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

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zenomorph)
    Already banned so irrelevant
    I think you missing the point, hunting can be done in a plethora of way not just the horse and hounds method. That is also about shooting and culling and even trapping if that is what you are in to.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hunting for sport is wrong, but if you are hunting for survival then I can understand.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    im against it. i understand people like the adrenaline rush, hunting an animal for fun and killing it seems wasteful and silly. that pic with you grinning annoys me!
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Killing for fun? No.

    But you're cute, so K.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    I think you missing the point, hunting can be done in a plethora of way not just the horse and hounds method. That is also about shooting and culling and even trapping if that is what you are in to.

    Non issue to me. Far more important things to fight against than shooting and culling
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Three Mile Sprint)
    I have actually passed numerous mental evaluations over the past seven years due to various Job's if it is's any consolation?

    I have mild OCD, otherwise i'm fine.


    So your fine if it's for culling reasons or if you fancy some Vennison?


    Maybe two hundred years ago, now it's almost exclusively the province of the working to lower middle class, and we don't go around in bands of nine on horseback either.

    Generally in bands of one or two, through cold snow, muddy fields and murky forests freezing our tits off.


    So people aiming to preserve our countryside and the species that reside within it are morons?
    Cool.
    I'm a vegetarian. Regardless, meat is part of a staple diet, some people through concerns of health require this. This is justified unlike hunting for pleasure.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Strongly against it... Killing an animal that was just getting on with its own business living life is stupid. If you want a thrill go skydiving or something...

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    If it's for food I don't see a problem. I would personally like to do the same but would rather hunt without a firearm, e.g. set traps. Personal preference I guess but something just doesn't sit right with me when it comes to using a firearm. Seems a bit cowardly to me.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilfred Little)
    If it's for food I don't see a problem. I would personally like to do the same but would rather hunt without a firearm, e.g. set traps. Personal preference I guess but something just doesn't sit right with me when it comes to using a firearm. Seems a bit cowardly to me.
    But you're still using a trap which is a man made tool. The odds aren't 'fair' so to speak either way. In terms of being humane I think I'd prefer to kill an animal with a clean shot from a rifle than trap it where it could remain for hours before you come back to check the trap.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone who isn't a vegetarian can't really complain about hunting.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fizzel)
    But you're still using a trap which is a man made tool. The odds aren't 'fair' so to speak either way. In terms of being humane I think I'd prefer to kill an animal with a clean shot from a rifle than trap it where it could remain for hours before you come back to check the trap.
    I knew these arguments were coming, it just doesn't seem particularly impressive or fair to use a firearm. If we're talking about being humane I would rather be trapped by my leg and have a chance to get away than be killed, you're going to cause the animal (by our definition) the ultimate suffering anyway.

    You can say a trap is a man made tool but that's my line. None of us are truly consistent in our beliefs, the people saying they are so against it would happily wear leather shoes or use medication that's been tested on animals if they were seriously ill and so on.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheSoulWithin)
    Hunting for sport is wrong, but if you are hunting for survival then I can understand.
    I somehow doubt he was hunting for survival
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mrfletch)
    I somehow doubt he was hunting for survival
    Not talking specifically about ThreeMileSprint. I was talking generally.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilfred Little)
    I knew these arguments were coming, it just doesn't seem particularly impressive or fair to use a firearm. If we're talking about being humane I would rather be trapped by my leg and have a chance to get away than be killed, you're going to cause the animal (by our definition) the ultimate suffering anyway.
    I get the impressive part, I think bow hunting is more admirable as it takes skill to get close enough. But fair? The animal is no more cut out to evade a man made trap than its a high powered scoped rifle. Is there skill involved with trapping of course, but then there is skill involved in shooting too. I guess I just think if you're going to kill something it should be swift, rather than it struggling in terror (some animals shred a limbs down to the bone in an attempt to escape) for potentially hours before being killed, preferably at least. That's really the problem people had with fox hunting, its the fact the fox is run till it drops before being ripped apart alive, not the act of hunting a fox in principle.

    You can say a trap is a man made tool but that's my line. None of us are truly consistent in our beliefs, the people saying they are so against it would happily wear leather shoes or use medication that's been tested on animals if they were seriously ill and so on.
    I wasn't saying you were hypocritical, I was just found it strange particularly the choice of trapping instead. I can see why someone might say a bow rather than rifle, a little less tech involved, but there isn't any personal danger or distress to trapping. Its not wits against wits, its just knowing how and where to place often purchased traps, having a beer and then heading back out to see if anything is there. I can't see it being less cowardly.
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by pinejuice)
    im against it. i understand people like the adrenaline rush, hunting an animal for fun and killing it seems wasteful and silly. that pic with you grinning annoys me!
    It's not really wasteful the overwhelming majority of Hunters utitlize the carcase as best they can, I mean it costs money to get out there and hunt, you want to get some return for your time even if it is just some Venison on Saturday evening.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilfred Little)
    If it's for food I don't see a problem. I would personally like to do the same but would rather hunt without a firearm, e.g. set traps. Personal preference I guess but something just doesn't sit right with me when it comes to using a firearm. Seems a bit cowardly to me.
    The odds aren't meant to be fair. You are the predator and they are the prey. We have developed more advanced ways of hunting which will give us the advantage. The prey has not developed more advanced ways escaping and that is why they are the prey. The animals kingdom is not about fair or unfair. Do you think it is fair that a fox will kill a defenseless lamb?
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by Three Mile Sprint)
    I actually have done that.
    But I assume that you still kill?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miser)
    But I assume that you still kill?
    Oh absolutely.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think that at times it's very easy to subjectively think about this from a human perspective. The main problem is that we simply cannot entirely empathise with the suffering of animals - from their own perspective - and so we, on some level, prefer to imagine that they have no real emotions. We believe it to be far more heinous to kill a human than an animal; mostly because we are the same as them, and thus we can recognise and understand their emotions. It all goes back to when we lived in caves - where it was advantageous to sympathise with others in the pack, yet to remain entirely indifferent to the suffering of those that we hunt. Really, the only thing that has ever allowed me to comprehend the suffering of animals is this; and even that has been ignored for the most part.
    Another issue is that of freedom. If we were to protect the rights of animals, by removing the rights of humans - the right to hunt - then do we not replace one issue with another? Not only would we be replacing one inequality with another, but we would also be increasing the likelihood of an armed hunter beginning to inflict his/her aggression upon humans. Not that I'm generalising all hunters, but certainly there are a few that hunt simply to act out deep psychological problems.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Three Mile Sprint)
    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.
    I can't find any studies supporting your assertion that this has "been conclusively proven", but there are many instances of hunting accidents and non-clean kills. The only other objection that I would raise is that even if it is less painful and distressing than the way they die of old age, some of the nonhuman animals which are regularly hunted likely have some self-awareness and wish to go on living, ergo it's not for us to decide when they die.

    (Original post by Three Mile Sprint)
    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.
    Pending your response on the pain and suffering issue, and considering the fact that not all animals hunted will necessarily be particularly self-aware, I think it can be said that at least some forms of hunting are morally permissible. Still (I haven't done much research yet), if there are better alternatives to conservation, I think we should pursue them - ending a potentially self-aware being's life which wants to go on living is quite risky, morally. Similarly, there are better alternatives to combatting human overpopulation than randomly killing newborn babies, which are even less rational and self-aware than adult nonhuman animals are: they don't have any sense of their existing over time.

    (Original post by RFowler)
    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.
    Yes, ‘therapeutic hunting’ doesn't appear to be as much of an issue, if at all, when compared to 'sport hunting'.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • 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.