Poll: When is Hunting Acceptable?

[jamradar]

Hunting is pretty fun, if you've never gone hunting than you really should.

 

[ecoho]

hunting is not only ethical its ecological. since we as humans have thined out other preditors we must take their place and hunt the animals so they dont starve to death.

 

[XT inc]

The only logical answer is for food and population control, to keep the balance in nature brought about by mans tampering. Foreign species that get brought over here and have their population explode in alien climates.

Hunting for sport or fun just seems dumb to me. I mean Going out to kill something with technology far greater than any creatures bare form. Even Bows and arrows are to advanced.

rare would be an animal species that kills for fun. You don't see a tiger fucking up some people for a laugh. I can never understand the joy of shooting a squirrel with a .22.

 

[interspark]

fun fact- humans are the most populous species on earth but the second is Orcas AKA Killer Whales

so... we should kill the orcas?

*facepalm*

 

[SargeGO]

When me and my family lived in Montana, we went hunting once or twice a year. We did it for food, because one deer could supply use with about 1 year worth of food. Since we moved to Washington, we hunt less, but when we get something we always use as much meat as possible. So I agree with hunting, as long as you use the meat.

 

[interspark]

hunting is not only ethical its ecological. since we as humans have thined out other preditors we must take their place and hunt the animals so they dont starve to death.

so essentially what you're saying is "we've killed the other animals so much, the only solution is to keep killing them, only for fun aswell as food"? we kill HERBIVORES in hunting, as we do in our day to day lives in farms, only in farming we breed animals solely to kill them so it's a pretty stable system. going into the woods and going on a kill frenzy won't have ANY kind of positive outcome

 

[RedRussian]

If it's tasty, blow it's head off. It probably had a better, though a little more stressed, life than farm animals.

Meh, probably not in this day and age when "farm" animals are packed in dense feed lots without enough room to turn around.

I tried hunting twice and thought it was pretty lame to be honest. Shot some ducks and one deer.Its not my thing I guess. Its kinda weird when hunters brag about how skilled hunters they are when they use a high powered rifle and a high powered scope to kill something.

Now bow hunters, those guys are skilled.

 

[RedRussian]

rare would be an animal species that kills for fun. You don't see a tiger fucking up some people for a laugh. I can never understand the joy of shooting a squirrel with a .22.

I mostly agree with you, but cats are the only species of animal besides humans that kill things for fun. (on a regular basis.)

 

[RedRussian]

whoops. Ignore this one.

 

[MagicMouse]

Regulated hunting is fine.

It regulates the population of animals so that they don't starve.

It provides us with food, and entertainment.

We kill more humanly than animals do.

It is perfectly natural.

(And no one can tell me that animals don't kill for fun. Have you ever seen what happens when a fox gets in a bird pen? It's a slaughter, a wasteful slaughter for no reason other than the fox enjoyed it.)

 

[Nicarus]

I believe hunting is acceptable as a means of controlling population. If too many of any species exists, there will be conflict of resource rationing and a lot of the species would die out prematurely.

...and yes, I'm taking a biology course heavy on ecosystem studies. Kind of "required" as part of the curriculum.

 

[Denamic]

Hunting is a part of nature, so what's wrong with enjoying it?
It's really no different than fishing.
It'd be kinda douchey to waste the meat though.

I mostly agree with you, but cats are the only species of animal besides humans that kill things for fun. (on a regular basis.)

No they really aren't.
Wolves and even some dogs love chasing down animals and killing them.
I'm sure there's lots of other predators that enjoy their means of survival.

 

[Absimilliard]

I opted for "When done for food", but that doesn't mean I feel you should only hunt when you absolutely need to. But as long as the animal(s) killed are eaten, I'm ok with it. (But trophies are just plain lame, unless you've killed something with your bare hands.)

 

[Yureina]

Only if done for food as a means of survival. "For Sport" hunting isn't right to me. I guess its because I really have a thing for animals and don't like seeing them get hurt.

