PDA

View Full Version : Hunting vs Slaughterhouses


DriveAlive
June 20th, 2017, 03:57 PM
As I have previously stated in another thread, I am now considering myself to be a vegan hunter. I mean by this is that I eat vegan, except when I eat meat from animal that I have killed. The reason why I have decided to make this change is because I cannot stand to eat anything from the meat industry (the egg and diary industry are just as bad).

While I could give up meat entirely, I enjoy hunting on a deeper level than just the meat that it brings. However, it is important to state that I do not enjoy the killing. In fact, animal cruelty is probably my most sensitive and important issue.

The debate in this thread is whether or not hunting is better than slaughterhouses or if one is exceedingly more cruel than another. It seems that any time I mention a great burger, no one cares, but as soon as I mention hunting, everyone attacks me. For those that are completely vegetarian/vegan I would be interested in how you weigh the moral and ethical killing of animals through hunting or slaughterhouses. For those that eat meat and do not hunt, how do you view hunting and how do you rationalize the cruelty of the meat industry?

I think it would be good if everyone also mentions whether or not they eat meat and why.

refrigeratorx
June 20th, 2017, 04:19 PM
The animals that you're killing are free and yes for you the quality will probably be better. In a weird way I would say that slaughterhouses, though cruel, are there and an established (unfortunate) industry. Animals are born and bred to die. The animals killed during hunting are free of meeting this capitalist demise. Though they lived a better life before, you are voluntarily cutting their life short. However, I don't believe in killing another living thing unless it's necessary for survival.

So to answer your question, neither are good. But you CAN make a difference with one of those. That being hunting. One person cannot stop the industry. But one person CAN stop hunting and give these multiple animals a life to live. These that you kill may also have defenseless children they care for, etc.

DriveAlive
June 20th, 2017, 04:47 PM
The animals that you're killing are free and yes for you the quality will probably be better. In a weird way I would say that slaughterhouses, though cruel, are there and an established (unfortunate) industry. Animals are born and bred to die. The animals killed during hunting are free of meeting this capitalist demise. Though they lived a better life before, you are voluntarily cutting their life short. However, I don't believe in killing another living thing unless it's necessary for survival.

So to answer your question, neither are good. But you CAN make a difference with one of those. That being hunting. One person cannot stop the industry. But one person CAN stop hunting and give these multiple animals a life to live. These that you kill may also have defenseless children they care for, etc.

Do you eat meat or are you vegetarian/vegan?

Slaughterhouses may be an institution for now, but many countries do not have the disgusting meat culture that we have here in America.

I would like to mention that I am not killing animals with defenseless children. I do not shoot pregnant animals or animals that are taking care of young children. How do I know this you ask? Because I shoot males.

mattsmith48 you seem like you might enjoy this discussion.

Posts merged. Please use the edit function next time. ~Amethyst Rose

PlasmaHam
June 21st, 2017, 01:04 AM
My opinion on this topic and debate is complicated, but to say it simply, I do believe hunting is more moral and better all around than farms and slaughterhouses. I honestly don't see how people harp on hunting as wrong, while they eat a hamburger unironically. However I do not believe that farm and slaughterhouses in general are the moral evil you speak of, but let's not dwell on that since a discussion on that would dwelve into areas off-topic from the point of your thread.

I eat meat: hunted, fished, and farm raised. I also raise my own eggs and some of my poultry in a coop out back. Reasons why I eat meat should be clear from my statements above.

Slaughterhouses may be an institution for now, but many countries do not have the disgusting meat culture that we have here in America. I am not trying to provoke an argument, since I am obviously not your target audience here. But I wanted to say something you may be overlooking. The USA is a major exporter of meats to other countries. I'll say that 25% of meats produced in the US are exported to countries who are not capable of supplying themselves with enough meat. So you can't pit the amount of slaughterhouses on the citizens of the USA alone, and you can't praise other countries for not having their own slaughterhouses while they buy meats from other countries.

And I hope you are aware slaughterhouses are a millennium old concept, the Old Testament even makes mention of it. The way you are addressing it suggests otherwise, when that is simply false.

Snowfox
June 21st, 2017, 01:48 AM
DriveAlive there is at least one thing I have to point out. When hunting Moose in finland there is state level advice to kill young moose first and let older ones live. Reason behind this is that 7 out of 10 wont survive first winter anyway. So to keep Moose population alive and well its is ethical to hunt younger ones.
Also Hunting is highly regulated like what firearm or caliber you can use (pistol hunting is totally banned far all game) what kinda of bullet has to be (full copper or JHP but not FMJ). And lastly you have to pass written hunters test to get hunting licence which we took at school in junior high. Also for moose there is shooting test you have to pass while its quite easy. you have to shoot 4 shot group and area is 17cm wide time for shots is 90 seconds. So old granny could do it,
Also I have to point out that there are different regulations for slaughterhouses and meat industry at different parts of world. Your point of view is purely american.
We took class trip to one slaughterhouse near where I live and we saw how one cow was killed with bullet to head.

And for you refrigeratorx even wild animals die and get eaten. That happens 100% of them. From perspective of deer its totally irrelevant who kills it and who then eats it.

Also now I get to some questionable ground but there is reason why meat eating is not necessarily bad. Forage what animals eat is something that we humans cant or dont want to eat so it is way to get food to table to millions of people. This again might be different in USA vs some other parts of world.

And lastly I eat meat and i love diary and I hunt. When ever i have possibility to choose I eat meat that is hunted by someone. It would be hypocritical to not to eat duck that my brother shot.

Periphery
June 21st, 2017, 03:34 AM
While I could give up meat entirely, I enjoy hunting on a deeper level than just the meat that it brings. However, it is important to state that I do not enjoy the killing. In fact, animal cruelty is probably my most sensitive and important issue.


I actually have a problem with this. You say you do not enjoy the killing yet you enjoy the hunting. Hunting being, well killing animals. Is it not cruel to shoot a helpless animal that is in its natural habitat just minding its own business? I actually find that pretty cruel, just as cruel as the slaughterhouse actually, because in essence in both cases you kill a helpless animal that has no way to defend itself. Also, if you eat meat you're not vegan. You can't be vegan and eat meat, that's not how that works.

DriveAlive
June 21st, 2017, 04:18 AM
I actually have a problem with this. You say you do not enjoy the killing yet you enjoy the hunting. Hunting being, well killing animals. Is it not cruel to shoot a helpless animal that is in its natural habitat just minding its own business? I actually find that pretty cruel, just as cruel as the slaughterhouse actually, because in essence in both cases you kill a helpless animal that has no way to defend itself. Also, if you eat meat you're not vegan. You can't be vegan and eat meat, that's not how that works.

