Poll: When is Hunting Acceptable?
- Thread starter Jumpingbean3
- Start date
Consider how there are other animal hurt other other for food so I would say why not? However in this day and age I would say it is acceptable if we were all back in the stone ages and we had to hunt food for ourself.
For food, as long as there's a stable population or you have no other choice. Hunting to keep populations in check seems to have a tendency not to work according to plan, i.e. hunt wolves to protect the small deer population, then a year or two later hunt deer because their numbers have exploded for some unforeseeable reason.
when the game isnt endangerd and is edible its pretty much OK and people when you select "under no circumstances" it would also mean that its illigeal for cultural reasons (maybe there is osme kind of tribe where a kid needs to kill a monkey as a part of a coming-of-age ritual)
Yup, I totally support people hunting animals. Seems fine, seeing as animals hunt each other all the time and its perfectly natural.
The thing that throws off this equation is the unnatural use of firearms, which quickly removes any sense of fairness or sport from the equation.
If you want to hunt I totally support you, but first I'm going to strip you down, take your gun, hand you a switchblade, and then point you towards the nearest bear. Best of luck macho man.
The thing that throws off this equation is the unnatural use of firearms, which quickly removes any sense of fairness or sport from the equation.
If you want to hunt I totally support you, but first I'm going to strip you down, take your gun, hand you a switchblade, and then point you towards the nearest bear. Best of luck macho man.
I'm all for hunting so long as you don't do it like the british. I fail to see how fifty guys on horses and thirty something dogs vs. one fox is fair game. If you wanna be a real man, you'll hunt with nothing but a bow and arrow. Good stuff right there.
I have no moral objection to doing it for food, but "For fun".
Well... Hmm. I suppose technically you're not doing any wrong in the world, but, I respect living creatures, so, I frown upon it.
Well... Hmm. I suppose technically you're not doing any wrong in the world, but, I respect living creatures, so, I frown upon it.
It is always acceptable IMO. Just don't over do it. Population control and what not. I personally would only hunt if I was going to eat what I kill but I see nothing wrong with hunting for sport.
When is hunting acceptable?
Always. With regulation though. If we over hunt one species then another species might die as well if the first was its main food source. also if animals are over hunted then what will happen to the next generation of hunters? they'll be screwed. and they have no right to be strewed.
Always. With regulation though. If we over hunt one species then another species might die as well if the first was its main food source. also if animals are over hunted then what will happen to the next generation of hunters? they'll be screwed. and they have no right to be strewed.
im not a hunter, but i dont think hunting is wrong. As long as there is a solid reason and restricitions then its fine. In most states you can only hunt certain animals at certain times because of population reasons and even then you must hunt the male( talking about deer) because killing 1 male will reduce the population more than killing 1 female. And for exotic safarris(sp?) aslong as there are limits then i dont see anything wrong with that either. It is a natural part of us as humans.
Hunting purely for sport bothers me a little, but I have no problem with people hunting "for fun" as long as they kill things they intend to eat.
Even then so long as it's legal hunting I'm really not concerned, I would just never do it myself.
Even then so long as it's legal hunting I'm really not concerned, I would just never do it myself.
As a sport its ok to me if the animal is at least as strong as you and you use no other technical devices as it does. Attach some bearclaws to a glove and up into the woods with you.
So best way is, hunt the most dangerous game
So best way is, hunt the most dangerous game
I clicked for sport, just to be pedantic.
But really, as long as you eat what you kill and don't decimate populations, I don't care. Plenty shoot and shoot purely for the fun of it.
Round here it's pheasants and rabbits, there are shitloads of pheasants and rabbits. What happens is the shooters tend to shoot purely for fun while the game keeper runs the shooting as a business.
Shooters shoot, keeper gets the animals to sell for meat, everybody's happy except for PETA.
But really, as long as you eat what you kill and don't decimate populations, I don't care. Plenty shoot and shoot purely for the fun of it.
Round here it's pheasants and rabbits, there are shitloads of pheasants and rabbits. What happens is the shooters tend to shoot purely for fun while the game keeper runs the shooting as a business.
Shooters shoot, keeper gets the animals to sell for meat, everybody's happy except for PETA.
Ok, I can't say that I thought many other people would say never under any circumstances but, really, more people think it's better just for sport.
When the animals get guns and can shoot back.
Seriously though, it is OK when you ensure the animal suffers minimally and when you use all parts of it, so as not to waste anything.
Also, the whole extinction thing. As long as numbers are kept in check, I think it is OK.
Seriously though, it is OK when you ensure the animal suffers minimally and when you use all parts of it, so as not to waste anything.
Also, the whole extinction thing. As long as numbers are kept in check, I think it is OK.