Hey PETA! Eat this!


PDA






jsalcedo
November 28, 2005, 07:57 AM
Hey PETA, Eat This!
A Thanksgiving tale.

By Stephen Spruiell

Each year around Thanksgiving, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals makes the evening news with some new campaign to get people to stop eating turkey. This year PETA wants me to believe that if I enjoy my annual serving of turkey at Thanksgiving, then I'm probably going to get the Asian bird flu. In order to make sure I'm aware of the threat, PETA members will "lie naked in flower-decorated coffins outside the Department of Agriculture" — just in case I walk by. As an alternative, PETA says I should ingest something called "tofurkey."




Although I'll pass on the tofurkey, I would like to thank PETA for its sincere concern for my health and in return, offer up a little Thanksgiving anecdote sure to warm the cockles of their turkey-loving hearts.

We show up at the ranch pretty early — usually before dawn — to start setting up for the turkey shoot. For me, that involves standing around, drinking coffee and trying to avoid any actual work. Slowly, folks from all over start trickling in — greeting friends, trying to stay warm, and setting up tents where they'll serve barbeque, tamales, and beer for the rest of the day.

Still others take out their rifles and start sighting in at the firing range. At the end of the range is a ditch. Pretty soon, if I'm working at the shoot, I have to take the four-wheeler down to the ditch and help set up. That involves taking a live turkey out of a trailer full of them, zip-tying its legs, and putting it in a wooden box with just its head sticking out. Another zip-tie holds the head in place, and then the box goes on top of a platform in the ditch so that just the turkey's head and neck stick up over the top.

It's $1 a shot. If you hit a turkey, it's yours. Same rules apply to the archery range nearby.

A man and his wife are on the scene to clean your turkey and bag it. Local people get a turkey for (if they're good shots) less than they otherwise would have paid. Sometimes, if they're lucky, they can make two and have a Christmas turkey also. In addition, the proceeds from the shoot go to community organizations and charities. And it's a whole lot of fun. Everybody wins!

Of course, I understand that the folks at PETA might not see it that way. Let me see if I can anticipate their objections and offer rebuttals.

1. The turkeys don't stand a chance: True, but neither do they stand a chance when they're lined up for the chopping block. At least this way is a bit more sporting.

2. It's not sporting at all: Okay, PETA, let's see you hit a target the size of a lemon from 100 yards.

3. What happens if the turkey doesn't die right away?: The box sort of explodes with wing-flapping, at which point one of us has to run out and drag it down and take the turkey out of the box and strangle it.

4. You're a sick freak: That may be true, but which one of us parades around in the nude on the sidewalk in front of the Department of Agriculture? Which, due to its proximity to the Smithsonian museums, is heavily trafficked by small children?

5. Yeah, but — : Speaking of children, PETA activists have always targeted this demographic in an attempt to alienate children from their parents and create a new generation of carnivore-hating radicals. The latest salvo in this effort is a series of comic books like "Your Daddy Kills Animals," featuring a villainous father hoisting a fish in the air and slicing it open with knife. The books contain graphic images and passages like, "Imagine that a man dangles a piece of candy in front of you. ... As you grab the candy, a huge metal hook stabs through your hand and you're ripped off the ground. You fight to get away, but it doesn't do any good... That would be an awful trick to play on someone, wouldn't it?"

Probably the best thing about the turkey shoot is that there aren't any PETA weirdoes in the part of Texas where we have it, so no one has to put up with college students in a giant fish costumes calling us murderers or naked protesters telling us that Thanksgiving is worse than the Holocaust (unless, of course, we venture too close to Austin). I'll be going back there soon for a little break from the p.c. circus, and that's something for which I'm very, very thankful.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/spruiell200511230842.asp

If you enjoyed reading about "Hey PETA! Eat this!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
warth0g
November 28, 2005, 08:06 AM
I dont like the thought of wrapping up a live turkey and shoot it. I just dont like the idea. You shouldnt play with food, in my opinion.

warthog

Onmilo
November 28, 2005, 08:38 AM
We didn't eat turkey this year @ Thanksgiving.
We ate dead pig.

bogie
November 28, 2005, 08:42 AM
That sort of "turkey shoot" is an old tradition...

However, I prefer the more sporting version...

The turkeyis tied behind a log, so that only the head will stick up. No box, no stationary turkey, no stationary head. This has been described going back tothe 1700s...

Of course, if you're doing it as a fundraiser, that might hack off a few folks...

Missashot
November 28, 2005, 08:46 AM
That, along with canned hunts, is one of the the worst, most unsporting ways of killing an animal that I have ever heard of.:cuss: Yeah, they die either way, but how would it feel if you were the one out there tied up in a box while people took pot shots at you. That is horrible. And, no I am not a fan of PETA, and I do enjoy a nice turkey dinner for Thanksgiving and Christmas. But there are better ways of shooting one.
Also, it is not a smart idea to serve beer to people who are shooting guns. :scrutiny:

C-grunt
November 28, 2005, 09:04 AM
Do you get to use your own rifle?

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 09:12 AM
Wow, yeah, that is a rather lame way to "hunt". I guess some folks is different from others is all.

auschip
November 28, 2005, 09:29 AM
Wow, yeah, that is a rather lame way to "hunt". I guess some folks is different from others is all.

It's not a hunt, it's a shoot. I guess I just don't see a difference between that and picking one up at the store (other then the proceeds going to charity at the shoot). Then again, I have been called callous with regard to the feelings of our animal friends (read dinner). :D

TexasRifleman
November 28, 2005, 09:50 AM
Well, I am going to die for sure then, I had Turkducken or whatever you call that combination thing.

Triple Bird Flu.....


As for the method of "hunting", rounding up cattle in a pen and shooting them in the head to have food isn't "hunting" either, but I've done that plenty of times.

These so called "Turkey Shoots" are very long in the tooth as far as tradition in some areas. Many decades of this going on, it's nothing new.

Feeding your family doesn't always have to be "sporting" or "fair" to the game. Last I remember, the Bible said God gave us the animals for our use. I used a few on Thanksgiving, and I am thankful for it.

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 09:56 AM
It's not a hunt, it's a shoot.

And the difference is what? you're using a living organism for the target instead of paper or metal gongs? Was that supposed to make it sound better or worse?

I guess I just don't see a difference between that and picking one up at the store (other then the proceeds going to charity at the shoot).

I guess there's not much difference, well, except the thing about being restrained while getting shot at and not dying immediately. It's not that the Turkey will die either way that would be questioned, it's the fact that the bird is caught, put into a truck, and then shot at by bubba-joe-bob all day until it finally finds the big turkey coop in the sky.

Tell me something, why not kill the turkeys before the shoot in a more decent way, then print targets of a turkey's head and set them at 100 yards for folks to shoot at? Would it be too cost prohibitive to do this?

I'm not with PETA on the animal rights thing, but to me, this is just not cool. But hey, to each their own, really none of my business, except someone posted this on the internet, so comments are fair game. Cheers.

TexasRifleman
November 28, 2005, 09:59 AM
I guess there's not much difference, well, except the thing about being restrained while getting shot at and not dying immediately.

Ever seen a slaughterhouse in operation?
So I take it you don't eat any meat that is commercially processed?
How do you kill an animal for meat in an "uncruel" way? You don't.
You do what you need to do to feed your people. That's life in the food chain.
I'm sure glad to be somewhere towards the top......

GRB
November 28, 2005, 10:04 AM
I have seen a slaughterhouse in operation. I never saw anyone repeatedly attempting to shoot bolts into the pigs or beef cattle heads and repeatedly missing. I saw a swift killing operation. I did not see people repeatedly terrifying the animals nor did I see someone trying to show how macho they were, how great a shot they were by working there and getting the job done. I have also seen and actually participated in slaughtering animals on farms many times. It in no way compares to what was done to the turkeys in the turkey shoot except that in the end they die and are eaten. I have often hunted and fished and never have treated the game animals with as little respect as is done in the above description of the turkey shoot. I take great pride in my hunts because ithey are fair chase, my animals are not bound and boxed for me to shoot.

My guess would be that, even in Texas this sort of thing would be illegal, that is if it were considered a hunt. With domestic birds that are destined for the chopping block thee may be some sort of way around the illegality. Yet, if there is a way around it being illegal, taking such a route does not make this any better or any more sporting. These things are how stereotypes get started and then keep going. I wonder do you and the others feel like big time hunters, do you feel like butchers at the fowl market, do you say something to the effect of: "hot diggity dang I dun gitted me a tother one ma, we dun gunna be havin sum good eats" when you shoot one?

I wonder what is the thrill of terrorizing the animal before you kill it? Does it taste better? I am not against hunting and fishing at all. I hunt and fish and have done so for many years. I will continue to do so. I have taken a fair share of game animals and a fair share of fish too and the hunting and fishing has always been fair. I don't have a diver placing hooks into fishes mouths so I can reel em in. I don't fish in a stocked kiddy pool. I don't hunt for deer that have been tied then staked, I don't hunt over a cage from which an animal is released so I can shoot it from 25 feet away (or closer).

I also buy meat. I understand that someone butchers it and, I have no problem with that. The butcher, as far as I am aware, does not play with the animal in any cruel manner before killing it. The butcher does not torture it before killing it. The butcher does not tie it up, keep it in a box with its head sticking out, then shoot at it numerous times until someone hits it or, shoot at it numerous times never hitting it and then chop off its head. The butcher does it swiftly as a matter of business - not as a matter of any sort of twisted show of marksmanship, luck, and deranged pleasure.

What you have described probably is something in which people take great pleasure at the miss as much as they do at the hit. Of course they love to see others miss and themselves hit but, they also love to see the terrified turkey try to duck its head. They love to see it bob up and down. This is not so much love of marksmanship as it is an appreciation of some other deeper down and less noble feeling. You could just as easily accomplish a marksmanship feat that would be equivocal to shooting the turkey's head by using a similarly sized target that would be set up to bob and sway as does the turkey's head. Instead of doing so you choose to use live turkeys to get your jollies. That sir is almost like a little kid torturing a fly by pulling off its wings or torturing a mouse by stirring it round and round in a pail of water until it drowns because it becomes too exhausted to swim, then doing it again and again until the kid matures into a kind of person who wants to shoot trussed and boxed turkeys for so called 'sport'. Note I said it is almost like a little kid doing those things. The difference is and, it should be the difference that makes all the difference, that you are adults who are doing this.:(

Don't you even have enough sense to realize that a group like PETA will get wind of this especially when you blatantly post about it here. They will sooner or later send in someone to your shoot who will join in. That person may miss while shooting but, he or she will not miss with the PETA video camera that he has hidden on himself. Then your little get together will be shown on TV on some animal rights show that disguises itself as a nature show or family animal sow. Or maybe it will debut on Animal Cops when the local SPCA comes to shut down your little shindig. Yes they will come if it gets filmed and they will shut it down even if legal once the film gets national attention. If not already illegal it will get outlawed. In effect you will have given all hunters and rifleman a black eye because you will be labeled as hunters, big bad terrible immoral and unethical hunters, by PETA and by all they can get to watch that video. You may think this is far fetched but it is their normal way of doing things. Sooner or later they will probably target your little 'turkey shoot'.

Despite the fact that I cannot stand what PETA espouses, despite the fact that I think PETA is mostly just a bunch of control freaks, despite the fact that PETA is in my estimation a very hypocritical organization - I would not blame them one bit if they tried to shut down your event. When they succeed at creating a new generation of carnivore hating radicals (as you call it), you and your turkey shoot will be one of the reasons they succeeded.

Regards,
Glenn B

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 10:08 AM
As for the method of "hunting", rounding up cattle in a pen and shooting them in the head to have food isn't "hunting" either, but I've done that plenty of times.

When you post a thread on the internet that you hog tie a bunch of cattle and prop them up at 100 yards and let the entire neighborhood take pot shots at them, I suspect you'll be taken a little differently than simply killing a few of your cattle to feed your own family.


Feeding your family doesn't always have to be "sporting" or "fair" to the game.

Let's not pull the "feeding your family" routine on this one. Turkeys, even store bought are not expensive. I doubt anyone went starving because they could not afford a Butterball or store-brand turkey during thanks-giving week when they're on sale.

I've been to these events to see what all the commotion was about. It's nothing but an excuse for bubba and his buddies to drink beer and BS, while shooting at a defenseless animal because half of those twits couldn't even hunt down a Walmart with a cell phone, a phone book and a map.

I doubt the clientele for these adventures is the same everywhere, all across the country, so my gross generalizations may not apply, but I suspect they are more the rule than the exception in most cases.

The fact that "it's for charity" doesn't make it right. People do all kinds of absurd things in the name of something good and think that somehow that cleanses any notion of impropriety on the part of the participants or the actual act or event. This logic defies gravity.

Last I remember, the Bible said God gave us the animals for our use. I used a few on Thanksgiving, and I am thankful for it

As I understand it, God is only the authority if you go to his church. Doesn't really matter to me what the "G" says, as long as it matters to you, I guess that's enough. Not for me, but hey, Judge not, right?


:D

belton-deer-hunter
November 28, 2005, 10:11 AM
in texas that is illegal isnt it canned hunt i like the idea cause it sounds pretty fun turkey moving out there a hundred yards but i have never heard of it before around here the turkey shoots jsut use paper targets huh wow i have been missing some fun although this does sound like a hot topic for people to complain about but if it is a domestic turkey should be okay

auschip
November 28, 2005, 10:12 AM
And the difference is what? you're using a living organism for the target instead of paper or metal gongs? Was that supposed to make it sound better or worse?

Hunting is fair chase, shooting isn't. You suggested that this was a hunt, I explained that it wasn't a hunt. It wasn't supposed to make anything better or worse, but was an explanation of what took place.



I guess there's not much difference, well, except the thing about being restrained while getting shot at and not dying immediately. It's not that the Turkey will die either way that would be questioned, it's the fact that the bird is caught, put into a truck, and then shot at by bubba-joe-bob all day until it finally finds the big turkey coop in the sky.

So instead of killing them by shooting them (or wringing their neck if the shot doesn't drop them right away), they could do it like the turkey slaughterhouses. Chop their toes and beaks off, hang em upside down, then submerge their heads in electrified water until a machine cuts their throats.


Tell me something, why not kill the turkeys before the shoot in a more decent way, then print targets of a turkey's head and set them at 100 yards for folks to shoot at? Would it be too cost prohibitive to do this?

Yes, the cost would be higher. I guess they could wait to kill the bird until the person shoots their target, however, I imagine the turnout would be much lower.


I'm not with PETA on the animal rights thing, but to me, this is just not cool. But hey, to each their own, really none of my business, except someone posted this on the internet, so comments are fair game. Cheers.

No problem, I probably wouldn't participate, but I don't have an issue with others doing it.

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 10:15 AM
Ever seen a slaughterhouse in operation?
So I take it you don't eat any meat that is commercially processed?
How do you kill an animal for meat in an "uncruel" way? You don't.
You do what you need to do to feed your people. That's life in the food chain.
I'm sure glad to be somewhere towards the top......