It is very difficult to explain the joy I get from hunting to someone who does not hunt. The easiest comparison for me would be cooking. I love cooking but not because of the eating at the end (though this is a part) or the actual chopping of onions, which I hate, but the whole experience of focusing on cooking. It is like meditation for me. There is something extremely human in the most primal homo sapien meaning of the word about being alone with your thoughts and connected to nature as you stalk an animal and kill it for food. I am not talking about the whole "whooping and hollering" with your buddies as you pound beers and blast away at deer with an AR15. I am talking about walking through the woods, tracking deer, and making the perfect shot. Sometimes you do not find an animal, sometimes you do and you cannot get a shot. These hunting trips are honestly almost as good as getting a kill. It is about the experience and not the destination.

A slaughterhouse, on the other hand, is insurmountably cruel. These are animals who have never taken a step outside, breathed real air, felt the sun on their back. They live in constant pain and fear until one day they are brought to a slaughterhouse and tortuously killed.

If I was an animal and I had to choose between living my life in the wild until one day a hunter puts a bullet through my heart, a wolf chases me down and bites me to death, or I am forced to live my life in the squalor of a meat farm, being in constant pain and fear, and then being electrocuted, stabbed, gutted, and boiled (which oftentimes happens while still alive), I can tell you which option I would choose.

As I said earlier, I am a vegan in every other situation not because I oppose the consumption of meat and animal products in all forms, but because I oppose the industries that harvest these products.

PlasmaHam and Snowfox, thank you both for your input. I should have been clearer, I do not have a problem necessarily with the concept of a slaughterhouse or the agrarian raising of animals for food. However, I am sickened by the industrialized and mechanized monstrosity that is the meat industry. We raise billions of animals in the worst conditions imaginable and give them horrific deaths. This is unforgivable in my opinion. Eating Kosher is obviously better if one is still going to eat meat from a factory but even that is usually not good enough. To raise the animals properly and kill them humanely would mean a drastic decrease in the scale and output of the meat industry and that would have economic effects. That does not make it the wrong thing to do. Also, I speak of countries like Japan that are culturally pretty light on meat consumption. Their fishing and whaling practices are obviously not something to be copied but that is not this discussion.

Snowfox
June 21st, 2017, 02:08 PM
So DriveAlive wouldn't it be possible to for you to consume meat when you know that lets say cow has lived life with mandatory grazing and which is killed with 357 revolver shot to head.
Way you described american meat industry system is little bit more than mildly disturbing.

So wouldnt it be better idea to use consumer power to change way they operate. I mean boycotting.

Aside from main subject I hate wasting. I hate every bit of it. While I greatly dislike eating of Cloven hoofs or liver we dont waste what we have hunted. We eat or give away to someone who eats all parts that are practically possible or safe (ie. not brains or eyes).
Do you take pelt?

Abyssal Echo
June 21st, 2017, 02:42 PM
As I have previously stated in another thread, I am now considering myself to be a vegan hunter. I mean by this is that I eat vegan, except when I eat meat from animal that I have killed. The reason why I have decided to make this change is because I cannot stand to eat anything from the meat industry (the egg and diary industry are just as bad).

While I could give up meat entirely, I enjoy hunting on a deeper level than just the meat that it brings. However, it is important to state that I do not enjoy the killing. In fact, animal cruelty is probably my most sensitive and important issue.

The debate in this thread is whether or not hunting is better than slaughterhouses or if one is exceedingly more cruel than another. It seems that any time I mention a great burger, no one cares, but as soon as I mention hunting, everyone attacks me. For those that are completely vegetarian/vegan I would be interested in how you weigh the moral and ethical killing of animals through hunting or slaughterhouses. For those that eat meat and do not hunt, how do you view hunting and how do you rationalize the cruelty of the meat industry?

I think it would be good if everyone also mentions whether or not they eat meat and why.

Yup I'm a meat eater... I usually eat chicken and beef but do prefer venison when I can get it.
To answer you question is Hunting better than a slaughterhouses Imo that depends on your reason for hunting in the first place.... if you are hunting for food which means you intend to eat it... that's fine if your out there doing it for sport... looking for a trophy to hang on your wall then it's not.
My moms allergic to eggs and is lactose intolerant...there's rarely any dairy products in our house.... as a result I can't say much about the dairy industry other than it's changed a lot since my mom was on the family farm.

DriveAlive
June 21st, 2017, 05:08 PM
So DriveAlive wouldn't it be possible to for you to consume meat when you know that lets say cow has lived life with mandatory grazing and which is killed with 357 revolver shot to head.
Way you described american meat industry system is little bit more than mildly disturbing.

So wouldnt it be better idea to use consumer power to change way they operate. I mean boycotting.

Aside from main subject I hate wasting. I hate every bit of it. While I greatly dislike eating of Cloven hoofs or liver we dont waste what we have hunted. We eat or give away to someone who eats all parts that are practically possible or safe (ie. not brains or eyes).
Do you take pelt?

I think that as long as it was Kosher and the cow was treated properly as you described, I would have a lot less problem with eating its meat. However, I obviously would still prefer to hunt and kill the animal myself.

Mars
June 21st, 2017, 05:35 PM
The meat industry is extremely toxic, not only morally as to how they butcher animals, but also to the environment. If slaughterhouses or farms weren't industrialized, but like how they we're before corn and soy were monopolizing the land, then it wouldn't be a problem. The animals and the meat would be much healthier and happier, and therefore better. I believe hunting (not trophy hunting, but hunting to eat and respect the animal) is a good alternative to eating industry meat. However, you have to always remember to respect the animals that you are killing and to not waste them.

One of my dads friends is actually kind of like how you are, DriveAlive . She's a vegan, but she eats meat if she knows it was killed humanly or morally. For example if it didn't suffer during its death, and it was happy during its life, then she'll eat it. It's a good way of thinking and imho, a better way of eating.