 

[Iron Lightning]

I don't have an issue with the practice as long as it doesn't cause anything to go extinct.

 

[Bruin]

Always, until it depletes the natural balance of things.

Humans are predators and without predators the ecosystem is thrown off.

True, but making a successful kill nowadays is easier than it used to be. It used to be that a whole group of us armed with primitive weapons had to band together to take down one animal, depending how big or dangerous it was, and this was such a difficult and risky task that we were happy to get red meat once a month.
Now, with a gun and good aim, we can kill pretty much anything that doesn't have a bulletproof skull. Humans are becoming too proficient as predators; this isn't even counting indirect killing via depletion of habitat.
I don't mind hunting so long as you make full use of the body (by which I mean eat it) and therefore don't waste the animal's death, and so long as it is strictly controlled to avoid overhunting. Anything else I cannot condone.

Humans.

Always so self-absorbed.

It doesn't matter how we kill them, as long as we kill them.

Generally, it's a rule that there's growers, plant-eaters, meat-eaters who eat the plant-eaters and meat eaters who eat the meat eaters.

Everybody has a place on the chain. Ours is at the top, at this time. We kill everything on the list and consume them all. It is our natural place nature has given us. Nothing is strange about it in any way, shape or form.

It is the predator nature has evolved us into being. The creature we were always going to be.

What is strange and unnatural is when man upsets the balance nature has established. This is why tigers have enormous hunting ranges, why wolf-packs kill one another for straying into other territories. Encroach on that land and you risk starving out those wolves. Some may see it as survival of the fittest, but in this case, we will topple everything beneath us if we kill everything for the sake of killing it.

But that scenario is impossible. There aren't enough hunters in the world, put simply, to get that job done without military force.

Remove the emotional aspect of things. You're talking from a viewpoint that is less than a hundred years old compared to an order that has been established over four billion years of careful evolution and planning. The animal is going to die--a set number of animals MUST die, actually, to keep the population healthy. Whether for food or for sport, they have to die. And if you eliminate predators like wolves (Looking at you, Europe), you create an enormous imbalance so that another predator has to fill the void or else you risk overpopulation by the prey species.

And all too often does man forget to count himself among the beasts. And we're too quick to forget that we're predators as well. Look at your canines in the mirror next time you brush your teeth. I find it's a good reminder--something you can't exactly get rid of and something that is a part of you.

And you're chalking up man's hunting capacity. Those dead deer on the side of the ride are an overflow. A surplus, I suppose, of creature. Count in all the deer-hitting accidents in a year combined and you still don't have the normal amount of deaths there would be from predators like wolves if man hadn't driven them out from "his" land. The only creatures man has hunted to extinction are ones we want something from commercially. And the one thing we should never underestimate about man next to his ability to kill himself, is his ability to be the greediest animal on the planet.

All the rest we've killed indirectly through deforestation. And those are usually fragile species at best, and as much as I sound cold for saying it--it's Darwinism. You can't adapt in a world without your ideal forest? You die. That rare treefrog in the Amazon who can only exist in one square mile patch of the forest which is presently being cut down is not going to make it in the long run anyway.

 

[Lord_Panzer]

Gentlemen, I suggest we hunt those who voted 'Never.'
Should you take up this cause you will be provided with a horse, a trained fox, and a red polo jacket.

Deer is delicious and squirrels are destructive. Ergo, we shoot them.

 

[XT inc]

rare would be an animal species that kills for fun. You don't see a tiger fucking up some people for a laugh. I can never understand the joy of shooting a squirrel with a .22.

I mostly agree with you, but cats are the only species of animal besides humans that kill things for fun. (on a regular basis.)

In all fairness, sometimes they eat it afterward, and in all honesty they have nothing else to do in life. Baser functions and batting around rodents. A human can't say they had nothing better to do than murder something for fun.

 

[CarpathianMuffin]

When done for food and with respect for the wildlife that you don't slaughter.

 

[voetballeeuw]

If you want to hunt go hunt. As long as you take the meat and everything.