Do You Agree With Deer Hunting?????

[timlewis]

I was answering a poll and this came up so what do u think?

[BitsyNaceyDog]

Deer hunting is definitely not for me, and I don't want to be anywhere around it. I don't think it's wrong though as long as the person/people use it for food.

[Pam]

I personally would never want to hunt or have a close relative (husband, son, etc.) who hunted, although I know lots of people who do. The husband of my good friend goes deer hunting all the time and they do eat the deer meat. I just don't understand the need since we all live near supermarkets.

[BC_MoM]

I personally would never hunt, but hunting is OK in my opinion. It helps balance populations of different animals so one doesn't starve because of overpopulation, etc.

[Karen]

As I have said before, we need people to hunt deer. This is actually becoming a huge problem uin some areas, because no one "wants to shoot Bambi," but it needs to be done. We have destroyed the balance of nature by eliminating most of the deer population's natural predators. With previous centuries "bounty" on wolves and other predators, there are none or very few left, not enough to keep the burgeoning deer population in check. The deer are wreaking ecological havok on some of our forests, destorying habitat for other species because of their overpopulation. And if we do not keep the deer population down by hunting, they will overpopulate and die of starvation.

Have you ever seen a deer dead from starvation lying on the side of the road? I have. Have you ever seen a skeletal deer licking road salt from the edge of the highway? I have.

What is kinder, a quick death by a hunter's hand, or long, slow, painful starvation of deer and other creatures whose habitat they have altered?

I am not a hunter, myself, but I respect the people who do hunt, and know it needs to be done.

[NicoleLJ]

Hunting is a way of life for us. Last year hubby got 3 white tails, 1 mule deer and tried for his elk but didn't get it. This year he is down for 2 white tails, a mule deer and an elk. We are hoping he gets all of them. I am not for trophy hunting though. When hubby hunts we use all teh meat. And some of our family uses it too. We stock about 4 families freezers with teh meat. It is very healthy. My step dad has diabieties and eating lean meat like deer is much better for him. Our freezers are almost empty so it is good that hunting season is starting soon.
Nicole

[Chilli]

I, myself, would never hunt, though I'm fine with people who hunt that uses every single peice of the animal they can.
And like said, if no one hunted, there would be a major overpopulation of certain animals.

[JenBKR]

I don't hunt, but my husband and father do. I have no problem with hunting, and it's MUCH more humane to the animals than commercial meat.

I don't want to say that ANY hunting is ok though because I don't agree with hunting just for sport, where the animal is not used.

[Christiansmommy]

I think deer hunting is okay...and actually probably most animals (with the exceptions of obvious ones). As long as it's not for the "sport", but to eat the meat. Afterall, that is the reason why certain animals were put on this earth, so that we humans could have meat to eat. I have eaten deer meat, though, and by itself, is too gamey tasting for me...it has to kinda have the taste "hidden" for me to like it :) My in laws family hunt , and keep all the meat and they do eat it all...

[Pembroke_Corgi]

Well I seem to have a different opinion than most people who posted, so I will say what I think at least.

I think hunting is a lazy way to "bring balance" to overpopulation. What about reintroducing natural predators and setting up preservation or conservation areas for them to live in? Too often we rely on a "quick fix" that will really not help the problem in the long run. Unless we keep shooting and killing overpopulated animals there will be no "balance." It's people's fault that it is this way, and I think it should be our responsibility to fix it, in the most natural, humane way possible.

I also have a big problem with bears and other animals that ARE NOT overpopulated being hunted. It's disgusting in my opinion to kill for sport. Also, growing up in the midwest I know that MOST hunters DO NOT use the animal for food. I had a friend whose father had 20 deer carcasses piled up in his garage every deer season. :mad:

I also think hunting is dangerous. Too often, you hear of hunting accidents (even the vice president accidently shot a friend) and pets being accidently killed because the hunters thought they were a deer or something.

[Zippy]

Hunting is ok as long as you use all of any animal you hunt and that you hunt during the right season.I don't agree with just shotting an animal and not using the animal for meat,clothing,ect...

[Argranade]

Deer populations do not need to be controled by guns.

I have seen on T.V where people catch the bucks that mate with the females and put them to sleep for a while, in the time these people neuter the male bucks so they produce less babies when there set free again.

Not all male bucks will mate all the time.There is a leader that will defend the females from other males, fights will occure and the winner usualy gets all the does...so then its that deer that needs to be neutered.

This is a way to keep a population down instead of shooting the poor things.

If only people would use there brains, a challenge is no good reason to shoot a living thing it hurts the animal no matter what.Wolves populations have gone down because of too many high ways being built near there homes and the pups these wolfs produce get run over by cars, no wounder deer have rised in population...because of humans.

Its up to Humans to fix the things we did wrong not kill them.

