are there any people out there that are animal lovers AND gun lovers?


PDA






againstthagrane
September 17, 2008, 01:39 AM
i like to hunt, but i only shoot animals that i can eat. i hear a lot of people on this board talking about hunting coyotes and bears and other "non-edible" game. i'm not judging, but personally i couldn't do it.

does anyone on this board share my point of view or am i in the minority?

If you enjoyed reading about "are there any people out there that are animal lovers AND gun lovers?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Chuck Spears
September 17, 2008, 01:47 AM
I eat bears.

mewachee
September 17, 2008, 01:56 AM
I eat mostly what I shoot, and leave what I don't eat for the crows and magpies. In all honesty, I would rather save the deer and elk for myself, and kill the dogs. I am the dominant predator(in my own mind).

Most properly cared for meat is good to eat, including bear.

TAB
September 17, 2008, 01:58 AM
it depends...If they are cuasing a prob, then yes I could and have.( Killing live stock) This also applys to things like rats/ mice.

jojosdad
September 17, 2008, 02:22 AM
I love animals - they're delicious.

Hoplophile
September 17, 2008, 02:25 AM
I love guns and I love animals. I don't shoot animals, though I'd like to go hunting (I consider it kinder than eating something that was cruelly caged its entire unnatural life).

I'd say most hunters like animals.

Nolo
September 17, 2008, 02:27 AM
Animals are wonderful.
Much simpler than humans, much more...
Damn, I love nature. I get a real clear head when I just go out into the woods in Southern Maryland... Pretty land.
Animals are great. I really do love them.
And no, I am not averse to hunting, though I haven't killed anything larger than a skink before (and that was by accident).
I think the American Indians had it right when they killed an animal.
Thank it. It's part of the natural order that it should die and you live, but thank it. As you would a soldier or hero.
Thank them for giving up their life that you might live.
Call me a hippie, but at least I am a hippie with a gun.

HK G3
September 17, 2008, 02:33 AM
I love animals, hunt as well.

Can't stand to see those commercials with the abused animals though, makes me sick to my stomach. Part of the reason I hunt is it's far more humane than factory farming... Healthier too.

Treo
September 17, 2008, 02:35 AM
I am a dog lover so to me killing a coyote for sport, well it's just not something I'm going to do.

As for Bears, I run into a lot of them in the woods around town and I think it's just so cool to watch them I couldn't imagine killing one for food or the skin.

Bottom line I would hunt for survival or kill a nusiance animal but not for sport even if I used every scrap of the animal.

ljnowell
September 17, 2008, 03:01 AM
Its kinda like this for me. I used to hunt all the time. Every season. When I was around 18 I realised that I would just as well like to sit in the deer stand and take pictures of the deer as kill them. I love to eat deer. Do it every year. I am one of the fastest butchers around here too. My dad uncles and cousins like to have me cut up thier deer every year. I dont have moral issues with it, I just choose not to. :D That being said, its something that has to be done. I like in Illinois and the deer population has to be controlled by hunting or else we will be over run. I used to love rabbit hunting but anymore its too much walking when its too damn cold out. I still squirrel hunt with a buddy of mine. His family eats them, so Idont mind shooting them and letting him have them, I personally wont eat one of those tree rats, although I do miss eating rabbit.

As far as loving animals:

My little girl
http://i334.photobucket.com/albums/m417/ljnowell/pictures72008196.jpg

And our newest edition
http://i334.photobucket.com/albums/m417/ljnowell/pictures72008036.jpg

Pantaz
September 17, 2008, 03:13 AM
I've always thought I would only hunt in a survival situation. However, without the knowledge/experience of killing and cleaning an animal, I can't really know if I would be successful.

Number 6
September 17, 2008, 03:24 AM
I am certainly a gun lover and an animal lover. I have no great desire to go out hunting, but I have nothing against it. I think I could go hunting and enjoy it, but I find it hard to justify to myself.

Diggers
September 17, 2008, 03:29 AM
I'm like you OP. Seems like a lot of us here are. (This topic is a good example of the "Gun owners can't be classified as hunters" issue)

I am all for hunting for food and appreciate the enjoyment that that kind of self sufficiency brings. Though, I really don't get the hunting of non food animals. I don't need or want to kill something solely to kill it.

Elza
September 17, 2008, 03:36 AM
I am one of the great animal lovers of all time. If you ever see me shoot an animal you will know that my family is hungry.

The reason I won’t hunt is my morbid fear of wounding one. If I knew that it would drop dead in its tracks without suffering I wouldn’t mind. I do, in fact, like a variety of wild game. I wouldn’t have a problem killing an animal I just don’t want it to suffer in the process.

Cosmoline
September 17, 2008, 03:37 AM
I love nature and I've had both cats and dogs as pets. LOTS of dogs. I won't hesitate to shoot an animal I intend to eat, or shoot one that's attacking my own animal. A grouse literally looks to me like a hamburger with wings. I salivate when I see one and have to stop myself from shooting them by the side of the road.

I do try to appreciate them, though. I've even been trying to appreciate spiders and harvestmen lately. That hasn't been easy. Some insects just seem to have come from the black pit of damnation. Some fish, too.

chieftain
September 17, 2008, 03:49 AM
Every Veterinarian I know is a hunter.

I don't know any hunters that don't like animals. In fact the hunters are the folks that have always saved habitat and animals world wide, oh and of course pay for it.

I don't know many "animal lovers" that don't hunt that put their money where their mouth is. At least not on any regular basis.