Dmaxd123
June 21st, 2017, 06:08 PM
I'm going to miss a bunch of points i'm sure:

to the person that says "how can you hunt but not enjoy the kill, aren't they the same" I do a LOT of hunting where nothing is killed, sometimes it's because the animal isn't where I was hoping it was, sometimes I just choose for one reason or another not to harvest that particular animal today but maybe another day, ect...

with today's world population hunting is ABSOLUTELY necessary I know many will get upset over that but a lot of times when people think hunting its US & Africa. both places are highly managed to keep a healthy population. Africa the meat from "trophy" hunts is used, feeds the locals, feeds the hunters, feeds the camp staff, and by the locals relying on both the money & the meat that Kudu now has a value to the locals so they aren't as likely to poach indiscriminately and kill off too many animals leading to poor populations and hunger down the road


on the farming end of things: yes there are bad farms but there are a LOT of absolutely amazing and great farms too. I know a kid working at a feedlot, those cows are outside, born on a pasture somewhere hang out with mother for probably 6 months, go lay around a feedlot for 12 months or so being catered to to keep them happy & healthy, then off to slaughter. even at the slaughter house the industry has moved to trying to keep it all humane and low stress as it's better for the animal and a calm animal will produce a better meat

i grew up/live/work in the dairy industry: that is a group of animals that lives a pretty darn good life. calves are fed 2-3-4times/day clean bedding, warm in the winter, fans in the summer, cows get nice big stalls, all the feed they can eat, complete diet, room to exercise a vacation for a couple of months before they have their calf, and in return all we ask from them is about 2 hours a day to get up from their bed come to the parlor and then it's back to whatever they want to do for 22 hours


so I think there are bad hunters and bad farmers, but bad hunters aren't as numerous they just stick with you more, and bad farmers run out of $$ and go out of business but the stories stick with you so people think hunting=killing farming/slaughterhouse=abuse

Periphery
June 22nd, 2017, 05:43 AM
I'm going to miss a bunch of points i'm sure:


With today's world population hunting is ABSOLUTELY necessary I know many will get upset over that but a lot of times when people think hunting its US & Africa. Both places are highly managed to keep a healthy population. Africa the meat from "trophy" hunts is used, feeds the locals, feeds the hunters, feeds the camp staff, and by the locals relying on both the money & the meat that Kudu now has a value to the locals so they aren't as likely to poach indiscriminately and kill off too many animals leading to poor populations and hunger down the road.

In what way is hunting necessary though? I'd say hunting doesn't produce enough food to provide for the world population, and the large farming industry actually does. The hunters feed themselves, how is that helping anyone else? Trophy hunts are usually on rare endangered animals, cows aren't exactly an endangered species. Do you actually have any proof the trophy hunters, who usually come from the western world feed the villages? As far as I'm aware that's the last thing they actually care about.

bunnyhabit
June 22nd, 2017, 07:11 AM
i only eat seafood, vegetables and fruits. it seems from my reading that slaughter houses are very bad treatment of their animals. if i had to choose i would vote for murdering animals in their natural habitat as they would enjoy their life more before death in this situation.

mattsmith48
June 22nd, 2017, 01:27 PM
Killing an animal is a cruel thing, of course slaughterhouses are a lot more, but hunting is still cruel. That being said, we still have over 7 billion people to feed and vegetarianism and veganism is not for everyone, someone said that you can't feed everyone just by hunting a couple animals and if we tried it wouldn't take long before we kill off entire species. I'm not the biggest fan of hunting, it is the most natural way to do it, but the reality is there is a high demand for meat and other animal products, and hunting can not answer that demand, we definitely need to find more humane and ecological ways to answer that demand, also the quality of live of livestock could and should be greatly improve, this would lead to better quality in the products.

Dmaxd123
June 22nd, 2017, 03:24 PM
In what way is hunting necessary though? I'd say hunting doesn't produce enough food to provide for the world population, and the large farming industry actually does. The hunters feed themselves, how is that helping anyone else? Trophy hunts are usually on rare endangered animals, cows aren't exactly an endangered species. Do you actually have any proof the trophy hunters, who usually come from the western world feed the villages? As far as I'm aware that's the last thing they actually care about.


why is hunting necessary: hunting is necessary for wildlife management NOT for consumer food supply.

Africa is an easy place to look at: where there is regulated hunting there are generally healthy & diverse populations of animals from kudu to elephant, still lots of natural causes such as drought and disease but when the population is lowered the quota on those animals is lowered until the population is back within an acceptable density for the land.

lets look at elephants: I don't know what an elephant hunt costs but lets say 50K USD, now the locals have a reason to let the elephants live even if they are a nuisance at times. By allowing the animal to live a hunter comes in pays the outfitter 50K, the outfitter pays the government/local tribe 25K (not sure on exact figures but it's a large portion that DOES go back to the government & locals) locals have a job, some locals are employed to keep the poachers at bay thus selective harvesting of elephants = MORE elephants

elephants in countries where there is no hunting... the population is generally very low due to indiscriminate poaching, the locals have no value on that elephant they just see it as a pain that is destroying crops not as a means of making $$, also by not keeping the population in check you reach imbalances & overpopulation


and as far as the proof that hunters feed the villages:
https://gothunts.com/see-what-happens-to-an-elephant-after-elephant-hunting/

this is what poachers do: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2013/02/11000-elephants-poached-group-says/

I think elephants are safer with hunters selectively harvesting compared to poachers who will shoot as many as they can take the tusks and keep on going

DriveAlive
June 22nd, 2017, 05:53 PM
Killing an animal is a cruel thing, of course slaughterhouses are a lot more, but hunting is still cruel. That being said, we still have over 7 billion people to feed and vegetarianism and veganism is not for everyone, someone said that you can't feed everyone just by hunting a couple animals and if we tried it wouldn't take long before we kill off entire species. I'm not the biggest fan of hunting, it is the most natural way to do it, but the reality is there is a high demand for meat and other animal products, and hunting can not answer that demand, we definitely need to find more humane and ecological ways to answer that demand, also the quality of live of livestock could and should be greatly improve, this would lead to better quality in the products.

I did not mean to suggest that hunting should replace slaughterhouses as the global source of meat. I was merely asserting that the practice of hunting an animal is far less cruel than a slaughterhouse.

I am not sure why veganism is not for everyone because it is a healthier diet that is less resource intensive and would also end slaughterhouses. I am not saying that everyone should hunt, just that it is hypocritical to claim that hunting is cruel while eating meat from a slaughterhouse. I would love to see a world of vegans and hunters.

DriveAlive
June 25th, 2017, 02:49 PM
I would like to also mention that SUSTAINABLE hunting of certain species can be very beneficial for helping the survival of these species. Also, real sportsmen are very much against the selling of public lands to companies for development. I just read an article on the Field & Stream website about this.

lliam
June 25th, 2017, 04:40 PM
While I could give up meat entirely, I enjoy hunting on a deeper level than just the meat that it brings.


Imo the only reason for hunting is that you hunt and kill animals for eating.