[MajesticCollies]

What about reintroducing natural predators and setting up preservation or conservation areas for them to live in? Too often we rely on a "quick fix" that will really not help the problem in the long run. Unless we keep shooting and killing overpopulated animals there will be no "balance." It's people's fault that it is this way, and I think it should be our responsibility to fix it, in the most natural, humane way possible.


We have a deer population of over 700,000 deer just in the state of Ohio. Introducing natural predators did not solve our problem. They brought in Coyotes to try and help the over population that would starve in the winter or come down with TB due to lack of water and alls it did was let the coyotes prey on our pets of dogs and cats and other live stock cause they were easier to prey on. I used to hunt but now I do not. No time actually. I do go to local hunters and get there left over year old deer meat from thier freezers and feed it to my dogs. Venison just happens to be some of the best raw meat for dogs do to its leanness of it. I'm not in favor of the people who hunt for sport and leave the animal lay.

[critter crazy]

Before my medical problems occured, i was an avid hunter. Our whole family is, I feel there is nothing wrong with it as long as it is not just for the "kill". People who kill deer and just let them lay, are cowards. If I could I would still hunt! I miss it terribly!

[Suki Wingy]

I could never do it but pretty much all else has failed to control the population, and we all know how the food chain works. My neighbors have land and hunt, and I'm actually looking forward to buying some meat for my dog.

[timlewis]

I did not post when i started this thread but i do deer hunt although i havent in 2 years i probably will rifle hunt this year. Someone said we should repopulate wolves and coyotes to take care of the problem, we have plenty of coyotes not wolves. If you think about it is it more humane for a wolve or coyote to fight and tear a deer to shreds even start eating it while its still alive, or to kill one in seconds with a gun or bow. I shot a doe 2 years ago and it didnt run 50 yards until it fell over and died that to me is a lot more humane that coyotes and wolves. Now my BIL shot a doe one year and we had to chase it down and he had to kill it with a knife(without going into detail) he had hit it in the shoulder and we tracked it until it just couldnt go anymore. But at the same time a predator can just the same lame one and it get away and be that way for the rest of its life. And as i said in another thread there is almost nothing like sitting in your tree stand and having a buck or doe walk under you and having your bow pulled back ready to shoot. It really gets your blood a pumping, and im sorry if this offends anyone but just according to where you are brought up it is a sport, I dont think its right to just throw the meat away dont get me wrong. Although when you go deer hunting you are out for the biggest rack you can find, I personally dont eat much deer meat I will however give it to someone who is less fortunate than I am and let them eat it.

[Husky15]

Deer are my favorite animals and it just kills me inside knowing it is now hunting season and that there are men out there killing them. I understand though that sometimes it needs to be done. But if it is done just for the sport, it makes me really mad. There has to be a good reason to it. Either for the overpopulation situation, or for food. If someone just does it because it's fun then makes no use of the dead deer, it makes me angry.

And you're right, Tim. Death by a bullet can definitely be less painful then death by a wild dog tearing it to pieces.

[Karen]

Deer populations do not need to be controled by guns.

I have seen on T.V where people catch the bucks that mate with the females and put them to sleep for a while, in the time these people neuter the male bucks so they produce less babies when there set free again.

Not all male bucks will mate all the time.There is a leader that will defend the females from other males, fights will occure and the winner usualy gets all the does...so then its that deer that needs to be neutered.

This is a way to keep a population down instead of shooting the poor things.

If only people would use there brains, a challenge is no good reason to shoot a living thing it hurts the animal no matter what.Wolves populations have gone down because of too many high ways being built near there homes and the pups these wolfs produce get run over by cars, no wounder deer have rised in population...because of humans.

Its up to Humans to fix the things we did wrong not kill them.

Do you have any data on how much time and effort it would take to do that, never mind the huge amout of dollars? And what would you do with the extra hundreds of thousands of deer that now exist? And how would you be sure of getting enough of the bucks, when many of the poulation exist in forests away from human habitation?

Wolves used to be shot - in huge numbers - by ranchers and farmers, and others who regarded them as nuisances. I think that has a lot more to do with the lack of wolves than highways being built, frankly.

Yes, we - the humans - created this problem, so we - the humans - need to fix it. Whatever method works should be used, and probably a combination of methods. But there are people who hunt and use the meat well and wisely. And in doing do, they help manage the deer population, but also don't need to buy as much meat from commericial farmers, so can have a positive impact on the food supply as well.

[Argranade]

I realy don't care how much money would go into an effort like that, as long as less animals are being shot it's fine with me, I swear if I had money I would throw it into all this research..if only I did.


Wolves used to be shot - in huge numbers - by ranchers and farmers, and others who regarded them as nuisances. I think that has a lot more to do with the lack of wolves than highways being built, frankly.