Make what you will of that.

Go figure.

Fred

Ala Dan
September 17, 2008, 03:56 AM
I don't hunt, drink, do drugs, or chase wild women~! What a boring life :rolleyes:~! :D

But, I do LUV animals- as I have three dogs, and a 25 lb. Siamese cat~! :uhoh:

And, I do LOVE quality firearms~~!!!!

againstthagrane
September 17, 2008, 04:14 AM
i eat bears

do they taste like chicken? :P

Elza
September 17, 2008, 04:20 AM
chieftain: I don't know many "animal lovers" that don't hunt that put their money where their mouth is. At least not on any regular basis.????????

dmftoy1
September 17, 2008, 05:37 AM
2 dogs and a cat here, one deer (very little left) in the freezer. I love animals and treat my dogs like they were my kids. I'd be one nasty bastard to deal with if you hurt my dogs.

I love to hunt as well . . . I'm of the belief that if you can't put a bullet where it should go then you don't have the right to be out hunting. Do people wound deer . ..yes, it's an unfortunate fact, some of it caused by lack of practice and some of it is just life. I'm as sad when I see a deer killed by a bad shot as I am when I see a deer dead along side the road.

When I shoot a deer I'm actually sad for a few seconds just before I start field dressing it, it's hard to explain but I have the same feeling when stuff a pheasant into a game bag. The sadness is brief and has never stopped me from feeling like a little kid at christmas just at the thought of going hunting.

+1 on not understanding the killing of animals for "sport". If it's not causing me problems and I'm not going to eat it then it's live and let live.

I think the anti-hunting yahoo's are people who don't understand what happens if you let a population grow past what habitiat there is to support it. They're the same type of people who believe that no one should ever defend themselves and that the police will be there instantly if they need them.

Just my .02

Regards,
Dave

qwert65
September 17, 2008, 07:14 AM
I'm a veterinary student and I hunt(pheaseant and deer), I'm not really into hunting predators(though I've shot a couple foxes eating my mothers chickens)

Ben Shepherd
September 17, 2008, 07:45 AM
I hunt a few species: Deer, elk, rabbit, and coyote to name a few.

I also have a dog and a cat. In the past I have had rabbits and parakeets as pets also.

foghornl
September 17, 2008, 07:56 AM
I don't hunt very much any more, but I certainly did in years long past.

Love dogs, too. Cats? not so much

I have passed on shots many times because I wasn't sure I could make a clean humane kill. I once ran across the remains of a deer that had ben "gut shot" MANY times...looked like the deer had taken hits from several buckshot rounds, NONE in a "vitals" area....mostly in the intestinal and back leg area. Still makes my blood boil when I think about it. Peritonitis is a long painful rotten way to go.

Bubbles
September 17, 2008, 07:57 AM
I hunt deer because I like venison.

Predators end up DRT if I catch them messing with my livestock, otherwise they're left alone.

bhk
September 17, 2008, 08:06 AM
While there are exceptions, I think hunters are generally much more appreciative of wildlife (and animals in general) than nonhunters. They certainly have a better understanding of wild animals, their habits, and the natural lands they require. Hunters have been the ones that formed the basis of the modern conservation movement, and the ones that have forked over gobs of money to help that happen. Teddy Roosevelt began this campaign, and he certainly was an animal and pet lover. Eleven percent of the purchase price for all retail guns and ammo go directly to conservation purposes (federal Robertson-Pittmann Act).

All the hunters I know have multiple pets and love them dearly. I work with lots of wildlife/conservation professionals, and they also are all pet owners. They are not, however, members of PETA!

Oh, and by the way, I am the hunter of many things and have been for decades.

EShell
September 17, 2008, 08:20 AM
Every Veterinarian I know is a hunter.

I don't know any hunters that don't like animals. In fact the hunters are the folks that have always saved habitat and animals world wide, oh and of course pay for it.

I don't know many "animal lovers" that don't hunt that put their money where their mouth is. At least not on any regular basis.

Make what you will of that.

Go figure.

Fred
I think Fred is close to summing it up.

I've always loved animals of all sorts and have always been something of an amateur naturalist. Growing up on a farm, I've had all kinds of pets, wild and domestic, terrariums and aquariums and animal husbandry projects. Life without a couple dogs around would be odd to me, and we always keep a few laying hens that are as much pets as they are anything else. Animal behavior and the way nature works are some of the most interesting and fascinating things there are to me.

I've worked for local wildlife rescue services and given quite a bit to helping preserve wildlife, including buying and using a hunting license every year. I also work to improve habitat and support wildlife on my own property. In the winter, we feed wild birds that would normally live on the weed seeds found in the fallow fields and brushy tracts of "wasteland" that disappear with housing developments daily. I'll stop the car to move a confused snake or turtle off the road, and yet I hunt. Oddly enough, some folks can't make sense of this seemingly contradictory behavior - to deeply care about wildlife and still be capable of killing.

As with farming and any other sort of animal husbandry, wildlife management has numerous facets. One ultimately recognizes that death is always a part of life. Livestock is bred to be harvested, and butchering steers, rabbits and chickens, however distasteful, is a necessary part of farm life. So is picking vegetables and cutting hay. Wildlife populations often need control, and hunting is one very humane way to accomplish this.

To my way of looking at hunting, the overall experience is the reward, and harvesting a game animal is really not the most important point, simply a necessary part of it. Without my love and appreciation of nature, I would not have the patience to walk the woods or sit and wait, and much of the enjoyment of hunting comes with the intensity of observation of the natural world that is only possible when one becomes a part of it.