Yes, I have seen a slaughterhouse in operation. When I was there, I did not see Bubba drinking beer, sitting at the controls of the kill-mechanism (or fail safe for fully-automated sets) playing "hit or miss" all day with the delivery unit while the birds were held there until Bubba finally got it right.

It's certainly not painless, and I'm sure it's not fun, and the animal is just as dead, but it also doesn't get to hang around while someone tries to kill it all morning while being terrorized, which is where the difference lies.

No one "needs" to participate in this kind of shoot to feed their families.

GRB
November 28, 2005, 10:20 AM
Last I remember, the Bible said God gave us the animals for our use. I used a few on Thanksgiving, and I am thankful for it And when God the Almighty told you this, or at least when you read it in God's Holy Scripture the Bible - did your God tell you to scare the stink pickles out of the animals, to get your perverted jollies off, before killing them? Why on earth or why under the heavens would you bring God into a conversation like this, are you that aware that these turkey shoots are so wrong that you need to fall back on the : "well God said this or God said that argument?" God should not have been brought up in this discussion at all, you dishonor God by implying that God would approve of these turkey shoots.

However they kill turkeys in a slaughterhouse, it is not done for pleasure. It is done to run an efficient business and to feed the masses. Getting your jollies off by terrorizing animals that is a whole different story. All the charity in the world and all the I need food arguments in the world don't cut it with this exampoly of apparent slightly deranged pleasure seeking. No one there is starving 9 if they were they could sell their guns and ammo and buy food or go to aget a handout). They go for the thrill of shooting a boxed and trussed animal. That is the bottom line with these shoots.

middy
November 28, 2005, 10:21 AM
they also love to see the terrified turkey try to duck its head
I love how you guys go all anthropomorphic on the turkey. Like it knows what a gun is and is trying to duck... :rolleyes: "Egads! I do believe that human is trying to kill us, old boy!"

Would it be better if we gave him a blindfold and a cigarette? Let him dictate his last will and testament, and write letters to his 5 dozen offspring?

Always a couple of city boys piping in on threads like this to postulate their superiority to the ignorant "Bubbas"... then eating a turkey sandwich made from an animal that died a harder death for their self-righteous convenience.

Fly320s
November 28, 2005, 10:22 AM
So that is what a turkey shoot is. I've seen signs for 'em around here, but never been to one.

Sounds fun. :evil:

Especially since I don't have to clean it. :D

Werewolf
November 28, 2005, 10:24 AM
A turkey's brain is so small I wonder if it even qualifies as a brain. For the turkey to be terrified as some claim it would have to have the ability to figure out it was in danger and be able to recognize that the whizzing sound it is hearing represents a danger.

The turkey is operating on instinct and reflex. Bullet whizzes by and it ducks just like you would. It's reflex. The difference is you understand the why of the reflex - the turkey doesn't. So to say it is cruel to use the turkey as a target isn't very rational at all IMO since it is incapable of recognizing the danger in any real sense. A turkey has no ability to judge that the whizzing sound it hears as the bullet passes by is a threat.

ASIDE: I wonder what Alvin York would have to say about this thread?

middy
November 28, 2005, 10:25 AM
Every day in a turkey pen is far more frightening than being tied down and hearing loud noises.

Especially when the dogs get in...

But please do continue to admonish the "bubbas", I always enjoy a good laugh.

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 10:28 AM
So instead of killing them by shooting them (or wringing their neck if the shot doesn't drop them right away), they could do it like the turkey slaughterhouses. Chop their toes and beaks off, hang em upside down, then submerge their heads in electrified water until a machine cuts their throats.

Just had one small issue with this:


Their toes and beaks do not get chopped off first as far as I know. They are shackled upside down for up to 6 minutes (the longest they can legally be hung like that, here at least).

The "electrified water" stuns them so they don't move and they also don't feel much I would figure. They they are killed and scalded to loosen their feathers to be plucked. PETA sometimes makes this process sound horrifying just as you did, what do you think they say about these kind of shoots? How hoorible can they make those sound?

Other than that, cheers.

boofus
November 28, 2005, 10:28 AM
See? this is why we all need .50BMG rifles. They make it painless and instantaneous for those turkeys. If PETA really cared about those turkeys they would lobby for free 50 caliber rifles for everyone.

migoi
November 28, 2005, 10:32 AM
have enough brain power to actually be thinking: "Whew, he missed me on that one." and be scared about it?

The turkey sitting in the box understands that the loud noise from 100 yards away was caused by someone intent on making him dead?

migoi

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 10:32 AM
I love how you guys go all anthropomorphic on the turkey. Like it knows what a gun is and is trying to duck... "Egads! I do believe that human is trying to kill us, old boy!"

Would it be better if we gave him a blindfold and a cigarette? Let him dictate his last will and testament, and write letters to his 5 dozen offspring?

Always a couple of city boys piping in on threads like this to postulate their superiority to the ignorant "Bubbas"... then eating a turkey sandwich made from an animal that died a harder death for their self-righteous convenience

Gee, I didn't know that turkeys were deaf and couldn't hear the sound of the missed shot...because yeah, animals don't scare easily by loud noise and restraint. Yes, i believe any animal that is held captive by another and is then subjected to loudn noise in an unfamaliar environment is a wee bit scared.

The Turkey pens don't look too fun either, but they don't look terrifying. :scrutiny:

:rolleyes:

Omni04
November 28, 2005, 10:33 AM
Wow, i never knew these things existed either. It does seem kind of barbaric, and i don't know if i would participate- but this was a very amusing read!

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 10:37 AM
Forecasting lockdown before page 3 is filled in this thread. If it survives longer, I will be rather surprised.

TexasRifleman
November 28, 2005, 10:37 AM
did your God tell you to scare the stink pickles out of the animals, to get your perverted jollies off, before killing them?


No, what I said was that these "Turkey Shoots" are no more cruel or horrifying than any other method used to HARVEST (note I didn't say HUNT) meat.\

Personally I wouldn't attend one, I enjoy a real HUNT, because I know if it gets to where I am hungry I can just run to the store. Point is this is just another method of gathering meat but for some reason a few of you are freaking out over it.

Any slaughterhouse or other meat processing plant is just as gruesome, but I don't any of you that are bashing on this guy for attending a Turkey Shoot out protesting the other forms of gathering meat.

As I said, there is no "uncruel" way to kill an animal to eat, so what's the difference?

As for God, the point again is that we are at the top (some would argue only near the top) of the food chain so again, how we gather meat is not any more cruel or unusual than a Tiger that toys with a gazelle before killing it or any number of other activities that occur in the wild. How we got to the top of the food chain we can debate or not, no matter to me.

Why is this one so horrible in comparison to everything else that goes on in the name of eating? It's not.

nat
November 28, 2005, 10:42 AM
As far as I know some studies showed that torturing a mammal before killing it (as they do for instance in Korea) releases toxins in its body, making it somewhat less good for the eater's health. I don't know if it is true for birds.

During those "turkey shooting" parties the miss-kills (beasts hurted instead of being killed) are probably more frequent than during an usual turkey-slaughtering operation

This "turkey-shooting" thing is not hunting and when shooting I would better fire at a classic (non living) target.

Headless Thompson Gunner
November 28, 2005, 10:46 AM
Get over it, folks. It's a turkey shoot, not a hunt or a marksmanship competition.

A turkey is going to die so that my family can eat on Thanksgiving. There's no way around it. We're not going to turn vegetarian any time soon.

Does it really matter how the bird is killed, so long as it doesn't suffer needlessly? The author explicitly states that there are people on hand to ensure that the animals die quickly once wounded. So what's the problem? Chaining up the bird near loud noises? That's daily life for a bird in a poultry farm.

At least this way the turkeys' deaths provide some charity and entertainment/comraderie. Slaughterhouses provide neither. By comparison, slaughterhouses are just plain wasteful. The turkey shoot makes their deaths so much more meaningful. :neener:

Sinsaba
November 28, 2005, 10:54 AM
That, along with canned hunts, is one of the the worst, most unsporting ways of killing an animal that I have ever heard of.:cuss: Yeah, they die either way, but how would it feel if you were the one out there tied up in a box while people took pot shots at you. That is horrible. And, no I am not a fan of PETA, and I do enjoy a nice turkey dinner for Thanksgiving and Christmas. But there are better ways of shooting one.
Also, it is not a smart idea to serve beer to people who are shooting guns. :scrutiny:


That, along with canned hunts, is one of the the worst, most unsporting ways of killing an animal that I have ever heard of.

1) Who said anything about sport? This was a way of raising money for charity. Why should killing an animal for food involve sport anyway? Why should they get a "sporting chance"? I suppose hunting deer with a high powered rifle hidden from view is sporting? Or do you take exception to deer hunting too?

but how would it feel if you were the one out there tied up in a box while people took pot shots at you

2) This is a TURKEY we are talking about, not a human!!:scrutiny: a dumb animal, a dumb animal raised for being KILLED!

That is horrible.

3) What is "horrible" why is it "horrible"? I don't understand the basis or purpose of that statement.

I do enjoy a nice turkey dinner for Thanksgiving and Christmas. But there are better ways of shooting one.

4) Better how? Remember the primary purpose isn't "killing turkeys" it is raising money.

The PETA people react in just this manner, the "put yourself in the place of the __________" or "it isn't sporting", or any number of other misplaced emotional appeals. The fact of the matter is THEY ARE ANIMALS.

brerrabbit
November 28, 2005, 10:55 AM
Wish they would have one around here, sounds like a lot of fun. Well, since I'm getting ready to put up a chicken house, I might just make a hutch for turkeys so we can have one for kith and kin.

Euclidean
November 28, 2005, 11:13 AM
I for one would much rather be tied up, stuffed in a box, and shot in the head than systematically tortured in a death factory. I'm not crazy about either option but the former is far cleaner and less painful than the latter.

Plus I doubt it takes 90% of the participants more than one shot, assuming they're using a rest and have properly configured optics. The only reasons someone might miss is windage, their zero is off, they're using cheap ammunition, etc. I wouldn't do something like this with say an SKS and I doubt anyone else would either. I'd like to think most people know that if you're going to kill an animal, you put it down clean, and would choose the right tool for the job.

Turkeys are incredibly stupid things that only know how to eat, crap, and mate. Doing something like this to say a chimpanzee or a horse might be wrong, but a turkey doesn't even have the capacity to be self aware.

trickyasafox
November 28, 2005, 11:17 AM
its a turkey. the money goes to charity, so i agree with that, and to be honest if some guy or gal gets feed his or herfamily for a buck plus whatever it cost for the shell, good for him/her. i really dont see a difference between this and people who buy their chickens live then slaughter them.

roo_ster
November 28, 2005, 11:30 AM
This thread is quite interesting, not because of the subject matter, but because the subject matter has become some sort of rorschach test for the posters.

Please, post on.

********

Oh, now that I think of it, what do the pro & anti-turkey shooters think of bull fighting?

Dog fighting?

Cock fighting?

Thumb wrestling?

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 11:32 AM
Oh I see, we only care about the smart animals? Dumb ones don't matter. LMAO. White sheets and woodgrain all around.

Have fun.

DorGunR
November 28, 2005, 11:39 AM
Dang, I didnt know we had so many PETA folks posting here. ;)

Missashot
November 28, 2005, 12:00 PM
1) Who said anything about sport? This was a way of raising money for charity. Why should killing an animal for food involve sport anyway? Why should they get a "sporting chance"? I suppose hunting deer with a high powered rifle hidden from view is sporting? Or do you take exception to deer hunting too?
OK you are right boxing up a turkey and shooting it is NOT a sport. It is a barbaric way to torture and kill an animal. Any animal.
2) This is a TURKEY we are talking about, not a human!! a dumb animal, a dumb animal raised for being KILLED!
OK it is a dumb turkey, but at least it isn't a cruel turkey.:D
3) What is "horrible" why is it "horrible"? I don't understand the basis or purpose of that statement.
It is horrible because there are people who think that this is an OK method of killing.
4) Better how? Remember the primary purpose isn't "killing turkeys" it is raising money.
Then in that case, there are better ways to raise money.
Like I said, I am all for killing and eating animals. What I am not for is torturing and maiming then killing and eating animals.

psyopspec
November 28, 2005, 12:13 PM
We're not going to turn vegetarian any time soon.

Point clarity, HTG, nobody has suggested that anybody do this.

So...


Go vegan or go home!!! C'mon, it's for the chiclets.:evil:

shooting time
November 28, 2005, 12:14 PM
IMHO I think it should be outlawed ! It gives hunters & shooters a bad name. Every turkey shoot I have been to consisted of shooting a shot gun at a stationary target or a rifle at a moving target.Just imagine if you had to have your pet put down would you want it tied up and put in a box and shot at? You want a turkey shoot, shoot at a paper targets and give out store bought turkeys ! I hunt and beleive in fair chase and one shot kills with proper shot placement for minimal if any suffering for the animal.

The Viking
November 28, 2005, 12:28 PM
As far as I know some studies showed that torturing a mammal before killing it (as they do for instance in Korea) releases toxins in its body, making it somewhat less good for the eater's health. I don't know if it is true for birds.
I'v heard that the meat gets more tender if the animals release adrenaline/endorphines/whatever. Don't remember if the article said anything about harmful effects if it.

repsychler
November 28, 2005, 12:32 PM
I can't say that using a living thing for target practice is something I'd be interested in.
I'm a hunter, I love hunting, but this just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

DorGunR
November 28, 2005, 12:40 PM
As far as I know some studies showed that torturing a mammal before killing it (as they do for instance in Korea) releases toxins in its body, making it somewhat less good for the eater's health. I don't know if it is true for birds.


BS..........I lived in Korea for 9 years and I never saw or heard of this.

AnthonyRSS
November 28, 2005, 01:02 PM
I can't believe this many people care.

They are animals; we are not. If you don't believe that fundamental truth, then you can't be helped.

1911Tuner
November 28, 2005, 01:05 PM
I agree with the dissenters. If you want sporting, take to the field after the master of reconnaisance...Mr. Wild Turkey. He'll give ya all the sport you can handle. And...if you're good enough to best him...the most succulent cooked bird that ever graced your table.

Tie'em up and take shots at'em? No fair!

TexasRifleman
November 28, 2005, 01:11 PM
It is horrible because there are people who think that this is an OK method of killing.



As opposed to the BETTER ways to KILL something? The Turkey is just as dead as if he were given a leather recliner and put to sleep while watching TV shows isn't he?

For animals raised to be killed for food in the end anyway, whether it be turkey, cattle, hogs, etc, how can you possibly argue the MANNER of death?

If you are against the killing totally, fine, but to argue that some methods of killing are OK and some are cruel is pretty comical, especially if you eat meat yourself.

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 01:20 PM
OK it is a dumb turkey, but at least it isn't a cruel turkey

Missashot, best line in this thread so far. I lol'd. :D

To clarify, since the PETA members insinuation has been brought up, I think PETA is a hammer in search of a nail and practically useless.