A deeper meaning simply never existed.

To interpret more in something like this is simply a self-justification for our own brute lust to kill.


As for the thread's topic, I eat meat, but I don't feel the slightest desire to wander around the wilderness with a weapon to kill animals.

I would simply leave it to the natural predators because it has been their job for millennia.

However, I also don't have the slightest desire for eating meat that has been processed industrially. In my family we'd still our own house butchering til the 1980s.

We should return to this level, even if it's only a utopia that appeals to me as an ideal.

DriveAlive
June 25th, 2017, 05:04 PM
Imo the only reason for hunting is that you hunt and kill animals for eating.

A deeper meaning simply never existed.

To interpret more in something like this is simply a self-justification for our own brute lust to kill.


As for the thread's topic, I eat meat, but I don't feel the slightest desire to wander around the wilderness with a weapon to kill animals.

I would simply leave it to the natural predators because it has been their job for millennia.

However, I also don't have the slightest desire for eating meat that has been processed industrially. In my family we'd still our own house butchering til the 1980s.

We should return to this level, even if it's only a utopia that appeals to me as an ideal.
Would you care to elaborate on what you understand to be the "more" that I interpret in hunting. Personally, hunting brings me great peace and a connection to nature and my food. I do not think I enjoy anything as much as hunting.

So you say that you eat meat but despise the concept of hunting. The point of this thread is really to discuss what you perceive to be the moral difference between killing an animal yourself or having someone else kill an animal for you.

I agree with you that we should return to a world where animals are treated with respect and killed with respect. It would reduce the meat supply but that is not a bad thing. Our country has way too much food anyway. Honestly, the amount of food that is wasted sickens me.

lliam
June 25th, 2017, 11:45 PM
Would you care to elaborate on what you understand to be the "more" that I interpret in hunting. Personally, hunting brings me great peace and a connection to nature and my food. I do not think I enjoy anything as much as hunting.

So you say that you eat meat but despise the concept of hunting. The point of this thread is really to discuss what you perceive to be the moral difference between killing an animal yourself or having someone else kill an animal for you.


I have no general moral reservations to kill animals if they ensure the survival of humans.

So if you kill animals to eat them and do so in bulk, there is nothing we need to discuss.


If you kill only animals, because the hunt gives you an inner peace, I would have problems with you if you were direct neighbor.

I think, for example, the whole brimbooth of hunting, as I know it from German and English hunters, is a completely dumb biz. Even though I know that hunting by humans, necessarily replaces the absence of the predators. At least in Germany and Western Europe.

No offense, but it's kinda similar to your reasoning with this inner peace stuff and being connected with nature. I'm not a militant animal-rights activist and leave it up to you and your conscience how to deal loving hunting as a vegan.


Personally I don't need to hunt animals to find peace and reconnection with the mother nature. I just put on my sneakers, and go for a run for ten or twenty km through the woods and countryside.

And if I want to observe animals, I make it like a scout, follow their tracks and behave as inconspicuously as possible cause I'm a guest in the realm of animals.





I agree with you that we should return to a world where animals are treated with respect and killed with respect. It would reduce the meat supply but that is not a bad thing. Our country has way too much food anyway. Honestly, the amount of food that is wasted sickens me.


Well, speaking of respect, I have to think again about the deeper meaning.


If I should go hunting someday, I'l simply leave the house, take my quiver, my crossbows, or my bow and hunt a suitable animal for consumption and kill it.

This would be simply a very factual act to me because I need that animal's flesh to survive.

I would take care that I not to kill too young animals, or younger, female ones, mothers and such. And, of course, that I would care about not kill more animals than I need meat to survive. If this is interpreted as respect, so that's is my form of respect that I can think of.


This also applies similar to farm animals too.

My approach here is, if it comes to speaking about respect, that I only hold a limited amount of animals. Such limitation depends on how much animals I can provide on my properties and how many animals can live a stress-free life on it before they get slaughtered and such.


All in all, I think, we should leave the whole nature as far as possible to itself, which includes hunting as well. Unfortunately this isn't always possible due to our mistakes in the past and our way of life as a result of the past.

DriveAlive
June 25th, 2017, 11:51 PM
I have no general moral reservations to kill animals if they ensure the survival of humans.

So if you kill animals to eat them and do so in bulk, there is nothing we need to discuss.


If you kill only animals, because the hunt gives you an inner peace, I would have problems with you if you were direct neighbor.

I think, for example, the whole brimbooth of hunting, as I know it from German and English hunters, is a completely dumb biz. Even though I know that hunting by humans, necessarily replaces the absence of the predators. At least in Germany and Western Europe.

No offense, but it's kinda similar to your reasoning with this inner peace stuff and being connected with nature. I'm not a militant animal-rights activist and leave it up to you and your conscience how to deal loving hunting as a vegan.


Personally I don't need to hunt animals to find peace and reconnection with the mother nature. I just put on my sneakers, and go for a run for ten or twenty km through the woods and countryside.

And if I want to observe animals, I make it like a scout, follow their tracks and behave as inconspicuously as possible cause I'm a guest in the realm of animals.








Well, speaking of respect, I have to think again about the deeper meaning.


If I should go hunting someday, I'l simply leave the house, take my quiver, my crossbows, or my bow and hunt a suitable animal for consumption and kill it.

This would be simply a very factual act to me because I need that animal's flesh to survive.

I would take care that I not to kill too young animals, or younger, female ones, mothers and such. And, of course, that I would care about not kill more animals than I need meat to survive. If this is interpreted as respect, so that's is my form of respect that I can think of.


This also applies similar to farm animals too.

My approach here is, if it comes to speaking about respect, that I only hold a limited amount of animals. Such limitation depends on how much animals I can provide on my properties and how many animals can live a stress-free life on it before they get slaughtered and such.


All in all, I think, we should leave the whole nature as far as possible to itself, which includes hunting as well. Unfortunately this isn't always possible due to our mistakes in the past and our way of life as a result of the past.
I hunt for pleasure. I kill for meat. What I mean is that I do not hunt for sport. I enjoy the hunt, not the kill. The kill is for meat. Do you get what I mean?

Snowfox
June 26th, 2017, 02:15 AM
DriveAlive I know what you mean.
However what you think about hunting for money?
There are several cases in my country where people do it for good reason. Harmfull alien species. American mink that has gone wild here and is endangering our ecosystem. Same goes with raccoon dog.
Both were not originally from here but has gone wild and are endangering other species because of original human activity of bringing them here for fur-farming.