Like Fred, I too believe that most '"animal lovers" that oppose hunting and farming simply do not put forth the efforts that most hunter/conservationists do. They usually fail to understand the world around them, living in some kind of idealistic Walt Disney illusion, and fail to understand what life, and death, really is.

Without truly understanding the effects of their actions, they throw a token check in the mail to support misguided organizations, so they can congratulate themselves on doing "something". This check is a fraction of what portion of my license fees go toward scientific management, a fraction of the revenue generated by the Pittman-Robertson fund (11% tax of our equipment and supplies) does for habitat, and they proclaim themselves "supporters" that "protect" wildlife from those who would hunt and/or scientifically manage wildlife.

The outfits they encourage with their individually small, but collectively large, donations spend the money on generous (staggering) corporate salaries (http://www.worldtwitch.com/animal_charities_2001.htm ), flattering publicity, membership drives, impeding logical management efforts and fostering harassment programs on all levels. They would prefer overpopulations of animals to starve and die of disease in a weakened state than to allow humane harvest and sensible control of the prey animal populations that, in the absence of predators, will not remain in check. They increase animal suffering, live in a cartoon fantasy world and call themselves "animal lovers".

So, yes, I hunt AND love nature/animals.

Ske1etor
September 17, 2008, 08:24 AM
Just because I am a firearm enthusiast and a hunter doesn't mean I hate animals. I fish but I don't have a general hatred for the fish I catch.

Hunters do more for wildlife conservation each and every year than every "Wildlife Conservation" group combined and we do it will putting meat on the table.

Think about it, if a hunter expects his/her children or grandchildren to be able to hunt, we have to keep the populations going. Over population is one of the biggest killers in the animal kingdom where urbanization has happened.

The reason for this is that when people move into a wooded area and start building they have a tendency to kill off the "predator" or scary animals but leave the "prey" alone. Over population happens and diseases run wild in those species. Hunting those "prey" species keeps the herd in check and the hunters are essentially providing "natural selection".

I wouldn't consider myself an animal lover, as I relate the term animal lover to the people crying about chickens being killed for food or deer being killed for trophy. I see nothing wrong with either. Torturing animals is morally wrong and should be viewed as legally wrong but killing an animal quickly and humanely is not torture.

To further clarify on the "Killing a deer for the trophy." Some people seem to be very confused on this topic. When a legal hunter steps into the woods looking for that "Trophy" buck, he is looking to fell a big deer. Now, some people just go ahead and assume that this means that the hunter is going to shoot the big deer, find it, cut its head off and leave the carcass to waste. This is absolutely not the case. A legal and moral hunter may kill for the size of the rack but the meat will be used regardless. Even if the hunter already has plenty deer meat in his freezer the meat will be used. Giving the meat to a friend is one thing that happens alot. I hunt, although most of the time unsuccessfully and I have friends that give me fresh deer meat almost every season. Normally these are folks that have already killed a few deer and the meat would simply go to waste in their freezer.

There is a lot that P.e.t.a. supporters could learn if they would open their eyes a bit, slow down their mouth's and listen to an ethical hunter for a second.

jpruitt
September 17, 2008, 08:26 AM
I love guns and I love animals. I don't shoot animals, though I'd like to go hunting (I consider it kinder than eating something that was cruelly caged its entire unnatural life).

I'd say most hunters like animals.



I love animals, hunt as well.

Can't stand to see those commercials with the abused animals though, makes me sick to my stomach. Part of the reason I hunt is it's far more humane than factory farming... Healthier too.

These posts represent my views as well. I am both an animal lover and gun lover. I won't kill anything I don't have to.

That said, I've always felt I should learn how to hunt and prepare an animal to be eaten in case I am ever in a survival-type situation. I come from a family of gun owners, but not hunters, so I don't even know where I would go to learn.

Seancass
September 17, 2008, 08:28 AM
I enjoy guns and wildlife. I do not hunt. Most of my friends do. Since i shoot with them all the time, they wonder why i don't hunt and don't come when invited(very rare). In theory i have no problem with it at all, including problem animals like coyotes, and prarie dogs. In practice, i like having never killed anything and being able to say my "dangerous" guns have never even hurt anything. One might even accuse me of being an environmentalist, but that would clash with my love of tractor pulls and drag racing.

I'm also a meatatarian, so maybe this all make me a hypocrite. Oh well, i'll probably continue eating meat, shooting, and not hunting for a long time to come.

76shuvlinoff
September 17, 2008, 08:32 AM
I enjoy nature but have not hunted in almost 30 years yet I am indeed a gun enthusiast... just with a limited collection on a limited budget!

What I shoot these days are paper targets for practice and critters that pose a threat to the horses or pets. In this area that would be woodchucks or any critter that digs bigazz holes on my property or feral dogs especially if in a pack. I have not hesitated to shoot in that situation and it does not come close to keeping me awake at night.

As far as being an "animal lover," in general I'd have to say yes but not in an extremist way. I have absolutely nothing against anyone that hunts and eats what they harvest, in fact I respect them, it's just not for me at this time of my life.

possom813
September 17, 2008, 08:37 AM
I'm not an animal lover by any means, but I do have a certain respect. I'm not going to go out and kill everything I can just because. Dogs seem to love me for some reason. I'm not sure why, maybe I have a smell they like.

I hunt deer for food

I hunt hogs for food

I dove hunt for food

I rabbit hunt for food

I trap hogs for the extra money

I hunt coyotes for the privilege to hunt for other animals on the landowners property.

