Uh, hello! Isn't anyone considering that hunting is typically done for a purpose, called food...dog fighting has no purpose except gambling and often people use terrible and cruel methods to train the dogs!!!
2007-07-31 13:04:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by lizbth81 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
Your right dogfighting is very wrong and killing a dog because it's worthless for fighting is wrong who cares about the gambling part (except for the government) Vick should get life for what he did to those dogs I hope he gets to play football this year and somebody like John Lynch comes from his right side and hits him so hard it breaks his neck, but the hunting thing is different I personally can't eat carets and live with all the animals. That would be a little hard considering they would over populate and out number people that's why hunting is regulated all over the country to keep the animal population down it may be cruel but hunting is practiced for a reason. And you should also not be stupid enough to think that if you bring up dogfighting Vick isn't going to come up a couple of times in some answers
2007-07-31 20:26:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by Jeremy 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Talk to a game warden some time. Controlled hunting is necessary for animal population control in order to fend off disease, over population, starvation, etc. Not to mention those hunting permits and fees go into the tax base that benefits everyone. I hunt and I do eat everything that I kill. That is vastly different than raising and training dogs to kill for the viewing and gambling pleasures of humans. Also hunting with the proper permits is legal. Dog fighting is not.
2007-07-31 23:19:20
·
answer #3
·
answered by ndmagicman 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
dogs are bred to fight and lack free will or the ability for "fair chase". hunting is used as wildlife management tool, controlling populations of wild animals and their effects on humans and their eco system. there are several examples of highly populated species that are not well regulated (regionally) by hunting that have a huge effect on humans. deer being hit by cars, bears rummaging through suburban garbage cans and wildcats having no fear of humans and attacking humans can all be directly linked to poor population management. though hunting is not for the faint of heart, the hunted animal surely lives and dies in a much more humane manner than those animals that are raised commercial livestock opperations. the social side effect of dog fighting is also negative, exessive gambling and public health concerns top the list. hunting has positive side effects like aggressive land conservation and tax revenue that is used to help wildlife. the pittman-robertson act, a tax on hunting and fishing goods, and the sale of federal wildlife stamps or "duck stamps" are the largest monetary contributor to the national wildlife refuge system. hunters also are some of the largest donors to land conservation, ducks unlimited has conserved thousands if not millions of acres of wetlands that if not saved would more than likely be dry or developed now. hunters were also at the forefront of the crp and the wrp programs, the most successful wetland and grassland conservation program in the history of the usa. next time you go a wildlife refuge you should thank a hunter, their the reason the land is there. hunting is not a blood sport it is a neccesary conservation tool and a time honored tradition that ironically helps people appreciate and respect animals and life. dog fighting is blood sport that honors aggression and violence.
2007-07-31 20:25:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by ben s 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
I get what you are saying, but hunting is restricted to certain breeds in certain areas of the country. I agree that hunting for sport is cruel, but you also have to think about the amount of remorse we give to domesticated animals... plus, dogfighting is on such a different level because those sick people are training them to be vicious creatures that kill each other and cause pain, whereas hunting is supposed to be quick and painless. I'm not trying to stick up for hunting, just trying to get across the difference between the two
2007-07-31 20:06:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by Monica F 1
·
2⤊
1⤋
YOU HUNT ANIMALS FOR FOOD.
who do you know that eats dogs.
hah this is off topic but like my social studies teacher ate a dog once at someones house, she like didnt know until she wanted to give left overs to the dog, but the left overs were the dog..strange huh.
2007-08-01 13:42:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by Colleen M 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Dogs fighting one another will happen ---only a sick coward would force two animals to fight and ' get off on it '
People have been hunting for malina that's how we got where we are.
Hunting a deer for example is better than letting it starve to death. There are less than humane ways of hunting also.
2007-07-31 20:10:37
·
answer #7
·
answered by Bemo 5
·
5⤊
0⤋
Look idiot, you are allowed to drink alcohol, but you can't smoke pot. MANY of us disagree with this law, but it IS a law. So most of us ABIDE by the law, agree or NOT.We gulp down the margarita's even though we would prefer a joint!
I don't agree with hunting either, but it is legal and there is nothing I can do about it. However, at least the animals that are hunted are not starved, beaten, and otherwise abused BEFORE they are put in a cage to fight and tear each others throats out. At least somebody's pet deer isn't stolen off the street to throw in a cage of killer deer to be used for bait and ripped to pieces in seconds.
You and the others posting this insipid crap are so stupid, you really don't even deserve answers.
Here's a better question: Why didn't your mother drown YOU at birth? because it wasn't legal, but I am sure she thought about it
2007-07-31 20:15:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
1⤋
i own 2 dogs because they protect my home and are loyal pets and i would never dream of fighting dogs. one of my dogs is a 75lb lab who also goes duck hunting with me, he retieves the dead duck, i also will shoot a deer because they are good 2 eat. 2 compare hunting with dog fighting is about the most ignorant thing that i have ever heard of. if we dont hunt wild animals they will be over populated and will starve, but i guess thats the way liberals think.
2007-08-01 10:27:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by medicmike 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Correct. Most Americans do not consider hunting to be cruel.
2007-07-31 20:00:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 5
·
2⤊
0⤋