Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lerjj)
    Similarly, a thrill does not need to come from a sport. In fact, did you know you can have fun without killing anything? Just a thought...
    I know you can, I also have fun Target Shooting, Fencing , Taekwondo , Traditional weapon fighting, Basketball, Badminton, Chess etc etc.

    I am very active in a lot of sports.

    I don't hunt because it's the only thing that I find enjoyment in, I hunt because I find it to be the most enjoyable.(even if I didn't find it to be the most I would still do it)
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Three Mile Sprint)
    I know you can, I also have fun Target Shooting, Fencing , Taekwondo , Traditional weapon fighting, Basketball, Badminton, Chess etc etc.

    I am very active in a lot of sports.

    I don't hunt because it's the only thing that I find enjoyment in, I hunt because I find it to be the most enjoyable.(even if I didn't find it to be the most I would still do it)
    My point is that missing out on one experience will not substantially detract from your life in a meaningful way. The only argument that I have seen for hunting that holds some water is this:

    Most meat is produced cruelly. Hunting for meat reduces the amount of meat needed to be produced in this way. This outweighs the cruel methods employed to kill the animals as opposed to humanely killing the animals.

    Now, I do not have a particularly strong defense for that argument at the present time. I do not, however, agree with the argument because farming animals can be humane, whilst hunting never can. The argument is contingent upon farmed food being inherently crueler than hunting which is IMHO not necessarily true. Moreover, farming methods are necessary to produce large quantities of meat, whilst hunting can never provide enough food for everyone (trying to phrase this better but it keeps turning into a socialist piece on elitism ).

    What you need to know for now is that I disagree with all other arguments, for good reasons.
    I disagree with the stated argument, but out of instinct and religious conviction moreso than reasoning.
    My ignorance of a good rebuttal is not evidence of it's nonexistence.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lerjj)
    My point is that missing out on one experience will not substantially detract from your life in a meaningful way. The only argument that I have seen for hunting that holds some water is this:

    Most meat is produced cruelly. Hunting for meat reduces the amount of meat needed to be produced in this way. This outweighs the cruel methods employed to kill the animals as opposed to humanely killing the animals.

    Now, I do not have a particularly strong defense for that argument at the present time. I do not, however, agree with the argument because farming animals can be humane, whilst hunting never can. The argument is contingent upon farmed food being inherently crueler than hunting which is IMHO not necessarily true. Moreover, farming methods are necessary to produce large quantities of meat, whilst hunting can never provide enough food for everyone (trying to phrase this better but it keeps turning into a socialist piece on elitism ).

    What you need to know for now is that I disagree with all other arguments, for good reasons.
    I disagree with the stated argument, but out of instinct and religious conviction moreso than reasoning.
    My ignorance of a good rebuttal is not evidence of it's nonexistence.
    Ok
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lerjj)
    Hunting can't really be undertaken humanely. You are unnecessarily putting an animal through a whole heap of pain for personal enjoyment. If it was an efficient way of gathering meat (which agree, the living conditions are better) then we'd sustainably raise deer etc. and then kill them humanely. The idea that you're doing it for meat is self-deluding. You are hunting for sport (word used loosely).

    Taking pleasure in causing other's pain might be evolutionarily programmed, but that does not stop it being morally reprehensible. Killing creatures in the harmful way that hunting promotes is just out of order. There is no reason to do it, as enjoyment can easily be obtained from other sources.
    Hunting can be undertaken humanely. A hit to a key part of the body like the head or heart is usually a virtually instant death, quick and painless. If it misses a bit and wounds the animal, it can usually be retrieved and dispatched quickly if the hunter is half competent.

    The animal welfare arguments against hunting are massively exaggerated. Animals killed because of hunting usually die a more humane death than they would ever experience on the wild. And usually a lot more humanely than most humans get to die.

    The pleasure from hunting does not come from the kill or from "causing pain". This is a big misconception. A kill is simply a logical end to a successful hunt. Think of it this way - I don't hunt to kill, I kill to have hunted.
    And even an unsuccessful hunt without a kill is a pleasurable event, a point which debunks the whole "hunting is killing for fun" argument in one fell swoop.

    The pleasure part comes from everything else - being out in the countryside, finding quarry species, hunting them down, getting within range, using stealth, taking the shot and in a lot of cases, eating the meat afterwards. With some types of shooting there may be working the dogs as well, which is a skill in its own right.

    And most shooting is not done purely for sport. A shoot described as sport usually has other aspects. e.g. It is done for sport but provides a food source as well. Or it is done for sport but also pest control, as with deer, rabbits, pigeons, etc. In the UK at least.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RFowler)
    Hunting can be undertaken humanely. A hit to a key part of the body like the head or heart is usually a virtually instant death, quick and painless. If it misses a bit and wounds the animal, it can usually be retrieved and dispatched quickly if the hunter is half competent.