I've probably shot just about every species of animal native to Texas at one point in time or another. Whenever I've had to shoot a non-game animal, it has been for a justifiable reason.

tigre
September 17, 2008, 08:52 AM
I'm a biologist and I like guns. I don't hunt and don't know if I ever would, but I respect hunting for food as it's more humane than paying a factory farm to kill animals for you, and it's probably more ecologically sound than even small-scale farming. And it's a useful wildlife management tool, since we've already messed up the population dynamics of predators and prey in this country and have to keep things in check ourselves as a result. I do know people who are adamantly anti-hunting who give quite a lot of time and money to groups like the Nature Conservancy and wildlife rescue/rehabilitation groups, and do other things for conservation, but they're probably in the minority.

meef
September 17, 2008, 09:20 AM
Heck, I love guns and I love animals.

However, I don't eat guns and I don't shoot animals.


Just my personal preference. YMMV.

:)

inker
September 17, 2008, 09:24 AM
I think the poem by Otto von Riesenthal (on the bottle of every Jägermeister) sums it up:

It is the hunter’s honour that he
Protects and preserves his game,
Hunts sportsmanlike, honours the
Creator in His creatures.

CajunBass
September 17, 2008, 10:00 AM
I'm not an "animal lover." I can't stand dog or cats in the house. I tolerate them because my wife likes them. It wouldn't bother me one bit if we never had another one. Dogs have their place outside, but I wouldn't have one myself if I had to feed it and take care of it. I really don't care about cats one way or the other. I wouldn't shoot one just to shoot one, but if a truly feral one took to hanging around the place..

I like to hunt and fish. I especially like to squirrel hunt. One of the nice things about squirrel hunting (actually any hunting, but I'll use squirrels as an example) is not having to kill anything to enjoy it. For example the season is open now and I've been a few times. I have yet to pull a trigger. I've had a number of them behind the crosshairs and thought to myself "BANG...gotcha" but I didn't feel like skinning them and cleaning them that day. I haven't deer hunted in years, but would if I wanted to. Same goes for most any other animal that was legal to take.

I don't have to kill an animal to hunt it. I have to have the opportunity to kill it to have hunted. So just going out in the woods and watching the birds and the bunnies don't cut it. That's watching birds and bunnies, not hunting. Rather or not I choose to pull the trigger is my decision, and I really cannot tell you how I come to that decision. Sometimes the gun goes "bang" and sometimes it doesn't. Simple as that.

Loosedhorse
September 17, 2008, 10:05 AM
If you're a deer, you'd rather--
starve and freeze to death one harsh winter?
get hit by a car?
get a little older and slower so the coyotes finally get you?
over-populate an area, eat gardens, and breed Lyme disease ticks (before suffering one of the demises above), as the pro-Bambi government sadly pronounces that nothing can be done?
or, just after a good rut, never even hear the shot that takes you out?

Add to that how much of taxes on rifles, ammo, license fees, etc. gets fed back (or is supposed to get fed back) to preserving animal habitat.

Look at Africa--those areas that have trophy game hunting: there is an economic incentive to protect the animals from poaching in order to preserve the business of high trophy fees, so populations are preserved. Where hunting is forbidden, the animals have value to only poachers whose chief obstacle is the under-paid gov't employee who's supposed to discourage the (better armed) poacher. Successful "photograph safari" areas are the exception rather than the rule--unless they're large enough to sustain their own predator populations, then culling of animals is necessary (but hunting would be bad).

We've seen many examples of areas in Africa where the government was responsible for preventing poaching--and then the gov't went on the fritz for a couple of years. Animal populations were devastated.

If you've trophy hunted in Africa, you know that while you may bring home only a portion of the animal, the whole animal gets used locally--and is an important part of the local economy.

And no one understands better than hunters the need to maintain habitats and ecologies.

There's lots of ways to love animals and to help the environment. Hunting is one of them.

(And feeling a little sad for a moment after you recover a beautiful animal? I hope you never lose that, and I expect you never will.)

Dravur
September 17, 2008, 10:07 AM
I hunted large game in Montana for a looong time. I also hunted prairie poodles and gophers. We ate the large game and the poodles et al. were left for the eagles, owls and coyotes.

I was raised on a ranch and pretty much ate venison, elk and moose my whole life. I also dont have any compunction about whacking a prairie rat.

You haven't lived until you are knee deep in a swamp, gutting a moose.

Also, if anyone knows a great place to hunt prairie rats in CO, let me know.

eflatminor
September 17, 2008, 10:10 AM
Including you and me. Do you think the buzzards have some moral quandry over the dead prairie dog feast they're left? Or the magots? Preditors kill and that's what you are.

hso
September 17, 2008, 10:14 AM
It is naive to think that on a board this size you won't find folks that shoot but don't hunt and folks that shoot and do hunt and even hunters that will or won't hunt certain species. It's like assuming farmers who raise animals for slaughter to feed the suburban masses somehow don't have pets that they treat like family or that hunters don't lavish affection on their hunting dogs.

My wife hunts, but I don't. I don't see any problem with it, I just haven't had the desire.

Do we have pets that we treat like members of the family? Sure we do.

If you really want to know, start a well constructed poll.

