What's your opinion? I think hunting should be allowed if the animal is not a threatened species. This is because hunting is actually, in a sense, more environmentally friendly than buying food, and a lot of people find it fun. And it's not mean to animals, at least not compared to how chicken get killed to reach the produce isle.
The sloth ate the leaves from the tree, now the tree has no chlorophyll and may die, ban the sloth. The sloth is being chased by a wolf and may die, ban the wolf. The bear is going to kill the wolf, ban the bear. Hunting will always happen for food. I think hunting is perfectly acceptable.
The only hunting I know where the primary target of the animal is the head is turkey hunting, other than that, hunters don't usually aim for the head.
The sloth ate the leaves from the tree, now the tree has no chlorophyll and may die, ban the sloth. The sloth is being chased by a wolf and may die, ban the wolf. The bear is going to kill the wolf, ban the bear. Hunting will always happen for food. I think hunting is perfectly acceptable.
Exactly! If animals can hunt other animals then I don't see why humans can't either.
Hunting it's in the human nature, let them hunt, if they respect the rules and they don't kill too many animals (or each other) everything is fine. Fishing is also a form of hunting, but there is nothing wrong with fishing though killing fishes can hurt more the environment than hunting.
Oh really? I never knew that. Why do they not shoot in the head?
Hmm, I have never really questioned it. The only answer I have is because it just looks terrible to shoot something in the head. Brains and teeth scattered around just isn't anything people want to see. Also, people who trophy hunt (not me) don't want to ruin what they are trying to mount.
Hunting is not necessary in our society anymore. It should be illegal except in the case of Aboriginal people because it is a part of many religious events in their culture. Plus, if you want to shoot at moving things you can go shoot flying discs or something =P
The sloth ate the leaves from the tree, now the tree has no chlorophyll and may die, ban the sloth. The sloth is being chased by a wolf and may die, ban the wolf. The bear is going to kill the wolf, ban the bear. Hunting will always happen for food. I think hunting is perfectly acceptable.
That is different. People who compare humans to animals are moronic. We cannot be compared to them because we are completely different. The sloth has to eat the leaves, the wolf has to eat the sloth (since when do sloth's get chased by wolves? xD)
Hunting will always happen for food IN THE WILD. We are not in the wild, we create societies, we are the anti-wild, therefore we should not act as though we are in it.
A man shooting a bear that doesn't know he was there is different from two wolves squaring off in the winter...
Also, people who trophy hunt (not me) don't want to ruin what they are trying to mount.
Trophy hunting is the worst kind.
They're hung upside down, and then they hit them; or something, then they have their throats cut. Shooting them in the head is much more humane.
Those animals were bred for food. They know nothing of their possibilities, ignorance is bliss. The animals in the wild don't deserve the same fate.
First of all, animal populations do need to be controlled. Living in Texas I see deer run over by cars all the time, and hitting a deer can result in a fatal accident. Also, more animals consuming food and resources in an ecosystem mean less food and resources for the other animals, so some will quite obviously starve. In all honesty, which is worse, to be shot and die within the day at most or starve to death over a course of weeks? Also, hunted meat can be quite beneficial to the family on the budget as all the meat on a deer, boar, turkey, etc. can be gotten for the price of a hunting license and the ammunition. A good hunting rifle costs usually $250-$400 or you can just get a WWII era surplus rifle for maybe $75-$125. Ammunition costs maybe $20 for 20 rounds, use one box to sight the rifle in, get used to it and another for the actual hunting. A hunting/fishing license here costs around $45. At first this would cost more then buying food from a store, but over time it will save the person money which especially today a lot of people need. All in all, hunting is an okay activety as long as it is carried out legally. There are restrictions on game animals, here I think it's no more then 3 deers a year, a certain number of turkeys and dove, and as many boar and coyotes as you can get (their disliked by ranchers here for several reasons). It can also save someone money in the long run and provide them with fairly healthy if prepaired correctly meat, as in there are no added chemicals or substances then those found in nature. It's not a difficult activety to get into, but you do have to pass a hunter's safety course in Texas, I do not know about other states and there are a lot of safety controls. I personally haven't hunted but I am thinking about going boar hunting with my .223 AR as it seems a fairly good rifle for it and I do like bacon.
Can't agree with you there. Certain animal populations need to be controlled.
Animal Population is controlled naturally by the Predator vs. Prey relationshiop.
As the population of wolves rises they will eat more deer, the deer population will decrease causing starvation of wolves. With fewer wolves the deer population will rise, etc.
We don't need to control animal population. Except in the case of domesticated animals.
The sloth ate the leaves from the tree, now the tree has no chlorophyll and may die, ban the sloth. The sloth is being chased by a wolf and may die, ban the wolf. The bear is going to kill the wolf, ban the bear. Hunting will always happen for food. I think hunting is perfectly acceptable.[quote]That is different. People who compare humans to animals are moronic. We cannot be compared to them because we are completely different. The sloth has to eat the leaves, the wolf has to eat the sloth (since when do sloth's get chased by wolves? xD)
Hunting will always happen for food IN THE WILD. We are not in the wild, we create societies, we are the anti-wild, therefore we should not act as though we are in it.
A man shooting a bear that doesn't know he was there is different from two wolves squaring off in the winter...
[/quote]
I am not moronic-there are three kingdoms, 'lantae', 'fungus', and 'animalia', more commonly known as plants, fungus, and animals. Under Animalia you can find class, the classes are as follows: crustaceans, birds, reptiles, amphibians, mammals, and birds. Since humans are covered in hair and believed to be in the direct bloodline of apes, we are in the class 'mammals', which is a sub-level of animals, so in future I'd rather you not call me moronic. :/
Just imagine wolves eat sloths. Otherwise I'll have to rewrite my food-chain and I am too tired to do that.
We've created societies, but as soon as we go into the wild we are not bound to civilized manner we're expected to reach in society. As soon as I am out in the wilderness with a gun, I am no longer in a formed society, so I am allowed to kill whatever I want.
therefore we should not act as though we are in it.
As soon as we are in the wild, we are bloody there, so act like it. When we are in a formed society, act like it.
Animal Population is controlled naturally by the Predator vs. Prey relationshiop.
The predator prey balance in some areas is uneven that the prey wouldn't hardly be effected.
One animal that I'll use for an example is the wild boar, what predator is going to kill massive, powerful, and aggressive beasts? A coyote? A fox? A hawk? Some areas of the world don't have wolves or bears.