No one actually eats them. from mink we take fur and grease from raccoon dog just fur. there is fur buyer who pays for pelts and grease. Mink grease is used to make boot-wax in case you didnt know.
Hunting is mainly done by trapping. Law defines that traps should not be killing traps so actual killing is done with .22 lr or 22WMR (rifle) or with hammer.
Few years back it was legal to drown those animals but they made it illegal.
Your opinions of this

DriveAlive
June 26th, 2017, 12:19 PM
DriveAlive I know what you mean.
However what you think about hunting for money?
There are several cases in my country where people do it for good reason. Harmfull alien species. American mink that has gone wild here and is endangering our ecosystem. Same goes with raccoon dog.
Both were not originally from here but has gone wild and are endangering other species because of original human activity of bringing them here for fur-farming.

No one actually eats them. from mink we take fur and grease from raccoon dog just fur. there is fur buyer who pays for pelts and grease. Mink grease is used to make boot-wax in case you didnt know.
Hunting is mainly done by trapping. Law defines that traps should not be killing traps so actual killing is done with .22 lr or 22WMR (rifle) or with hammer.
Few years back it was legal to drown those animals but they made it illegal.
Your opinions of this
This is very dangerous territory for sure. In Louisiana, there is a similar problem with nutria, which the French brought over for fur but now destroy the ecosystem and can cause flooding. The state offers money for nutria tails in order to encourage people to eradicate them. The same goes for pythons in Florida. In these instances, I am okay with people killing these animals. However, I quickly draw the line when they are doing so to species that are not dangerously invasive.

I would also like to say that I am extremely against trapping as it is cruel. I understand that there are a lot of them and that they are hard to catch, but that is no excuse to treat the animal any worse.

Snowfox
June 26th, 2017, 01:21 PM
DriveAlive I fail to see how trapping is cruel. I have seen how it is done trap is like cage that closes when prey goes in. Trap itself doesnt hurt or kill animal it just closes animal to one cage. Then trapper gets txt message to his/her cellphone and goes to chek what animal set that trap. Its its neighbour cat release if its prey kill it with either hammer or shoot it.
Traps that kill or injure have been banned decades ago

DriveAlive
June 26th, 2017, 01:24 PM
DriveAlive I fail to see how trapping is cruel. I have seen how it is done trap is like cage that closes when prey goes in. Trap itself doesnt hurt or kill animal it just closes animal to one cage. Then trapper gets txt message to his/her cellphone and goes to chek what animal set that trap. Its its neighbour cat release if its prey kill it with either hammer or shoot it.
Traps that kill or injure have been banned decades ago

I was thinking about the traps we see here in America. They work by catching the animal by the leg and usually breaking it.

Snowfox
June 26th, 2017, 01:27 PM
oh those have been practically banned since 60s you can use them only if you at same time sit nearby with gun ready to fire so you can use them to for example hunt wolf. And to get licence to hunt wolf.... well it really takes helluva paperwork.

DriveAlive
June 26th, 2017, 01:51 PM
I guess we are just really behind here in America.

lliam
June 26th, 2017, 07:59 PM
The kill is for meat. Do you get what I mean?

yeah :D

DriveAlive
June 26th, 2017, 10:56 PM
yeah :D

I did not mean it to sound facetious or anything. I was merely saying that the hunt is for pleasure but the kill is purely practical.

lliam
June 27th, 2017, 01:10 PM
Well, I just prefer the fact that the hunt should only be allowed for this practical aspect, but, luckily for those who do so, you can't forbid anyone to have fun whilst hunting. :D

DriveAlive
June 27th, 2017, 01:46 PM
Well, I just prefer the fact that the hunt should only be allowed for this practical aspect, but, luckily for those who do so, you can't forbid anyone to have fun whilst hunting. :D

hmmm

There is a difference between being a hunter and a killer. I am a hunter. Those who work in slaughterhouses are killers.

Flapjack
July 1st, 2017, 06:30 AM
Okay I do eat meat, I was vegetarian before for 10 months but it was reallyyy bad for my health as I only ate cheese and chocolate (I have veggies).

I think hunting is okayyish if the animal isn't endangered and the meat is used for food.

I think the meat industry's method of killing the animals is a lot more humaine than hunting and I am glad to see battery farms being outlawed in Europe but I think there is still a long way to go before I consider the animals treated well. I think more regulation and awareness is needed.

For now I try to buy free-range whenever I can, I would love to be vegetarian again as I do truly hate to see animals suffer but it just wasn't compatible with my lifestyle.

DriveAlive
July 1st, 2017, 10:54 AM
Okay I do eat meat, I was vegetarian before for 10 months but it was reallyyy bad for my health as I only ate cheese and chocolate (I have veggies).

I think hunting is okayyish if the animal isn't endangered and the meat is used for food.

I think the meat industry's method of killing the animals is a lot more humaine than hunting and I am glad to see battery farms being outlawed in Europe but I think there is still a long way to go before I consider the animals treated well. I think more regulation and awareness is needed.

For now I try to buy free-range whenever I can, I would love to be vegetarian again as I do truly hate to see animals suffer but it just wasn't compatible with my lifestyle.

Flapjack!!! Great to see you here again.

Why do you believe that slaughterhouses are more humane than hunting? Personally, I look at the quality of life of the animal. I see the quality of life of an animal who lives in the wild until one day getting shot to be much better than an animal who lives in terror and pain until being painfully killed in a slaughterhouse.

Flapjack
July 1st, 2017, 11:12 AM
Flapjack!!! Great to see you here again.

Why do you believe that slaughterhouses are more humane than hunting? Personally, I look at the quality of life of the animal. I see the quality of life of an animal who lives in the wild until one day getting shot to be much better than an animal who lives in terror and pain until being painfully killed in a slaughterhouse.
Thanks it's great to be back!! Missed this place so much!! :')

I believe that because they are killed immediately with a bolt or electricity whereas an animal being hunted may be shot several times before it does however I have also seen the videos on youtube of cows having their skin removed when they are clearly still alive and animals being beaten but I like to think that is the minority as there are rules and regulations to stop that.

As for the quality of the animals life as you mentioned, I agree wild animals do live better lives than those raised for meat and that is why I try to buy free range but even then the quality of life will not be as good as a wild animal.

Hunting does also have other benefits such as reducing the number of animals such as deer that have no natural predictor and the quality of the meat is much higher.

Tbh what I hate most about hunting is the culture, men trying to prove their manliness by shooting an animal that didn't even know they was there with a high powered rifle and then posing with its body parts.

