“Sierra Kills” Shooter’s Original Online Post Recovered

Posted by: Bigfoot Evidence on December 1st, 2011

“If You Saw Bigfoot, Would You Shoot It?”

This was the title of the thread that was originally posted by Justin Smeja on Taxidermy.net before it was removed. The thread was unusual because the question wasn’t posted on a Bigfoot forum. Instead, it was posted on a website forum about taxidermy, a method of reproducing a life-like three-dimensional representation of an animal for display.

When Smeja posted this question, he was not yet convinced he shot Bigfoot. According to Robert Lindsay, “Smeja did not believe in Bigfoot at the time of the shootings, and one month later, he still doesn’t really believe in Bigfoot. So his mind is making up all sorts of strange stories about bears in order to try to make sense of the incident.”

Read more at Bigfoot Evidence.

About Bigfoot Evidence
The latest Bigfoot sightings, photos, and videos. World's only 24/7 Bigfoot News Blog: Encouraging readers to draw their own conclusions from the evidence and arguments.

5 Responses to ““Sierra Kills” Shooter’s Original Online Post Recovered”

  1. stompy responds:

    Makes me sick that someone would shoot a sasquatch or even think about doing it when they were not threatened.

  2. airgunner responds:


    It’s a basic rule of gun safety to never shoot anything you can’t identify. But I suppose someone could identify a squatch as a Bigfoot if he knew what one was supposed to look like.

    Of course, if it is attacking you, all bets are off. You still have the right to protect yourself and others.

    The sad fact is, if Bigfoot is real, it will probably take a dead body to prove it.

  3. joedastudd responds:

    Interesting question.

    On one hand it would be undeniable proof and allow for research and correct protection of the species.

    On the other you killing a defenseless animal.

    If I was in a situation where I was 100% sure it was bigfoot and I had no other way of capturing it (or gaining undeniable proof) I think I would have to take the shot.

    By undeniably proving the existence of the animal you would be protecting the rest of the species, not only their habitat but also allowing laws against further killings.

    A lot of the species discovered have been killed, tags then identified as a new species later.

    Look at the coelacanth, one dead specimen has lead to a lot of research which has lead to the conservation of the whole species.

  4. whiteriverfisherman responds:

    I can’t understand why this story is still being discussed. It has more holes in it than a screen door. Shot a Bigfoot, didn’t shoot a Bigfoot, Has bodies, doesn’t have bodies. Left them on the side of the road, left em in the woods someplace. Come on. My seven year old daughter could make up a better story than this one.

  5. whiteriverfisherman responds:

    Oh, to answer the question about shooting a Bigfoot, no I would not unless I had to defend myself. If anyone is worried that this guy actually shot a Bigfoot, don’t be, it never happened.

Sorry. Comments have been closed.

|Top | Content|

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest


Creatureplica Fouke Monster Sybilla Irwin


|Top | FarBar|

Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.