BruceRDucer
September 17, 2008, 10:32 AM
are there any people out there that are animal lovers AND gun lovers?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i like to hunt, but i only shoot animals that i can eat. i hear a lot of people on this board talking about hunting coyotes and bears and other "non-edible" game. i'm not judging, but personally i couldn't do it.

does anyone on this board share my point of view or am i in the minority?---AgainstTheGrane

(1) It doesn't make sense, to say that one LOVES, either guns or animals, in the general sense, because you do not qualify what LOVES means.

If to LOVE is not to eat, then you could claim that you LOVE people simply because you don't eat them. In fact, you could hate many people, but not eat them. That hardly serves to mean that you LOVE people.

(2) You cannot argue that you LOVE animals, only because you eat certain animals and not other animals, or only kill certain animals to eat, and won't kill or eat others. I don't rob banks or trains, but it doesn't serve as proof that I love either

(3) Your term "NON-EDIBLE" is not precise. One can eat predators. Their flesh is muscle, regardless of the taste, they are EDIBLE

(4) Your question as to whether your views are in the minority or majority might only serve to indicate the commonality of views or lack thereof. It doesn't serve as a rational justification for any view. So in that sense, even if you are in the minority view, it doesn't mean that you are either Right or Wrong.

______________________________________________

In the end, your proposition becomes a general question as to the morality of killing animals that one does not intend to eat. It is a very broad and complex issue, and personal sentiments rather than reason usually predominate.

The deeper issue beyond your question, is the proposition, not whether it is MORAL; but whether it is LEGAL. It is LEGAL.

/:)

Crow1108
September 17, 2008, 10:50 AM
But, I do LUV animals- as I have three dogs, and a 25 lb. Siamese cat~!

Ala Dan, is this him?

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a85/AmnJoker333/1181098462982.jpg

:D

But on a more serious note: I love animals. I grew up around cats (parents never owned any dogs). I can respect hunters, I just haven't ever been hunting. I'd like to go sometime, but my work schedule hasn't permitted it (joined the USAF at 18, was assigned to Japan as my first base (no guns), and just got back from there last year. I mostly use my firearms for my monthly range trips, and if need be, defending myself and my wife.

LawofThirds
September 17, 2008, 11:14 AM
I enjoy animals and guns. I'm also a vegetarian. I don't hunt because I wouldn't put the animal to use. I don't have any problem with hunting, I just don't see the point if I'm not going to eat it after I shoot it.

ZeSpectre
September 17, 2008, 11:16 AM
So far there is only one animal that I flat out HATE. Possum.
Don't really know why, never had one attack me or anything, I just HATE the damned things!

csmkersh
September 17, 2008, 11:19 AM
I'm a gun owner, hunter and animal lover - fried, baked, what ever.

I enjoy watching does box, birds flit about and coyotes and bears. I'll shoot dogs and cats roaming the ranch long before I'll shoot a coyote.

theotherwaldo
September 17, 2008, 11:24 AM
I like to shoot. I don't like to kill. I only kill when my family needs to eat, when an animal is seriously injured and unlikely to survive, or when an animal is a danger to those around me.

When I must shoot, it is my duty to shoot accurately and kill cleanly.

That is the other reason that I must practice.

RP88
September 17, 2008, 11:26 AM
I don't like hunting, but I love animals and guns.

I really can't kill most animals (I say 'most' because I have no problem hitting a 30-lb catfish on the head with a hammer before I clean it:uhoh:)

Old Grump
September 17, 2008, 11:40 AM
Fish to frogs, squirrel to bear, they are all meat for the pot. Like most dogs, horses, mules and cows better than I like their owners. Nothing against cats, I'm just allergic to them and they bother my birds. I have 8 bird feeders on my porch, I built my wrap around porch specifically to handle the bird feeders and don't even think about taking my guns from me. Some of my best moments while deer hunting were when I had a Chipmunk with his paws on the toe of my boot looking up at the chickadee perched on my hat brim. Thats when you feel like you are really part of nature.

Claude Clay
September 17, 2008, 11:46 AM
i do my hunting at stop and shop. stalking the slippery tofu in the cold ; cornering the red baron in the frozen arena. ice fishing behind glass. i can tell by the spilt honey that there was bear activity in aisle 4 recently. dress is important--good high boots will help deflect the wild carts from nipping your heels. vigilance must remain high even after the hunt is over for as you return to your transportation there are many other hunters coming and going--some not knowing if they are the hunter or the hunted.

and yes, i love animals and children.....properly prepared their delicious

hardwarehacker
September 17, 2008, 11:57 AM
My guns are mechanical toys. Gadgets I love to tinker with, ingenious designs and excellent craftsmanship. I don't hunt, but have no problem with competent and ethical hunters. Since people have killed off so many predators, somebody needs to take over their job and keep the herbivores in balance.

I do have an ethical problem with people who kill things which aren't threatening them and which they will not eat. Living things of ALL sorts have lives of their own and were put here by the same power which created people. Each one has a place in our world and should be respected. If you want to play predator, be a real predator and kill for food or in self defense. Otherwise, you are simply exterminating other creatures to feed your own warped ego.

I grew up in Los Angeles and knew too many 'mighty hunters' who went out every year to do the male bonding trip. Got blind drunk for a few days, shot at sounds in the bushes, crippled a deer when they got lucky, and maybe brought back a trophy or a few pounds of meat. These guys were so disgusting I still have no personal interest in hunting.

Sean Dempsey
September 17, 2008, 11:59 AM
Every hunter I've known is an animal lover. Dogs, cats, horses, and all various pets. Some of the biggest hunters/fishers I know absolutely love animals and don't just kill them, but also appreciate them for their beauty and purpose alive.