I do understand why you think hunting is more ethical buddy and I have no problem with hunting as long as the animal is not endangered.

You said before you were vegan because of how the animals are treated, in the future when conditions hopefully improve, would you consider eating meat from a slaughterhouse again:)

Snowfox
July 1st, 2017, 03:14 PM
Flapjack I find it interesting that you dislike hunting culture. There is reason why some hunter try to kill animal in a way that animal never knew it was target. Another way is chasing when ie deer is chased with dogs or human chain to killing spot.

This is stress and its effects to meat. Stress meat tastes bad. While chasing is practical way it does cause stress. Sniping doesnt and quality of meat is better.
I have also pointed out that there are some game animals that are hunted for pest control and pelt not for meat and that there are good reasons why this is done.

Flapjack
July 1st, 2017, 03:19 PM
@Flapjack (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=122060) I find it interesting that you dislike hunting culture. There is reason why some hunter try to kill animal in a way that animal never knew it was target. Another way is chasing when ie deer is chased with dogs or human chain to killing spot.
If that is how it came across then I am sorry, I do believe shooting is more humane than dogs but that isn't why I don't like hunting culture. I don't like how guys try to prove their manliness by shooting animals and hate it when they pose with body parts. I don't understand how people can enjoy killing animals.

I only mentioned the shooting to illustrate how there is nothing brave or manly about hunting in my opinion. I also don't like how some hunters purposefully target animals as a way of showing off.

Hunting for food is one thing but killing for fun is another.

Snowfox
July 1st, 2017, 03:27 PM
Flapjack there is something very very primal in it. Like when I got my hunters licence and my brother took me to hunting with some other men.... I shot my first rabbit with shotgun and they used its blood to paint my face and chest making me man... sounds stupid and hilarious and it is at least outdated like this used to be "thing" hundreds of years ago but that "thing" still exists.

We are sometimes quite primal. Well its not just man thing I know women who hunt too.

Also hunting can be done other reasons than for food. Land owners are happy that someone kills rabbits cause they eat from fields.

Flapjack
July 1st, 2017, 03:34 PM
Also hunting can be done other reasons than for food. Land owners are happy that someone kills rabbits cause they eat from fields.
Very true, I actually was mentioned in a previous post about how it can be used to control the numbers of a population of animals with no natural predator and sometimes culls are necessary to stop the spread of disease so I am not against hunting as a whole just people who do it for fun.

@Flapjack (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=122060) there is something very very primal in it. Like when I got my hunters licence and my brother took me to hunting with some other men.... I shot my first rabbit with shotgun and they used its blood to paint my face and chest making me man... sounds stupid and hilarious and it is at least outdated like this used to be "thing" hundreds of years ago but that "thing" still exists.
You do you boo, personally I hate stuff like that but you have every right to do it and it would be hypocritical to criticise you and still eat meat, it's just not my thing.

DriveAlive
July 1st, 2017, 04:18 PM
If that is how it came across then I am sorry, I do believe shooting is more humane than dogs but that isn't why I don't like hunting culture. I don't like how guys try to prove their manliness by shooting animals and hate it when they pose with body parts. I don't understand how people can enjoy killing animals.

I only mentioned the shooting to illustrate how there is nothing brave or manly about hunting in my opinion. I also don't like how some hunters purposefully target animals as a way of showing off.

Hunting for food is one thing but killing for fun is another.

I agree that hunting should not be for manliness or lack thereof. There can be a sense of friendship and bonding when you hunt with another person, though.

I am not necessarily sure I agree with this point of view, but I did hear a professional hunter express his view of why he hunts dangerous game. In his mind, facing down an animal that can kill you as easily as you can kill him puts you both in a situation where you must choose between fight or flight. If you both choose to fight, then you are both accepting the reality that one or both of you will end up dead. This willingness to accept your fate and face off against the animal is what makes the dangerous game hunting such a great and powerful experience. Once again, I am not necessarily sure I agree with this but it is an interesting way to phrase it.

I think it is better to say, "killing for food is one thing but killing for fun is another." I hunt for fun. I kill for food. That is a very important difference to me.

mattsmith48
July 2nd, 2017, 11:30 AM
Very true, I actually was mentioned in a previous post about how it can be used to control the numbers of a population of animals with no natural predator and sometimes culls are necessary to stop the spread of disease so I am not against hunting as a whole just people who do it for fun.


The hunting for population control is bullshit. There is a maximum number of animals an habitat can sustain if that maximum is past some animals will either naturally die due to the lack of food or migrate else where, it was that way for hundred of millions of years before humans and there is no reason we should change that.

DriveAlive
July 2nd, 2017, 11:43 AM
The hunting for population control is bullshit. There is a maximum number of animals an habitat can sustain if that maximum is past some animals will either naturally die due to the lack of food or migrate else where, it was that way for hundred of millions of years before humans and there is no reason we should change that.

ecosystems have been irreparably changed and therefore natural predators no longer exist or there are invasive species and the like. Personally, I do not want masses of deer to starve to death. I would much prefer to cleanly kill a certain amount of deer and provide food for people. But that is just me.

Flapjack
July 2nd, 2017, 06:16 PM
I agree that hunting should not be for manliness or lack thereof. There can be a sense of friendship and bonding when you hunt with another person, though.

I am not necessarily sure I agree with this point of view, but I did hear a professional hunter express his view of why he hunts dangerous game. In his mind, facing down an animal that can kill you as easily as you can kill him puts you both in a situation where you must choose between fight or flight. If you both choose to fight, then you are both accepting the reality that one or both of you will end up dead. This willingness to accept your fate and face off against the animal is what makes the dangerous game hunting such a great and powerful experience. Once again, I am not necessarily sure I agree with this but it is an interesting way to phrase it.

I think it is better to say, "killing for food is one thing but killing for fun is another." I hunt for fun. I kill for food. That is a very important difference to me.
Sorry for the late reply buddy!! :)

Okay I fully get how the hunting minus the killing can be fun, bonding with friends, playing with guns and the thrill of tracking the animal etc etc so we agree there :)

Now here is where we disagree xD I do not view an animal can 'kill you as easily as you can kill him puts you both in a situation where you must choose between fight or flight. If you both choose to fight, then you are both accepting the reality that one or both of you will end up dead.' as the hunters often use guns without the animal knowing they're even there and they're really far away anyways. In any other context you would call them a coward.

