Two Tennessee Men Banned From Hunting For Life After Discovery of a Gruesome Killing Spree

635906117074141009-deer-3635906115313479865-deer-1Densibel Calzada, 23, and Eddy Albert, 21, have secured two distinctions in Tennessee. They have not only secured the harshest penalty ever issued by the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency but they are generally viewed as this week’s worst human beings in the state or possibly nationwide. The two men have been banned from hunting in Tennessee and 43 other states after they illegally killed as many as 40 deer. They added to that carnage with sickening videos mocking suffering or dead animals.

Officials are still not sure how many deer the two killed but counted at least 40. In one video a deer is still alive when one blew its head off and then celebrated with the bloody scene. The two were first stopped trespassing on private property but two days later they were found with beer and a dead deer in their car. Search warrants then revealed the gruesome record.

The nationwide ban is made possible under the Interstate Wildlife Violator’s Compact, where a ban in Tennessee is enforced by every compact member.” The men also were assigned court costs and the state confiscated their rifles and bows. Each also faced $5,000 in restitution fees and at least $1,800 each to post bail.

Nevertheless, there remains a question of whether hunting laws need to be strengthened to allow for jail time or felony records in the most extreme cases. These men are responsible for a long, calculated, and unlawful killings involving dozens of deer. The most serious penalty is a hunting ban which should be obvious and automatic. However, do you feel that there should be a more serious penalty?


33 thoughts on “Two Tennessee Men Banned From Hunting For Life After Discovery of a Gruesome Killing Spree”

  1. Unless these were the fastest processors known to man, these deer were not hunted for food. They were not dressed out. If you just let a dead deer sit, intact, it will taint the meat. I have not hunted, but friends and family do. Field dressing a deer is hard work. None of the deer in the photos appear to have been dressed, so all that meat was wasted. They didn’t even hunt without a license to feed mass quantities of people.

    So the ethical objection is that this is a wasted community resource, violation of fish and game hunting laws, and it killed animals for absolutely no reason.

    If you hauled out 40 salmon and left them to rot on the riverbank, it would also be a complete waste and violation of fish and game. And it’s taking a resource from the community that could have been used. Unless the deer had chronic wasting disease and this had been a cull, any deer that is shot should be consumed, and since this is a shared resource people need to obey laws regarding limits.

    1. Karen – I wonder how Fish and Game would handle an Indian buffalo stampede kill. Couple of thousand buffalo run off a cliff. Hmmm.

    2. Karen S….I don’t disagree that what they did isn’t the smartest or nicest or what have you. My point is animals are killed for fun, profit, food, etc. every day and twice on Sunday all over the world and sanctioned and approved by govco. It’s hypocritical in my humble opinion to single out some yahoos who do it without govco’s permission when these same govco’s sanction mass killing however prettied up they make it to justify it.
      Seems to me it’s not unlike the state making something illegal on moralt grounds like the numbers racket (Lottery) and then step in and make a monopoly of it for themselves. I have little doubt if govco’s were to be offered enough money, they’d approve of the killing of 10 times the amount of deer and in the same fashion that these yahoo’s killed them and wouldn’t think twice about it. imo

      1. It’s rare I agree with Karen S but on this issue I do.
        It’s not just that they did it for sport, it’s the way in which they did it.
        ““They were getting on top of the deer and doing all sorts of things,” said TWRA information officer Doug Markham. “They had one where the deer was still alive and they blew his head off. They were high-fiving each other after showing the hole where they had shot one at nighttime. I didn’t see all of the videos, but the officer said some of it was just really grotesque.””

        It seems these were sick and deranged individuals who got off on the cruelty aspect of blowing half of a mammal’s face off while it’s alive, along with whatever acts were too grotesque for the police to discuss. It wasn’t just for trophy sport, which I disagree with but is can be done legally. This seems to be killing for the fun of watching the animals suffer and enjoying their tortured deaths. If there was evidence of “govco” endorsing the killing of animals in this method I’m sure there would be outrage too. Videos of the meat industry not doing enough to ensure pigs are unconscious in the slaughter generates substantial outrage. If you had footage of employees mutilating these creatures while living there would be demands for jail time.

        1. Sorry! Not convinced! Dead is dead! Prettily or ugly, the end result is the same…intentional killing at the hands of humans.
          I doubt the distinctions in the manner of their deaths would mean much had they the mind to discern it.
          Just because it may shock the conscience for some to see it accomplished in the manner that it was, I’m still of the mind that if anything, maybe the two need to have some counseling to help them reconcile the socially acceptable differences between govco approved and legalized mass killing and the non-socially acceptable and non-legalized mass killing by private individuals. Maybe while they are at it, they can also learn about collateral damage killings of innocent humans during war or the history of govco genocide under the guise of the greater good arguments or similar ethereal arguments and then return to society having been properly indoctrinated in how best to go about being a mass killer should they want to engage in it legally.

  2. Hal: If you ever had deer in your yard or neighboring woods you would perhaps see them as sacrosanct. Better to kill pedophile priests and bent nuns than deer.

    1. LinnChainey: I’ve had plenty of Deer, Fox, Raccoons, Possum, Skunks, etc. in my yards and frankly while I appreciate nature and am not a hunter, I’m not inclined to want to ascribe a greater value for one animals life over another. I’ve had dogs and other animals that were very important to our family and yet I still put humans above ALL animals even the humans who deserve the harshest penalties for the heinous crimes they commit against other humans. And while I don’t like the idea of mass killings of animals for the fun of it, I find it hypocritical to arrest and jail people for the non commercial killing of animals while the state sanctions it for others whether for commercial or non commercial purposes. imho

  3. What’s the difference in killing mass quantities of deer and mass quantities of fish, snakes, pheasant, quail, etc.? Do deer now equate to something less than human yet greater than other animals? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

  4. This is not “hunting” – this was carnage for the sake of the slaughter. They’ve outgrown pulling the wings off of butterflies.

    This didn’t fill the freezer, and most hunters would probably agree that this was a sad waste.

    Doglover – the overwhelming majority of people in the US are omnivores. Whether you buy it in a grocery store or hunt it yourself, you are eating an animal killed for food. You are no more a psychopath buying a steak at a restaurant than if you hunt it yourself. Omnivores who oppose hunting are hypocritical. It also reminds me of the shark that keeps swearing off eating fish on Finding Nemo .

    Personally, I have not hunted, although people in my family do. I would have a hard time doing it, but I acknowledge that buying my meat is merely paying someone to do the hard part for me. I’ve tried vegetarian, and am healthiest as an omnivore.

  5. Isn’t there already some sort of ‘enhancements’ or additional criminal penalties for violent crimes committed possessing or using a gun? Not sure how this doesn’t constitute a violent crime… seems pretty violent to me.

    Also, I seem to remember back when I was living in California that poaching came with a potential 1 year prison sentence, legitimately hefty fines and could Fish & Game could confiscate any and all gear/equipment you used in the poaching (including your vehicle) in that state. Surprised that Tenn doesn’t have something similar.

Comments are closed.