I think what you mean to ask is if there are Gun Lovers and Non-Hunters.

j_charles
September 17, 2008, 12:04 PM
it's far more humane than factory farming... Healthier too.

For some reason that thought never occurred to me... that's a great point, and probably the best "justification" (if you will... though I know you don't need to "justify" it, it's a free country and all) for hunting I've heard.

BTW I have never hunted, but I might think seriously about doind so if I ever got the invitation to. I am also a major animal lover, and nature lover. There is (almost) nothing I like more in this life than to spend a day in the woods. I even get a kick out of watching the squirrells scampering up a tree when I'm walking my dog in the neighborhood.

ctdonath
September 17, 2008, 12:13 PM
Unfortunately, "animal lover" is a loaded term, and we all know what that term entails - the absurdity of which is nicely & sarcastically addressed by Tom Lehrer:
It takes a certain amount of courage to get up in a coffee-house or a college auditorium and come out in favor of the things that everybody else in the audience is against like peace and justice and brotherhood and so on.
Yes I love animals. My two dogs are family. I want fish & birds as pets. I enjoy seeing rabbits & deer & birds & squirrels in my yard. I cringe at the thought of what wildlife was displaced/destroyed for our social luxuries of roads, homes, etc. I even evaluate whether bugs in the house should be left alone.

I just have no delusions about where my steak comes from, and look forward to eating it.

gregormeister
September 17, 2008, 12:16 PM
You can eat bear, though I find it greasy. You can eat coyote, but no thanks. So I don't hunt them. Squirrel is a funky tasting meat and not to mention I have a pet squirrel therefore he'd never bark to me anymore if he knew my former wretched squirrel hunting past.

I have dogs and cats too, but the bottom line is if its tasty and I have a permit to hunt it then I'll eat it...

TexasRifleman
September 17, 2008, 12:17 PM
I find it interesting that some people find the terms "hunter" and "animal lover" mutually exclusive.

Lack of education I suspect.

I'd argue that more hunters are animal lovers than not.

If you don't care about wildlife, how it finds food, how populations are maintained etc, there will be nothing left to hunt.

If you are 100% against hunting there is no real change, the wildlife that would die due to hunters would simply die due to starvation nearly all the time anyway.

OregonJohnny
September 17, 2008, 12:22 PM
I love animals. I've always had pets and have taken in small abandoned wildlife. I also love guns, have owned them since age 9 or 10, it's now become a disease. I've never been that much into hunting, except bird hunting.

I once heard a stand-up comic say, "Hunting...the only sport where one of the teams doesn't even know they're playing."

I have never killed anything larger than a pheasant. But by God, I love pheasant hunting. I have been deer hunting 3 or 4 times and have only seen elk. I have been elk hunting 2 or 3 times and have only seen deer.

Once, when elk hunting, I walked into a clearing and saw a nice big 4x4 buck staring at me from about 25 yards away. We just stood there staring at each other. I couldn't resist shouldering my rifle and taking a peek through the scope at him. I think he knew it was elk season and not deer season. Anyway, I decided it would be hard for me to pull the trigger on him if it had been deer season. I haven't been big game hunting since, because I'm not sure I could pull the trigger, since I really don't have the need or desire for the meat.

Having said that, I did draw deer tags this year with a big group and am headed out into the wilderness in a few weeks. I plan on taking my Winchester 30-30 and not my scoped 30-06 so I'll have an excuse why I couldn't shoot at that beautiful buck 250 yards away...

Caliban
September 17, 2008, 12:26 PM
i give money to both the nra and the aspca. nothing contradictory here.

mewachee
September 17, 2008, 12:29 PM
There are more deer and coyotes in North America than there were before Europeans settled it. Your insurance rates are affected more by deer hits than any other factor. Predators are the only real conservationist, even if they are human.

I was not raised a hunter and I loved animals. However, my understanding and respect of animals are much greater because of my real connection with them. Last week I slept on the top of a mountain with a herd of elk bugling and mewing. To me that is a true human experience. I also shot a mule deer at 30 yards, while it was none aware; an experience a wolf or coyote has. Tonight I hope to kill a whitetail doe, and hopefully I get a bear this season.

To suggest that to love these animals is not to experience life and death with them is foreign to me. A hunter has a much greater stake in health of his herds and it's management.

jhco
September 17, 2008, 12:32 PM
bear is delicious
and i like animals and love guns

bruss01
September 17, 2008, 12:32 PM
Like the OP, I have a deep respect for living things, but still consider myself part of the food chain. Our modern world enables me to eat without killing, yet I am aware that every time I eat (meat or fish) something died and somebody did that killing for me. I have killed and eaten things which I have caught in the wild, and also things which were raised in captivity expressly for eating. So I don't have any issues with killing and eating.

I can see someone taking a practical attitude about predators and pests, especially when they live in an area where these can be a problem and one is basicly on one's own in dealing with them. As a general rule, it's probably a bad idea to eat predators and scavengers because of health reasons. And of course self-defense killing just speaks for itself.

