Trophy Hunting -- Yea or Nay?

[TheGreatGatsby]

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?

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]

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?

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.

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

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

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?

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.

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

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

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

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?

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.

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

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

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

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

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?

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.

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

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

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

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

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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]

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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]

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

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

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

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.

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

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.

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

 

[9thIDdoc]

"People who hunt animals are barbaric, imo."

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

 

[DriftingSand]

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]

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.

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

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.

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.

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]

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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]

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.

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]

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]

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.

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.

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]

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]

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.

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.

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.

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]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.