I don't hunt, I don't see much sport in modern hunting, so I see it more as a hobby. But that's perhaps a personal preference, not dogma. I am fully aware of a number of folks that truly need to hunt (folks waaaay in the thick, poorer folks) and I am also aware of the deep tradition that hunting is with some families. All of that is awesome, I am all for it. You go out, you stalk/wait/happen upon your prey, you use a proper caliber rifle round or bow or whatever is appropriate and you kill the animal as quickly and cleanly as possible. That is a set of skills and requires exertion, that is a sport. I don't really feel that sitting in a duck boat or a tree stand all day is a sport, but it does require exposure to the elements and a ton of patience, so who am I to judge.

This is neither here nor there, but I wanted to clarify a bit before I went on.


As I said, I am not with PETA, nor do I support them. When there is no reasonable alternative, I am completely for testing done on animals, killing animals to thin populations, killing predators of endangered species, killing animals to eat them (whether en masse in a slaughter house or hunting/fishing), what I am not for is the senseless practice of these things, or the questionable methods that can be used when more viable and less barbaric methods are available.

This shoot, where folks may or may not drink beer (totally and unequivocally against using alcoholic beverages while handling firearms, period), that have a bunch of turkeys trucked in, tied up, put into a box with their heads sticking out and are forced to sit there while people take pot shots at them for a $1.00 turkey is completely ridiculous.

A sportsmen's club local to me has their turkeys for this shoot donated to them by a local supermarket to raise money for a children's hospital. These are store bought turkeys. The participants shoot at shoot-n-see targets, 1 shot, $1.00. The bullet must hit in a precisely marked area of the target. This is a more viable alternative, though arguably no less brutal as slaughterhouses can be nasty places... though I would not believe all the horror stories you see here, these folks that try and call those like me, "PETA supporters" are apparently comfortable using PETA literature and verbiage to describe how barbaric the methods that my store-bought turkey endured are compared to their own. Hypocrisy to point out hypocrisy is a circular argument.

Hell, for about the same money spent out on the event described in the original post, you could be like most of the "Turkey Shoots" I have seen where you shoot at silhouettes or targets, and win a fresh turkey that is humanely slaughtered there and plucked and bagged to take home. No need for the tie wraps for the turkeys' legs, no need for the boxes, the costs of those materials could cover targets or silhouettes. This is a better way to do this, which is why I am against these live shoots. I honestly had never heard of the type of shoot as described in the original thread taking place these days, of course I'm a damn Yankee, things are likely different elsewhere.

Kurush
November 28, 2005, 01:21 PM
This is a dumb argument, there's no way to prove either side and no way to convince anyone else you're "right" (because you're not right, it's just your opinion), so why blow all this hot air around.

Oh and :neener: to all the bunny huggers.

Sindawe
November 28, 2005, 01:24 PM
Well, I suppose that if one's marksmanship is so poor as the require the prey animal be tied down and unable evade, one really should not be classified as a hunter.They are animals; we are not. Animal: A multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, nonphotosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure.

So what sort of plant are you AnthonyRSS?If you want sporting, take to the field after the master of reconnaisance...Mr. Wild Turkey. He'll give ya all the sport you can handle. And...if you're good enough to best him...the most succulent cooked bird that ever graced your table.+1

Bull fights? Dog fights? Cock fights? Outlets for degenerates who are too cowardly to put their own hides at risk.

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 01:34 PM
+1 1911Tuner and Sindawe:

You two strike me as Hunters, whereas I am not and part of my argument may be invalidated by that.

bosshoff
November 28, 2005, 01:46 PM
I AM a hunter. This is not hunting. This is shooting. That being said, i'd probably participate if i were there. Not really any different that lopping off its head with a hatchet.

jsalcedo
November 28, 2005, 01:53 PM
I'm seriously wondering how shooting deer from a blind using a feeder is any different from this kind of turkey shoot?

Other than the possibility that a deer will not be killed on the first shot and not be found by the hunter and left to die slowly.

These stupid turkeys in the box are going to get a quick death one way or the other.

All sports involving live animals can be called barbaric for one reason or another. I don't agree that this turkey shoot is any more cruel than any other method.

Anyone remember when the Brits used live birds for target practice before the advent of "clay pigeons" ?

DelayedReaction
November 28, 2005, 01:58 PM
I don't particularly like the idea. I'm all for taking a lemon and putting it 100 yards away for people to try and hit, but stringing a turkey up so you can blow its head off seems needlessly cruel.

TexasRifleman
November 28, 2005, 02:00 PM
I'm seriously wondering how shooting deer from a blind using a feeder is any different from this kind of turkey shoot?

Other than the possibility that a deer will not be killed on the first shot and not be found by the hunter and left to die slowly.



And that's exactly the point, they are the same thing, but the hunters here will spend paragraphs arguing the differences, even though there are not any.

Baiting a deer and fencing in turkeys, so that they may both be shot at, are EXACTLY the same things and I'm enjoying people arguing for one and against the other. Both are killing animals for food, something I endorse fully!

And as you mention, the turkey shoot may be MORE humane in that there are no escapes of wounded animals who will die later.

I just don't see the big deal.

Chrontius
November 28, 2005, 02:02 PM
However they kill turkeys in a slaughterhouse, it is not done for pleasure. It is done to run an efficient business and to feed the masses. Getting your jollies off by terrorizing animals that is a whole different story.
I believe the point is that no matter how sadistic this form of turkey shoot is, it is still more humane than the 'efficient' method used in industrial turkey production. As a rule of thumb, instant hypervelocity decapitation does a number on the pain centers of the brain.

Would it be better if we gave him a blindfold and a cigarette?
It probably makes me a horrible human being to think this, but that would actually be kinda funny.

I can't believe this many people care.

They are animals; we are not. If you don't believe that fundamental truth, then you can't be helped.
Does that make us mineral or vegetable? What about archaebacteria?

AnthonyRSS
November 28, 2005, 02:09 PM
Hey, I see animals and humans as being completely different.
If you don't, that's up to you.

W4AKR, out.

GRB
November 28, 2005, 02:10 PM
Even though the reply I am about to quote shows a distinct lack of forethought I will address the issue it raised:

Do domestic turkeys... have enough brain power to actually be thinking: "Whew, he missed me on that one." and be scared about it?

The turkey sitting in the box understands that the loud noise from 100 yards away was caused by someone intent on making him dead?Here is what the turkey has to go on how it would react to this knowledge:

1) The turkey is trussed up. It is encloised in a box. It can not move normally because someone has just manhandled it to put it into this predicament. It is already scared because of this.

2) There are a lot of people around, talking, hollering and hooting.
This would normally make the turkey scared enough to flee but it cannot.

3) The turkey hears a large bang. This again enough to make it flee but it cannot so it bobbs its head as it tries to move away. It sure isn't staying still to be shot, this is one of the things that has made tuurkey shoots a bit of a challenge, they move and move frantically because they are scared (although in this case they are trussed up and boxed with only a head showing so the head moves or bobbs. No they are not ducking to avoid a bullet thinking that a bullet is coming, they are ducking (word comes from DUCKS so I guess by your logic ducks are smarter than turkeys) or bobbing, or moving their heads up and down and side to side because that is all they can do the way they have been tied up and boxed.

4) The wood or cardboard of the box gets splattered by dirt - please remember the box is in a ditch with only the turkey's head showing above the ditch and people are shooting bullets. Where do think at least some of the missed shots go? The dirt flying into the turkey's face makes it bobb and move its head even more and it still tries to get away but it cannot.

Need I go on with this? Funny you were not able to figure this one out.


As for this:

For animals raised to be killed for food in the end anyway, whether it be turkey, cattle, hogs, etc, how can you possibly argue the MANNER of death?I can argue the manner of death because I know as well as do you that animals are capable of fear and feeling. Why make an animal suffer anymore than it need to suffer to fill your plate. Now as to the real argument, it is not about dinner because remember not everyone, probably not even most, get a turkey at the turkey shoot. This is not a feeding thing at all really, it is just a friggin excuse for some backwoods gungho bumpkins or some deranged city slickers to kill something and take some sort of sick pleasure from having done so when the animal does not stand a chance. Sure you can miss but the animal gets killed anyhow later on. I suppose I am arguing is the cruelty, the barbarity, the I gotta kill it when its tied down attitude of this type of thing and, I am mostly arguing that when you do something that is inexcusably bad, just because you are doing something like that for charity does not make it any better. Nor does doing it by invoking the name of God make it any better; in fact it makes it pretty low in my view, about as low as can be.

As for those who keep saying something to the effect of 'who brought up sporting', maybe you had best ead the original post, the original poster brought it up but here it is in brief:2. It's not sporting at all: Okay, PETA, let's see you hit a target the size of a lemon from 100 yards.

The whole concept of shooting at a turkey trussed up and boxed is something that less than an adult would find joy in as far as I am concerned. To try to justify it by saying you are HARVESTING meat instead of hunting it is ludicrous. Hunting includes harvesting. The manner of harvest should be such that you show our respect for that being harvested. This is a sign of a true hunter/gatherer/harvester. if you have no respect for such - well you probably have little respect for other things if for only the reason that shooting at turkeys like this shows the true inner man or woman atb work. Again, it is not the killing I am debating, it is the act of scaring the crap out of the animals for absolutely no reason except to have fun. If that is what turns you on, I think there is a screw loose somewhere and there is no justification not even the word of the Almighty because he never told you to torture animals you may or may not be about to eat.

oldudbob
November 28, 2005, 02:21 PM
Who cares what PETA thinks?

silverlance
November 28, 2005, 02:25 PM
i'm ok with this sort of thing as long as they require shooters to use a large caliber, say 8mm or 308.

i've slaughtered many birds myself at home over the years (and i live in los angeles).

you buy a crate full of birds, then carefully yank one out while leaving the rest inside.

holding it by the neck, you stick it in the throat with a knife and twist its head to the side so all the blood gushes out onto the ground (usually a particularly fertile spot of soil - supposedly too much blood ruins land but never had that happen). when it finally ceases to struggle, you then have the PITA chore of plucking and cleaning. this is the part that i don't really know how to do well, because my grandmother would usually do it. I never got taught how to clean because my grandmother died soon after she started teaching me.

being a villiage girl, my granny was still pretty sensitive toward the feelings of animals. she would never eat cow because she spent most of her childhood with them, and any kill she made whether bird pig or dog was done smoothly and without hesitation.

she once told me about her first time killing a goose - she was afraid, and didn't follow through completely on the thrust. the goose wound up head half-on, half-off (what i woudl envision happening to those turkeys that only get "wounded" because they're using hmong deer rifles or the sort), and she fainted.

thus, the lesson she left with me was this: "if you're going to kill something, don't do it half-assed; either do it well or don't do it at all."

The Grand Inquisitor
November 28, 2005, 02:32 PM
Any person who engages in such an awful "game" is likely of no worth and is probably defective in many other ways.

Only defective and pathetic people enjoy killing animals, savagely, for fun and game.

joab
November 28, 2005, 02:44 PM
I suppose it could be considered torture if the turkeys were smart enough to know that they are being tortured.
These are birds, one step above bugs. I've had way too much personal interaction with fowl to assume anymore intelligence than that

As far as villagers killing quickly and humanly

I've seen dogs drowned, cows killed by having their throats cut and slowly drowning in their own blood, geese with their throats cut just enough to bleed out in the manner that you describe , and snakes boiled alive.
All in a matter of fact way with no tears or fainting

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 02:49 PM
backwoods gungho bumpkins

LMAO. :D

GRB
November 28, 2005, 02:56 PM
Baiting a deer and fencing in turkeys, so that they may both be shot at, are EXACTLY the same things and I'm enjoying people arguing for one and against the other. Both are killing animals for food, something I endorse fully!As I said, I hunt - I do not bait deer - it is quite illegal where I hunt. If it were legal, I would not do it then. The thing thought that makes deer baiting and turkey shoots not one in the same thing is that the turkey has already been caught (or in this case farmed/ranched). It is tied up, it is boxed. It is already scared more than many seem to imagine, then you start taking pot shots at it to see who can hit it. A deer hunt, and I mean a legal, sporiting deer hunt, is something very different., The deer is in its element. The hunter enters that element and tries to outwit the deer to get close enough for a shot (all deer I have taken have been within a maximum of about 35 yards from me). The deer, if missed can run. Sure a missed shot willscare it, but it can get away before the next shot unless the hunter is very quick and shoots better the second time around which is not as liely as hitting it the first time around. It is definitely the same as a turkey trussed and boxed that cannot escape and that has shooter after shooter taking shots at it while it is tied up and boxed. The true sportsman hunter (even one hunting to feed his family) uses ethics during the hunt and shows respect for nature's bounty and this includes the deer. If you don't show this respect for the land and the game, then you probably are the type who would try to defend these turkey shoots as being the same as hunting. The mentality behind being an ethical hunter and being a slob hunter are quite different even if the end result is a dead animal and; the mentality behind being a turkey shoot participant using an immitation moving turkey head target as opposed to using a boxed and trussed turkey are also quite different despite the outcome of a dead bird.

If you don't believe that there is a difference in how some animal is killed because it is going to wind up dead anyhow then tell me would you agree to this. If anyone of you who whole heartidly supports this turkey shoot thing has a beloved pet dog that is near death and needs to be put down, bring it to some psycho who will agree to do the same to your dog as you think is ok for the turkey. Bind its legs, put it in a box with only its head protruding, set the box 200 yards downrange (its head is bigger than a turkey's so more distance is required). Make sure there are at least a couple of other animals so set up as targets so we can have a few shooters ondifferent points at once. Set the box downrange and let the shooting begin. Whomever hits the dog's head first wins whatever prize you have chosen, let's say a nice frozen butterbal turkey. Make sure to invite me because I want to see your reaction as it gets put down in this fashion. Invite your wife and kids too so they can witness it. Make sure you take a shot since it is your dog, but not the first shot, make yourself 10th in line. Then in about a week, tell me again how this would have been the same as bringing the dog to a vet for a quick and painless injection to put it down. I don't mean for you and your feelings either, I mean tell me how it would have been the same for your beloved pet.
Now remember, before you reply to my post, some of you say that because the end result is the death of the animal - it does not matter how you get to that point. Are you still as sure of that now as you were a minute ago.

Best regards,
Glenn B

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 02:58 PM
I suppose it could be considered torture if the turkeys were smart enough to know that they are being tortured.

Can we torture mentally handicapped people?

How about canines with mental defects? Could we string one of them up like a Pinata and then have the local kids whack at it with tire irons? The first kid to break that sucker open gets a year's supply of Ball Park Hot Dogs. $10.00 a shot, all proceeds go to "toys for tots".

Dumb monkeys? We could fire them out of a cannon into a giant steel target. A bullseye gets you a months supply of Rhesus Pieces...er, I mean Reeses Pieces. Proceeds go to the Hair Club for Men. $3.50 a shot.

Pulling the wings off of flies? Is that okay if I let a bunch of kids do it for charity? How about $1.00 for 10 flies cause they're cheap and easy to come by? Proceeds go to the Ronald McDonald House.