Yes thats what I mean, its the wolfes that need to be re-populated in the wild because there numbers are going down (I seen this on WWF) and with numbers going down deer are poping up everywhere then those deer starve from not enough food...if there where more wolfes to hunt them then maybe somthing good could come towards the deer from this, they would have more food and there numbers in population would be even.

Sounds kinda weird because the deer are going to be kept down by hungrey wolfes but at least its natural & not man made, I would not have it any other way as a matter of fact.

[Lady's Human]

The difference between a wolf eating a deer and a human doing the same is what, exactly?

[CagneyDog]

I have said before, we need people to hunt deer. This is actually becoming a huge problem uin some areas, because no one "wants to shoot Bambi," but it needs to be done. We have destroyed the balance of nature by eliminating most of the deer population's natural predators. With previous centuries "bounty" on wolves and other predators, there are none or very few left, not enough to keep the burgeoning deer population in check. The deer are wreaking ecological havok on some of our forests, destorying habitat for other species because of their overpopulation. And if we do not keep the deer population down by hunting, they will overpopulate and die of starvation.

Have you ever seen a deer dead from starvation lying on the side of the road? I have. Have you ever seen a skeletal deer licking road salt from the edge of the highway? I have.

What is kinder, a quick death by a hunter's hand, or long, slow, painful starvation of deer and other creatures whose habitat they have altered?

I am not a hunter, myself, but I respect the people who do hunt, and know it needs to be done.

Perhaps this is true Karen however, in my mind it is just a vicious circle. We've ruined enough, when will we learn that it's time to leave nature alone? That's just my two cents.

[*iluvskipper*]

Well I put deer hunting is ok because i guess it helps control their population but idk i guess that they way some people hunt and kill animals just really bugs me and if you see the music video for Rise Against's "Ready To Fall" you would know what i mean... uhh here ya go...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tgDusbS5nmU

[Glacier]

Hunting feeds my family--human and canine. Not deer hunting though. There aren't enough deer up here to have a hunting season on them, unlike most places. However, there are more than twice as many moose as people. So far this season, hubby has been skunked so we are trying to find a place to get a side of organic beef. I just can't eat commercially raised meat anymore.

My husband is a hunter. He's a good one. Never takes an animal for it's horns. Frankly smaller ones taste better! There will never ever be a trophy head hanging in my house!! My father in law is a carver. He turns the antlers into beautiful carvings. We have a First Nations friend who turns the hides into all sorts of clothing and drums. Another native friend takes the "using everything" a step further than we do--we give him all the liver, nose, intestines ect and yes he eats them! The dogs get all the bones and other non-human edible parts.

The dogs' Uncle Randy is a wild game butcher. He keeps my canine family well fed with scrap meat and bones. I have four freezers just for the dog food meat. My dog food bill would triple without his help.

Where I live there are many people who don't live within driving distance of a supermarket. There are communities here that are fly-in only, no road access, where a pound of regular hamburger would cost well over 10 dollars. Those people depend on hunting to survive. That's a large part of why I am so opposed to any drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

[Tollers-n-Dobes]

I voted for any hunting is ok, but that only applies to the people who hunt and eat all of the meat and such off of the animal. I don't agree with hunting simply for skin, fur, antlers, etc. I only agree with it as long as it's used as food.

[Argranade]

The difference between a wolf eating a deer and a human doing the same is what, exactly?

Wolfs are natural in this Humans are just a pest at this.

I belive only Native's should be able to hunt.

Don't ask why, because if I explain it im sure no one shall understand it.

[Twisterdog]

What is the difference in shooting a deer and eating the meat vs. paying someone to kill a cow for you, and then eating the meat? If you eat meat, an animal died. Period. There is NO difference in hunting for a deer, and going through the McDonald's drive-through for a Big Mac or some McNuggets. Unless you are a vegetarian, you have NO room to criticize hunters. To say hunting is "wrong" while you are eating meat is so incredibly hypocritical to me.

Now, hunting just for the sport or the antlers is certainly wrong, of course. But if you eat it, there is nothing wrong with hunting, anymore than there is anything wrong with going to the grocery store and buying a steak.

[critter crazy]

What is the difference in shooting a deer and eating the meat vs. paying someone to kill a cow for you, and then eating the meat? If you eat meat, an animal died. Period. There is NO difference in hunting for a deer, and going through the McDonald's drive-through for a Big Mac or some McNuggets. Unless you are a vegetarian, you have NO room to criticize hunters. To say hunting is "wrong" while you are eating meat is so incredibly hypocritical to me.

Now, hunting just for the sport or the antlers is certainly wrong, of course. But if you eat it, there is nothing wrong with hunting, anymore than there is anything wrong with going to the grocery store and buying a steak.

