Anti-hunting gun owners

[SteveS]

You are not in danger of going without meat or protein. We have plenty of farm animals that we've specifically raised for this purpose.

What's more, our technology has greatly outpaced evolution. No quarry has a chance against a decent marksman; they don't understand how a little moving blob on a hill a quarter of a mile away could possibly be dangerous. I do hold a begrudging admiration of people who hunt using more primitive techniques (such as atlatls). At least then, the quarry had a chance.

So you have no problem with someone else killing a penned up animal that had little chance just to feed you, yet you begrudge someone that wants to do it themselves? You do realize that farm animals have to die to give you that protein?

Your comments on technology and evolution seem to indicate a great deal of ignorance as to what hunting really is. Have you ever hunted? In regards to the hunting I have done, it is not as easy as you describe. For one thing, I am not much of a danger to a deer a quarter mile away because I doubt I could consistently hit a target that far. Despite all our wonderful technology, the animals I have hunted have great senses and will avoid me if they can hear me, see me, or smell me.

This is the same ad hominem nonsense that anti's use against us along the lines of, "If you own a gun, you're obviously a fat, drunken redneck with undersized genitals who only wants to have the opportunity to shoot other people who break into your house."

As for ad hominem, you throw out a few with your equating of controlling the population af an animal with going in to famine regions and killing people. While I respect animals, I do not think they are the same as people, which you clearly do.

 

[H&Hhunter]

This seems to ignore entirely the question of why animals are a valuable resource. In each of your arguments, hunters value them only as a tool for the continued propagation of hunting: that is part and parcel of the state of mind some here have objected to.

Wooderson,

Well quite simply my value of the animal whether as a tool or not propagates the animal and preserves the land on which it lives and increases it's numbers and it's genetics. It is good for the animal it is good for the environment and it is good for everybody who wants wild animals to remain on this planet.

As far as the Black Buck. let me try and explain. In India the black buck is almost extinct due to poaching and land encroachment. This what happens when an animal has no intrinsic value to the local protein starved population, they are wiped out. So when you stop using hunting as a conservation tool the animals are not somehow magically and morally protected and no longer used for the whims of mankind. In fact quite the opposite occurs. They will be ruthlessly wiped out as has been demonstrated so many times.

India is now buying Black buck from Texas to try and repopulate them in several preserves. Is it really so hard to understand the importance of value being placed on wildlife and how effective hunting is as a management tool?

I guess I should put it this way. What do you think is a better situation for wildlife. A hunting ranch in Texas which derives it's funds from the effective management of game animals. Or that same ranch being turned into a strip mall?

I see it happening here on the front range of CO with startling rapidity. Massive tracts of wildlife habitat are bought every year and developed into high density housing. They are invariably named after the animals who were destroyed to make our developers dream come true. Names like Pronghorn Vistas and Wapiti estates. then without fail a bunch of glazed eyed city dwellers move in with their shiny new cars and their high and mighty environmental beliefs. Many are anti hunters and they are becoming a powerful force and are voting their unique brand of ethics and emotional Walt Disney wildlife management plans. And by doing so continue to wipe out wild animals at an alarming rate.

In America just like in Africa there would be very few wild animals left outside of National Parks if it wasn't for hunters. Your Anti hunting groups do NADDA, NOTHING, ZIPPO towards meaningful wild life conservation and land management and preservation.

Hunters are the ones who do the lions share of the work and pay the lions share of the bill.

 

[Sniper X]

I've seen a few responses where someone said something about not liking those who hunt what they don;t intend to eat. But there is a classification of "hunting" that falls into rodent/varment eradication that falls into that catagory. I have to, absolutely have to eradicate rabbits, and prarrie dogs, and a few Coyotes a year every year off of my 10 acres and my neibors 30 acres of land. I live in the mountains outside Albuquerque NM, and we have a problem with to many varments durring some times of the season and they need to be thinned out or they will die of starvation of not enough water.

I do also hunt deer and elk and feral pigs, but have mostly only hunted feral pigs for the last three years because of the mis management of game species here in NM.


I DO eat the meat of game animals I hunt, and of the feral piggies (YUMMM!).

 

[Smellvin]

In terms of relating to people, I'm just challenging the concrete block that most people cemented in their heads that killing humans is inherently wrong whereas killing non-humans is inherently right. If you apply a certain set of logic to the former, why does the latter become something completely different and alien?