We could beat lame horses with clubs for fun and televise it like a Jimmy Swaggart telethon! $25.00 for 5 minutes of whacking. No prize really, let's just get out some aggression on a dumb horse that will be shot eventually anyway.

Hell, most fish have terribly small mental capacities, let's get a 60-gallon bucket of them, and then whack them with big Bertha Warbird Titanium Drivers for $1.00 a shot. Furthest hitter gets a coupon for $25.00 off at Red Lobster! The money can go to the March of Dimes!

Wow, you guys are right, this can be fun!

Tory
November 28, 2005, 02:59 PM
"Tell me something, why not kill the turkeys before the shoot in a more decent way, then print targets of a turkey's head and set them at 100 yards for folks to shoot at? Would it be too cost prohibitive to do this?"

No, it wouldn't. Clubs in my area have been doing it that way for decades, with NO attrition in attendance, no loss of revenue and no abuse of living animals for the pleasure of these "noble sportsmen." :scrutiny:

A target is a target is a target. You can hit it or you can't. In short, there's no reason why the shoot can't consist of paper targets and turkey prizes. ;)

GRB
November 28, 2005, 03:05 PM
NineseveN,

While I lightheartidly referred to 'backwoods gungho bumpkins' to make a point, please note I also lightheartidly included 'deranged city slickers' to be fair and to avoid a stereotype. Anyone can be as callous as can those who would shoot turkeys like was described. I don't want anyone thinking I believe such behavior is limited to one type of person or stereotype or that I was making an argument against one type of person from one area. So I mentioned two from far flung corners of our world. I do think however, in all seriouness, that such behavior does seem to inflame the minds of others, such as PETA or ALF members, to the point where they would immediately associate such behavior with certain stereotypes and, they would then place all shooters, hunters, harvesters, turkey eaters and so forth into a turkey shooter particiapnt stereotype because of such.

best regards,
Glenn B

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 03:08 PM
Glenn I agree, but "Derranged City Slickers" wasn't all that funny. If you would have used the tired and true "bubba" or even the often misued "Hillbilly", I wouldn't have thought twice about it. But "Bumpkin" made my sides hurt, regardless of the context.

Did not mean to cause offense. Thanks.

HankB
November 28, 2005, 03:08 PM
I've never participated in this sort of turkey shoot, but even after reading the comments here, I don't see what the fuss is about - this isn't like dogfighting or cockfights, the turkey expires quickly and ends up as someone's dinner - where he was headed anyway.

Hmmm . . . being that these are shooting forums, I wonder if people know how metallic silhouette shooting got started, and how the parent sport is STILL practiced south of the border? PETA members will "lie naked in flower-decorated coffins outside the Department of Agriculture"Isn't Rosie O'Donnel a PETA member? :barf: I see how this sort of thing could ruin a person's dinner.

Mnemesyne
November 28, 2005, 03:11 PM
For all of you out there who are mobile...what about the handicapped who perhaps enjoyed normal go out in the woods, set up a camp and wait hunting...but due to some unforseen event or accident or heaven forbid, late showing birth defect can no longer do this?

I know there are many "shoots" designed to help those people still enjoy their sport (hense why it's a shoot not a hunt)...Yeah, the rest of us might not consider it sporting, and hey, you always have the choice of not going (imagine that)....the animals are going to die whether from starvation, disease, slaughterhouse, hunter or by someone at a shoot....

How many of you with your deer hunting areas set out a block of salt or one of those automatic feeders with the "deer caine" or some other concoction in it? Oh wait...that's perfectly fair right? Wrong....If you're that big on the "sport" of hunting..then go out without your cammies and fancy modern technology anti scent gear and nail a deer....It's not that hard honestly....If you sit still long enough, even without all the fancy modern gear, the deer will come to you.....

Of course...there's always using a bow or black powder weapon....From what I've been told, turkeys aren't exactly the easiest animals to hunt...it's an accomplishment to get one (especially with a bow or other close contact weapon)....

I grew up on a small farm where my grandparents killed chickens/ducks for food...Been to the slaughterhouse/meatmarket at a young age too, so I'm familiar with how they die...It's food....we eat said food....If you don't like it...go snack on a carrot or something....Remember, this IS America...if you don't like something...you can choose not to participate.....


Mneme

GRB
November 28, 2005, 03:13 PM
NineseveN,

You did not cause any offense sorry if I made it seemlike that. Bumpkin, well I guess I show my age, it was a term used many years ago and was made popular in movies (I remember it in comedies) about rural folks and city folks gettin together in some awkward situation - usually when the city slicker was describing the rural dweller... I guess it is sort of funny now that I think of it, and I did use it meaning it lightheartidly with no ofense intended. Better for all to laugh about it than get twisted.
Thanks
GB

GRB
November 28, 2005, 03:22 PM
Mnemesyne,

Remember, this IS America...if you don't like something...you can choose not to participate.....I do seem to remember this is America, in addition to not participating in something I find rather barbaric, I can also protest it or at least discuss why I find less than attractive to me. That is the whole point of a forum like this and certainly mst have been the point of the original poster, don't you think he anticipated some further discussion?

As for the issue at hand, you again echo what others have said:

It's food....we eat said foodThis is not about getting food as there is much less a chance of getting the turkey this way thatn there would be in going to the market. This is about the ritual of a bunch of folks who come together to shoot at a trussed up and boxed up turkey to ahve fun. The attraction is not that you are going to get a turkey for a dollar and one single round - I am willing to bet that if there is still a tirkey after everyone has fired, some will take another crack at it, and again and again and again until either the sunsets, the range closes, or someone else shoots the bird. My guess would be that at some turkey shoots, some people probably pay more to take shots that miss than it would cost them to buy a turkey and make a donation to a charity - the ammunition costs alone could wind up making it cost more than buying a bird and making a donation. No, this is ot about eating the turkey, this is about a rather sadistic method of getting your jollies if you so participate.

best regards,
Glenn B

jsalcedo
November 28, 2005, 03:23 PM
I am surprised at the overwhelming reaction to the treatment of the turkeys
as described in the article.

For the record, I am a vegetarian have never hunted or intentionally killed an animal.

I guess the main difference between people and their opinons on this subject
are based on culture, upbringing and social mores regarding the treatment of animals.

50 years ago nobody would have batted an eye and would have probably started their own shoot. Does that make people from that time less moral?

Anyone remember the outrage and indignation when Queen Elizabeth II attended a bird hunt/demonstration a couple years back?

She saw a wounded bird on the ground, picked it up and quicky popped it's head off. Believe it or not it was a major new story. The animal rights activists were peeing thier pants because of how the queen dispassionately dispatched the wounded bird. I guess they wanted the maimed bird lie on the ground and bleed to death.


Regarding:Only defective and pathetic people enjoy killing animals, savagely, for fun and game.

That is a pretty bold statement, I agree cruelty should never be tolerated
but the fun and game part is 90% of the hunters out there.

joab
November 28, 2005, 03:28 PM
Can we torture mentally handicapped people?
Some people tried real hard to continue the torture of Terri Shiavo

This thread is proof that we are far too removed from our agrarian roots when we equate turkeys and flies to people and even to other animals with the mental capacity not to eat their own crap

Go out a spend some quality time with a turkey and then come back and tell me how close to human emotion they can get

Do you also agree with this statement
A rat is a pig is a boy

trickyasafox
November 28, 2005, 03:33 PM
you can legally hunt over bait? i dont think you can in NY. can you hunt over feeders in other states?

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 03:41 PM
Joab, the handicapped person comment was a stab, not a real good point. I'm actually sorry I made it because it predictably allowed you to roll away from the other points made and bring something so unrealted as Terry Schiavo into the mix.

Daniel T
November 28, 2005, 04:07 PM
What manly skill it must take to shoot a confined animal. :rolleyes:

This isn't even close to hunting over bait; at least the hunted creature can run away if you miss.

Turkey's aren't the smartest creatures in the world, but if they're really that stupid, why are they so hard to hunt?

dasmi
November 28, 2005, 04:14 PM
We didn't eat turkey this year @ Thanksgiving.
We ate dead pig.
We ate both.

GRB
November 28, 2005, 04:42 PM
Go out a spend some quality time with a turkey and then come back and tell me how close to human emotion they can getI am not saying they experience emotions as do humans however; I am saying that they do experience fear and they do react to it and to needlessly make any animal fearful over and over again just for the sake of having fun, while using charity and food requirements as a mitigating factor, is preposterous and only goes to show the cruel senseless barbarity to which some HUMANS will stoop. That is thewhole point about bringing up anything about humanity in this discussion, not saying that animals feel as humans but that humans should act like humans which includes a sense of moral correctness, ethics, respect and so forth. I respect the game I have killed, the farm animals I have harvested, and the land from which I receive nature's bounty. I am in touch with my hunter/gatherer roots and am also quite in touch with an agrarian mentality even though I live far from rural America. I think it is more likely a person who derives pleasure from scaring animals and then killing them who is more out of touch with anything natural. There is absolutely no need other than satisfying a sick sort of blood lust to these turkey shoots. A hunt on the other hand can be justified in many ways: getting closer to nature and to your hunter/gatherer roots, supplying your own hard won meat, learning to survive on your own, game population control, all done with ethics of the sportsman. Just banging away at the bird tied into a box, well all that stuff about charity and need for food is pure balderdash. There would have been lots more better ways to win a turkey in a shooting contest.

Thats it for me, I think, banging my head against your wall is doing no good - just as you banging your head on mine will not get your way through to me that such is acceptable ethically, or morally the way it was depicted.

One last thing though, there is no analogy between this:

She saw a wounded bird on the ground, picked it up and quicky popped it's head off. Believe it or not it was a major new story. The animal rights activists were peeing thier pants because of how the queen dispassionately dispatched the wounded bird. I guess they wanted the maimed bird lie on the ground and bleed to death. and shooting at a Turkey bound and shoved into a box with its head sticking out for a bunch of people to shoot at. You are conversing with other gun and hunting enthusiasts on thsi site, not with a bunch of PETA or ALF members. As for your question about 50 years ago, and whetehr or not we are more moral than people back then, Iw ould like to think that we have come to the point when our morals have indeed improived over people of the past. I know it not to be so on everything but, on some things yes our morals are better on others they are worse. The thing is though, 50 years ago my father and grandfathers and at least one of my uncles would have refused to participate in a turkey shoot for the same reason mostly as I do today even though they too were on ocassion hunters or harvesters of meat. They had ethics regarding the taking of animals.

All the best,
Glenn B

Sinsaba
November 28, 2005, 04:47 PM
Some people tried real hard to continue the torture of Terri Shiavo

This thread is proof that we are far too removed from our agrarian roots when we equate turkeys and flies to people and even to other animals with the mental capacity not to eat their own crap

Go out a spend some quality time with a turkey and then come back and tell me how close to human emotion they can get

Do you also agree with this statement


+100

jsalcedo
November 28, 2005, 06:16 PM
One last thing though, there is no analogy between this:


Quote:
She saw a wounded bird on the ground, picked it up and quicky popped it's head off. Believe it or not it was a major new story. The animal rights activists were peeing thier pants because of how the queen dispassionately dispatched the wounded bird. I guess they wanted the maimed bird lie on the ground and bleed to death.


I was commenting on the hippocracy of animal rights folks.... as an aside

joab
November 28, 2005, 07:00 PM
Joab, the handicapped person comment was a stab, not a real good point. I'm actually sorry I made it because it predictably allowed you to roll away from the other points made and bring something so unrelated as Terry Schiavo into the mix.OK since you don't consider Teri a mentally handicapped person or possibly because it hit too close to home I'll address your post case by case
Can we torture mentally handicapped people?Already covered

[QUOTE]How about canines with mental defects? Could we string one of them up like a Pinata and then have the local kids whack at it with tire irons? The first kid to break that sucker open gets a year's supply of Ball Park Hot Dogs. $10.00 a shot, all proceeds go to "toys for tots".Where has anybody advocated hitting the birds with tire irons? The bird's head is the only thing sticking out of the box if anybody gets a hit it will simply be dead and only slightly stupider
If the purpose of the exercise was to inflict as much pain as possible while rendering the meat unusable I would be against it as would everyone here including the OP

Dumb monkeys? We could fire them out of a cannon into a giant steel target. A bullseye gets you a months supply of Rhesus Pieces...er, I mean Reeses Pieces. Proceeds go to the Hair Club for Men. $3.50 a shot.And where has anybody advocated shooting turkeys out of cannons. More simplistic emotionalisms

Pulling the wings off of flies? Is that okay if I let a bunch of kids do it for charity? How about $1.00 for 10 flies cause they're cheap and easy to come by? Proceeds go to the Ronald McDonald House.They're flies get over it

We could beat lame horses with clubs for fun and televise it like a Jimmy Swaggart telethon! $25.00 for 5 minutes of whacking. No prize really, let's just get out some aggression on a dumb horse that will be shot eventually anyway.Where has any body advocated beating the turkeys with clubs. And for that matter what makes a lame horse stupid. As with the other points you bring up a better suited argument would be "What if we shoot oranges out of spud guns, can we still make apple cider"?

Hell, most fish have terribly small mental capacities, let's get a 60-gallon bucket of them, and then whack them with big Bertha Warbird Titanium Drivers for $1.00 a shot. Furthest hitter gets a coupon for $25.00 off at Red Lobster! The money can go to the March of Dimes!I guess you know what I'm going to ask, so I'll answer myself nowhere. Just as nobody has suggested physically torturing any animal, but you

Wow, you guys are right, this can be fun!

Berek
November 28, 2005, 07:34 PM
Hey PETA, Eat This!
*snip*
5. Yeah, but — : Speaking of children, PETA activists have always targeted this demographic in an attempt to alienate children from their parents and create a new generation of carnivore-hating radicals. The latest salvo in this effort is a series of comic books like "Your Daddy Kills Animals," featuring a villainous father hoisting a fish in the air and slicing it open with knife. The books contain graphic images and passages like, "Imagine that a man dangles a piece of candy in front of you. ... As you grab the candy, a huge metal hook stabs through your hand and you're ripped off the ground. You fight to get away, but it doesn't do any good... That would be an awful trick to play on someone, wouldn't it?"

They already do this. They're called "sexual predators." Why doesn't PETA go after them? Stop the really sick things in the world first.