Having said that, I do hate the idea of killing something just to be killing, for entertainment as it were. I don't get any joy out of seeing something drop over dead, even if it's something like a rat. Frankly, I don't understand people who do. Satisfaction from a legitimate concrete objective accomplished? That's another thing altogether. If I'm going to eat it or put the meat (and other parts) to good use, that's legitimate in my mind. Coyote or feral dog going after the sheep/chickens/whatever? Again, legitimate in defense of property. Bear coming at me from the bush? Hey, him or me, simple math. But just wanton destruction, killing for the joy of killing? Must be made of different stuff than I am, cuz I just don't get that at all. I haven't understood the purpose of a prarie dog shoot, for instance. Maybe they are some kind of plague on the earth that I'm not aware of... if so, please educate me. I'm not talking about burrowing rodents in your back yard, undermining the foundations of your house, I'm talking about a PRARIE, with little burrowing fellas living there the way their ancestors have for millenia. Just not getting it.

everallm
September 17, 2008, 12:33 PM
I shoot and I love my pets.

If I would hunt, it would be for that I could eat.

The only time I was told I couldn't eat what I killed was by one of my RSM's when I was in the Army.....:evil:

Caliban
September 17, 2008, 12:33 PM
hopefully people who say "if i had to" understand that thinning herds to avoid things like car collisions qualifies as "having to". i usually say that i wouldn't kill anything i wasn't going to eat, but clearly i will also kill something that is trying to kill me, and i certainly would sooner shoot a deer than risk crashing into it on the highway (already had plenty of near misses).

highlander 5
September 17, 2008, 12:37 PM
I don't hunt or fish but I am an animal lover. Reading some of the stories on 1911Tuners website makes me want to shoot the previous owners of those poor dogs. If were in my ability I'd adopt them all. I got 3 Shetland sheepdogs all gotten from rescues and a cat that we adopted as well.

XDKingslayer
September 17, 2008, 01:24 PM
I love animals. Right beside the mashed potatos.

BruceRDucer
September 17, 2008, 01:33 PM
/

I love animals. Right beside the mashed potatos.----XDKingSlayer

:what::what::what: You eat VEGETABLES?

That sir, is an outrage! Oh the humanity!

:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::what:

Noxx
September 17, 2008, 02:02 PM
I am a dog lover so to me killing a coyote for sport, well it's just not something I'm going to do.

+1. I work with some folks who love to go coyote hunting, I try to stay out of it, after all, it's their business and not mine. Shooting an animal and just leaving it where it drops seems like bad pool to me.

I do hunt tho. I'm first up in the morning for a day of quail or pheasant, and on the rare occasion I can manage to go out for deer with some old friends, I'm thrilled to go, and even more so to bring back a freezers worth of meat.

Same goes for fish, turn the bass loose, eat the trout. I don't kid myself about being a predatory omnivore, if it's something I eat, I feel like I should be able to kill it myself. If it's not, I'd as soon leave it be.

Rickstir
September 17, 2008, 02:03 PM
I shoot to defend my live stock. Coys, coons, possums, fox, etc. I also eat deer, turkey, dove, quail. We have six dogs, 3 cats and 22 chickens.

Hoppy590
September 17, 2008, 02:10 PM
i love animals. (except snakes)

iv grown up with dogs, cats, gerbils etc. iv only met 1 dog i was afraid of ( a pitbull that had a rough past) i love horses, goats, cows and all domestic animals. but i eat a very meat central diet.

i think coyotes foxes and wolves are very handsome animals. and i think deer bouncing through a field is one of those moments you learn to love nature. and at the same time i dont think a deer should starve to death. id rather it be hunted for meat, or just taken from the habitat so there is more food for other deer. i dont think coyotes belong near my neighbors kids and my dogs.

i dont hunt ( not getting up early and carrying back a deer that weighs more than me) but im not opposed to it as long as its in good sport, and the animal is taken humanely with as little suffering as possible

againstthagrane
September 17, 2008, 02:24 PM
(1) It doesn't make sense, to say that one LOVES, either guns or animals, in the general sense, because you do not qualify what LOVES means.

If to LOVE is not to eat, then you could claim that you LOVE people simply because you don't eat them. In fact, you could hate many people, but not eat them. That hardly serves to mean that you LOVE people.

(2) You cannot argue that you LOVE animals, only because you eat certain animals and not other animals, or only kill certain animals to eat, and won't kill or eat others. I don't rob banks or trains, but it doesn't serve as proof that I love either

(3) Your term "NON-EDIBLE" is not precise. One can eat predators. Their flesh is muscle, regardless of the taste, they are EDIBLE

(4) Your question as to whether your views are in the minority or majority might only serve to indicate the commonality of views or lack thereof. It doesn't serve as a rational justification for any view. So in that sense, even if you are in the minority view, it doesn't mean that you are either Right or Wrong.

there is one in every thread...you know EXACTLY what i meant when i asked the questions. yet, you have to dissect what i wrote in the hopes of making yourself feel more intelligent. next time i want to be graded on a post i'll put an APA cover sheet and heading on it. :/

i know i'm not right or wrong. i didn't say i was judging.

Artiz
September 17, 2008, 02:30 PM
I love animals and I love guns.
The only animal I can hate sometimes is the two-legged one.

XDKingslayer
September 17, 2008, 02:32 PM
You eat VEGETABLES?

That sir, is an outrage! Oh the humanity!

Mashed potatos are a condiment not a vegetable.

ilbob
September 17, 2008, 02:33 PM
i like to hunt, but i only shoot animals that i can eat. i hear a lot of people on this board talking about hunting coyotes and bears and other "non-edible" game. i'm not judging, but personally i couldn't do it.Lots of people eat bear. And there is nothing quite as nifty as a bear skin rug.

A guy I shoot with used to hunt coyote around here when pelts were worth nearly $100 each. he gave it up when the price dropped to the point they were not worth shooting.

I say shoot em if you have a use for them or their skin, or they become a nuisance.