Again, I'm not trying to make anyone angry or harass anyone. I'm just challenging assertions.

 

[HuntCast]

I've seen a few responses where someone said something about not liking those who hunt what they don;t intend to eat. But there is a classification of "hunting" that falls into rodent/varment eradication that falls into that catagory. I have to, absolutely have to eradicate rabbits, and prarrie dogs, and a few Coyotes a year every year off of my 10 acres and my neibors 30 acres of land. I live in the mountains outside Albuquerque NM, and we have a problem with to many varments durring some times of the season and they need to be thinned out or they will die of starvation of not enough water.

I do also hunt deer and elk and feral pigs, but have mostly only hunted feral pigs for the last three years because of the mis management of game species here in NM.


I DO eat the meat of game animals I hunt, and of the feral piggies (YUMMM!).

Sniper X,
There is nothing wrong with what you do. You are taking the place of the predators that no longer exist in the food chain where you live. Which, come to think of it, is not surprising. We are ALL predators, no matter how badly some want to pretend otherwise.

 

[lance22]

Settle down boys

Hunting is moot to the 2A, so take it or leave it.

I've noticed that farmers aren't getting their proper credit for wiping out some of the speciies mentioned ... vegitarians always point to hunters as wiping out poor innocent animals but they forget that the wheat and corn fields for their $ 12.00 Fancy Bistro Veggie Meal wasn't cleared off by hunters ... and those old farmers poisoned plenty of eagles and what not.

The prarie dog thing is like the goose problem we have here in MN in urban areas ... millions of geese sh|++ing up every golf course, yard, and park in urban MN. I wish to God that some decent person would blow them all away ... it wouldn't be hunting, but it would be some well deserved eradications. Oh yeah, throw in these diseased city pigeons too.

So, cut the hunters some slack ... but at the end of the day the 2A still doesn't have anything to do with hunting.

 

[HuntCast]

n terms of relating to people, I'm just challenging the concrete block that most people cemented in their heads that killing humans is inherently wrong whereas killing non-humans is inherently right. If you apply a certain set of logic to the former, why does the latter become something completely different and alien?

Animals are food. If not for us, then for other animals.

If you can't see a difference between us and them, that says more about you than it does the rest of us.

 

[K-Romulus]

I only hunt with a bow . . .

 

[only1asterisk]

Smellvin,

You equate killing ground hogs to killing small children. You see no difference in reducing the numbers of a deer herd to allow them to live and murdering the starving survivors of a bloody civil war. Yet you see eating pen/cage raised animals as somehow ethically superior to killing wild animals for food?

You have presented no logic.

David

 

[Smellvin]

Animals are food. If not for us, then for other animals.

To me, it seems like that's the rough equivalent of saying that since your brownie will be eaten, I might as well eat it for myself. Or since everything dies, the circumstances don't matter.

You equate killing ground hogs to killing small children. You see no difference in reducing the numbers of a deer herd to allow them to live and murdering the starving survivors of a bloody civil war.

The ground hog was breaking machinery inadvertently as was the child. I was saying that the very first impulse was to kill the ground hog, but that wouldn't even be considered with the child.

The deer herd vs. starving, famished people is completely valid. Both are going to starve anyhow and, since we know best, we will reduce their numbers. I'm in effect asking as why the initial solution to both problems are so different.

Yet you see eating pen/cage raised animals as somehow ethically superior to killing wild animals for food?

I don't see eating caged animals or hunting as morally superior... I just think that since someone has already the killing for you, there's no particular need to do it yourself.

You have presented no logic.

Try just for a moment to put yourself in the shoes of the animal. If you genuinely try to see it through their eyes you'll see what I'm saying. You still might not agree with it, but you'll understand what I'm saying.

 

[HuntCast]

So, cut the hunters some slack ... but at the end of the day the 2A still doesn't have anything to do with hunting.

Since when do anti's of any stripe care about the what the 2A actually means?
If hunting is banned, do you think you have a snowballs chance in hell of keeping your handguns or AR's safe?
I have a buddy in Australia who would love to beg to differ with you.

Sorry to disagree here, but the THREAT against the 2A has EVERYTHING to do with hunting.

 

[only1asterisk]

We might as well be discussing abortion or religion.