    The animal welfare arguments against hunting are massively exaggerated. Animals killed because of hunting usually die a more humane death than they would ever experience on the wild. And usually a lot more humanely than most humans get to die.

    The pleasure from hunting does not come from the kill or from "causing pain". This is a big misconception. A kill is simply a logical end to a successful hunt. Think of it this way - I don't hunt to kill, I kill to have hunted.
    And even an unsuccessful hunt without a kill is a pleasurable event, a point which debunks the whole "hunting is killing for fun" argument in one fell swoop.

    The pleasure part comes from everything else - being out in the countryside, finding quarry species, hunting them down, getting within range, using stealth, taking the shot and in a lot of cases, eating the meat afterwards. With some types of shooting there may be working the dogs as well, which is a skill in its own right.

    And most shooting is not done purely for sport. A shoot described as sport usually has other aspects. e.g. It is done for sport but provides a food source as well. Or it is done for sport but also pest control, as with deer, rabbits, pigeons, etc. In the UK at least.
    I may have spoken with too much rhetoric by accident. Sorry! My point was that hunting causes pain, and the only logical reason to hunt is for pleasure. Yes, the pleasure may not come from the pain itself, but the point was that you are causing pain in order to attain pleasure. It's just wordier this way.

    The bolded part "If it misses a bit" is the key point really. An accurate enough shot ought to be able to kill an animal quickly enough that I won't have an issue. My issue is that an accurate enough shot is not guaranteed, and thus hunting causes unnecessary suffering by killing animals in a way that is not always effective. Imagine if instead of a captive bolt gun, you shot cattle from 20 yards. It would be immediately banned by welfare standards. The way animals die from hunting is inherently crueler than the way they die through farming methods, and I do not think that is a debatable fact (what may be debatable is the entire life experience seeing as the animals are 'freer').
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Three Mile Sprint)
    For many this seems to be an activity of great contention, often emotionally charged and with individuals often displaying a great passion either for or against it.

    I myself will state I am a hunter, I enjoy hunting immensely as a sport and as a hobby, I also support and have engaged in trophy hunting.
    I started out hunting foul and small game with my father when I was younger, but as I grew older I moved on to progressively larger game and also started Bow Hunting , which I then made my primary form.
    I have hunted in many countries in the world and stalked and taken game such as Deer, Elk, Proghorn, Moose, American Black Bear etc(tried Mountain Lion, but the things are tricky) , and even to Africa to hunt Oryx and Impala's.

    For myself I enjoy the thrill of the hunt itself, the test of man against his environment in tracking the game to the skill of getting close enough for a clean kill and the joy of brining what can be a long and physically challenging task to fruition in one deeply satisfying moment.

    However I have known many personally and over the internet who see it as a horrific act, tantamount to criminal murder and whos opinions of me are drastically changed due to my love of the sport.

    This link is an educational video from the Scotish Highland management team BASC, dealing with Deer Stalking but more importantly the process of Culling, which is the primary reason most hunters hunt.
    It contains some graphic scenes

    So what do you think of Hunting TSR, thrilling bloodsport or Morally reprehensible, or is it somewhere in between?
    Below are some pictures of myself from quite a few years ago now.



    (This is a re-hash of a simmiler thread I made a few years ago, just to see how opinions have changed on the matter if at all and to revive what can often by a stimulating debate!)
    If hunting is done for responsible reasons-- i.e. to reduce a population that is out of control, I have nothing against it. I'd just rather the animals were given quick deaths with as little pain as possible. I'm a vegetarian, so I probably shouldn't be saying that I approve of any kind of hunting, but I understand that there are practical purposes for it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I personally thing is it morally wrong. I mean I understand killing something for survival but killing something for sport? Surley that is not a achievement but a waste to a life.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hunting as a hobby is just gross. But if you do it for survival hunt on. I'm Native American and we were called savages for holding animals sacred and practicing decent but graphic and effective hunting skills and using as much as the animal as possible, then praying for it and cherishing it out of respect. but for fun, hell no. We tend to have emotional ceremonies everytime an animal is killed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zik007)
    I personally thing is it morally wrong. I mean I understand killing something for survival but killing something for sport? Surley that is not a achievement but a waste to a life.
    lol I concur.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Three Mile Sprint)



    (This is a re-hash of a simmiler thread I made a few years ago, just to see how opinions have changed on the matter if at all and to revive what can often by a stimulating debate!)
    We could've done without the photos -,-
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ApeMob)
    Hunting as a hobby is just gross. But if you do it for survival hunt on. I'm Native American and we were called savages for holding animals sacred and practicing decent but graphic and effective hunting skills and using as much as the animal as possible, then praying for it and cherishing it out of respect. but for fun, hell no. We tend to have emotional ceremonies everytime an animal is killed.
    Would you consider culling also gross?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zik007)
    I personally thing is it morally wrong. I mean I understand killing something for survival but killing something for sport? Surley that is not a achievement but a waste to a life.
    The animal gets eaten and it's body/remains used.