I agree completely!!

[Corinna]

I live where we have reintroduced the wolves. Not a good idea . 1st the new pack killed off the excisting ones here. so that genetic strain is gone . 2.they have become lazy perferring the domestic game to actually hunting the wild overpopulated game. ( This includes cats and dogs. )
Hubby was a taxidermist for a while we would take any meat that thropy hunters didn't want . Had a long list of people that needed meat to live. he was a hunter until the cancer took the muscle in his shooting arm. Misses getting out in the woods he would ususally not shoot his until the last day just so he could watch so many animals.

[NicoleLJ]

What is the difference in shooting a deer and eating the meat vs. paying someone to kill a cow for you, and then eating the meat? If you eat meat, an animal died. Period. There is NO difference in hunting for a deer, and going through the McDonald's drive-through for a Big Mac or some McNuggets. Unless you are a vegetarian, you have NO room to criticize hunters. To say hunting is "wrong" while you are eating meat is so incredibly hypocritical to me.

Now, hunting just for the sport or the antlers is certainly wrong, of course. But if you eat it, there is nothing wrong with hunting, anymore than there is anything wrong with going to the grocery store and buying a steak.


Very well said. I agree completely.
Nicole

[Pembroke_Corgi]

What is the difference in shooting a deer and eating the meat vs. paying someone to kill a cow for you, and then eating the meat? If you eat meat, an animal died. Period. There is NO difference in hunting for a deer, and going through the McDonald's drive-through for a Big Mac or some McNuggets. Unless you are a vegetarian, you have NO room to criticize hunters. To say hunting is "wrong" while you are eating meat is so incredibly hypocritical to me.

Now, hunting just for the sport or the antlers is certainly wrong, of course. But if you eat it, there is nothing wrong with hunting, anymore than there is anything wrong with going to the grocery store and buying a steak.
Well, I'm a vegetarian, but I do feel there is a difference. I certainly don't agree with the way animals are raised or processed through the meat industry, but at least there aren't people walking around randomly with guns.

I spent most of my childhood living in the country, and even though we did not permit hunting on our land, we found traces of hunters anyway. I personally don't want any firearms near my house. Another thing that really bothers me is when I see CHILDREN with guns. It's bad enough that an adult could take a bad shot, but that parents allow their children access to deadly weapons blows me away.

[luvofallhorses]

no, I don't or any kind of hunting and some, not all..but some treat their dogs like s***! :mad: :mad:

[CathyBogart]

I think hunting is OK as long as the animal is eaten or otherwise put to good use. (Hung on a wall is NOT good use IMO)

I agree with Twisterdog.....I feel that most animals killed by hunters had a better life, and a faster death, than animals commercially raised for food.

[PJ's Mom]

I am totally against hunting deer. I live in an area that's growing so rapidly that we don't have to hunt them. We're driving them out of their homes and killing them with our cars. :( :( I get so sad to see a dead deer on the side of the road...especially a young one.

[zoomer]

I think deer hunting, ANY hunting actually, is wrong. I would never hunt and hate how people stuff & hang deer heads in their house...

[cmayer31]

Hunting is fine, sport hunting is wrong. It's been said before in this thread: if you eat meat of any sort then an animal died for your pleasure. Hunting is a way of life for many people whether they are 'native' or not. Cow, deer, moose, fish, turkey, pig... meat doesn't just appear in a package; it came from a living creature.

**edit** I need to add that wildlife conservation is near and dear to my heart. When I say hunting is ok I am referring to game animals that are used for food and survival. I am extremely against the taking or rare, endangered, protected, or otherwise non-normal food source.

[IRescue452]

The problem with setting up conservation ares is that we can only do small amounts of land. Deer thrive on edge spaces between wooded areas and open areas. When you set up a bunch of 100 acre conservation areas you get a larger deer population. As the area gets larger, the population goes down. States that are mostly large conservation or wooded areas actually have less deer than say Wisconsin, where the wooded areas are split up. Natural predators, on the other hand, thrive more in large conservation areas. So the places where natural predators prefer are different from the deer's favorite places.

[Alysser]

Yes, if hunting is not done for sport. If it's done for food and overpopulation problems I don't really mind it. I could never kill an animal in such a way myself. My dad used to hunt but he doesn't anymore.

[Suki Wingy]

There is NO difference in hunting for a deer, and going through the McDonald's drive-through for a Big Mac or some McNuggets.
Actually, there is. Most meat from McDonalds came from animals very poor conditions because it's the cheapest possible, and hunting a deer is ananimal that lived a netural life, so in a way eating McDonalds is a whole lot worse than hunting and eating a deer.

[Twisterdog]

Actually, there is. Most meat from McDonalds came from animals very poor conditions because it's the cheapest possible, and hunting a deer is ananimal that lived a netural life, so in a way eating McDonalds is a whole lot worse than hunting and eating a deer.

