# Trophy Hunting -- Yea or Nay?



## DriftingSand (Feb 21, 2015)

I've read articles about dudes who hunt African game (Hippos, Rhinos, Elephants, etc.) just to say that they did and to mount a head on the wall.  I'm not personally a fan of this type of hunting.  I'm not about killing just for the sake of killing.  It's not really that hard to park a Range Rover by some bushes; aim a Weatherby .460 Magnum rifle at some Hippo 300 yards away; and shoot it through the shoulder; then have your guide chop off its head.  I don't really see the sport in that and I find it wasteful and unnecessary.







I think there are really only 5 good reasons to shoot animals:

1) For food!  This is the best reason.
2) To thin out overpopulated herds of a specific species for the ultimate benefit of that species.  This type of hunting has proven to be beneficial time and again.
3) For self protection or for immediate protection of another human life.
4) Pest control in an around farmland or ranches.  There are some animals (certain birds, gophers, moles, prairie dogs, wolves, etc.) that can devastate crops or livestock).  A farmer or rancher has the important task of feeding populations of people and have the right to protect their livelihood.
5) To put an animal out of its misery, pain, or suffering.

But shooting a Rhino for its head or horn doesn't fit into the above categories in my opinion.


----------



## Roadrunner (Feb 21, 2015)

DriftingSand said:


> I've read articles about dudes who hunt African game (Hippos, Rhinos, Elephants, etc.) just to say that they did and to mount a head on the wall.  I'm not personally a fan of this type of hunting.  I'm not about killing just for the sake of killing.  It's not really that hard to park a Range Rover by some bushes; aim a Weatherby .460 Magnum rifle at some Hippo 300 yards away; and shoot it through the shoulder; then have your guide chop off its head.  I don't really see the sport in that and I find it wasteful and unnecessary.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Paying $100,000 in guide fees, trophy fees, lodging, etc, raises money to protect these animal.

I wouldn't do it, if I had the money, but, it does provide the money for game management.

Until there is an alternative source of revenue, it will go on.


----------



## DriftingSand (Feb 21, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> DriftingSand said:
> 
> 
> > I've read articles about dudes who hunt African game (Hippos, Rhinos, Elephants, etc.) just to say that they did and to mount a head on the wall.  I'm not personally a fan of this type of hunting.  I'm not about killing just for the sake of killing.  It's not really that hard to park a Range Rover by some bushes; aim a Weatherby .460 Magnum rifle at some Hippo 300 yards away; and shoot it through the shoulder; then have your guide chop off its head.  I don't really see the sport in that and I find it wasteful and unnecessary.
> ...



There is truth to that but if these guys are truly concerned about game management then they can simply give $100,000 to the cause without shooting the animals they purport to protect. But I know where you're coming from.


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Feb 21, 2015)

If you eat and use what you kill I have no objections. If you're only doing it for a picture, trophy, etc. then I have a big problem with it and would have no problem with anti-hunter hunters stalking the trophy hunters.


----------



## Moonglow (Feb 21, 2015)

Delta4Embassy said:


> If you eat and use what you kill I have no objections. If you're only doing it for a picture, trophy, etc. then I have a big problem with it and would have no problem with anti-hunter hunters stalking the trophy hunters.


The US has been sending special forces members to help snipe out any poachers..


----------



## Roadrunner (Feb 21, 2015)

Delta4Embassy said:


> If you eat and use what you kill I have no objections. If you're only doing it for a picture, trophy, etc. then I have a big problem with it and would have no problem with anti-hunter hunters stalking the trophy hunters.


