PETA tells girl brutally mauled: ‘Put yourself in the place of the’ bear

bear_attack

An infamously over-the-top animal rights group told a Pennsylvania teen who was mauled by a black bear that she should think of the poor animal and stop hunting.

Camille Bomboy

Camille Bomboy

Camille Bomboy, 18, was hunting deer near her family farm in Lock Haven on Dec. 9, when the bear attacked her, nearly ripping her ear off her head, according to WeAreCentralPA.com.

The bear only stopped the attack when Bomboy’s step-father scared the animal away by firing his gun in the air.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, commonly known by its acronym PETA, wasted little time. Its special projects division manager sent a letter to the still-recovering girl four days after the attack. The letter read, according to WeAreCentralPA.com:

December 13, 2013

Dear Ms. Bomboy,

I am writing on behalf of PETA and our more than 3 million members and supporters, including thousands across Pennsylvania, to send our best wishes for your speedy recovery and ask you to take a few moments to reflect on this incident. This seems to be a good opportunity to put yourself in the place of the individuals you and the rest of your hunting party were trying to kill. As terrifying as it must have been to be attacked by a bear, please consider the frightening and painful experiences that hunters set out to impose upon animals. There used to be a bumper sticker that read, “I support the right to arm bears!” That was a joke, but in all seriousness, it would be a blessing if you were to abandon hunting and decide to live and let live.

As this mother bear demonstrated, animals form intense bonds with their young, just as we do, and will go to great lengths to protect them, just as your stepfather did for you. Like us, animals value their lives and don’t want to be killed. And many animals endure prolonged, painful deaths when they’re injured by hunters but not killed outright, which I’m sure you know firsthand from being in the woods. A study of 80 radio-collared deer found that of the 22 deer who had been shot with “traditional archery equipment,” 11 were wounded but not recovered.

Now that you’ve experienced the horror of an attack—although this one was in self-defense—we hope you will choose to enjoy nature in only nonviolent ways. Thank you for your consideration.

Kind regards,

Alicia Woempner
Special Projects Division Manager

I’d wager that if Woempner was ever was attacked by a ferocious bear, she’d be armed to the teeth each time she decided to “enjoy nature.”

Check out A cappella group’s amazing version of ‘Little Drummer Boy’ goes insanely viral.

[poll id=”144″]

Comments

27 thoughts on “PETA tells girl brutally mauled: ‘Put yourself in the place of the’ bear

  1. Ya Dont Say? says:

    I wonder if Alicia Woempner is aware that her beloved PETA kills nearly all the animals that it can get it’s hands on. They have to report it to the State of Virginia. Thousands of dogs and cats found their END in the hands of LIARS.

  2. judyavelsor says:

    anytime you are walking in the woods you could have come across a bear. It is not science . . . Geez they live there. Who would walk in the woods. If you go hunting . . . you could be the hunted.

  3. April Cox says:

    For those defending PETA on here visit this website

    http://www.petakillsanimals.com/

    and re-read the article – the girl was hunting DEER not BEAR (see the difference in spelling?)

    Genesis 9:3
    Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. And as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything.

  4. Blessed Mary says:

    PETA IS INHUMAN WHEN THEY PUT ANIMALS BEFORE PEOPLE

    As for hunting many Americans still hunt for their food, so leave them alone PETA.

  5. PlanB says:

    Used to be bears killing people all the time. Now we have guns and can keep their population at manageable levels. Also there wasn’t these people with nothing better to do that to write letters and pretend to give wild beasts “rights.”

  6. Aaron Barnes says:

    nature made me into a meat eater nt me so if u have a problem with me eating meat than blame nature nt me

  7. ffyduf says:

    PETA is retarded!!! the bear should be dead. we have the right to bear arms and we can hunt as we please we need to get PETA out of here none of us hunters need these stupid liberals gettin in our way and trying to make us not hunt

  8. RM Gordon says:

    Shame on you! You are a special kind of idiot!! That little girl was ATTACKED!! PETA is a bunch of lying, bleeding heart liberals who have more money than common sense! God forbid you ever get some “perspective” about what it is like to be attacked by a wild animal… or be hungry!!!

  9. Mark Harner says:

    I agree that every other species on the planet would be better off without humans, but your existence is equally noteworthy in this respect. Why direct your ire toward hunters? You seem to have overlooked the fact that the woman was not attacking the bear. And, regardless, no one is blaming the bear which did what it is instinctively programmed to do. The complaints you hear are against the people from peta who speak out of both sides of their mouths. For an organization to claim animal welfare as a priority and then completely misunderstand the basics of ecology borders on negligence when its public comments have exactly the opposite effect on its under informed disciplines. Peta opposes even well-regulated hunting and fishing for purposes of consumption, even though each of these is far superior to agriculture as means of food production while minimizing environmental impact. A simple comparison of the wildlife inhabiting those ecological wastelands we call “fields” and “orchards” with those inhabiting the healthy, wild lands from which the hunter or fisher acquires his meal reveals all. What, exactly, do they believe happened to all of those animals (every individual, of every major species) when their habitat was destroyed in order to grow humanity’s preferred foods? Hunting has less environmental impact and results in far fewer animals destroyed, so what is their argument against it? They really do not have one, except to ignore the impact of the only alternative (agriculture) and focus entirely on the comparatively mild violence inflicted by the hunter. How can well-meaning people who put so much energy into hating hunting fail to observe the flagrant omission required to arrive at their conclusion?

Comments are closed.

Related Posts