Good point, and one that I agree with. :)

[Twisterdog]

Well, I'm a vegetarian, but I do feel there is a difference. I certainly don't agree with the way animals are raised or processed through the meat industry, but at least there aren't people walking around randomly with guns.

I spent most of my childhood living in the country, and even though we did not permit hunting on our land, we found traces of hunters anyway. I personally don't want any firearms near my house. Another thing that really bothers me is when I see CHILDREN with guns. It's bad enough that an adult could take a bad shot, but that parents allow their children access to deadly weapons blows me away.

And, as a vegetarian, I believe you have the right to say that you don't approve of hunting wild game or killing livestock, etc. I think vegetarians are the ONLY people who can legitimately criticize hunting, as long as they include ALL forms of killing animals for food.

It sounds to me, though, that your big complaint with hunters is that they have guns? Now, I am the first to admit that there are a LOT of idiots who hunt who should not be anywhere near a gun. They are untrained and unskilled. However, for you to group EVERY gun owner and EVERY hunter in with the untrained and unskilled people "randomly" walking around with a gun is certainly very wrong and ignorant.

There are also a LOT of idiots who drive who should not be anywhere near a car. How many innocent people die in car accidents every year because some moron ran a red light while talking on his cell phone and drinking coffee? How many drunk drivers are on the roads? A LOT ... but does that make EVERY driver a distracted, dangerous drunk? Of course not. And if a car is not a "deadly weapon", I don't know what is!

You are making some terribly broad generalizations about a large, diverse group of people. The vast majority of hunters are careful, conscientious people, it's just the very small percentage of idiots that make the newspapers. It's not dramatic headlines to report on the 95% of good hunters ... just like it's not dramatic headlines to report on the 95% of good drivers. You will read in the papers about the drunk who ran a red light or the idiot who shot his buddy in the back ... not the thousands of skilled, trained hunters or drivers quietly following the rules in the background.

As for children hunting, define "children". I know in the state I live in, there is a definate age and hunter safety training requirement before a teenager can hunt. Just like there is a definate age requirement and driver's training requirement before a teenager can drive a car. Are you saying you think a sixteen year old is mature and skilled enough to operate a 5,000 pound vehicle moving at 75 miles per hour ... but not mature and skilled enough to operate a firearm with required adult supervision? I disagree.

[wolf_Q]

I am not against hunting IF and only IF the meat is used for food. I do not agree with trophy hunting or hunting just for the fur.

I've grown up in a family that hunts deer. My grandfathers were deer hunters, my dad hunts deer, my brother hunts deer, etc. I've eaten my fair share of deer meat. I think it is hypocritical to be against hunting (for food) but buy meat from the store/restaurant. If you are vegan/vegitarian then hey you're allowed to be totally against hunting of course.

Everyone in my family who has hunted deer only got one deer per year, if that many years no deer at all. A friend of mine's farther is really obsessed with hunting (their house is covered in taxidermy!) and betwen him and her brothers they'd kill several deer (as well as many other animals) each year and not ONCE did I ever see them eat deer meat (I was at her house all the time growing up). That really bothered me and it still does. :/

[Miss Z]

As I know I've posted before, I have extremely harsh views regarding hunting. I'll keep it simple - I voted 'Any hunting is wrong'.

[Pembroke_Corgi]

It sounds to me, though, that your big complaint with hunters is that they have guns? Now, I am the first to admit that there are a LOT of idiots who hunt who should not be anywhere near a gun. They are untrained and unskilled. However, for you to group EVERY gun owner and EVERY hunter in with the untrained and unskilled people "randomly" walking around with a gun is certainly very wrong and ignorant.

Well, I realize that my view of hunters came off as rather harsh- I'm not saying that hunters are "stupid" or that they are unskilled, I just think the risk of allowing people to carry guns and shoot at things where other people may be is a risk that greatly outweighs any potential benefit of having animals hunted.


There are also a LOT of idiots who drive who should not be anywhere near a car. How many innocent people die in car accidents every year because some moron ran a red light while talking on his cell phone and drinking coffee? How many drunk drivers are on the roads? A LOT ... but does that make EVERY driver a distracted, dangerous drunk? Of course not. And if a car is not a "deadly weapon", I don't know what is!

Of course, anything can be used as a potential weapon. But that is not my point, and I personally think it is an irrelevant one. Guns were DESIGNED to kill other living things. Cars were not. Period. Guns frankly serve no other purpose. Maybe my argument is more anti-gun than anti-hunting, but I feel that hunting is just one more excuse we have to keep allowing guns, making the argument that it's a sport; it's a fun pastime.