Giving AK-47's to spear chuckers killed off more game than all the trophy hunters in history.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 21, 2015)

DriftingSand said:


> I've read articles about dudes who hunt African game (Hippos, Rhinos, Elephants, etc.) just to say that they did and to mount a head on the wall.  I'm not personally a fan of this type of hunting.  I'm not about killing just for the sake of killing.  It's not really that hard to park a Range Rover by some bushes; aim a Weatherby .460 Magnum rifle at some Hippo 300 yards away; and shoot it through the shoulder; then have your guide chop off its head.  I don't really see the sport in that and I find it wasteful and unnecessary.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




there is too little information from the picture posted 

the fees and permits may have gone to further the hippo population of the area 

how do we know that the critter was wasted


----------



## DriftingSand (Feb 21, 2015)

jon_berzerk said:


> DriftingSand said:
> 
> 
> > I've read articles about dudes who hunt African game (Hippos, Rhinos, Elephants, etc.) just to say that they did and to mount a head on the wall.  I'm not personally a fan of this type of hunting.  I'm not about killing just for the sake of killing.  It's not really that hard to park a Range Rover by some bushes; aim a Weatherby .460 Magnum rifle at some Hippo 300 yards away; and shoot it through the shoulder; then have your guide chop off its head.  I don't really see the sport in that and I find it wasteful and unnecessary.
> ...



The picture is just one example.  In that particular case perhaps the animal went to good use but I'm talking about the bigger picture and the underlying "need" to shoot animals simply for a wall trophy.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 21, 2015)

Your poll is missing to many options.
Personally I dont go looking for trophies,if I stumble across one and I dont already have a better one,I'll take the animal.
   Of course I wont shoot it unless I plan on eating it.

   And as was mentioned there are plenty of good reasons that have nothing to do with how big of a rack an animal has. 
     Although there are some animals you obviously shoudnt kill just because of their rarity.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 21, 2015)

DriftingSand said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > DriftingSand said:
> ...




in nature things don't go to waste 

although i am not a head hunter 

i have over the years taken some pretty spectacular game over the years


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 21, 2015)

DriftingSand said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > DriftingSand said:
> ...



  I dont begrudge someone the right to do so as long as it's done in a humane way and doesnt harm the population.
  I hunt for the enjoyment of getting out in the woods and putting meat on the table personally.
  And given the choice I'd rather go bird hunting than deer hunting just because it's more difficult.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 21, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Your poll is missing to many options.
> Personally I dont go looking for trophies,if I stumble across one and I dont already have a better one,I'll take the animal.
> Of course I wont shoot it unless I plan on eating it.
> 
> ...




you have to be careful harvesting to many trophy class animals 

otherwise one can hurt the population by taking the strong 

and leaving the less desirable genetic ones to breed


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 21, 2015)

jon_berzerk said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > Your poll is missing to many options.
> ...



    Yep...Thats one of the reasons I dont have a problem with so called canned hunts.
The animal was bred to be taken so it doesnt effect the natural population.
  And some of those animals invariably escape and help with the natural population as can be seen in the Texas Hill country.
    My favorite four legged critter is the Axis deer from India.
Beautiful rack and hide and the meat is far better than a whitetail.
      Go to 2:20 mark.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 21, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...




nice deer cool looking 

white tail here 

looks like the guy hit that one a little off mass 

with my Myles Keller i have had deer run less then fifteen yards and drop


----------



## Roadrunner (Feb 21, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...


Some fallow deer escaped from a game park near where I used to live.

I never saw them during deer season, and was not sure if you could shoot them anyway, or, if the law would set it like you were shooting somebody's cow or horse.

All sorts of exotics wandering around in Texas.

Newest "exotic" here in the Piney Woods is horses, turned loose by people who can no longer or will no longer feed them.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 21, 2015)

jon_berzerk said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



  Yeah,looks like he gut shot him.
If you ever get a chance I highly recommend you take one,doe or buck the meat taste like beef because they are grass eaters.
   You can steak out the whole animal because there is zero gamey taste.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 21, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



 As long as they aren't tagged they're open game and you can shoot em year round,no season.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 21, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...




they do look tasty


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 21, 2015)

People who hunt animals are barbaric, imo.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 21, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> People who hunt animals are barbaric, imo.



 People who let animals starve to death from over grazing are worse.
How would you want to go? In an instant or over months?


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 21, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > People who hunt animals are barbaric, imo.
> ...



