because they have no life! the most certainley have never been educated about hunting and the responsibilities that go with it. as hunters we are responsible for the welfare of the animals through liscence fees and benifit banquets and and andETC>>>>they can sit in trees all they want but don't try to influence me to you ways when you don't understand mine. they are almost as bad as having the jehovas and mormons pounding on your door, imagine them doing that when you are in your treestand?
2006-07-06 12:14:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
think about it....there are more morons in this world than genius's
SOMEONE explain to me how herding a domesticated cow(which means he thinks hes walkin in to get fed..the sweet people would never hurt him) into a pen where it cannot escape and knocking it on the head with a hammer that has the force of a train (and no, it doesnt always kill them the first time) is better than a duck cupping into my decoy spread (and assuming my new lab puppy doesnt break early) flies by and i have a chance of shooting it. Dont get me wrong, i love a tenderloin fresh from the butcher, but why dont you leave us the **** alone and at least talk about them. I eat all the meat i kill. And i hope you realize that by being a vegetarian doesnt change anything! The U.S. is not producing any less meat because of a few crackheaded carrot lovers.
to be anti-hunting is retarded. hunting is natural, and it keeps a balance in the ecosystem.
therefore- idiots = anti-hunting dumb***es
geniuses = hunters keeping a natural balance
if any carrot lovers wanna talk about it....feel free to e-mail me, im only gettin started.....
2006-07-05 21:14:08
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Many of the anti-hunting group I've encountered are either ignorant of the facts about hunting or just blindly condemn it as cruelty. Hunting has been around as long as human history.
One of the most cruel things I have ever seen was deer that starved because of over population and no hunting pressure.
It seemed to me to be such a senseless loss. Many responsible hunters actually donate game to food banks and homeless shelter through " Hunters for the homeless".
The antis ignore the fact that hunting activities generate millions in tax dollars to provide all of us with wildlife shelters and bird sanctuaries. Without these monies such activities would depend on the whim of congress.
2006-07-05 15:11:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by eternal_vigilance_0311 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Human society has advanced because of the human ability to grow crops and domesticate livestock - in short making hunting somewhat obsolete, by more than several thousand years. If most people had to hunt for their food, they wouldn't be spending their time in other productive ways, such as developing technology, or creating social institutions like schools, governments, religions, medicine, etc. After the advent of agriculture, hunting really only became a means of survival for the poorest (who didn't even have land they could farm) or as a sport for the richest (who could maintain land in a 'wild' state so they could hunt on it, and kept other people off that land). Eating fruits and vegetables might get old after a while - but do you think that most of your meats that you eat everyday are 'hunted' - beef, pork, chicken, turkey -- all are from domesticaed animals, not hunted animals. most of the exotic meats these days are from domesticated stock - buffalo, ostrich, alligator. no hunting needed there.
if hunting was the needed balancer of the ecosystem, then all those ecosystems that didn't have hunters would be out of whack, right? except that in areas with no humans, the ecosystem manages itself. the only time that hunting is necessary to balance the ecosystem is when human activity has thrown it out of balance. ie, humans come in and don't like wolves eating their sheep, so they kill the wolves... then the ecosystem is out of whack and the deer population grows without the predators, and so now humans have to hunt deer instead of letting wolves hunt deer.
i don't like PETA, but i see hunting as a sport as rather outmoded. if you need it to survive, that's fine. but if you are just going out to shoot some stuff, go play paintball. i wouldn't call hunting a sport anyway, since in a sport, all the players know they are playing a game - in hunting, your prey don't know that's its just a game to you, they are just trying to survive.
2006-07-05 15:01:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by jawajames 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well personally I am against hunting people, just a bear to clean and skin etc. Plus I think there are laws against it. Plus so many people around it really isn't sporting.
However, if you are talking about hunting animals, well, as a vegetarian I have no problems with it. Heck, if it were not for ranchers raising cows for meat do you think we would have any of them around? As for wild animals, go for it, just keep it legal where you are and I don't see a problem. Now going out and shooting 50 wild horses or more then your limit of deer, birds and such, I would have a problem with. But that is all. As for PETA, there are nuts everywhere, Regulus nuts, PETA nuts, political nuts. Just have to live with them.
2006-07-05 14:56:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by redhotboxsoxfan 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
There,s nothing wrong with hunting. Around here the deer and turkey are like rats. We have flocks of turkey that number in the hundreds and the deer are everywhere, even in the city. But my thing is people who think they should be able to kill 8 or 10 deer a season and then try to give the meat away and try to say they are being charitable. some people just like to kill things and those people are dangerous. Hunt for meat not to kill something
2006-07-05 15:58:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by big jack 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm an avid hunter and a firm beleiver in PETA...People for the Eating of Tasty Animals...without proper management, wildlife becomes your next hood ornament. I'm right there with you and I'll fight for my second amendment rights to the bitter end. I'm a woman and I own many rifles and shotguns, although no handguns (I don't care for them personally). I live in Maine and I detest hypocrits who will buy beef and chicken in a grocery store and then complain about my hunting. It's free range you schmucks! Not pumped with chemicals! We use all of what we hunt for. And it's DELICIOUS!
2006-07-05 15:02:46
·
answer #7
·
answered by Christina C 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
*sigh* Some activists are certainly against hunting for any reason, including food. MOST are only against SPORT hunting, which is certainly not "the balance in the ecosystem". I think there are better things to do with your time than shooting innocent animals for fun.
2006-07-05 14:50:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by -j. 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't mind hunting, it is the most basic instinct of life, and if it came to it, I would hunt. But the people out there hate it when an animal is killed not out of need but for skins of trophys, and they dont eat it. If you kill something use all of it, don't waste anything. They wouldn't. SO if you hunt, it shouldn't be sport hunting. It's just cruel.
2006-07-05 14:52:13
·
answer #9
·
answered by Reality Check 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I hate it when people kill animals but if it is done quick and painless then i dont mind just as much... im totally against all other kinds of animal cruelty though.
You should stop being such a jerk... you seem to think that because people who are against hunting are annoying to YOU, everyone else should just agree with you.
Can i make a suggestion?
...F*ck off :)
2006-07-05 14:55:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not hunting is more cruel. If you dont keep the population of animals like deer down then they will over populate and starve to death. At least when your shot you dont suffer. I love animals but I would rather save a family from starving then to save a cow or deer.
2006-07-05 14:53:53
·
answer #11
·
answered by A* 4
·
0⤊
0⤋