Berek

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 07:53 PM
Joab, it is apparent you have zero respect for whatever forms of wildlife you see fit to disregard. I feel this is an irreconcilable difference and there really is no point in arguing with you. If you don't see binding and boxing a turkey while taking pot shots at it all day to be just as cruel as say, I dunno, breaking a cow's legs so it can't run and then letting folks pay $5.00 to take a shot at it with hopes of winning it to be butchered and taken home, well then I don't think there is much to work with where you are concerned. Cows are stupid too, and this is just as bad as what goes on in slaughter houses, and the cow would be dead anyway by some means...so, it's okay, right? Nah, don't even bother answering that. I suppose if I said I wanted to eat Terry Schiavo it would've been okay, and I could have sold her organs and hair for charity. :rolleyes:

But it's been nice chatting with you. Well, not really, but you know, it wasn't unpleasant either....

joab
November 28, 2005, 08:28 PM
Joab, it is apparent you have zero respect for whatever forms of wildlife you see fit to disregard. I feel this is an irreconcilable difference and there really is no point in arguing with you. If you don't see binding and boxing a turkey while taking pot shots at it all day to be just as cruel as say, I dunno, breaking a cow's legs so it can't run and then letting folks pay $5.00 to take a shot at it with hopes of winning it to be butchered and taken home, well then I don't think there is much to work with where you are concerned. Cows are stupid too, and this is just as bad as what goes on in slaughter houses, and the cow would be dead anyway by some means...so, it's okay, right? Nah, don't even bother answering that. I suppose if I said I wanted to eat Terry Schiavo it would've been okay, and I could have sold her organs and hair for charity.
The turkey's leg was not broken
No pain was inflicted on it by making it run on broken limbs
They did not take pot shots at one turkey all day, unless they really sucked.
They took aimed shots at a turkey untilit was hit, just guessing no more than 3 to 5 shots within a couple of minutes at most.

If you want to argue facts instead trying to appeal to emotions by using apples to oranges exaggerations that ignore the facts then maybe something you say will have some merit
Until then you're just another anti

You have gone from a rat is a pig is a boy to a fly is a turkey is a dog is a horse is a monkey is a human

migoi
November 28, 2005, 09:11 PM
fowl, both domesticated and wild, are so terrified by guns going off and people yelling that we only have to call cease fire about 2 or 3 times a day to run the range chickens and some type of white, long legged bird off the range.

These birds have zero difficulty in landing on or wandering onto a hot range with multiple shots whizzing past them. If it's just one or two, then the shooters in the lanes they are in have to cease fire until they wander over to the next lane. Sometimes though enough land at the same time a cease fire has to be called and people have to go out on the range and shoo them away. Yelling and shooting over their heads don't work. Now it could be argued that the chickens are deaf, but the wild birds regularly land to search for bugs also.

If there is cruelty in this activity it comes in the form of the binding and boxing, something that lasts a few minutes at most, not in the shooting and yelling. Of course that store bought turkey was snatched up from the floor of the turkey house (big long metal roofed warehouse looking thing), stuffed in a crate with 8 or ten other birds, loaded on a semi-truck, transported many miles exposed to possibly freezing rain and weather amongst the incredible noise of our modern roadways, and left to sit for a bit before experiencing being snatched out of its crate, hung upside down (for what 6 minutes?) before having it's brain fried by electricity.

Hmmmm, several hours of various frightening sensations and experiences versus a few minutes of being exposed to some binding and a few loud noises. Talk about a lack of forethought.

migoi

Ryder
November 28, 2005, 09:14 PM
So what is the most humane way to kill a turkey? Is there a way that isn't going to hurt somebody's sensitivities? How about drowning? Put them in a vaccum chamber? Freeze them to death? How about the traditional slicing off their head? Oops, that's what they are doing with bullets, that's out.

Heyyyyy! How about lethal injection! Bambi lovers will be lined up for miles. :evil:

Gaiudo
November 28, 2005, 09:17 PM
I've been to these events to see what all the commotion was about. It's nothing but an excuse for bubba and his buddies to drink beer and BS, while shooting at a defenseless animal because half of those twits couldn't even hunt down a Walmart with a cell phone, a phone book and a map.



haha, thats priceless! Elitism strikes again.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with the above scenario a) bubba and his budies drinking beer and BSing... two of the great pleasures of life. b)shooting at a defenseless animal... a third pleasure in life (and quite a challenge, I've done it many times. Most of the time I will pay extra just to shoot some more, and then if I hit something give it to Ms. Grady down the road who doesn't have much to eat since her son died.

I love turkey shoots, its a great way to spend a sunday afternoon, meet the friends, discuss politics, shoot, etc. Although we usually do the "behind the log" scenario, not the box. Turkeys don't get "scared"... all the anthropomorphisms just lend a hand to the PETA crowd. This isn't Narnia, these animals don't talk or have rational consciousness, a soul, etc. This isn't "cruel". Tying them down and slowly burning their legs off with branding-irons would be cruel. A hit to the head with any calibre... usually does it really quick.

Man, I love thanksgiving turkey shoots, especially with good german stout. Guns are left up on the shooting line, everyone is extra safe, and shooting at a three inch target at a hundred yards with three beers in ya... well bubba, YOU try it! ;-).

PS brats on teh grill make a great addition to the afternoon.

cbsbyte
November 28, 2005, 09:19 PM
Turkey shoots are a little different in the Northeast. We don't shoot live turkeys, but paper silouettes of the either the head or entire body with kill zones with shotguns using small bird shot. The prize for "killing" the bird, or getting closest to the kill area is a frozen or in some cases a recently hunted Turkey. THis is more about fun, so their are many winners in different matches.

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 10:42 PM
Great, the advocates for consuming alcohol and shooting confined live targets all in the same day have spoken. What a true manifestation of the word, "men".

I think I'll try to bow out here, bubba just don't get it. And that's fine, barbarism as it may be, there are worse pursuits I suppose.

Still gotta get a kick of people thinking booze and firearms is okay, then to shoot at a living creature while doing it...wow.


:barf:

P.S. If everyone got a turkey within 3 shots, the charity would never make any money. Most of these bozos that I have seen couldn't hit a beer box at 100 yards. Cause that's how the money is made, they miss, horribly. You get a handful of real shooters that take their birds home in one shot, clean and accurate, then the clowns come marching in. It's a nice atmosphere, really, it is, I swear. :rolleyes:

RyanM
November 28, 2005, 10:42 PM
Those that are against this kinda thing would probably be better received if they'd stop trying to imply that this kinda thing is done out of bloodlust or "perversion." That's exactly the argument the PETA types use against hunting, as well. It really doesn't matter that much if the animal is tied up, free, whatever. It still gets killed. In most cases, "clean" kill or not, hunted or in a slaughterhouse or whatever, the animal is still absolutely terrified before it dies.

Personally I'm against causing unnecessary suffering to animals before they're killed. I definitely wouldn't support this kind of thing. Turkeys are indeed pretty dumb as animals go. But they're still quite capable of experiencing fear and pain. Just because the turkey can't tell you so in your own language, doesn't mean it's a totally insensate object. Oh, and if your standard of intelligence is "knows enough to not eat its own crap," you're gonna have to exclude dogs, higher primates, elephants, human infants, and human toddlers.

But c'mon try attacking the activity, not the people doing it. These people genuinely believe that it's morally right, or that turkeys lack the basic instinct to recognize danger, etc. It's not because they're a bunch of inbred freaks that get off on shooting helpless animals; not anymore than the people that actually hunt animals with anything more powerful than spears. And I'm sure the PETA morons would have a lot to say about the few people that do use spears.

NineseveN
November 28, 2005, 10:44 PM
You have gone from a rat is a pig is a boy to a fly is a turkey is a dog is a horse is a monkey is a human

I'd love to finish this run-on sentence with something involving you, but that would not be very high road of me, and I don't think it would do any good.

Kim
November 29, 2005, 12:16 AM
Bubbetts---------Do not asume only men find this activity O:K. I have no problem with it. But, then I was raised on a farm. Makes a big difference. My Dad raised cattle and chickens. You think this is bad try tying a chain to a dead calf hanging halfway out of a cow and pulling the calf out with the pick-up. That is what the VETS do. See how the little crippled chickens are taken care of with either a big stomping of the boot or a hitting of the head aganist a 2X4. Now my Dad was a gentle man. He even gave CPR to my dog when it got hit by a car and dug many graves for all kinds of pets. But life on a farm and the real world is not made for a pansey. And that is a nice word.:fire: If you do not like this then don't do it and leave everyone else alone. Kinda like just change the dang channel. Good Grief!

Walter
November 29, 2005, 12:43 AM
I read the first page of this thread, and went to the last page to post a reply.
Never mind what was in between.
It's obvious to me that in spite of the fact that the "War Between The States"
ended 140 years ago, there is still a huge cultural difference between the North and the South.
People in Texas have no problem with our version of a "turkey shoot", while
some folks in Pennsylvania think it is barbaric. Meanwhile, in Pennsylvania,
"pigeon shoots" continue. http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/1-17-2004-49555.asp

There's just no pleasing some people.

Walter

10 Ring Tao
November 29, 2005, 02:15 AM
The purposeful mental disconnect between reality and propriety of some people cracks me the hell up.

4570Rick
November 29, 2005, 03:10 AM
Each year around Thanksgiving, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals makes the evening news with some new campaign to get people to stop eating turkey. This year PETA wants me to believe that if I enjoy my annual serving of turkey at Thanksgiving, then I'm probably going to get the Asian bird flu. In order to make sure I'm aware of the threat, PETA members will "lie naked in flower-decorated coffins outside the Department of Agriculture" — just in case I walk by. As an alternative, PETA says I should ingest something called "tofurkey."


I used to eat turkey at Thanksgiving but I don't think PeTA hated me enough, so this year I started a new tradition. It's called a TurDuckEn. If this doesn't make PeTA hate me enough, next year I'l stuff the TurDuckEn into a Pig.:evil:

Malone LaVeigh
November 29, 2005, 03:26 AM
I'm seriously wondering how shooting deer from a blind using a feeder is any different from this kind of turkey shoot?Well, that's a pretty lame form of entertainment, too.

The thing I can't believe is that someone volunteers to go out and dispatch the wounded animals. You wouldn't catch me downrange from a bunch of beer-swilling yahoos with rifles.

nat
November 29, 2005, 05:52 AM
BS..........I lived in Korea for 9 years and I never saw or heard of this.

Some South-Korean do torture cats and dogs before slaughtering them [http://www.koreananimals.org/2001news.htm] (search 'torture').

More references:
[http://www.google.fr/search?hl=fr&hs=m2M&client=firefox&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&q=korea+dogs+torture&spell=1]

You may be unaware of this, but this does not make it BS.

"There is no snow in the US, I lived in Hawaii for 18 years..." :banghead:

joab
November 29, 2005, 06:59 AM
No offense Nat but given the choice of accepting the word of someone who has actually lived in Korea or the word of someone who apparently has only read PETA light organizations websites I'll have to go with the person with first hand knowledge.
Not saying either is right or wrong just one is more credible

I'd love to finish this run-on sentence with something involving you, but that would not be very high road of me, and I don't think it would do any good.You have obviously tried to assigned human emotion to animals just as Ms. Newton did. But at least she did stick to mammals“A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy.”

— Ingrid Newkirk, President, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA (http://www.boundless.org/features/a0000874.html)

And have also implied or even stated that those that disagree with you view, based on very limited life experience of the subject, are less intelligent than you and are worthy of scorn as "bubbas" and Klansmen

Your position on the issue is not what I take exception to. It is the arrogant ignorance that you display and the irrelevant emotional argument you present using ridiculous and juvenile exaggerated comparisons

NineseveN
November 29, 2005, 10:12 AM
You have obviously tried to assigned human emotion to animals just as Ms. Newton did. But at least she did stick to mammals“A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy.”

— Ingrid Newkirk, President, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA

You need to learn to read. Fear is not a human emotion, that is the only emotion I have stated that Turkeys feel (fear and derivatives of fear). If you think that animals cannot experience "A feeling of agitation and anxiety caused by the presence or imminence of danger" then you're wrong and not qualified to have this discussion with adults. Read what I wrote, not what you want me to write.


And have also implied or even stated that those that disagree with you view, based on very limited life experience of the subject, are less intelligent than you and are worthy of scorn as "bubbas" and Klansmen

Those that drink alcohol while using a firearm are utterly irresponsible infants.

The term "bubba" has more to do with being backwards than it does intelligence. How do you know what life experience I have on the subject? Either discuss what I said or dont discuss it with me at all. You don't know me, I don’t know you. How can you possibly comment on what my life experiences are? Have you ever been to a turkey shoot? I have.

I do think that people who think that because we are currently at the top of the food chain that gives us the right to use all animals in any manner we see fit, whether barbaric or disrespectful, lack class and respect for nature. I think people like you that seem to be unable to admit that animals experience ‘fear’ because it is a "human emotion" are unintelligent and suffer from a complete lack of information on the subject. Being able to feel fear has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence, it is a basic emotion that is a simple response to a number of stimuli (feeling trapped, loud noises, the unknown, pain etc...).

I never said "Klansmen" nor did I interject race or racism into this. I don't appreciate you attributing things to me that I did not say. I never, ever, not once, not even one half of a time said anything about anyone being a “klansman” or a racist. If you have nothing to say other than what you can make up, I'd ask that you bow out of this discussion.

Your position on the issue is not what I take exception to. It is the arrogant ignorance that you display and the irrelevant emotional argument you present using ridiculous and juvenile exaggerated comparisons


You think fear is a human emotion and that animals, namely turkeys do not experience it, and I'm the ignorant one with a limited world experience? Yeah, okay, nice talking to you. Please refrain from further discussion with me and I will do the same for you. I try not to discuss things with folks like you.

CentralTexas
November 29, 2005, 10:53 AM
has nothing to do with the Second Amendment other than to turn more people into anti 2A folks.
Non gun culture aware folks equate this sort of behavior with all gun owners as there isn't a distinction between 2A types and hunters.
It reinforces that public perception of many that gun owners are cruel rednecks and that hunting isn't a sport but a slaughter. Don't believe me? Print the article and take it to several non gun folks (city folks, not the next farm)and get their opinion.
I have to explain all the time to folks that know I am pro gun, how being a vegetarian isn't a contradiction to being pro gun. The simple idea of pro gun doesn't equal hunter doesn't compute.
Do I dislike some of PETA's methods? Yes, but every time they pull a stunt they get incredible press coverage and while many of the public may think what "whackos" ,they get to hear the message PETA puts out and many listen. Overall donations and membership climb.
As long as many in the non gun culture public see gun ownership=hunter and
hunter=shoot a bird in a box & shoot a bird in a box when a paper target will do= cruel/unsportsmanlike/redneck etc. we gun owners have a problem in public perception. This isn't a good perception of the noble hunter IMHO.
CT

Camp David
November 29, 2005, 11:00 AM
Every time I hear of some ridiculous PETA crusade, I shoot an extra animal in protest... squirrel, fox, deer, etc. I really wish I could mail them the innards of some of these... some of the PETA broads would really enjoy, I am sure, aged squirrel innards, and they could profit from them!

I heard that a local squirrel hunter's group has inaugerated a "PETA Squirrel Hunt" olympics (a day devoted to squirrel hunting based on numbers of kills and size of bullet used!)