Moral relativism argument. Sorry bro; you either think trophy hunting is barbaric or you don't. That other stuff you're throwing out there is noise.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 22, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



  And I thought I made it pretty clear I dont have a problem with it in most cases.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 22, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...



It doesn't matter if you have a problem with it. It's a fallacy.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 22, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



 A fallacy? I dont think you know what that word means.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 22, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...



That's funny. I know that you don't know what the word means.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 22, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



 Why you think that word would apply here is the question.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 22, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...



Why would it matter if you're making a fallacious argument? Are you seriously asking that question? How about you define what you think a fallacy is and why it somehow shouldn't matter.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 22, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



  Claiming trophy hunting is a fallacy is retarded.
The thought of having to explain that to you is embarrassing.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 22, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...



Ah...so you have basic comprehension issues. Fallacies are arguments that fail to meet the rigors of logic. My argument was not that trophy hunting is a fallacy. My argument was that you were throwing out questions about the morals of other activities as a means to somehow justify the morality of trophy hunting is the fallacy of moral relativism. You're the only one 'embarrassing' yourself, kid.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 22, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



 You failed to mention any of that until now.
You fail at basic communication.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Feb 27, 2015)

_"People who hunt animals are barbaric, imo."_

People who think hunting is barbaric are raving idiots, imo.


----------



## DriftingSand (Feb 27, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> People who hunt animals are barbaric, imo.


LOL. Ever kill a spider?  An ant?  A wasp?  An earwig?  All are living things.  Would you consider yourself "barbaric" for killing one?  Since the beginning of time man has been hunting for survival.  Some have killed to protect themselves from being ripped to pieces.  Interestingly, I bet you're one of them who believe killing an unborn baby is perfectly acceptable.  That's how the upside down mind of a Progressive generally works.


----------



## DriftingSand (Feb 27, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> DriftingSand said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...


I've even gone so far as to hunt all day until I found a good target then just sat their and watched without shooting it.  In my mind, I found what I was looking for and knew that I could bag it with a well placed shot.  I win!!  I've ended up weighing my actual need for meat with my location and time of day.  If I'm in rough terrain I don't really want to drag a deer out and if it's late I don't relish the idea of cleaning/dressing a deer late into the evening.  I'm lazy that way.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 27, 2015)

DriftingSand said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > DriftingSand said:
> ...



 Oh I hear ya. I like to be back at camp by nine in the morning drinking whiskey and coffee and the deer is already at the processor.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 27, 2015)

DriftingSand said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > People who hunt animals are barbaric, imo.
> ...



First off, comparing animals to insects is inhumane. But second off, I don't mindlessly kill insects w/o cause. I respect the ecosystem. Third off, hunting for survival and hunting for sport are two different things. Fourth off, I'm not a liberal deuche hypocrite, I'm not for abortion....I just happen to have an enlightened view upon respecting animals and people. Apparently in your left vs right world it's choose one or the other.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Feb 27, 2015)

_First off, comparing animals to insects is inhumane. But second off, I don't mindlessly kill insects w/o cause. I respect the ecosystem. Third off, hunting for survival and hunting for sport are two different things. Fourth off, I'm not a liberal deuche hypocrite, I'm not for abortion....I just happen to have an enlightened view upon respecting animals and people. Apparently in your left vs right world it's choose one or the other._

Right. So you call people barbarians because you respect them?
And you think you have a more enlightened view of the ecosystem than the average hunter? Cute. Humans are as much a part of the ecosystem as bugs and animals. So are plants and water for that matter. You impact the ecosystem simply because you exist. You eat, drink, and produce waste. You travel on highways and railways where untold numbers of animals made their home or found their food. A person who kills a wild turkey is a barbarian in you eyes because it is more "enlightened" to pay someone to kill and package one for you. Or, if you are some kind vegan, you pay someone to bring you the vegetation that a deer might have needed to survive. Right. So very morally superior (BS!).
Hunters are the only group I know of that has actually asked  to pay higher taxes and fees in an effort to ensure that their impact on the ecosystem is a positive rather than a negative one. I would sure like to see one of you holier-than-thou types try to match those benefits before spouting off about how enlightened they are.


