Do You Agree With Deer Hunting?????

[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.

[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.

[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?

[*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.

[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.