For example, if I was to challenge a very strong guy to a fight, lets say Anthony Joshua (http://static.boxrec.com/thumb/f/fb/Anthony_Joshua.jpeg/200px-Anthony_Joshua.jpeg) (the lion in the analogy) and then shot him in the back before he even knew I was there.... would you say I was a brave hunter that risked my life as he did or would you call me a coward?

Just for the record, if a crazy man did actually fight a lion unarmed, I wouldn't consider them brave, just a stupid nasty man that wanted to hurt animals.

The hunting for population control is bullshit. There is a maximum number of animals an habitat can sustain if that maximum is past some animals will either naturally die due to the lack of food or migrate else where, it was that way for hundred of millions of years before humans and there is no reason we should change that.
Okay I completely get why you would think this and it is true that left untouched all the species in an environment will reach an equilibrium, however the world is unfortunately humans do have an affect on nature!

For example, animals like toxic toads, lizards and fish are introduced into areas with no natural predators and then proceed to eat native species or eat the food that native species need or damage habitats that native species need etc etc

In the case of deer and correct me if I am wrong because I am just going off of memory, they did used to have a natural predator that kept their population under control and that was the wolves. Wolves got made extinct in the UK (and I assume places in the US where deer numbers are a problem too) by farmers angry that they were killing their chickens.

Now deer have no natural predators and if left unchecked their population would increase, they will consume more plants, less plants for other animals to eat and live in, these species will then experience a reduction in population that will have a knock on effect across the food chain.

PlasmaHam
July 2nd, 2017, 06:41 PM
In the case of deer and correct me if I am wrong because I am just going off of memory, they did used to have a natural predator that kept their population under control and that was the wolves. Wolves got made extinct in the UK (and I assume places in the US where deer numbers are a problem too) by farmers angry that they were killing their chickens.

Now deer have no natural predators and if left unchecked their population would increase, they will consume more plants, less plants for other animals to eat and live in, these species will then experience a reduction in population that will have a knock on effect across the food chain.
True. Most wolves were driven out of the eastern states hundreds of years ago by farmers and native tribes. Nowadays there are very few natural predators around here that could take down a full-grown deer. Another factor in the unnaturally large deer population in the USA is that humans are cutting down forest lands and replacing them with grass and bush lands. Grass/bush lands provide more food for deer than forests, so their populations can grow from that too.

Unchecked, the population will eventually endure a mass starvation, in which both their own and other native species will see a stark population drop-off. This could result in more threatened species undergoing even more population decreases, or even extinction. Also, a much higher rate of deer/car collisions will happen as a result of an uncontrolled population, resulting in both human death and millions if not billions of dollars of property damage.

mattsmith48
July 2nd, 2017, 09:58 PM
Okay I completely get why you would think this and it is true that left untouched all the species in an environment will reach an equilibrium, however the world is unfortunately humans do have an affect on nature!

For example, animals like toxic toads, lizards and fish are introduced into areas with no natural predators and then proceed to eat native species or eat the food that native species need or damage habitats that native species need etc etc

In the case of deer and correct me if I am wrong because I am just going off of memory, they did used to have a natural predator that kept their population under control and that was the wolves. Wolves got made extinct in the UK (and I assume places in the US where deer numbers are a problem too) by farmers angry that they were killing their chickens.

Now deer have no natural predators and if left unchecked their population would increase, they will consume more plants, less plants for other animals to eat and live in, these species will then experience a reduction in population that will have a knock on effect across the food chain.

True. Most wolves were driven out of the eastern states hundreds of years ago by farmers and native tribes. Nowadays there are very few natural predators around here that could take down a full-grown deer.

Deer also have mountain lions, bears, jaguars, and coyotes as predators, if wolves are no longer present in some region deer still have other predators, plus humans who kill them for food, we don't need to hunt them just for population control.

Personally, I do not want masses of deer to starve to death. I would much prefer to cleanly kill a certain amount of deer and provide food for people. But that is just me.

If you kill them for food its fine people need to eat, but say its for that not for a bullshit reason like population control or entertainment.


Another factor in the unnaturally large deer population in the USA is that humans are cutting down forest lands and replacing them with grass and bush lands. Grass/bush lands provide more food for deer than forests, so their populations can grow from that too.

About stop destroying their natural habitat, it sounds like an easier and less cruel.

Unchecked, the population will eventually endure a mass starvation, in which both their own and other native species will see a stark population drop-off.

Weird that you care so much about controlling the population of deer so they won't starve, but when it comes to controlling the human population with contraception and education and giving people enough money to be able to feed themself you're completely against it.

This could result in more threatened species undergoing even more population decreases, or even extinction. Also, a much higher rate of deer/car collisions will happen as a result of an uncontrolled population, resulting in both human death and millions if not billions of dollars of property damage.

Deaths of humans cause by a collision with a deer is fairly low compared to the number of accident and depends on multiple factors like speed, weather size of the animal ect.

DriveAlive
July 3rd, 2017, 01:36 AM
Sorry for the late reply buddy!! :)

Okay I fully get how the hunting minus the killing can be fun, bonding with friends, playing with guns and the thrill of tracking the animal etc etc so we agree there :)

Now here is where we disagree xD I do not view an animal can 'kill you as easily as you can kill him puts you both in a situation where you must choose between fight or flight. If you both choose to fight, then you are both accepting the reality that one or both of you will end up dead.' as the hunters often use guns without the animal knowing they're even there and they're really far away anyways. In any other context you would call them a coward.

I get what you mean. The point of view of dangerous game hunting as a choice between fight or flight was implying a situation in which you are not shooting an animal from far away. When you hunt African dangerous game like cape buffalo, you are doing it at close range. If you are facing a charging cape buffalo and you only have one shot to kill the buffalo before he kills you, I think the idea makes more sense.

Snowfox
July 3rd, 2017, 02:25 AM
mattsmith48 I dont know about you or Canadians at general but do you really eat money????
I mean metal is not tasty and notes taste just plain... cotton paper.
Most of people on earth we eat food.
Also humans are natural predators its kinda we replaced wolves. Only if you had seen me my face painted with blood in hunting trip with my bro. We even look like mad predators

Flapjack
July 3rd, 2017, 03:49 AM
Deer also have mountain lions, bears, jaguars, and coyotes as predators, if wolves are no longer present in some region deer still have other predators, plus humans who kill them for food, we don't need to hunt them just for population control.
In the UK at least, deer have no natural predators and I don't think there is enough killed for food to stop population growth and for that reason, culls are unfortunately needed.

mattsmith48
July 3rd, 2017, 09:34 AM
mattsmith48 I dont know about you or Canadians at general but do you really eat money????
I mean metal is not tasty and notes taste just plain... cotton paper.
Most of people on earth we eat food.
Also humans are natural predators its kinda we replaced wolves. Only if you had seen me my face painted with blood in hunting trip with my bro. We even look like mad predators

What the fuck are you talking about?