----------



## DriftingSand (Feb 28, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> DriftingSand said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



The key to your statement is: "without cause."  My OP reveals several "causes" for shooting animals.  The "cause" that would initiate your killing of a cockroach is the same one that farmer would use to kill a mole or a Starling or the one that a rancher would use to kill a predator.

Also, there's no reason why "survival" and "sport" can't be combined.  But one doesn't necessarily need to hunt deer for either sport or survival.  It could be that a man is on a tight budget and decides that it's more economical to shoot a deer for the meat than to buy a year's worth of beef.  Also, as stated in the OP, a person could shoot a particular species of animal for the long term benefit to that species.  When herds of deer become overpopulated then food becomes scarce and the entire herd is in danger of starvation and disease.

Food for thought.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Feb 28, 2015)

there are plenty of good reasons to kill various animals for reasons other then for eating 

i have and probably would shoot and kill another  rabid skunk 

would i eat it 

not a chance of it 

does that mean it the (rabid skunk) "went to waste"


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 28, 2015)

DriftingSand said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > DriftingSand said:
> ...



I can at least semi-understand people that hunt and eat their food. But I still don't feel like it's the right thing to do in this day and age. It's not necessary. I think humans have a responsibility to be friends of nature as much as possible.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 28, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> DriftingSand said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



 Hunting is absolutely necessary to keep populations under control.
You'd have starving deer all over the damn place if you didnt thin em out.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 28, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> DriftingSand said:
> 
> 
> > I've read articles about dudes who hunt African game (Hippos, Rhinos, Elephants, etc.) just to say that they did and to mount a head on the wall.  I'm not personally a fan of this type of hunting.  I'm not about killing just for the sake of killing.  It's not really that hard to park a Range Rover by some bushes; aim a Weatherby .460 Magnum rifle at some Hippo 300 yards away; and shoot it through the shoulder; then have your guide chop off its head.  I don't really see the sport in that and I find it wasteful and unnecessary.
> ...



And if well managed it actually helps the overall population. Well managed means only allowing the shooting of older or non viable members of the herd, as determined by qualified wildlife management personnel.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 28, 2015)

DriftingSand said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > DriftingSand said:
> ...



One can be concerned and want a tangible result from said concern at the same time.


----------



## 1stRambo (Feb 28, 2015)

Yo, its senseless, who can miss a sitting duck? The big animal has no chance of escaping, like a rabbit or bird?
So, if they want a big head hanging on the wall, buy a plastic one!!!

"GTP"


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 28, 2015)

1stRambo said:


> Yo, its senseless, who can miss a sitting duck? The big animal has no chance of escaping, like a rabbit or bird?
> So, if they want a big head hanging on the wall, buy a plastic one!!!
> 
> "GTP"



  So you'd rather they die a slow painful death from starvation?


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 28, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > DriftingSand said:
> ...



That's right wing propaganda. Nature can balance itself.


----------



## 1stRambo (Feb 28, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> 1stRambo said:
> 
> 
> > Yo, its senseless, who can miss a sitting duck? The big animal has no chance of escaping, like a rabbit or bird?
> ...



Yo, that hippo looks awful healthy to me?

"GTP"


----------



## martybegan (Feb 28, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



We ARE part of nature, we just overcame our lack of thick skin, claws and large teeth via our naturally larger and more complex brains.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 28, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



 What a dumbass.. How exactly does that happen?
THEY STARVE TO DEATH you fucken dolt!


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 28, 2015)

1stRambo said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > 1stRambo said:
> ...



 Did you stop to think that he looks that way because of game management?


----------



## 1stRambo (Feb 28, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> 1stRambo said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...



Yo, or is it natural?

"GTP"


----------



## Roadrunner (Feb 28, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> 1stRambo said:
> 
> 
> > Yo, its senseless, who can miss a sitting duck? The big animal has no chance of escaping, like a rabbit or bird?
> ...