As for children hunting, define "children". I know in the state I live in, there is a definate age and hunter safety training requirement before a teenager can hunt. Just like there is a definate age requirement and driver's training requirement before a teenager can drive a car. Are you saying you think a sixteen year old is mature and skilled enough to operate a 5,000 pound vehicle moving at 75 miles per hour ... but not mature and skilled enough to operate a firearm with required adult supervision? I disagree.

I know for a fact that many such laws are openly disregarded. I grew up in Iowa! Many of my classmates were hunting with their fathers by the age of 12, which in my opinion is dangerous! They wouldn't let their 12 year olds drive a car or have sex, so why on earth would they give them a weapon? It honestly shocks me that some parents who are conservative in every other way would give their children a device to potentially kill themselves, easily. Until a few weeks ago my dad still lived out in the country. Occasionally on my way to his house (which required driving on several gravel roads) I would see bands of hunters. One time, I saw a father with 2 children, the youngest could not have been more than 9 years old, and he was holding a rifle. It really made me feel sad. :(

[lizbud]

I don't agree with any hunting of animals, unless you are starving and
need them for food for yourself & family.

[Twisterdog]

Of course, anything can be used as a potential weapon. But that is not my point, and I personally think it is an irrelevant one. Guns were DESIGNED to kill other living things. Cars were not. Period. Guns frankly serve no other purpose. Maybe my argument is more anti-gun than anti-hunting, but I feel that hunting is just one more excuse we have to keep allowing guns, making the argument that it's a sport; it's a fun pastime.

A gun is just a tool. Albeit, a potentially very dangerous one, but simply a tool, nonetheless. A bow, an arrow, a sword, a spear, a knife, a flyswatter, a mousetrap ... all simply tools, and tools designed to kill living things. One could use a car, a hammer, a boot, a table lamp, a brick, a rock ... ANYthing to kill another living thing, if one were so inclined. It is the person using the tool that makes it dangerous or productive, not the tool itself.

I grew up in a household of gun owners. I learned from a very young age that a gun was an adult's tool, to be handled with respect, care and knowledge. A gun held no aura of mystery for me, no more than a hammer or a frying pan did. I never once thought of touching one of my dad's guns or playing with them. I was simply taught that a gun is a useful but potentially dangerous adult tool, just like the power saw or the lawnmower.

I own a gun now. My gun is locked up in a safe. I have never killed a living thing with it. My grandmother willed it to me, it's a cool old antique with fond memories attached. And, yes, I DO think it's a fun passtime to go target or skeet shooting. I and my gun are in NO WAY dangerous to anyone.




I know for a fact that many such laws are openly disregarded. I grew up in Iowa! Many of my classmates were hunting with their fathers by the age of 12, which in my opinion is dangerous! They wouldn't let their 12 year olds drive a car or have sex, so why on earth would they give them a weapon? It honestly shocks me that some parents who are conservative in every other way would give their children a device to potentially kill themselves, easily. Until a few weeks ago my dad still lived out in the country. Occasionally on my way to his house (which required driving on several gravel roads) I would see bands of hunters. One time, I saw a father with 2 children, the youngest could not have been more than 9 years old, and he was holding a rifle. It really made me feel sad. :(

There have always been and always will be people who disregard laws. But not ALL hunters disregard this law. My son is fifteen and has never been hunting. He will not go, if he chooses to go, until he is sixteen and has passed hunter and gun safety classes with flying colors. Almost everyone I know with a teenager feels the same way I do. I have no doubt whatsoever that there are people who let nine year olds hunt. There are also people who let thirteen year old have sex in their home, who let twelve year olds smoke cigarettes, who let fourteen year olds do drugs in their bedroom or drive the family car around town. My son goes to school with kids who live like this. It's all wrong, any time a law like this is broken. But the fact that a few idiots disregard the law does not make it a useless or invalid law, and should not be used to slam the 95% of people who choose to abide by it.

I'm certainly not trying to convince anyone to be "pro" hunting or "pro" gun. Not at all. Everyone is entited to their own opinion. I do not, however, like to see someone criticize an entire group of people for the actions of a few. Prejudice is prejudice, no matter if it is directed at race, sex, political view or hobby. It is always wrong to make judgements about every member a certain group of people, based on nothing more than their membership in that group or a very limited experience. What is the difference in saying, "I don't like hunters because when I was a kid I saw some hunters doing stupid things." and saying "I don't like African-Americans because when I was a kid one called me a bad name at school."? What's the difference in saying, "All gun owners are irresponsible and dangerous because I heard on the news about a few of them." and saying "All Columbian-Americans are dangerous drug dealers because I haeard on the news about a few of them."? I HATE prejudice of any kind, and I would just as vehemently defend vegetarians, pacifists, women, teenagers, Moslems, etc. if there was a thread condeming the entire group for the actions of a few.

