Hunting should definately be banned. If it is control you use to argue, then there are better ways then the barberic killing of foxes and their cubs. In my opinion they should not be “controlled” Look at how many humans there are on the earth , how sellfish are we to say that we have the right to controll their numbers anyway, while we let ours grow as we pollute the earth. Very sellfish indeed.Who is controlling us?
It is an unnessacery sport and excuses are given such as “the hunters will be put out of work!” and thats more important then lives. These are lives we are dealing with. Killing to survive is one thign but killing for fun is just totally unnessacery!
a. what if they kill and eat their kill? obviously big game hunting (i.e Africa) is not an example of this but i mean more everyday hunting. if they ate their kill how would they be different from animals?
b. does this include fishing or are fish not cute enough/worthy of our feelings?
(in case you’re wondering i voted against hunting even though i dont mind fishing and although i believe the previous post was a bit harsh your arguments for your point seem quite childish. also reading your other posts you want depressing but an accurate account of human life? visit: crimelibrary.com/serial_kill … index.html and look at especially Kitty Genovese, Ted Bundy and Lopez)
Tell me what you mean by childish all of you? I would like to know why I sound childish. Of course if I do it is because the way in which I translate my ideas into words is alot less developed than yourse because I am only 14. Fine pick on me and give in to your agism, I dont realy care because all im trying to say is that hunting is wrong however I put it forth!
Well personally I believe that we shouldnt kill any animals but I dont want to get into that one if you do visit the other forum I have set up ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/vi … p?t=139722 so to me A. would still be unexceptable but it would be a more reasonable idea. Fishing is a light subject, I dont go fishing and I dont think I realy want to mainly because it causes suffering but I also find it of not to much interest. I did go fishing once but I used sweetcorn as bait instead but it is still painfull to the fish. Fishing is much better than fox hunting though and I can see why alot of people would agree with it futher than fox hunting.
Biologically speaking, humans are designed to hunt, kill, and eat that kill.
(Shooting foxes doesnt count, neither does killing rhino so dont flame…)
When you come right of saying something is “wrong” is makes you sound a bit nieve and a bit extreme. Im not criticizing, but thats how it comes off.
Now, as for hunting:
Responsible hunting is done with an ecological point of view, and is generally a boon on the particular biome. Hunting over-populated regions helps the animal life flourish.
Think of it like this: The animal can die by a gunshot, or the animal will starve to death, and its prey will die out in that region as well. So which way would you like it to die?
But irresponsible hunting, well… That is something different.
Well sorry if I sound nieve im not some militant extremist I just use the word wrong because it is the best word I can come up with. I could say unfair or unethical but I thought wrong rounded it off nice enough!
You ask me if I would prefer, well the problem with this is if you think about crimes. There is theft and murder just because murder is worst dosnt mean that theft is not bad. If one is eliminated why cant both be? There must be a better way of controlling the animals. It is our constant desire to spread our population throughout earth that has brought alot of this overpopulation amongst the animals. We shouldnt interfior with these animals lives.
Posts are judged on their content and not on who posted them. If you have issues with the content, feel free to discuss/debate/argue/criticise. If you have issues with the age of the person who posted it, feel free to post elsewhere.
Hey, like I said Im not callin you ANYTHING. All Im pointing out is that language like that lends itself to those ideas.
Im not giving slope arguements here, my point was that in an overpopulated area the animal WILL die without extreme intervention. Which brings us to this:
Just so you know, naturally species will go extinct EVERY DAY. WIthout human intervention.
Also, humans ARE a part of the biosphere, it is up to us to be benefical. But saying we “shouldnt interfere” is downright impossible. There are far too many of us.
Well thats not quite why ovrpopulation happens most of the time.
Most of the time its some natural disaster or illness that kills off a large number of the pop. of a species, then it’s prey overpopulates due to lack of being hunted.
“Constant desire to spread our population…”
Genetically speaking, Yep. Unfortunatly, it ends up being quite disasterous for humans to be so prolific. So we are thinned out. Usually by our own species.[/code]
Im sorry but can you just tell me what exactly we do to prevent extinction in animals? It is us that causes the extinction. We shouldnt interfior, we may help but nor interfior. The thing is controlling species is not normal or natural. You dont see any other animals on the earth controlling animals purposely. There must be some other ways of controlling such as distribution of the animals and food and water being supplied to them. Im not sure of the other choices but im sure that there has to be some.
I realise that alot of overpopulation is due to that but im pointing out that it is us who destroys their habitat and builds on the land they once lived on!
why is that? is it becuse i fish dosent make an aduable “whine”? or that as already stated hes not “cute” i would think a hook through the mouth would hurt alot more then geting shot and instantly dieing ( i know not all animals instantly die when hunted)
We encourage certain species to grow at a faster rate than they would if we weren’t here, and we cause certain species to grow at slower rate(or decrease) than if we weren’t here. Surely our role isn’t to act as if we were never here. Every thing we do on this planet affects our surroundings, in the same way that every other species affects its surroundings.
This world has progressed or regressed for millions of years both with us and without us. It has gone all those years with the rise and fall of many species, all of which made their own contribution to world in which we live. We all act in the way which best benefits us, be they our simple survival (farming) or furthering our happyness (not condemning hunting as purely an activity for sport but classifying it as possibly a sport and survival technique)
It is stupid for us to assume that we can exist on this planet and not affect it, so bother to try to reduce the affect, ie by killing foxes?
At the same time, not killing foxes allows for more sheep.
So at the end of all that, ive finally reached a conclusion that has absolutly nothing to do with what i said (sorry)
Its either more sheep and less foxes or less sheep and more foxes.
We could put up big fox proof fences to stop the problem leaving to foxes dying out naturally anyway…or no fences, with sheep dying out naturally.
Get this stupid idea that I find animals cute and cudly out of your head. Im not one of those persons that loves animals and stuff I just think their suffering is uneccasery. I never thought about the idea of fishing being worse than hunting, often the foxes are ripped apart by the dogs. Fish usually arnt killed when you fish they just experience a small amount of pain but that is not as bad as being killed.
im not advocating fox hunting i belive if you shoot an animal you damn better well eat it.and if the person dose eat the animal whats the problem? the animal was as you say truly free and died just the way any other animal dies
Well im taking this on at the angle that I agree with you because this forum is nothing more but to stop hunting but in reality because I am a vegna I would have to disagree. That is a different argument though and you very well know where it belongs!
Im not advocating hunting for sport but I do believe some species need to be controled ie Crocidiles, Alligators, Phiranna any species that is a danger to human beings if that leads to their extinction then so be it. We are the superior species on this planet, thats natural because thats evolution.
ah but if you wenrt a vegan do you thiink you would still feel the same way about hunting? it is all related now tell me what would be wrong with hunting a wild animal then eating it?
that is the stupidest thing ever. i was in some form of agreement with your (albeit obfuscatory) views, but now you’ve lost me. the point of fishing in terms of food is to kill the fish. i would argue that fish suffer more than animals who are hunted, as the animals in many cases die swiftly through shock, whereas, CD, fish SUFFOCATE to death.
I would feel the same way if I was a vegetarian but if I was a meat eater then I would probably have different veiws. I dont want to argue about the matter of eating animals as I have already set it up in a different forum and you know which one it is.