Is Hunting morally OK or an unnecessary evil?

[MobBoss]

Shooting a lawyer in the face is real hunting. That guy could defend himself - in a court of law too.

Depends on which face you shoot him in.

HA! See what I did there?

 

[JollyRoger]

Hard to tell without the specifics....which we dont have.

70 kils from a guy with a heart condition that later couldn't even avoid shooting his hunting partner? That speaks canned to me.

 

[MobBoss]

70 kils from a guy with a heart condition that later couldn't even avoid shooting his hunting partner? That speaks canned to me.

Assuming the report from the gossip reporter was accurate...

 

[warpus]

Your assumption here is false. Try reading some of the specifics on that list I gave. Some were indeed simply predatory attacks because a human can be an easy meal ticket.

*cough*

Like many animals, they seldom attack unless cornered, threatened, or wounded. They are less likely to attack humans than grizzly bears and typically flee for cover as soon as they identify a human visitor.

A black bear will not attack a human for consumption-related purposes. It might attack you for one of the reasons given above.

I never said it was equal...I was just countering your ridiculous idea that the animal were helpless. They arent. Even a deer will gore and kick a hunter and can hurt him bad if the hunter isnt careful. Even in a situation where a human has all the advantages, nothing is ever guranteed.

Please.. Hunting is safer than driving a friggin car is.

I wonder how many animals hunters have managed to kill - compared to how many hunters have been killed by animals they were hunting?

What do those numbers look like? 6,000,000,000 vs 3,000 ?

I never said that animals are helpless - but 99.99999% of the time they are no match for a seasoned hunter with a rifle. And that's the reason I don't really see hunting as a sport - it's not really a fair game if the odds are in your favour like that.

It's like asking Real Madrid to play a soccer game against MobBoss & family.

 

[cardgame]

If we wanted to hunt with the prey having guns, we'd sign up in the Army, where we'd get paid to do that...

 

[MobBoss]

*cough*

*cough* from your own link: Deaths by black bear, though, are most often predatory

Didnt I just say that?

A black bear will not attack a human for consumption-related purposes.

What does predatory mean to you then? Predatory precisely means killing something for consumption.

You may want to read your own link just a tad bit closer next time.

It might attack you for one of the reasons given above.

Or, it may attack you cause its hungry. Thats what 'predatory' means.

Please.. Hunting is safer than driving a friggin car is.

Well, duh, no where near as many people hunt as opposed to drive. If people hunted as much as they drove.....

I wonder how many animals hunters have managed to kill - compared to how many hunters have been killed by animals they were hunting?

You bucking for a PETA membership?

 

[Cutlass]

That's very interesting El Machinae. Wouldn't this have been going on for thousands of years?

Or are today's hunters having a much greater impact on wildlife than the hunters of 1,000 B.C.?

edit: while our ancestors didn't trophy hunt as much as some of us do these days, there must have still been some evolutionary effects of hunting in the past.

When you are hunting for food, and you don't have high powered rifles and scopes, then you catch what you can, and what you catch is typically what an animal predator would, which is to say the slow one. Not the biggest and strongest. Trophy hunters want the biggest and strongest, and have the ability to kill it that our ancestors did not have.

 

[Zack]

If you hunt for sport then you are a Nazi who needs Jesus in your heart.

Spoiler :

JK! You'd be a communist who needs Jesus in your heart.

 

[Perfection]

I think the real question should be why do you feel the need to destroy other living beings? Do deer make you feel inadequte?

They jacked up my car and ate my parent's garden. Thus they deserve death.


Jerks

 

[warpus]

*cough* from your own link: Deaths by black bear, though, are most often predatory

Didnt I just say that?

That's the ONLY true thing that you said

We can focus on that, I suppose, and pretend that you know what you're talking about, but I would much rather stick to reality.

 

[MobBoss]

That's the ONLY true thing that you said

No, it wasnt. But that was spoken like someone on the losing end of the arguement. Well played.

We can focus on that, I suppose, and pretend that you know what you're talking about, but I would much rather stick to reality.

That reality being where your own links are used to defeat your arguement? Ok, lets go with that one.

I am not pretending here. Your're simply wrong on a fairly wide range of issues on this topic.

 

[innonimatu]

The question is absurd. Simply hunting is not a moral question at all. Where's the moral issue with hunting as an activity?

Hunting something in particular I can argue about - it can, depending on the circumstances, become a moral question.

 

[ComradeDavo]

They jacked up my car and ate my parent's garden. Thus they deserve death.


Jerks

Sounds like you should have built a better fence. Or maybe a fence if you didn't have one already. No need to resort to death.