David

 

[H&Hhunter]

Joe tax payer does a lot more when all things are considered but not neccesarily in the name of hunting.

Titan,

Thank you for very coherent and informative post. I would like to correct that last statement. I have some numbers here that I am quoting from the`NSSF.

these numbers are somewhat outdated but they are the most current that I have access to.

As of 1998,

Each day sportsmen contribute $3 million dollars to wild life conservation efforts that is more than 1.5 billion a year.

Hunters contribute about $30 Billion a year to the US economy and support roughly 1 million jobs annually.

Through private foundations such as DU and the RMEF hunters contribute an additional $300 million annually towards wildlife conservation.

For every tax payer dollar invested in wildlife conservation the sportsmen contributes $12 dollars.

 

[H&Hhunter]

AS far as hunting having nothing to do with 2A.

From a puritainical stand point that may be true HOWEVER, Hunters are a massive group of gun owners. Alienating them with names like Fudd and Bambi killer is not a wise thing to do. We should be embracing and educating non 2A hunters they are a huge demographic of people with like interests.

Come to think of it I can't think of a single person I hunt with who isn't pro 2A. Some of them need some education on what exactly that means, like Mr. Zumbo did but they are all pro 2A.

Why in the world would any of you want to belittle and alienate them?

It just doesn't make sense.

 

[Sniper X]

Smellvin,

No offense, but You have stated points that sound like mantra talking points from PITA or other fringe animal rights organizations. I have seen these arguements many many times and they are allways very thin whe analized.

First, the point about "sopmeone else doing the killing for you" If you equate killing an animal to that of a human murder, than eating an egg makes you an accessory to murder....of a cute baby chicken.

Second point, if you think the managed killing of game species is murder, you should watch a documentary on what happened in Alaska when an animal rights group got a partial stop to killing Carabou and Reindeer for a season, there were litterally thousands dying on the sid eof the roads and in the outback of starvation. Even had them dying in towns and becomming a health hazzard to us bad ol humans.


There is a SCIENTIFIC reason for game management, and it has nothing to do with anythig but conservation of a species and humans love for animals. If you can;t see this then that is up to you what you beleive. It seems you too have been at least semi brainwashed by the PITA types. Who btw kill as many pet species as any two or three animal shelters, now there is a corrupt organization!

Please wathc this video and get back to us.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9ijLulwUTY

 

[bowfin]

Trophy hunting? Don't like it. IMHO it is a little childish....

Maybe it's because you don't understand what trophy hunting is. Do you know the real definition of a trophy hunter? I think not, so here it is:

"A trophy hunter isn't judged by which animal he shoots, he is judged by which animals he WON'T shoot."

Most trophy hunters will come home empty handed rather than shoot an animal that is not up to their standards. We have many deer hunters around our area who have a "It has to be bigger than the last one or I won't shoot" philosophy. Some haven't shot a buck in two years. If they want a deer to eat, they get an Antlerless Only tag, which in some areas are literally given away in a "Buy one, get one free" program to control the populations.

You also might be laboring under the false assumption that a deer taken as a trophy excludes it being eaten. I am sure some aren't, but I have never heard of that happening first or secondhand in my 30 years of hunting.

Now, given the above, the only reason you could now have against trophy hunting is that there might be some unwarranted ego involved, that it is wrong for someone to have to have a big set of antlers to be happy or satisfied. Well, if you are going to criticize trophy hunters for that, then you must also take a dim view on anyone who owns a Kimber or Les Baer 1911 instead of a Hi-Point, or owning any AR when their pride won't let them be happy with an SKS. Their is a little bit of pride and vanity that goes into most human endeavors, whether it is "trophy hunting" or upgrading a firearm that is already reliable and has acceptable accuracy.

I hope this helps clear up some misconceptions.

 

[only1asterisk]

Come to think of it I can't think of a single person I hunt with who isn't pro 2A.

I know a very few that were prepared to make some Zumbo type compromises until they were properly educated, but the overwhelming majority are solid in their support for the RKBA.

david

 

[markk]

many people who insist that hunting is somehow "cruel" simply fail to realize what the alternatives are for these animals

they seem to think that if it werent for that hunters bullet these animals would simply lie down on a sunny day in a flower filled pasture surrounded by all their animal friends and peacefully pass on

this is not reality
in nature there is no "peaceful" death
only violence at the "hands"(read claws and teeth) of other stronger animals
often being eaten whilst still alive

some people deny this truth just as they are in denial regarding their own inevitable death

a hunters bullet IS merciful

 

[Glockman17366]

I'm not a hunter... I will shoot pests (squirrels, gophers and such).