[Pembroke_Corgi]

I'm certainly not trying to convince anyone to be "pro" hunting or "pro" gun. Not at all. Everyone is entited to their own opinion. I do not, however, like to see someone criticize an entire group of people for the actions of a few. Prejudice is prejudice, no matter if it is directed at race, sex, political view or hobby. It is always wrong to make judgements about every member a certain group of people, based on nothing more than their membership in that group or a very limited experience. What is the difference in saying, "I don't like hunters because when I was a kid I saw some hunters doing stupid things." and saying "I don't like African-Americans because when I was a kid one called me a bad name at school."? What's the difference in saying, "All gun owners are irresponsible and dangerous because I heard on the news about a few of them." and saying "All Columbian-Americans are dangerous drug dealers because I haeard on the news about a few of them."? I HATE prejudice of any kind, and I would just as vehemently defend vegetarians, pacifists, women, teenagers, Moslems, etc. if there was a thread condeming the entire group for the actions of a few.

Well, perhaps I have made my posts unclear, but I do not see how I have criticized an entire group of people, or shown "prejudice" against hunters. I do strongly disagree with the practice of hunting. I do strongly disagree with parents allowing children have access to guns. I'm not trying to make an argument that hunters are stupid or that they are all irresponsible jerks. I'm also not trying to make this disagreement personal, and I dislike that you are personally attacking me now. I think it is ok to disagree with an idea without personally attacking a group of people.

I disagree with people who hunt- fine, but that doesn't mean that I am making a statement about what kind of people they are. I do think that it is "wrong" to allow young children to handle guns, but I know that in our society hunting is considered "ok." Fine. That is fine, I don't think people who hunt are terrible people, but I do have a problem when they are unsafe.

Finally, I have noticed that Americans who believe that guns are dangerous and should be more closely monitored are seen as "anti-American." Somehow, because I dislike guns and point out that they are, in fact, tools to kill, I am prejudiced against gun owners. Personally, I am more concerned about a right to free speech than a right to own a tool that blows things off the face of the earth.

[cassiesmom]

I'm not going to vote, I'm just going to comment. Near my house there is a four-lane road adjacent to the forest preserve. When I go that way I will sometimes see deer at the edge of the woods (especially does). It's that time of the year where the deer are more active because they are eating and mating. They are much more suburban than they used to be. Maybe people think they're tame and try to feed them; they seem to get struck by cars more often these days. Striking a deer can hurt the car and the occupants as well as the deer. Drivers need to be more careful because the deer are a lot less shy at this time of the year. They didn't used to come clear up to the edge of the woods, or even try to cross the roads, like they do now. I'm not sure that hunting can be categorized as always good or always bad.

[Twisterdog]

Finally, I have noticed that Americans who believe that guns are dangerous and should be more closely monitored are seen as "anti-American." Somehow, because I dislike guns and point out that they are, in fact, tools to kill, I am prejudiced against gun owners. Personally, I am more concerned about a right to free speech than a right to own a tool that blows things off the face of the earth.

I wasn't meaning to attack you personally at all. I'm sorry if it seemed that way. I was just getting into the debate, that's all. Nothing personal. :)

And, I also feel it's just as wrong to label anyone who doesn't like guns as "anti-American." Another example of prejudice. Yes?

[elizabethann]

Personally, I don't hunt, but my family does. My brother, bil & nephew are up North moose hunting as I type this.

[buttercup132]

Well I seem to have a different opinion than most people who posted, so I will say what I think at least.

I think hunting is a lazy way to "bring balance" to overpopulation. What about reintroducing natural predators and setting up preservation or conservation areas for them to live in? Too often we rely on a "quick fix" that will really not help the problem in the long run. Unless we keep shooting and killing overpopulated animals there will be no "balance." It's people's fault that it is this way, and I think it should be our responsibility to fix it, in the most natural, humane way possible.

I also have a big problem with bears and other animals that ARE NOT overpopulated being hunted. It's disgusting in my opinion to kill for sport. Also, growing up in the midwest I know that MOST hunters DO NOT use the animal for food. I had a friend whose father had 20 deer carcasses piled up in his garage every deer season. :mad:

I also think hunting is dangerous. Too often, you hear of hunting accidents (even the vice president accidently shot a friend) and pets being accidently killed because the hunters thought they were a deer or something.Ditto Ditto Ditto

[Lady's Human]

I have yet to meet a hunter who doesn't use the animals taken for food. You can't base an entire group on the actions of one. The person with 20 deer carcasses piled up in his garage wasn't following hunting laws, as most states have a VERY low per hunter bag limit on deer, except for nuisance herds.

As to bears not being overpopulated, in some areas they have an extremely high population. NY, NJ, some parts of Mass, all are having problems with bear overpopulation and the ensuing human/bear run ins.

