads being lauded in the media for their (supposed) "anti-poaching" activities take their orders from multi-national mining corporations or companies that want to exploit local populations as cheap labor.