Excellent!:o

mattdus
November 29, 2005, 11:45 AM
Bubbetts---------Do not asume only men find this activity O:K. I have no problem with it. But, then I was raised on a farm. Makes a big difference. My Dad raised cattle and chickens. You think this is bad try tying a chain to a dead calf hanging halfway out of a cow and pulling the calf out with the pick-up. That is what the VETS do. See how the little crippled chickens are taken care of with either a big stomping of the boot or a hitting of the head aganist a 2X4. Now my Dad was a gentle man. He even gave CPR to my dog when it got hit by a car and dug many graves for all kinds of pets. But life on a farm and the real world is not made for a pansey. And that is a nice word.:fire: If you do not like this then don't do it and leave everyone else alone. Kinda like just change the dang channel. Good Grief!
I didn't grow up like this and cant relate out of experience but I still give a big +1

GRB
November 29, 2005, 11:57 AM
jsalcedo,

My apologies for believing you wrote that piece. I must have read it three times before I realized it was someone else's article. I had mistakenly attributed some of the statements to you, sorry about that.

Has been one interesting thread with lots of participation and discussion.

All the best,
GB

Gaiudo
November 29, 2005, 12:06 PM
Somehow the arguments that just because someone doesn't enjoy something therefore it ought to be illegal still reigns strong in some people's thinking. You would think they would learn.

Some of y'all northerners just live in a completely different reality, and thats ok. Just don't move down here, we enjoy our culture. Its been going strong for a while now. Seems like every time that a northern "emotion" gets in the mix, we end up losing alot, and I hate that. Thats not aimed at all of y'all up there, just the ones to whom it would obviously apply on this thread, and similar entities.

The whole argument "every time someone does this we lose face" will just as quickly be applied to open carry, ferel hog hunts, and teaching my (hypothetical) four year old how to shoot his first .22. I'm not hurting your rights, just your tender emotions. Sorry, cry by yourself or others like you, but please don't try and badger, bully, or bludgen me into adopting your weakened emotional state. By the way, they were having some great turkey shoots up in eastern Pennsylvania and upstate NY two hundred years ago no problem; are you going to say that the likes of Washington, Jefferson, etc were less "sophisticated" then you? Yeah right. I simply hold that you have been "tenderized".

Janitor
November 29, 2005, 12:10 PM
in texas that is illegal isnt it canned hunt i like the idea cause it sounds pretty fun turkey moving out there a hundred yards but i have never heard of it before around here the turkey shoots jsut use paper targets huh wow i have been missing some fun although this does sound like a hot topic for people to complain about but if it is a domestic turkey should be okay
I'm sorry, but .... huh?

1911Tuner
November 29, 2005, 12:11 PM
The hunt is a grand tradition, and I once lived for it. It's been said by a wiser man than I:

It's not the kill. It's the hunt itself. One doesn't hunt in order to kill. One kills as a symbolic end to the hunt, because it's the hunt that we live for. The kill is incidental.

Trussing up a noble game animal and killing for the fun of it...whether bred on a farm for the express purpose of gracing our tables, or driven out of its own element into an enclosure...makes it simply killing, and nothing more. A slaughterhouse to which the public is invited to participate...in the name of entertainment and/or fundraising. Sorry. Doesn't do it for me.

I've never met anybody who works the slaughterhouses who gets much of a kick out of their jobs...and many don't do the job for very long. Dumb animals aren't sharp enough to know what's coming? Don't bet on it.
The dogs in a kill shelter know what's going on there. The look in their eyes are testament to that. Instinct or intelligence...They know. The ones that are destined for the table deserve the quickest death that we can hand them...and without undue fanfare so that they won't know what's coming for any longer than necessary...but they know.

It's also been said that:

"The measure of a man's character can be seen in the manner in which he treats his animals."

I tend to agree with that statement.

Sindawe
November 29, 2005, 12:16 PM
+100 on 1911Tuner's comments.

Janitor
November 29, 2005, 12:20 PM
"The measure of a man's character can be seen in the manner in which he treats his animals."
Agree fully with this.

No - I don't think the turkey is any more "terrified" by being shot at like this than he would be at the slaughterhouse. I don't think it's really torture - these are birds, with birds brains. The panic is probably from the restraint - same result with any animal.

I just think it's a bit twisted to think of it as entertainement.
-

Gaiudo
November 29, 2005, 12:39 PM
I completely agree with Tuner's comments, with the exception of the comment on the "kill being incidental" (I don't think many until this past half-century would even care to give credence to that). However, I would categorize Tuner's comments and the turkey shoot as being two completely different (ahem) birds. By no stretch of the imagination is this hunting, and noone has said that it is. I would MUCH prefer to be out in the woods than at a turkeyshoot. However, the fact that it isn't hunting doesn't make it immoral, and I think its a looong stretch to categorizing this in any way as torturing or terrifying an animal. Shoot, give me a slate call and some camo any day. But that can't compare to the present discussion.

Atticus
November 29, 2005, 12:48 PM
I'm less concerned with what the turkey is thinking or feeling, than I am with what the participants are thinking and feeling. There's gotta be a better way to do this. I think that most of us just have an issue with them being trussed up and shot at by people who might or might not have any marksmanship skills. At that point it becomes just a sick game of chance. To compare this to hunting, as some have, is simply ludicrous.

NineseveN
November 29, 2005, 12:54 PM
Somehow the arguments that just because someone doesn't enjoy something therefore it ought to be illegal still reigns strong in some people's thinking. You would think they would learn.

I don't think I recall anyone saying this should be illegal...I think that responsible adults with a respect for wildlife should know better.

Some of y'all northerners just live in a completely different reality, and thats ok. Just don't move down here, we enjoy our culture. Its been going strong for a while now. Seems like every time that a northern "emotion" gets in the mix, we end up losing alot, and I hate that. Thats not aimed at all of y'all up there, just the ones to whom it would obviously apply on this thread, and similar entities.

Living in a different reality would be most Northerners being unable to see the need for folks to hunt and live off of the land. That gap is losing space as we move forward to an age where every small farm is replaced by a Wal-Mart, but that mentality and the lack of understanding, with all of our metro-convenience still has a tendency to prevail. That's more of a rural VS urban thing, not a North VS South thing.

Living in a different reality would be a urbanite not understanding that some folks out in the thick of things need to kill stray dogs before they group up, form a pack mentality and go after your livestock or your family. We usually call the pound. That's more of an urban/rural thing instead of North and South.

Living in a different reality would be a Northern urbanite being unable to understand an extreme hatred for illegal immigrants coming from Mexico. After all, they don't have to see it first hand and deal with it. Hatred is a bit extreme, but I can understand the emotion tied up into something like that.

Living in a different reality would be someone from Pennsylvania not understanding what it's like to be in a hurricane, and someone from Florida not understanding what it's like to be stuck in a blizzard.

Not seeing the binding and boxing of an animal to be shot at by folks who may or may not have been drinking alcohol is not a different reality. At least, not how I see it. Despite being a dirty Yankee, I have a deep respect for animals and mother nature. No, I'm not a tree huger, I support logging, oil drilling, industrialization, but I also support respect for the things you take form this earth, plant, animal and mineral. Just because an animal is dumb does not give one the right to brush off the needless mechanisms some use to kill it in the name of fun, sport or charity. Like 1911Tuner said, it's not about the kill, it's about the hunt...when you remove the hunt, it's about killing. Killing and charity just don't wash in my opinion, and that has nothing to do with regionalism or geographic location, because I know many, many folks from the south that are appalled by this type of behavior, and I am aware that similar behavior occurs up north as well, even in my home state of PA.

I know I used some very extreme examples earlier, they were arguably useless, so let's get serious for a second here and consider this:

Would it be fair to hog tie a deer, put it in a box with its head sticking out and let folks pay $2.00 to take a shot at it from 200-300 yards? The deer will be hunted during deer season and die anyway. And by the qualifications in this thread, deer are stupid animals (they wander into obvious highways and traffic, run into windows, hang out at rifle and pistol ranges rather often), and after all, they're just animals, and we're human, and at the top of the food chain. So is that fair to do? Is it right?

What about a cow? They die in slaughter houses under pretty rough circumstances just like turkeys. To say that any living creature is a lesser organism to justify the actions taken against it is a serious flaw in character as far as I am concerned. You do what you do because you need to, and you do it in the best way possible, otherwise, find some paper or steel to shoot at.


The whole argument "every time someone does this we lose face" will just as quickly be applied to open carry, ferel hog hunts, and teaching my (hypothetical) four year old how to shoot his first .22.

Even though it’s a valid point, I don't much like it either. I have no opposition to anything stated in the above paragraph, which again shows that you cannot water this down into a North VS South thing.


I'm not hurting your rights, just your tender emotions. Sorry, cry by yourself or others like you, but please don't try and badger, bully, or bludgen me into adopting your weakened emotional state.

This is a little too dismissive, don't you think? No one is badgering or bullying anyone here, the OP brought this up in an open public discussion forum. Simply not agreeing with you is not coercion. and to call it a "weakened emotional state" is a pretty flimsy tactic, perhaps we're enlightened and have more respect for the bounties of this earth?

By the way, they were having some great turkey shoots up in eastern Pennsylvania and upstate NY two hundred years ago no problem; are you going to say that the likes of Washington, Jefferson, etc were less "sophisticated" then you? Yeah right. I simply hold that you have been "tenderized".

Lots of people did lots of thing in the past, that in no way justifies the present. Julius Caesar had sex with young men and boys. Some of our founding fathers owned slaves, some important Americans in history beat their wives or engaged in promiscuity. None of those things are morally, socially or maybe even legally acceptable today. Distasteful or callous acts committed in the past by great men in no way transform the acts into honorable in the present. And I don't see how anyone can logically make the comparison with a straight face.

1911Tuner
November 29, 2005, 01:27 PM
Gaiudo said:

I completely agree with Tuner's comments, with the exception of the comment on the "kill being incidental" (I don't think many until this past half-century would even care to give credence to that).
************************

Then you haven't been completely indoctrinated with the spirit of the hunt.
It's possible to hunt all day and not kill...(I've proved this on several occasions) :rolleyes: ...and still thoroughly enjoy the day. I hunt the Southeastern Whitetail every chance that I get...when physical limitations will permit...but I stopped killin'em several years ago. I pit my best against his...and occasionally I win. The difference now is that, I go home and revel in my success without the skinning chores...and he gets to go tend to the girls while the rut is still in full swing.

The comment wasn't mine. I read it somewhere...but it's very true.
Even when I took the shot, I never mounted the trophy, and always ate what I killed. Maybe it's the 1/8th Sioux Indian in me that won't let go after all these generations, but I've just always had a deep respect for the animals that I harvested...even the ones that died an ignoble death in some obscure slaughterhouse.

Happy hunting!;)

CentralTexas
November 29, 2005, 02:08 PM
when I see comments like this-

"Every time I hear of some ridiculous PETA crusade, I shoot an extra animal in protest"

Yes, we wouldn't want to reinforce the ideas they have that hunters are just crazed blood thirsty killers.....

CT

Gaiudo
November 29, 2005, 02:27 PM
Then you haven't been completely indoctrinated with the spirit of the hunt.
It's possible to hunt all day and not kill...(I've proved this on several occasions)

Tuner, I agree with you, and have spent an entire season never taking a shot (yes, I did see some ;) ). My all time favorite hunt involved stalking a Nebraska whitetail across a treeless plain with a bow. Took me seven hours to cross two hundred yards, and got within ten yards. I never even took the shot, just watched him and the does bed down. I could go back to my warm house and eat Christmas turkey and ham and have a hot drink, so I was all for it.

However, my comment was directed at the idea that killing wasn't an important part of hunting, only rather an incidental side effect. Though for us many times that might be the case, and I am grateful that we have the opportunity to enjoy that luxury, for many its simply not true. My statement was to make clear that for many/most hunters even 50 years go the kill was a large part of the hunt, and not simply incidental. I realized this in college, when a full 2/3rds of what I ate during the school year came from the venison steak/burgers/jerky/sausage/pizza/you name it/ that came from the half-dozen or so deer a year I was killing. It wasn't a matter of *only* the hunt, but also the pure necessity of taking meat. I'm only a 16th cherokee, so not up to your bloodlines, but I do feel the deep respect for the God given nature and its bounty. However, killing comes into that as well, and fits just as large part of the overall picture as the "stalk". I am grateful we can enjoy both aspects of it, and to reduce the killing part to simply "incidental", which many (present company excepted) seem to be claiming these days in an attempt to ease the social anxiety of the non-hunters is simply to lower ourselves to their delusional perspective on reality.

1911Tuner
November 29, 2005, 02:35 PM
Gaiudo...You DO understand then! :D

I hope I get to get into the tangled brush that is Eastern and Central NC this year. I may even take one for the freezer...but probably not.;)

Creeping Incrementalism
November 29, 2005, 02:58 PM
"There is no snow in the US, I lived in Hawaii for 18 years..." :banghead:

Don't people go snowboarding near the peaks of some of those volcanic mountains?

Firethorn
November 29, 2005, 03:11 PM
You know, my grandfather once described a turkey shoot. Except no ties were utilized. The turkeys were dumped into an aisle. Their heads would only show if they stuck them up. They could move from side to side.

Seems alot more sporting to me...

Creeping Incrementalism
November 29, 2005, 04:07 PM
I have no problem with turkey shoots but can understand why some people wouldn't find it entertaining. However, the logic and some of the arguments people who are against it are using is often hypocritical to some degree. If you are a vegetarian and completely against hunting than I'd say your logic is consistent, but for everybody else I'd say it isn't, because:

1. The turkeys are scared

I'm sure almost all the time wild animals being hunted are scared to some degree, at least from the moment of being shot until they die, except for hits to the brain. And I'd say domesticated animals about to be slaughtered are most of the time alarmed to some degree. I'm sure the turkeys are at least perturbed at being tied up, but, having raised cockatiels, and knowing that domesticated turkeys are about the dumbest animals around, I have my doubts. Who can say for sure? Humans, not being domesticated turkeys, can’t.

2. It isn't sporting

When folks say, "Sporting is when the animal is free in it's element"... Oh yeah? Well I say sporting isn't using a rifle, it's using a bow. Or using a bow isn't sporting, it's using an atlatl and spear. Or atlatl's are for girly men, just throw the spear. Or the spear is too easy, use a rock. Or a rock is to easy, use your hands. What's sporting is completely a matter of opinion.

3. People drinking at the events means they are bubbas

What about people who have a glass of wine or two at dinner and then drive home, are they bubba's? I wouldn't drink and shoot, but don't have a problem with those that have a few, but are otherwise safe.

So if you are a non-hunting vegetarian who believes in DUI's for .01 BAC, you're being consistent, but I don't think anyone else is.

