Hey Neanderthals! Guess Who's Got a New TV Show?

Mott the Hoople said:
You've obviously have never hunted. The majority of the time your prey out wits you and you come away with nothing. If it was rigged...there wouldn't be anything to hunt.
Click to expand...

Are you saying you don't understand how the animal, with nothing but its body and wits, and you, armed with additional weaponry that puts you at an advantage, are not an equal match?
 
Bijou said:
Are you saying you don't understand how the animal, with nothing but its body and wits, and you, armed with additional weaponry that puts you at an advantage, are not an equal match?
Click to expand...
Sure, define equal footing. I have my weapon and I have my wits and thats about alls I have. When you hunt virtually everyting you hunt has superior strength, speed, reflexes, agility, smell, vision, hearing, touch and they aren't exactly unarmed. If you ever hunted a deer, wild boar, racoon, moose, elk, bear, etc, you'd become acutely aware that they aren't exactly unarmed either. Why just a couple of years ago a hunter here in Ohio was gutted by a deer he shot cause he didn't wait for it to bleed out before he approached. Deer got the last word there. That don't sound rigged to me.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Sure, define equal footing. I have my weapon and I have my wits and thats about alls I have. When you hunt virtually everyting you hunt has superior strength, speed, reflexes, agility, smell, vision, hearing, touch and they aren't exactly unarmed. If you ever hunted a deer, wild boar, racoon, moose, elk, bear, etc, you'd become acutely aware that they aren't exactly unarmed either. Why just a couple of years ago a hunter here in Ohio was gutted by a deer he shot cause he didn't wait for it to bleed out before he approached. Deer got the last word there. That don't sound rigged to me.
Click to expand...

You miss the point. You have 'weapons', too - your teeth and hands/nails. If the animal has superior strength against you without an additional weapon, then you LOSE. That's unacceptable to hunters who claim to love the 'sport' of the hunt.

And your anecdote is the exception and not the rule, and you know it.

Equal footing is using whatever you are naturally endowed with. That is all the animal you're hunting gets, right? Nothing additional. If that puts you at a disadvantage because the animals you're hunting are stronger, etc., then you shouldn't be hunting. If you can't take them down with your bare hands, then it isn't a fair fight and nothing 'sporting' about it.
 
Bijou said:
Hunters hunt because hunters like killing animals. End of story.
Click to expand...

Hunters like numerous things about hunting. I, like many hunters, also hike, camp, canoe and enjoy other outdoor activities that have nothing to do with killing an animal. I love the outdoors. Hunting is one of the activities that brings me in closer contact with the wild.

I also prefer to have wild game as the main source of meat for my family. So dismissing the idea that people hunt for food is incorrect.

I also know that the dollars I spend on licences, special fees and special taxes provide much of the budget for state conservation work.

And lastly, I (the hunter) am the only predator for several of the species I hunt. Without hunters there would be no population controls besides starvation after the animals denude the forest.
 
WinterBorn said:
Hunters like numerous things about hunting. I, like many hunters, also hike, camp, canoe and enjoy other outdoor activities that have nothing to do with killing an animal. I love the outdoors. Hunting is one of the activities that brings me in closer contact with the wild.

I also prefer to have wild game as the main source of meat for my family. So dismissing the idea that people hunt for food is incorrect.

I also know that the dollars I spend on licences, special fees and special taxes provide much of the budget for state conservation work.

And lastly, I (the hunter) am the only predator for several of the species I hunt. Without hunters there would be no population controls besides starvation after the animals denude the forest.
Click to expand...

Super. You and Ted have a lot in common. I'm sure you'll just love his new show. :)
 
Bijou said:
Doesn't matter. Lots of people like eating animals but couldn't kill one.
Click to expand...

Which is cowardly and worse. Why is it ok to pay someone else to kill an animal (and in horrible conditions), but not ok to kill an animal (with great effort to make the kill as quick as possible) in the wilds yourself?
 
evince said:
I bet you spend tons more money than I do putting meat in the freezer.

guns, ammo and all combined
Click to expand...

I bet he doesn't. You can typically get about 50-80 pounds of meet off an average deer. (varies based on region)

What do you pay for a pound of meat desh?
 
WinterBorn said:
Which is cowardly and worse. Why is it ok to pay someone else to kill an animal (and in horrible conditions), but not ok to kill an animal (with great effort to make the kill as quick as possible) in the wilds yourself?
Click to expand...

Where did I say it was okay for someone else to kill an animal that they eat? Oh, that's right - I didn't. You just needed to inject that so you can - once more and for the umpteenth time - defend your hunting practices ad nauseam. We get it. You're the most responsiblest, bestest, most moral hunter on the planet.

If you want to have a different discussion other than the one in this thread, go start one.
 
Bijou said:
Are you saying you don't understand how the animal, with nothing but its body and wits, and you, armed with additional weaponry that puts you at an advantage, are not an equal match?
Click to expand...

You mean the animal that can see better, smell better, hear better, with better reflexes and much greater speed, and with much greater familiarity with the terrain?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top