 

[hugtug]

For those that think killing animals is somehow cleaning them up and assisting evolution for the better, it's usually the opposite. People pick the big healthy animals to kill for food (and sport). Evolution is a two sided sword. Evolution is not always for the better, like some people seem to think. Just because things evolve, doesn't mean they are better - a lot of animals can still survive if they are worse off than before (for example humans could survive with smaller hands and three fingers, so if we evolved that way it wouldn't be better but we could survive).

http://www.all-creatures.org/cash/cc95-ss-how.html

If I was a deer, I'd much rather starve all winter long and then still barely remain alive, and eat in the summer being happy that I just barely made it through. I've been through tough times in life where I thought I was going to suffer for the rest of my life, but then everything got better and life was that much more wonderful when I got through that terrible period. What's my point? You may speculate and assume that deer will starve and die - but you don't know that. Just because a deer is skinny and is shivering (which people have witnessed) doesn't mean it will die - it may be just going through tough times. You may also assume that hunters pick the diseased and weak animals so this strengthens the animal - not true. Hunters pick the big best animals to shoot. The more healthy meat you get, the better. You don't see people picking the rotten eggs and eating them, instead of the big healthy eggs, now do you?

How does this all tie in? well let's say you see a skinny deer. Are you going to shoot it? No. It doesn't have meat on it. So instead of actually helping the deer, you go and shoot the ones that have meat on them which are able to survive the winter. You don't go and kill the skinny bony one that IS in fact suffering! Make sense? So yeah, you're not helping. You thought you were and that was your excuse, but nope, sorry it don't work that way.

As someone else said, fishers kill the big fish, and throw away the small ones. This is evolution for you: not for the better, in many cases.

Also, anyone who brings up God and how God allows you to hunt for so and so reasons should be ridiculed for being so naive. The bible was put together by a bunch of cute philosophers, not scientists. In fact they don't even qualify as philosophers - they are more like short story tellers with a mix of FUD spreading. It really is too bad you americans put God on your money too. My particular personal God told me to kill people who are stupid. Does that mean I should do it? Sure! After all I can't deny God!

 

[trader/warrior]

For those that think killing animals is somehow cleaning them up and assisting evolution for the better, it's usually the opposite. People pick the big healthy animals to kill for food (and sport). Evolution is a two sided sword. Evolution is not always for the better, like some people seem to think. Just because things evolve, doesn't mean they are better - a lot of animals can still survive if they are worse off than before (for example humans could survive with smaller hands and three fingers, so if we evolved that way it wouldn't be better but we could survive).

http://www.all-creatures.org/cash/cc95-ss-how.html

If I was a deer, I'd much rather starve all winter long and then still barely remain alive, and eat in the summer being happy that I just barely made it through. I've been through tough times in life where I thought I was going to suffer for the rest of my life, but then everything got better and life was that much more wonderful when I got through that terrible period. What's my point? You may speculate and assume that deer will starve and die - but you don't know that. Just because a deer is skinny and is shivering (which people have witnessed) doesn't mean it will die - it may be just going through tough times. You may also assume that hunters pick the diseased and weak animals so this strengthens the animal - not true. Hunters pick the big best animals to shoot. The more healthy meat you get, the better. You don't see people picking the rotten eggs and eating them, instead of the big healthy eggs, now do you?

Also as someone else said, fishers kill the big fish, and throw away the small ones. This is evolution for you: not for the better, in many cases.

We already have custom made animals for food, made through selective breeding and constantly being improved. And it is a fact that animals like deer in places where there are little or no predators because of human activities will go into a sort of "boom-and-bust" cycle... Just as many animals dying in a slower way (actually probably more) . not to mention the effects on the rest of the biome (is this the correct word?).

And hunting is in no way "assisting evolution" it just has an effect like pretty much everything else. Do you think it would be that horrible to have a bit smaller deer?

Edit: read your link and some interesting info there, I in no way claim to know much on this subject. But do you really think everything would be fine and dandy if we let them stay there with no natural predators? Sounds more like a problem with the management of hunting rather than hunting itself

 

[AngryPinkMoose]

After a recent experience I had, I am now against all hunting for sport.

 

[MobBoss]

That's the ONLY true thing that you said

We can focus on that, I suppose, and pretend that you know what you're talking about, but I would much rather stick to reality.

Nice little update to this thread...just for Warpus:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,560144,00.html?test=latestnews

Woman Mauled to Death by Pet Black Bear
Monday, October 05, 2009

Print ALLENTOWN, Pa. — Authorities in northeastern Pennsylvania say a woman was killed by her pet black bear as she cleaned its cage.

State police say 37-year-old Kelly Ann Walz was mauled to death Sunday evening by the 350-pound bear.

A state Game Commission spokesman says Walz kept the bear inside a steel and concrete cage near her house about 20 miles northeast of Allentown.

Officials say Walz threw a shovelful of dog food to one side of the cage to distract the bear while she cleaned the other side. At some point the bear turned on her and attacked.

The bear was shot and killed. No information was available about who shot the bear.

Game officials say Walz also owned a Bengal tiger and an African lion. They say she had licenses to own the animals.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Was Kelly Ann Walz eaten?

 

[Mowque]

Hunting is boring, so I gave it up.

 

[Quackers]

Kill as many animals as you want and eat them all. Enjoy! You super-predator!