No, they'd rather poachers with AK 47's get every last one of them before "hunters" get them.

I do not consider most of what is sold as "hunting" in South Africa to be "hunting".

More like culling.

You go out into a National Forest in America, and kill a 5 year old white-tail buck, and you are a hunter.

Ordering a rhino or elephant on the internet, and flying to Africa to shoot it, is not hunting.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 28, 2015)

1stRambo said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > 1stRambo said:
> ...



   Couldnt tell as I wasnt there.
But to claim that game management doesnt work is ridiculous.
  There was a time when whitetail deer were a rarity in East Texas from over hunting.
They enacted limits and the deer population exploded.
 For years after that they refused to up the limits until they finally started listening to hunters claims of the extremely poor health the deer showed....yes they were starving to death.
  Game management is about keeping a healthy number of animals.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 28, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > 1stRambo said:
> ...



I can see that reasoning, but if there is a demand, and said demand can be used to fund conservation programs that help the overall specie, then let the canned hunter can hunt.


----------



## 1stRambo (Feb 28, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> 1stRambo said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...



Yo, we are talking about Africa?

"GTP"


----------



## Roadrunner (Feb 28, 2015)

martybegan said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...


I am all for letting the canned hunter hunt.

If I won the lottery, I would not do it though.

Pachyderms never did shit to me, and lions are just big kitties.

Got no quarrel with either.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 28, 2015)

1stRambo said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > 1stRambo said:
> ...



 Hunting in general. Trophy hunting in particular.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Feb 28, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...



 The only reason I could ever fathom shooting a predator is personal protection or live stock preservation.
   They're just to damn cool to be shooting for no reason.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 28, 2015)

Roadrunner said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...



A refreshing viewpoint, to be sure.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 28, 2015)

martybegan said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...



You're only making my original point. Barbarians choose to see themselves as simply animals too.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 28, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...



How many dears have you come across that were near starvation? Check and mate.


----------



## martybegan (Feb 28, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Roadrunner said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...





TheGreatGatsby said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



We are animals that can make lasers. Sooner or later the hunting laser will be perfected and hunting and cooking will be combined into one!

Look at that deer.... ZAAAPP!!!  who wants a venison streak?


----------



## DriftingSand (Feb 28, 2015)

martybegan said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > Roadrunner said:
> ...



Maybe we could create some antler scrimshaw while we're at it.


----------



## DriftingSand (Feb 28, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> DriftingSand said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



I've been a "friend of nature" for as long as I've hunted and fished.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 28, 2015)

DriftingSand said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > DriftingSand said:
> ...



Yea, cos friends kill friends.


----------



## DriftingSand (Feb 28, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> DriftingSand said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



And eat 'em too.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 28, 2015)

DriftingSand said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > DriftingSand said:
> ...



I'm sure you had X # of generations tell you how great and natural that hunting is. But its 2015; not 1815. You can be the change you want to see, bro. Stop terrorizing animals.


----------



## DriftingSand (Feb 28, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> DriftingSand said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



1) Hunting is just as enjoyable today as it was a 1000 years ago.
2) Hunting is still necessary to keep herd sizes under control; thus, a benefit to wildlife.
3) Wild game tastes better and is healthier for you than hormone fed beef full of antibiotics.
4) Only pussies don't hunt.


----------



## skye (Feb 28, 2015)

Leave animal creatures alone!

If hunters need  to hang a trophy on the wall I suggest this instead.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Feb 28, 2015)

DriftingSand said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > DriftingSand said:
> ...



Oh, you're a man's man cos 'pussies don't hunt!' Malarky! You think you need to prove you're the toughest of the tough? Become one of the select few hundred American mercenaries fighting against ISIS.

How come they don't hunt buffaloes in Yellowstone (a high tourism place) if hunting is necessary to population control?

Wow, you can press a trigger and kill an unsuspecting animal; oh aren't you just bad ass! (Sarcasm).


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Mar 1, 2015)

Antihunters are just city idiots with an abiding fear of the outdoors and those who enjoy it.