Then there is

4. It gives PETA or fence-sitters ammunition to make hunters/gun owners look bad.

Ending turkey shoots is an example of creeping instrumentalism, which I find so pernicious I used it as my handle on this board. They won’t stop there, and if fact they will use it as a precedent to ban more hunting/shooting If this is your worry, then make sure the turkey’s body can’t be struck by misses (use log/berm/metal plate or something), and make an effort to make things less rambunctious, but don’t try to end what is an enjoyable event for some people.

joab
November 29, 2005, 05:30 PM
You need to learn to read. Fear is not a human emotion, that is the only emotion I have stated that Turkeys feel (fear and derivatives of fear). If you think that animals cannot experience "A feeling of agitation and anxiety caused by the presence or imminence of danger" then you're wrong and not qualified to have this discussion with adults. Read what I wrote, not what you want me to write.By comparing them to humans albeit retarded humans you assigned them human characteristics whether you wanted to or not.
Your intent was to stir the emotions of the reader by further making apples to oranges comparisons of beating dogs and horses. That's an emotional argument
Yes animals feel fear ,or a reasonable facsimile, however a turkey is just too stupid to put two and two together and realize that those fast moving bugs around his head are trying to kill him.
( If you had asked for clarification instead of getting irrelevant and smart alecky with your first post I would have explained that)
If you cannot carry a conversation without hysterical and irrelevant emotionalisms then you are not qualified to have a conversation outside of your chosen choir

The term "bubba" has more to do with being backwards than it does intelligence. How do you know what life experience I have on the subject? Either discuss what I said or dont discuss it with me at all. You don't know me, I don’t know you. How can you possibly comment on what my life experiences are? Have you ever been to a turkey shoot? I have.And I guess that being backwards has more to do with being dumb than just simple minded:rolleyes:
How do I know what your life experience is?
I've read your hysterical irrelevant emotion driven comments here, they tell me all I need to know

I do think that people who think that because we are currently at the top of the food chain that gives us the right to use all animals in any manner we see fit, whether barbaric or disrespectful, lack class and respect for nature. I think people like you that seem to be unable to admit that animals experience ‘fear’ because it is a "human emotion" are unintelligent and suffer from a complete lack of information on the subject. Being able to feel fear has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence, it is a basic emotion that is a simple response to a number of stimuli (feeling trapped, loud noises, the unknown, pain etc...).Never said the turkeys are unable to feel fear only that they lack the intelligence to feel fear in this situation. To feel fear they must first be able to acknowledge that there is something to fear
I also have never even hinted that I believe animals should be abused only that this does not constitute abuse as you believe

I never said "Klansmen" nor did I interject race or racism into this. I don't appreciate you attributing things to me that I did not say. I never, ever, not once, not even one half of a time said anything about anyone being a “klansman” or a racist. If you have nothing to say other than what you can make up, I'd ask that you bow out of this discussion.Come again?Oh I see, we only care about the smart animals? Dumb ones don't matter. LMAO. White sheets and woodgrain all around.You can amend that last statement if you care to

You think fear is a human emotion and that animals, namely turkeys do not experience it, and I'm the ignorant one with a limited world experience? Yeah, okay, nice talking to you. Please refrain from further discussion with me and I will do the same for you. I try not to discuss things with folks like you.Perhaps you should read the statement in question again. I did not say in it that you were giving human emotion to turkeys I was not even speaking of the emotions of turkey. I said that you were presenting an emotional argument. As in trying to play on emotion instead of any kind of fact by trying to equate shooting a turkey with torturing mentally handicapped humans..

mrmeval
November 29, 2005, 05:43 PM
http://www.thesalmons.org/lynn/turducken.html

[QUOTE=jsalcedo]Hey PETA, Eat This!
A Thanksgiving tale.
PETA says I should ingest something called "tofurkey."

1911Tuner
November 29, 2005, 06:08 PM
joab and NineseveN...Ya'll take a break and cool off a bit. NineseveN...Check your PMs.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled flame war.:)

roo_ster
November 29, 2005, 06:10 PM
Those that drink alcohol while using a firearm are utterly irresponsible infants.

The term "bubba" has more to do with being backwards than it does intelligence. How do you know what life experience I have on the subject?

Well, I know what sort of experience you don't have.

See, there are these time-honored shooting competitions in Switzerland. One competition calls for the shooters to stand on a ridge overlooking a valley. A target to be set up on the opposite ridge across the valley. The shooters shoot from a standing position near a post. The post serves not only as a mark from where to take the shot...it also serves as a handy shelf on which to place their ale stein. Without the post there may be a tragedy. Like someone spilling their beer. :eek:

Yet another competition is held in honor of the Oath on the Rütli sworn by the men of Uri, Schwyz and Unterwalden in 1291:
Rütlischiessen (http://www.swissworld.org/dvd_rom/eng/customs_2003/content/autumn/shootingruetli.html)
In this case, wine is also found. "...one long-time marksman observed that getting up to the Rütli meadow is a lot easier than getting down."

I guess my questions for NineseveN would be: Are these Swiss competitors merely "irresponsible infants" or are they also "bubbas?" (In NineseveN's opinion) And how do you say "bubba" in German, French, and Italian?

After NineseveN is finished telling the rural folks of America just what is appropriate, he can hop on a direct flight to Zurich and begin his harange of the "infantile" Swiss and thier "backwards" customs.

1911Tuner
November 29, 2005, 06:20 PM
jfruser...I'm tryin' to put out a fire here before somebody gets booted. Howsabout refrainin' from throwing gas on it. I'd consider it a favor.;)

45Broomhandle
November 29, 2005, 06:42 PM
http://www.hunt101.com/img/347092.jpg

'NUFF SAID?

Sindawe
November 29, 2005, 07:51 PM
Hmmmm...I've read about such in reference to ancient history. Looks interesting. I may have to try it, though I've never deboned a bird before. Anybody got any pointers?

Tofurkey: I've never had a decent one. Sausage and hamburger "fakes" are usually much better. Both can be found in my freezer at home currently. :D

jsalcedo
November 29, 2005, 07:56 PM
I've never deboned a bird before. Anybody got any pointers?


Foodnetwork.com has it in their database.

They did a pheasant in a duck in a turkey, Phuckey?

mrmeval
November 29, 2005, 08:17 PM
Nope bigger to smaller first three of beginning last is last two though could be three for pronounciation.
TurDucAnt

How about
Turkey<-Duck<-Chicken<-Phesant<Quail<-Pidgeon<-Starling

Turducchiphequapiding


:)
Foodnetwork.com has it in their database.

They did a pheasant in a duck in a turkey, Phuckey?

madmike
November 29, 2005, 08:23 PM
Nope bigger to smaller first three of beginning last is last two though could be three for pronounciation.
TurDucAnt

How about
Turkey<-Duck<-Chicken<-Phesant<Quail<-Pidgeon<-Starling

Turducchiphequapiding


:)


lark inside that (Lark's Tongues in Aspic...good tune, never tried the dish), and remember that budgerigar is Aborigine for "good to eat."

Then stuff that whole mess into a goose inside an ostrich.

Ostrogooturduchipheaquapidginglardgie

Now, how can we get hold of condor and spotted owl?:evil:

Boss Spearman
November 29, 2005, 08:44 PM
That sort of "turkey shoot" is an old tradition...

The turkeyis tied behind a log, so that only the head will stick up. No box, no stationary turkey, no stationary head. This has been described going back tothe 1700s...

...

I recently saw Sergeant York with Gary Cooper and they showed this event exactly as you describe it.

KriegHund
November 29, 2005, 08:54 PM
At first i thought "You put a turkey in a box, zip tie it in, and then shoot it in the head? :confused:

Then i realized the turkey was liable to die anyways, but it wouldnt provide such entertainment.

Meh, whatever. Personaly, ide rather be shot in the head than have my head chopped off.

Maybe im just a wierdo, but i wouldnt mind trying to shoot a moving turkey head with my mauser....
Theres not much point to it IMO if it aint moving. Otherwise its just a regular old target....

Dragun
November 29, 2005, 09:14 PM
Forecasting lockdown before page 3 is filled in this thread. If it survives longer, I will be rather surprised.:D

i have no problem with this kind of fund raiser!

madmike
November 29, 2005, 09:15 PM
Gee, I didn't know that turkeys were deaf and couldn't hear the sound of the missed shot...because yeah, animals don't scare easily by loud noise and restraint. Yes, i believe any animal that is held captive by another and is then subjected to loudn noise in an unfamaliar environment is a wee bit scared.

The Turkey pens don't look too fun either, but they don't look terrifying. :scrutiny:

:rolleyes:

Capstick reports that African megafauna, that certainly DO have brains, regard gunfire largely like thunder, and don't make a connection between the noise and an animal falling over unless they actually see a hunter close with the animal.

Seeing as he killed near 1000 elephant and God knows how many cape buffs, rhino, lion, leopard, antelope, gazelle...I'm inclined to believe the turkey has no clue what's going on.

Now, I'd rather shoot at a MOVING turkey for sport than a head in a box. But that's a personal position.

Commercial poultry are raised in various ways, usually in small cages with their beaks burned off (My father in law designed the laser system many places use, that removes the beak and cauterizes in one operation). If it's an egg farm, the male chicks are simply tossed into a dumpster. I believe meat farms are the same--few males are kept. Claws are usually retained, but frequently have to be cut off to remove the animal if it dies. A disease outbreak means the entire barnful are killed at once to reduce the spread. Egg farms run a very odd artificial light and dark cycle to force egglaying to a high rate. Want to talk about veal, lamb, "Cornish" hens and such? Commercial meat isn't pretty.

Let's not even discuss the French's version of veal made from a foal that was starved for three days after birth and then killed.

Of course, just because a turkey shoot isn't worse doesn't mean PETA won't make mileage out of it.

Can we stick an activist in a box and save a turkey?:neener:

madmike
November 29, 2005, 09:30 PM
It is horrible because there are people who think that this is an OK method of killing.


I remember at Boy Scout camp taking the chickens they brought to us, looping their heads through a string to hold them, dragging out the feet so the neck was over a stump and swinging a camp axe. Took 2-3 chickens before we had the form down for a clean kill.

For Wilderness Survival merit badge, I watched a guy catch a bird and twist its neck.

I've also rescued birds with wings full of shot that didn't do the job. Some lived, some died within a few hours.

Which if these methods is better than shooting a turkey in the head?

madmike
November 29, 2005, 09:34 PM
Bull fights? Dog fights? Cock fights? Outlets for degenerates who are too cowardly to put their own hides at risk.

The toreador does. Though anyone who wears pink and lavender and tight pants I do wonder about.

madmike
November 29, 2005, 09:38 PM
It probably makes me a horrible human being to think this, but that would actually be kinda funny.

Wonder if I can roll one that small. Tape it in his beak and wrap a little bandana around his eyes?

I think that would improve the fundraiser. Guy looks through his scope, sees the blindfold and cigarette, busts a gut laughing and can't hit the bird.

madmike
November 29, 2005, 09:48 PM
Now as to the real argument, it is not about dinner because remember not everyone, probably not even most, get a turkey at the turkey shoot.

the animal does not stand a chance. Sure you can miss but the animal gets killed anyhow later on.

So, the FIRST animal doesn't stand a chance. The odds improve with each succeeding animal until the day is done.

Hunting includes harvesting. The manner of harvest should be such that you show our respect for that being harvested. This is a sign of a true hunter/gatherer/harvester.

Oh, bull. People who depended and those who still do depend on hunting to survive use the least sporting method possible. !Kung Bushmen use poisoned arrows. Herds have been stampeded or herded by fire and off cliffs. Animals have been hamstrung and stoned to death. If you've ever seen even a video of African wild dogs bringing down a gazelle and chewing its organs out alive, you'd consider ANY human hunting humane.

And then they told stories of their bravery around the campfire while smoking hemp and drinking fermented millet.

madmike
November 29, 2005, 09:51 PM
1911/m1 garand fanatics amuse me. They are great guns, but there are reasons (and good ones) they arent on the battlefield any longer.

Hm...I agree on the Garand. But who's going to tell Marine Recon their recent order for 1911s is wrong?

madmike
November 29, 2005, 09:52 PM
Any person who engages in such an awful "game" is likely of no worth and is probably defective in many other ways.

Only defective and pathetic people enjoy killing animals, savagely, for fun and game.


You realize PETA says almost that exact quote about ALL hunters and fishermen?

ezypikns
November 29, 2005, 10:12 PM
but if it's your cup of tea, more power to you.

1911Tuner
November 29, 2005, 10:39 PM
Off-topic, but what the hello...It's already gone to hell in a handbasket anyway, so...

1911/m1 garand fanatics amuse me. They are great guns, but there are reasons (and good ones) they arent on the battlefield any longer.
**********************

Garands...mainly because they couldn't be quickly topped off without taking them out of battery.

M-1911...mainly because of our European NATO allies insisting that we conform to their ammo standards...and the fact that the old ones were worn out...and another contract would have been too expensive since only one manufacturers had any of the original tooling and few of the ordnance gauges used to build new ones correctly.

I really don't see much point in letting this one stay open...but since I'm not in my jurisdiction, I'll defer to one of my colleagues for the call.

madmike
November 29, 2005, 10:39 PM
but if it's your cup of tea, more power to you.


I think that may be a great post.

Especially, in summary:

So, we're "Getting back to our roots" by hunting, but seeing as turkey shoots were more common in the past, we're hoping to be more "ethical" these days than those. Interesting dichotomy.

And I should equate a useful and beloved family pet (since a hound was mentioned) with a turkey, and how sad I would feel if someone shot it? Sorry, but I don't feel sad for a dead turkey, period. Not even roadkill. It's meat or it's not and that's as far as I think of them. I DO get sad when I see a dead cat or dog. Pets and food are not the same in my culture. I realize there are cultures where this is true, including some farms, but in that case, the animal is killed just as readily (Though sometimes you only take one leg at a time. Hey, fine pig like that, you don't kill him all at once:p ).

I've actually become convinced through this thread that there's nothing wrong with this tradition at all. It's quick and painless enough, bound to be LESS scary than what I've seen of animals in line in a slaughterhouse after being trucked across country for the honor, and definitely and efficiently winds up as meat.

Hell, most fish have terribly small mental capacities, let's get a 60-gallon bucket of them, and then whack them with big Bertha Warbird Titanium Drivers for $1.00 a shot. Furthest hitter gets a coupon for $25.00 off at Red Lobster! The money can go to the March of Dimes!

Heck, I'd take up golf for that, though. Sounds like a blast.

As far as animals being scared by gunfire, I recall numerous times rabbits sitting on a trap range eating dandelions, right in front of 5 guys with 12 gauges.

And why would 8mm or .338 be necessary? A friggin .22 will brain a bird. Talk about massive waste of power.

Oh, and I resent being called a "bubba" and the implication of barbarism and stupidity (actually, I think it was a statement, not an implication) because I don't object to this. That sounds pretty much like a PETA activist talking. And it's bigotry. I've occasionally had a beer while carrying, and I drove home afterwards, too! Horrors.

I recall PETA doing a "vegetarian" Thanksgiving for homeless, and commenting on how "grateful" the homeless were to get fed. Duh. And yet it was a soundbite. We need to be looking at this for our own soundbites, to drown them out.