In the UK at least, deer have no natural predators and I don't think there is enough killed for food to stop population growth and for that reason, culls are unfortunately needed.

I found this article from 2015 that talks about reintroducing the lynx to some British forest.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/earthnews/11457882/Wild-lynx-to-return-to-Britain-after-1300-years.html

DriveAlive
July 4th, 2017, 12:32 AM
Deer also have mountain lions, bears, jaguars, and coyotes as predators, if wolves are no longer present in some region deer still have other predators, plus humans who kill them for food, we don't need to hunt them just for population control.



If you kill them for food its fine people need to eat, but say its for that not for a bullshit reason like population control or entertainment.




About stop destroying their natural habitat, it sounds like an easier and less cruel.



Weird that you care so much about controlling the population of deer so they won't starve, but when it comes to controlling the human population with contraception and education and giving people enough money to be able to feed themself you're completely against it.



Deaths of humans cause by a collision with a deer is fairly low compared to the number of accident and depends on multiple factors like speed, weather size of the animal ect.
No one here has said that killing is for entertainment.

mattsmith48
July 4th, 2017, 10:50 AM
No one here has said that killing is for entertainment.

No one here, but they are people who hunt for the ''Sport'' and leave the animal after they killed it

Dmaxd123
July 5th, 2017, 02:36 PM
No one here, but they are people who hunt for the ''Sport'' and leave the animal after they killed it

I can't think of anywhere it is actually legal to just leave an animal lay after you kill it except things like groundhogs and other nuisance pests

many states/countries even if you are "trophy" hunting, you are legally required to take the hide/horns from the field last if it is multiple trips to retrieve the animal otherwise you can/will/should be ticketed for wasting of a game animal

Mrflufay
August 7th, 2017, 06:29 AM
I beleive hunting is okay if done correctly. Sometimes (very rarely) out in the forest id spot a hole with spikes clearly meant for some animal such as bear or big cat. I believe if the animal is honored and dies within a reasonable time it is alright. I also believe the hunter should feel some sort of respect for the animal since it did just give its life for you (the hunter). Its for sure much better than the poor souls that are in cages all their lives.

Flapjack
August 7th, 2017, 06:47 AM
I beleive hunting is okay if done correctly. Sometimes (very rarely) out in the forest id spot a hole with spikes clearly meant for some animal such as bear or big cat. I believe if the animal is honored and dies within a reasonable time it is alright. I also believe the hunter should feel some sort of respect for the animal since it did just give its life for you (the hunter). Its for sure much better than the poor souls that are in cages all their lives.
No animal has ever given its life for a hunter :D:D:D they are murdered dude call it what it is!! They don't run up to the hunter and commit seppuku xD

Mrflufay
August 7th, 2017, 06:53 AM
No animal has ever given its life for a hunter :D:D:D they are murdered dude call it what it is!! They don't run up to the hunter and commit seppuku xD


Alright, alright i meant it more figuratively than literally. :D

Snowfox
August 8th, 2017, 08:09 AM
What people seem to forget intentionally is that human is one of those predators. Wolves lions what ever you have out there. Human is one of them. We are part of nature even if you dont like it.
For some reason lots of people are too arrogant to admit it. Therefore hunting and gathering is part of our natural way to feed ourselves as well as farming and fishing.
Bear eats fish meat and vegetables. Pigs eat about everything. Humans eat about everything too.
But it seems that some people especially those from are arrogantly moral radiating.
They like to point out always everywhere how morally superior they are when they eat soy. Soy that is produced in some 3rd world country on land that used to be rainforest before it was cut down to become soyfarm. Or soy that was transported thousands of miles until it went to his/her/it's/whatever food table.
Their main joy in life seems to be banning absolutely everything that they dont like.

Moral radiating pisses me of for some reason

Flapjack
August 8th, 2017, 08:46 AM
What people seem to forget intentionally is that human is one of those predators. Wolves lions what ever you have out there. Human is one of them. We are part of nature even if you dont like it.
For some reason lots of people are too arrogant to admit it. Therefore hunting and gathering is part of our natural way to feed ourselves as well as farming and fishing.
Bear eats fish meat and vegetables. Pigs eat about everything. Humans eat about everything too.
But it seems that some people especially those from are arrogantly moral radiating.
They like to point out always everywhere how morally superior they are when they eat soy. Soy that is produced in some 3rd world country on land that used to be rainforest before it was cut down to become soyfarm. Or soy that was transported thousands of miles until it went to his/her/it's/whatever food table.
Their main joy in life seems to be banning absolutely everything that they dont like.

Moral radiating pisses me of for some reason
I like eating meat but I don't enjoy killing animals... that's not me being arrogant just how I feel. I was vegetarian for about 10 months last year but had to quit due to my health. People can enjoy meat and have a problem with the meat industry and hunting and just for the record there are many reasons for why a person may choose to be vegetarian! Some do it for health reasons, others because they love animals and don't want to contribute to their suffering... what's wrong with that?

Also can you stop stereotyping whole groups? What do you mean 'they' like?? They don't all act the same ya know... in High School I sat next to a girl for 2 years and only found out she was vegetarian when it came up in class.. I think you only notice the loud vegetarians because they are loud and the quiet ones don't mention it...

Just because humans can eat meat doesn't mean we have to! Doesn't mean we have to treat the animals terrible before we kill them!

Snowfox
August 8th, 2017, 10:57 AM
Flapjack hmm where to start. ok....
I love stereoptyping. You should try it too sometimes... ;D

I hunt and I enjoy killing part but I dont enjoy animal suffering. Clean kill is what I aim. During last season I let one deer go and my brother asked why. I told him that My angle and this deer was such that there was possibility of not killing this deer and that I dont want to torture animals.
Also did you know that meat industry doesnt have to be like it is now.
As side note few years back Vegan group here attacked farms destroying property. They said they represent all vegans and all vegetarians as whole. So I think its quite clear that vegetarism leads to fanatic violent behaviour... or what you think



;D;D;D

NewLeafsFan
August 10th, 2017, 10:31 PM
I also enjoy hunting. Personally, I don't think that one option is any better than the other in this thread. In both cases the animal is usually killed quickly. Obviously there is the odd exception such as veal or a horror story where a pig didn't die right away but ran around screaming. I could not live without meat.