[Argranade]

As to bears not being overpopulated, in some areas they have an extremely high population. NY, NJ, some parts of Mass, all are having problems with bear overpopulation and the ensuing human/bear run ins.

The only reason there over populated is because US humans have taken over so much land and there's not enough room for the poor bears to spread out by.

[Lady's Human]

Actually, there's more woodland in Mass now than there was in the 1800's.

[Argranade]

Yes SOME areas have more land than others but on WWF they showed many acres being cut down and bears did not have enough room same for wolfs.

I still want more land for the animals than humans.

[Karen]

Yes SOME areas have more land than others but on WWF they showed many acres being cut down and bears did not have enough room same for wolfs.

I still want more land for the animals than humans.

Have you ever looked at population density maps for your own province? I am certain that in Ontario, there's more land for animals than people, just not in the city.

[*future vet*]

I agree with hunting because it helps to control the population. I think it's a sport that many people enjoy, even if they don't get a deer they can appreciate the beauty of the outdoors. :)

[sumbirdy]

I don't like it but it is a big thing where I live. Most people around here just do it for fun though and won't hunt the animal down if it is wounded and ran away like they are supposed to.

[columbine]

I'd rather eat meat from a hunted animal who ran around in the woods all their life than one who'd stood immobile in a stall, although I guess wandering around a pasture isn't bad. But I only agree with food hunting (subsistence or sale), not trophy hunting (although of course selling the skin & antlers reduces waste and I'm all for it), and the hunting itself is done SOBER.

[Marigold2]

All hunting is horrible, some might be warrented if over population is a factor. If the animal is used for food, that is a different matter then stuffing the head on a mantal.

[king2005]

I'm sure I posted here somewhere, but don't have the time to check.

I'm all for hunting for a couple reasons.
Its better meat as it hasn't been drugged or abused. It actually gets to live a life & serve its purpose in the balance of nature. The populations in some areas NEED to be thinned out with hunting, or the poor things starve to death or get hit by cars left right & centre (There is no way in HELL I want to stand beside another deer & watch it garge blood until the poor thing dies).

Just go to Ottawa, Ontario, Canada & see the deer there... There is THOUSANDS & THOUSANDS of deer in that city. If your in Kanata (its part of Ottawa now), try driving on Richmond Rd going into Bells Corners, without seeing atleast 6-10 deer in that open field. So many deer get hit there.. You see dead bodies all the time. If your walking on the trails, the deer are never fat. They are ALWAYS thin... The trees are always chewed up (meaning there no very little food, as all the food as already been eaten, hence bare trees).

I ONLY believe in 1 kind of hunting! & Thats hunting for food. I don't care who eats the meat, but aslong as the whole animal is used, I'm happy.

Selling the pelts for blankets, the antlers for coat racks, bones for dogs, is great!!! I have a game rabbit pelt (nearly 10yrs old) for my table, & a game rabbit foot for a key chain (its nearly 15yrs old now).

I totally support hunting for food. Game hunters deserve to be SHOT!! The sick BEEPs!!!

[AllAmericanPUP]

just my thoughts..i havent read any of the replies so someone else may have said this

but hunting is ok with me but i do not agree with people that its a sport.
people hide in trees or behind trees or wherever and they kill animals with a gun or a bow...that is not sport and you are not amazing if you manage to kill an animal that is out in the open and defenseless while you hide and use a weapon

[critter crazy]

ummmm....should i just run up on said deer and stab it with a spear, or maybe i should chase it over a cliff. Just curious what you find is acceptable about hunting if you dont agree with hiding and shooting??:confused:

[JuniorxMyxLove]

I don't encourage deer hunting, but if the meat is used, what is sowrong with it? Everyone is talking about how bad it is, but is it any worse then eating a hamburger?Cows were killed to get that hamburger meat! Everyone is overlooking the obvious. Animals are killed daily to get food for us. Killing it ourselves is just another way to get it. Shooting doves, on the other hand, is a horrible crime. People don't use the doves. But if they use the deer, and are careful and hunt when they're allowed to, I don't see why they shouldn't be able to.I mean, think about it. Being shot my an arrow or bullet probably isn't much worse - if it is at all- then what they do to the cows and chickens and sheep at slaughterhouses.

Wolfs are natural in this Humans are just a pest at this.

I belive only Native's should be able to hunt.

Don't ask why, because if I explain it im sure no one shall understand it
No offense, but that's sort of racist. What is the difference between Natives and very other people? Both are people, both need to eat, both should be able to hunt deer if they use the meat. You're right, I wouldn't understand it. Because I think that people are people, and nothing can change that. Not skincolor, not race, not anything.

[Kalei]

Deer hunting is not wrong as long as people don't kill the babies and when they catch one its for food not for sport.