----------



## Politico (Mar 1, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> > If you eat and use what you kill I have no objections. If you're only doing it for a picture, trophy, etc. then I have a big problem with it and would have no problem with anti-hunter hunters stalking the trophy hunters.
> ...


No they haven't lol.


----------



## DriftingSand (Mar 1, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> DriftingSand said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



1) The plural of buffalo is buffalo!
2) Regulated hunting and total annihilation are two, different things.  
3) You can hunt buffalo in the USA.  It's regulated and you can only hunt in certain areas.
4) You can't hunt buffalo in Yellowstone because it's a National Park that draws lots of tourists and because Yellowstone management is busy regulating the population of bison without the help of hunters: Yellowstone Initiates 2014 Wild Bison Slaughter The Wildlife News  They're purposely killing off bison for the benefit of the herd of 3000 to 3500.  Even Yellowstone management knows that killing is sometimes necessary.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Mar 1, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



 Sorry,I cant take anything someone says seriously when they cant even spell ''deer" properly. And to add to the stupid you put an "S" at the end.
  And yes I have seen starving "deer".


----------



## DriftingSand (Mar 1, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...



LOL.  You mean you have seen starving "dears."  Hahahaha


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Mar 1, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> DriftingSand said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



  Terrorizing? I promise you the deer doesnt even know what hit him.
Unlike that cow who watches his buddies get the bolt gun and can smell the blood from the hundreds of cows that came before him.
    Stop with the fake sympathy....bro.


----------



## Moonglow (Mar 1, 2015)

Politico said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > Delta4Embassy said:
> ...


Sure they have been....Saw a show on it last week..


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Mar 1, 2015)

DriftingSand said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > DriftingSand said:
> ...



That's not population control, dude. That's f'ing politics like anything else. That's a tribe of Indians making money on killing 25 buffalo and selling their meat at market. Nice try; but even you had to have know that was malarky. You probably were hoping I wouldn't read the fine print though.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby (Mar 1, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > DriftingSand said:
> ...



Deer often don't die right away. And if you want to argue that slaughterhouses are inhumane, then fine. But it's not an argument for hunting imo.


----------



## Politico (Mar 2, 2015)

Moonglow said:


> Politico said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...


Yes saw it on tv so it must be true lol.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Mar 2, 2015)

TheGreatGatsby said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



  Doesnt really matter what you think. The fact remains that deer have to be thinned out or starvation becomes a problem.
    You'd rather see them suffer for months,id rather see them put down quickly.
 You endorse sickness and hunger for the entire herd,while I endorse the quick death of a few to keep the majority healthy.
    You're one sick individual.


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Mar 2, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> TheGreatGatsby said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...



Problem with this particular arguement is it can be applied to people as well. Better if we just cull the human herd in famine struck places so famines don't wipe everyone out. 

Instead, the only pro-hunting arguement should be, in a time when there's untold additives in supermarket meat, hunting and getting meat au natural is the healthiest option. Plus it's much more spiritually positive to hunt, thank the animal for providing you with sustenance, and utilizing as much of it as you can then forcing someone else to raise animals for you so you can pretend to be morally superior. Getting your hands dirty and bloody is if nothing else much more honest than buying meat from a store. To say nothing of the lives of farmed animals are utterly miserable. The life of wild game is as happy as can be except for a few moments at the end.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Mar 2, 2015)

Delta4Embassy said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > TheGreatGatsby said:
> ...



  So you want to equate humans to deer? Thats crazy talk.
And you still didnt address the need to thin the herd for the good of the entire herd.
   It has to be done,there is no maybe about it.


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Mar 2, 2015)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...



Human animal would be better off without over 7 billion of us competing for finite resources. That's the deer arguement. Pretending we're not just another species of animal but something special is the crazy talk.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Mar 2, 2015)

Delta4Embassy said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > Delta4Embassy said:
> ...



 Than what are you waiting for? 
Animals dont think,they are not self aware. So of course it's different,no matter what kind of BS moral platitudes you want to throw out there.


----------