And I do not give a @#$%#@ing @#%#^%$ if some Q#$%#@ing PETA @#$*($er is reading this board. No, I WILL NOT base my posts on what might or might not offend my opponents. They can go #@$^Y a #$&@. And I will just ignore anyone who suggests that my free speech, within the rules of this forum, FOR people of like mindset, should be moderated for a bunch of whacktards. That was the mentality that caused Snitch and Wussy to sign a deal with the clinton assministration. @#$%& the opposition. They have their own boards, and they don't moderate their speech in case we see them.

roo_ster
November 29, 2005, 11:05 PM
jfruser...I'm tryin' to put out a fire here before somebody gets booted. Howsabout refrainin' from throwing gas on it. I'd consider it a favor.;)

1911Tuner:

Sorry 'bout that. I hadn't read the last few posts by the, ahh, most vehement pro & anti turkey shooters & didn't see your post till after mashing the "submit reply" button. It took me a while to complete the post, given distractions.

I woulda made it less pointed & more jovial, if I had.

I gotta admit that the idea of a few fellows taking long range shots from an unsupported standing position while imbibing room-temperature barley goodness has some charm. Also, what's not to like about a culture that makes a festival out of a target shooting competition, compltete with sausage, kraut, & all sorts of victuals? Sounds like a little slice of heaven to me.

NineseveN
November 29, 2005, 11:24 PM
Jfruser:

I maintain that anyone that operates a firearm while under the influence of alcohol is utterly irresponsible. I don't care what other cultures do. Are they "Bubbas"? I don't know, hey have a different culture and a different set of laws and forms of government. I do know that in many, if not most places, operating or even having a firearm while having alcohol in your blood can result in a legal hassel or even jail time and having your firearms rights suspended or revoked. Not everywhere mind you, doesn't need to be.

As responsible firearms owners, we should be advocates of safety, booze and guns are not safe. If you feel otherwise, more power to you, glad I don't shoot with you.

madmike
November 29, 2005, 11:27 PM
Jfruser:

I maintain that anyone that operates a firearm while under the influence of alcohol is utterly irresponsible.

Do you feel the same way about cars and power tools? Have you EVER driven after consuming, before the total alcohol content had been metabolized?

You're far more likely to hurt someone with a car than a gun.

jsalcedo
November 29, 2005, 11:28 PM
Crude but you get the idea.

NineseveN
November 29, 2005, 11:29 PM
Joab:

Your intent was to stir the emotions of the reader by further making apples to
oranges comparisons of beating dogs and horses. That's an emotional argument.
I'm glad you are inside my head. please do not presume to know what my intent was, it shows ignorance on your part. I already stated that those examples were bad and probably out of line. I made a more appropriate example later on. My intent was to vent because some of the things encountered in this thread annoyed me to no end.

Yes animals feel fear ,or a reasonable facsimile, however a turkey is just too stupid to put two and two together and realize that those fast moving bugs around his head are trying to kill him.


What difference does that make? The animal, a living creature is in fear due to a
circumstance that someone put it in. You can split hairs all you want about intelligence or capacity to reason, it all boils down to putting the animal in an unnatural situation and inducing a fearful state. I thought that was clear. I wasn’t the one that suggested that the animal was aware of what was going on, and in fact, I clearly stated that part of the fear was fear of the unknown and unfamiliar.

If you cannot carry a conversation without hysterical and irrelevant emotionalisms then you are not qualified to have a conversation outside of your chosen choir

And if you cannot discuss a situation without presuming to know someone else's intent, then you'd be better off having a discussion with yourself.

And I guess that being backwards has more to do with being dumb than just simple minded

Nope. The term, "backwards" is often used to refer to something that has shown a distinct lack of progress, or in some cases, even regression. It is not necessarily meant to be a negative term, as progress is not always a good thing, and sometimes moving backwards is the only way one can reasonably go. Those that continue this type of "shoot" are participating in an event that goes back a long time, progression on the issue would be, at least to me, moving forward enough to respect the animals, all of them no matter how "dumb" they are and not going out of the way to inflict more harm or fright than necessary. It has nothing to do
with intelligence, I am very certain that some remarkably educated folks participate in such
shoots.

How do I know what your life experience is?
I've read your hysterical irrelevant emotion driven comments here, they tell me all I need
to know.

:rolleyes: So basically, you read some things I said on the internet and all of the sudden, you know my life experiences? Wow, amazing.

Never said the turkeys are unable to feel fear only that they lack the intelligence to feel fear in this situation. To feel fear they must first be able to acknowledge that there is something to fear I also have never even hinted that I believe animals should be abused only that this does not constitute abuse as you believe


Neither man nor animal needs to acknowledge something to fear it. Fear often stems from the unknown or uncertainty. Panic is a form of fear, anxiety has roots in fear. Fear is not a rational thing and therefore does not need to fit into a preconceived pattern of acknowledgment.

I said:
I never said "Klansmen" nor did I interject race or racism into this. I don't appreciate you
attributing things to me that I did not say. I never, ever, not once, not even one half of a
time said anything about anyone being a "klansman" or a racist. If you have nothing to say
other than what you can make up, I'd ask that you bow out of this discussion.

Come again?

You quoted me as saying:
Oh I see, we only care about the smart animals? Dumb ones don't matter. LMAO. White sheets
and woodgrain all around.
amend that last statement if you care to

Um, "White sheets and woodgrain all around." is not a racist remark. It's actually taken from an obscure work of literature relayed to me by my father (the title I forget, it's been many years). My father relayed it to me some time ago. As I recall, it's about a young princess who becomes a queen when her parents take ill and pass on. She takes a young boy from a neighboring village as her king. Anyway, through the course of the story, all kinds of terrible event happen to her (she finds her king with another woman, her prized horse runs away and goes missing etc...),

Due to these events, she is consumed by so much rage, that she wages war on all of the villages and kingdoms to the North, South, East and West (he cheating king was from the South, her horse ran off to the East, the woman her king cheated on her with was from the West and she wages war on the North simply because they protest her war against everyone else).

After many months of fighting, the wars begin to take their tolls on all of the lands. Where there were once forests there are now charred earth and embers rising from the funeral pyres. The entire world around her turns ugly and she is stricken with a great sadness over the state of things. Her councilor urges her to call off the wars and begin to heal the lands and rebuild what has been damaged as that will surely be the only way she can overcome her grief. She was a queen, surely it was in her power to do such things. But she could not be reasoned with, she would not call off the wars or rebuild. Instead, she solved her sadness by taking all of the bed sheets in her castle and covering the windows so she did not have to look out at the barren world she had created. She shut and boarded up every door to the castle (wood doors). And she was happy, despite the fact that nothing changed. the world was still ugly and getting worse, she simply chose to ignore it. She used the white sheets and wood grain to block out the cries for her to stop, to hide the ugliness that had consumed the lands. It's basically a metaphor for folks covering up ugliness or other unfavorable things with something pleasant in order to be able to ignore the underlying negatives.


I can honestly see where you may have gotten that wrong, I wasn't very clear, and the reference is so obscure I could not expect anyone to know it (hell, I hardly remember it). Sorry to disappoint you sir, but you were mistaken. As for the rest of what you have said, I think you’re wrong, you think I am wrong, let's agree to disagree. I find our discussion ugly at the moment.

madmike
November 29, 2005, 11:32 PM
What difference does that make? The animal, a living creature is in fear due to a
circumstance that someone put it in. You can split hairs all you want about intelligence or capacity to reason, it all boils down to putting the animal in an unnatural situation and inducing a fearful state.

Yup. sounds like PETA talking about hunting or the stockyard. And factually, the statement is correct.

So morally, I find the argument fails of its merits.

sorry.

NineseveN
November 29, 2005, 11:35 PM
Do you feel the same way about cars and power tools? Have you EVER driven after consuming, before the total alcohol content had been metabolized?

You're far more likely to hurt someone with a car than a gun.

Cars? Yes I do. No doubt about it.

Have I driven home after consuming some booze? Yes I have. It was wrong to do it when I did it, I dont do it any more and haven't done it since.

Power tools? I don't know that many people operate power tools around others while drinking, but yes this is also not cool.

Look, if you wanna booze up out in the middle of nowhere with not a soul around for 50 miles, drink up, shoot your guns, play with fire, drive wildly through the fields, set off some dynamite for all I care. When in populated areas, no, none of these things should be done while having alcohol in your system.


I cannot belive this place now, we're arguing FOR using alcohol while shooting a firearm? Oh my christ, where did THR go? I'm not even going to argue about this, it's ridiculous. :barf:

madmike
November 29, 2005, 11:44 PM
I cannot belive this place now, we're arguing FOR using alcohol while shooting a firearm? Oh my christ, where did THR go? I'm not even going to argue about this, it's ridiculous. :barf:

I was simply pointing out the ongoing hypocrisy. A person who consumes a beer during a shoot is a "bubba," but a person who drives after doing so is socially acceptable. For there to be a moral difference is plain hypocrisy.

I don't drink when I play guitar, either. It screws up my playing.

Every one of your statements is inherently simple opinion, unsupportable by observation. As has been noted several times, the emotional cries about feelings and emotion apply EQUALLY to animals in a slaughteryard. If you oppose one on moral grounds, you must oppose the other. The animal is coralled, prodded, restrained and killed amidst noise, confusion and the smell of death.

So I presume you won't be eating any more McDonald's or Jimmy Dean, right?

Right?

madmike
November 29, 2005, 11:49 PM
and setting up tents where they'll serve barbeque, tamales, and beer for the rest of the day.

By the way, as I read that, the drinking was AFTER the shooting.

NineseveN
November 29, 2005, 11:52 PM
I was simply pointing out the ongoing hypocrisy. A person who consumes a beer during a shoot is a "bubba," but a person who drives after doing so is socially acceptable.

I never said that. <-- read that again


I don't drink when I play guitar, either. It screws up my playing.

I'm proud of you, but I don't think I asked, nor do I think it si relevant.

Every one of your statements is inherently simple opinion, unsupportable by observation.

So it's my opinion that animals experience panic, anxiety or fear? Rightie-o then.



As has been noted several times, the emotional cries about feelings and emotion apply EQUALLY to animals in a slaughteryard. If you oppose one on moral grounds, you must oppose the other. The animal is coralled, prodded, restrained and killed amidst noise, confusion and the smell of death.

The difference is, slaughterhouses don't do it for fun. Read back to where I said that if there are no other viable means available, then so be it, fair enough. If other clubs did not have turkey shoots without the bound and box method, I would have nothing to say. If there are better ways for slaughterhouses to operate, I am all for them as well!


So I presume you won't be eating any more McDonald's or Jimmy Dean, right?

Right?

:rolleyes:

Anyway, I'm done, gonna find something productive to do.

Sindawe
November 30, 2005, 12:05 AM
I really don't see much point in letting this one stay open...but since I'm not in my jurisdiction, I'll defer to one of my colleagues for the call. Oh come on. This is almost as much fun as our semi-regular bickering over the War on Some Drugs. ;)

So who's got the popcorn?The difference is, slaughterhouses don't do it for fun.No, they do it for <<shudder>> profit. :D

Just to be clear (not that anybody cares at this point...) 1911Tuner summed up the issue quite well IMAO. Those of us who consume the flesh of another animal and/or hunt those animals would do well to respect the life we are taking so that our may continue. We all depend on each other survival and success. To regard the lives we take for our own sustenance as insignificant and without value cheapens our own lives and value, and in my view reduces the thing that sets US apart from the rest of the living world to naught.Anyway, I'm done, gonna find something productive to do. Same here, 'cept I'm gonna kill me some Nazi [CENSORED] (http://www.brothersinarmsgame.com/us/index.php)

madmike
November 30, 2005, 12:35 AM
Quote:
I was simply pointing out the ongoing hypocrisy. A person who consumes a beer during a shoot is a "bubba," but a person who drives after doing so is socially acceptable.

I never said that. <-- read that again[/quote]


The term "bubba" has more to do with being backwards than it does intelligence. How do you know what life experience I have on the subject?

Originally Posted by NineseveN
I've been to these events to see what all the commotion was about. It's nothing but an excuse for bubba and his buddies to drink beer and BS,



Cars? Yes I do. No doubt about it.

Have I driven home after consuming some booze? Yes I have.

Okay, so you're admitting to being a bubba?

You argue like a PETA activist. Insult, make bad comparisons, weasel out of statements be debating the meaning of the word "is." You allege that the ONLY purpose is for people to get drunk FIRST and THEN shoot, and ONLY for pleasure.

It's like a Puritan arguing against dancing because someone might enjoy it, or a LLL arguing that we should be in Zimbabwe instead of Iraq because then there'd be no profit and somehow the fight would be purer.

So it's my opinion that animals experience panic, anxiety or fear? Rightie-o then.

Another attempt to weasel. Sure they do. And they do so in the slaughter yard AT LEAST as much, and on the chopping block ABOUT as much. So accepting that statement makes no difference to the argument, which was that putting the animals in that state is wrong. You didn't answer me before, probably because you can't. Are you going to give up slaughteryard killed animals? It's not extreme and I won't mock you--Ted Nugent holds that position. The question is, will you live by your own standards, or are they only for certain people doing certain things?

No, it's your opinion that that's ACCEPTABLE for the slaughterhouse but not for a turkey shoot. That it's cruel and inhumane as opposed to a slaughter yard. That's it's more cruel than an axe. You've even frighteningly accurately paraphrased PETA's quotes on the subject of hunting.

There are legitimate arguments to be made against turkey shoots. I've heard several. Yours aren't.


Quote:
As has been noted several times, the emotional cries about feelings and emotion apply EQUALLY to animals in a slaughteryard. If you oppose one on moral grounds, you must oppose the other. The animal is coralled, prodded, restrained and killed amidst noise, confusion and the smell of death.

The difference is, slaughterhouses don't do it for fun.

Ah, so ENJOYMENT is the problem. So if I'm all emo and angsty it would make a difference? You're really failing to make a coherent argument here.

Read back to where I said that if there are no other viable means available, then so be it, fair enough. If other clubs did not have turkey shoots without the bound and box method, I would have nothing to say. If there are better ways for slaughterhouses to operate, I am all for them as well!

ah, so OTHER ways of scaring animals and killing them are okay. If I just chain his ankle to a post you're fine with it? What about a really large cage so he can run around? How about a band on his ankle and a jolt of juice through his brain, with a thousand others watching and knowing they're next (assuming turkeys are cognitive enough to parse that)?

And in the meantime, the slaughterhouse doesn't bother you. Wow.


Quote:
So I presume you won't be eating any more McDonald's or Jimmy Dean, right?

Right?

You still haven't answered this question.


Anyway, I'm done, gonna find something productive to do.

Boy, how many times have I heard that?

Nope. You fail. Argument has no merit, fails to differentiate between the acceptable and unacceptable behavior to an outside observer, respondent participates in behavior he defines as wrong for others, fails to answer basic questions to define his own position.

If I were scoring a junior high debate I'd call you the loser.

This is not meant as an insult. It's an observation. About three posts in, I decided this pasttime was bad and I wanted no part of it.

Every post of yours convinces me more that it's valid and I'd like to give it a try. You're doing a FANTASTIC job of presenting a logical position and defending it. I'm DEFINITELY going to try something like this next year. I'm willing to be persuaded not to. You're welcome to try a new approach.

Justin
November 30, 2005, 01:31 AM
Much like the turkey that has caused so much debate, this one's done.

If you enjoyed reading about "Hey PETA! Eat this!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!