I think hunters (especially bow hunters) are some of the finest sportsmen (and women) in the world!
I just don't care for the taste of game meat (or most meat, but I do love a good steak on occasion) and I'm not going to kill a non-pest critter if I'm not going to eat it.

Just my humble opinion...

 

[doubleg]

I find it hard to believe that anyone who is in the gun culture could be anti carrying guns while exercising to get free food . Unless there one of the whimps who crys everytime they see a peice of roadkill on the side of the road.

 

[30 cal slob]

i love animals. they taste GREAT.




seriously....

i am first and foremost a shooter with self-defense on the mind.

while i hunt occasionally, it is typically with a bow.

 

[lance22]

Well ... I hadn't considered that the 2A is indirectly important to the 2A, that in practicality all firearms would be banned if hunting were illegal ... I don't recall the Founding Fathers connecting the two in their writings but yeah, I'll admit you are right that in modern America this is probably the case so point taken and I appreciate having this pointed out.

The whole Zumbo thing has stirred a great pot ... and it's no secret that in places like Wisconsin, it is the old hunters who are adamant about keeping the most anti-gun governor in the history of that state. It is more than ironic that many 'rod n gun' clubs in WI won't support right to carry, and even refuse to host IDPA / IPSC matches because it violates their "One shot every three minutes" rule or whatever slow-fire rules they invented a million years ago.

Obviously the two groups are very different, but only one group is in favor of gun bans; only one group thinks the Brady Campaign makes sense. Only one group is damaging the cause ... and I'm not allowed to recognize this? From all appearance, Field n Stream wouldn't have a problem with donating space to the AHSA so it's not much of a stretch to view these people as enemies of the 2A.

Now, I don't want to destroy this enemy, I want to convert him ... but for now reality is reality.

 

[IllHunter]

My two cents, as a hunter...

No quarry has a chance against a decent marksman; they don't understand how a little moving blob on a hill a quarter of a mile away could possibly be dangerous. I do hold a begrudging admiration of people who hunt using more primitive techniques (such as atlatls). At least then, the quarry had a chance.

I'd like to invite you to hunt with me, if you're not too lazy and willing to expende the effort, we'll go wher the snow is often deep during the deer season, north. We'll have to have the proper equipment and clothing or we may die. Our quarry will be wearing what nature provided which will render him or her practically invisible and they will wield senses more sensitive than you can imagine. I once heard it described as "you being oblivious to a two hundred pound deer hiding in you living room". If you wish we can use a camera but that would be lazy, leaving the work of harvesting our quarry out of the picture.
Let's say we use a scoped rifle, 270Win, enough to be effective, first shot if at all possible. I've accomplished that more often than not. That is my goal, on several levels, it pleases me. My ego likes the concept that I practiced enough to still my freezing numb hands to make a shot, that I can sublimate my "buck fever" to hold for the right sight picture and "right prey", to know what I might hit if I miss or go through the target. Then we can address the meat quality unspoiled by the huge adrenelin rush that a wounding shot elicits.
We will have to drag the harvest to the road (vehicle) could be miles. That would be after we've field dressed it. I wonder if you have the "stomach" for that? As a side note, I'll bet you $50 the gut pile won't be here in the morning. I'ts probably not hungry humans that claim it. When we get it home +- 500 miles, we can thaw it and butcher it, if again, you have the energy and stomach.
This is not tongue in cheek but a serious invitation to join me. I could use the help, you could use the lessons waiting there.

 

[doubleg]

Man do these anti hunters make hunting sound easy. Imaging trying to shoot a oversized dog with antlers from 100 yards away through thick brush and trees. It is EXTREMELY difficult, but deer jerkey is more than worth the effort.

 

[bowfin]

Try just for a moment to put yourself in the shoes of the animal.

I have never shot an animal with shoes on, and that really is a salient point to be made.

Animals don't put shoes on themselves because they aren't human. You are giving animals people like feelings and thoughts and ascribing to them the probability that they exist as furry people. This is called anthropomorphism.