    Hardly a waste.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Hunting is morally indefensible, and saying that one gets a thrill from killing furry nonhuman animals for fun is no defence. It's quite worrying, actually, that people can get enjoyment out of killing sentient beings. Play Grand Theft Auto instead (they have deer that you can chase in a car and run over - such a thrill (!))
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    For those saying hunting is morally wrong, surely that would make livestock farming also morally wrong. People in the UK farm for two main reason, one is for the money and the other is because they enjoy it. But all these animals which they have bread are destined for slaughter.

    You may not realise it but meat from the supermarket is pretty expensive, it is cheaper to hunt the meat yourself. Even if it is just pigeons behind halls, it is a free and sustainable food source. Perfect for students who don't have much money.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viddy9)
    Hunting is morally indefensible
    In what way?

    and saying that one gets a thrill from killing furry nonhuman animals for fun is no defence. It's quite worrying, actually, that people can get enjoyment out of killing sentient beings.
    Other animals do, why is it unusual for Humans to do so?

    Play Grand Theft Auto instead (they have deer that you can chase in a car and run over - such a thrill (!))
    Never liked the GTA games personally, I know I know as a Gamer it makes me an outcast among my own kind, but I was always more of a Sci-Fi/RPG kinda guy.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Three Mile Sprint)
    In what way?
    As others have already said, hunting often causes nonhuman animals to suffer and to experience stress. Morally, I don't think it's right to inflict unnecessary suffering on other animals. We wouldn't hunt other humans, so why hunt other animals?

    (Original post by Three Mile Sprint)
    Other animals do, why is it unusual for Humans to do so?
    It's a fallacy to suggest that, because other animals hunt, humans should hunt too. It's become unnecessary in today's world.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viddy9)
    As others have already said, hunting often causes nonhuman animals to suffer and to experience stress. Morally, I don't think it's right to inflict unnecessary suffering on other animals. We wouldn't hunt other humans, so why hunt other animals?
    They would experience that same stress and suffering in greater amounts form another natural predator or from old age, why is it wrong for me to decide the timing?



    It's a fallacy to suggest that, because other animals hunt, humans should hunt too. It's become unnecessary in today's world.
    I take it you are a Vegetarian , yes?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Three Mile Sprint)
    They would experience that same stress and suffering in greater amounts form another natural predator or from old age, why is it wrong for me to decide the timing?
    Firstly, I would query that they would experience stress and suffering in greater amounts. The individual being which you kill is not doomed to such a fate by any means. Furthermore, hunting is known to damage ecosystems and can lead to extinction - if everybody started hunting for these "benevolent" reasons, there would be a serious problem.

    (Original post by Three Mile Sprint)
    I take it you are a Vegetarian , yes?
    Yes.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viddy9)
    Firstly, I would query that they would experience stress and suffering in greater amounts.
    It's been conclusively proven that a clean kill from a(human) hunter is far less painful and stressfull than the way big-game is killed by any other predator.
    It's also far less distressing than the way a lot of Animals die of old age.

    The individual being which you kill is not doomed to such a fate by any means. Furthermore, hunting is known to damage ecosystems and can lead to extinction - if everybody started hunting for these "benevolent" reasons, there would be a serious problem.
    99% of Hunters only hunt controlled populations.

    For instance I primarily hunt British Deer, British Deer are not endangered, they are grossly overpopulated..they are a vermin.
    In fact there are so many of them, that the deer are damaging the ecosystems and new targets mean we need to kill an extra 18'000 more a year than we currently do in order to protect other species of animal and plant life from serious and irreparable damage.

    I agree any Species that is endangered or suffering from low population levels should not be hunted.


    Yes.
    Good stuff!

    I was Vegi for a while..it didn't pan out.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viddy9)
    It's a fallacy to suggest that, because other animals hunt, humans should hunt too. It's become unnecessary in today's world.
    You could say the same about loads of aspects of human life. There's lost of things humans do/use today that could be described as unnecessary.


    I would also like to bring up the point about culling for conservation, not just sport and food. Deer are culled to prevent damage to woodland, as are rabbits. Mink are culled to protect water voles. Grey squirrels are culled to protect red squirrels. Most woodland creation projects require control of some species like deer and rabbits. All of that is necessary, and all of it heavily involves hunting, trapping and shooting. In this debate, we need to remember that hunting/shooting is done for many different reasons.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.