Another thought on the moose post

[uw_madtown]

[ QUOTE ]
That post made no sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

It made perfect sense, actually. I even read it twice, and it still made sense.

[Pinga]

[ QUOTE ]
All of you who think hunting is cool need to have your dicks removed.
If you are a hunter, I hope you die an untimely and horrible death.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Everyone seems to be ignoring the fact that I said I think KILLING FOR MEAT IS OK. I also think killing for population control is ok. The only thing I am against is killing for sport and fun. For the ones calling me a retard, learn to [censored] read.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's comforting. I like my dick.

Someone took a schwack off it when I was little but I still have most if it.

[Argus]

I've read all three of the hunting threads and I cannot believe that the point I'm about to make hasn't been mentioned yet. I hope I just missed it, because it's fundamental to countering the kneejerk argument many posters seem to have against hunting. The point I'm about to make applies only to managed legal hunting - I am definitely against poaching and the hunting of endangered/low population species.

Animals' populations cycle. They are highest in the summer, and they decrease in the winter, because their habitat can sustain fewer animals during the winter. Under a managed hunting program no more animals are killed than would die during the low population season anyway. These animals aren't wasted, and even if they are killed for sport they were destined for death anyway. There simply wouldn't be enough resources (usually food) to sustain them.

Hunters are often among the most ardent environmentalists, because when habitat is encroached by humans they lose their opportunity to hunt and enjoy the outdoors. Hunting is about far more than killing an animal for pleasure - it's about enjoying nature, developing a greater understanding of our place in the food chaing, and having fun. There are many positive reasons to hunt - at the risk of sounding trite, perhaps as many reasons as there are hunters.

That man isn't wasing a moose - he's using it. He's eating the meat, likely taking the head as a trophy, and also probably using the hide for leather. To suggest that this man has done something wrong or has sinned against nature is ignorant. Try thinking instead of saying, "Animals are cute and nature is important. Killing is bad. Don't kill the pretty animals."

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
And yes, it does make me better because I am not directly doing it. I would rather buy a fur coat than kill and skin something. It's not a whole lot better, but it is better.


[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's WORSE, because the fact that you disassociate yourself from the process means that you indirectly conttibute to more of it than you otherwise would if you had to do it yourself.

Would you eat AS MUCH meat if you had to kill it all yourself?

Would you wear fur (instead of cotton or wool) if you had to skin it yourself?

Would you eat as much chicken if you had to wring every chicken's neck?

I'll bet you wouldn't.

Therefore, by removing yourself from the actual process, yet supporting it financially, you actually do cause more of it than you would otherwise.

The same of course holds true of wearing cotton or wool: by buying it you support the process of harvesting and weaving it.

So your statement is based on emotion rather than reason. Think about it.