Gator
September 17, 2008, 02:48 PM
It is the hunter’s honour that he
Protects and preserves his game,
Hunts sportsmanlike, honours the
Creator in His creatures.

I like that! I've never tried Jägermeister, so I hadn't seen it.

I'm a zookeeper, so its safe to say I like animals. I care for fish, snakes, frogs, insects, birds, small mammals, and gators. In the past I have hunted squirrels, deer, and pheasant and even took one trip to Africa for plains game (zebra is delicious! :)). I don't hunt anymore, but have no problem with those who do. And it annoys me to no end when I hear the people I work with (big bunch of libs) condemning hunting as immoral. Most hunters are the best protectors of wildlife we have; hunters do more to preserve game and wild spaces than all the shaggy haired, granola eating, car covered with bumper stickers, sandal wearing, Al Gore voters out there. :D

Tropical Buzz
September 17, 2008, 02:51 PM
I am a dedicated meat eater and I've always liked guns. I have hunted hogs, moose, deer and various fowl here and in other countries. I am generally an animal lover though and have a difficult time relating to killing any animal just for the heck of it. I'd much rather shoot most wild animals with my camera. I ocean fish and spearfish but I'd just as soon be out on a boat having fun or diving and snorkelling for the scenery.

armoredman
September 17, 2008, 03:11 PM
My wife and I have 4 cats and 4 dogs, all rescued animals, and she fosters rescue dogs.

Here is her favorite Boots kitty in a familiar looking box...


http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b13/armoredman/boots20ammo20case.jpg

And my puppy Snickers, doing some CZ ads.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b13/armoredman/PICT0199.jpg

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b13/armoredman/Snickersshotgun.jpg

BruceRDucer
September 17, 2008, 04:09 PM
there is one in every thread...you know EXACTLY what i meant when i asked the questions. -----AgainstThaGrane

It is a proverbialism that "There's-One-In-Every-Crowd".
The question relevent here is, which vaguely worded ONE are you or I referring to?

For example, the common claim that other persons know EXACTLY what you mean actually is a common assumption, and often as not, it is entirely erroneous. Do you realize how delusional it is to assume that other persons can read your mind?

Insofar as you are adopting an ideological position that is strikingly similar to Animal Rights Activism, you may be darned well correct that I know EXACTLY what you mean.

_____________________________________________





"...you have to dissect what i wrote in the hopes of making yourself feel more intelligent."----AgainstThaGrane

If you wish to engage in Animal Rights Activism, that's okay; but you will be engaged rationally. REASON is the product and cause of Western Civilizations status.

_______________________________________________

"...next time i want to be graded on a post i'll put an APA cover sheet and heading on it. :/"---AgainstThaGrane


This is indeed one of the fundamental contradictions regarding public communication today. You initiate a public discussion suggestive of Animal Rights Activism, in a PUBLIC FORUM, then suggest some equally vague moral or ethic has been violated, and you cannot even clarify what that is with clear reason.

That's rather like a shell game wherein you opt to identify with some kind of woundedness.

______________________________________________


"i know i'm not right or wrong."----AgainstThaGrane

That's odd. You haven't demonstrated by rational thought that you are "not right or wrong". Neither does anyone else have any knowledge that this was already determined.

What I wrote, was an indication that nobody is of necessity, either Right or Wrong merely because their view is popular or unpopular, or in the majority or minority; but the distinction between what I wrote, and what you are indicating here, is that you now claim that you are, in fact, neither Right or Wrong. How can anybody exclude themselves from either part of a clear dichotomy?

_______________________________________



"i didn't say i was judging."----AgainstThaGrane

What you have here is a DENIAL of the very thing you are doing. However, since you have a vaguely worded proposition, you aren't likely to engage the proposition well, or in any meaningful depth. That is also characteristic of Animal Rights Activism. Rationally, the moral and ethical propositions are so vaccuous that any rationalist can entirely dismantle them. When that occurs in print, Animal Rights Activism shows itself to be entirely irrational.

"you can totally eat what you love,"---AgainstThaGrane

I don't derive the power or ability to do that from you. In fact, you are NARROWLY describing what I CAN eat. Now, by reason, I am only ALLOWED to eat IF I love it, and not allowed to eat what I do NOT love. That's ridiculous.


"have you ever had a girlfriend"-----AgainstThaGrain


Have you ever been more irrelevent? What has my personal life to do with it, and what right to you have making inquiries in a PUBLIC FORUM about my personal life?

At the very least, such a question offers you a 50% chance that the answer will be "No" and the reason you ask it is to shift the topic of topic from relevent ideas, so that you can engage in a very "low road" form of shaming behavior, which is a common feature in the Politically Correct movement and in irrational advocacies found in Animal Rights Activism. If you wish to discuss sex life issues, you might try a forum dedicated to that purpose. I do not believe this is the proper place for discussing sexuality or relationships. Do you?



Thank you very much. :):):):)

:what::what::what::what::what:

/

/

GPossenti
September 17, 2008, 04:17 PM
Absolutely. I have a gun so I don't have to sick my dog on intruders.

WhisperFan
September 17, 2008, 04:27 PM
I am not a vegetarian .... but some of my favorite foods are!

Seriously - I am a meat eater and I used to hunt. I don't hunt any more, but I have no problem with those that do, and I really understand the need for hunting more than many people I speak with.

All that being said, my wife and I have property where there are deer, turkey and fox. My wife throws out a mix of stuff that contains corn, peanuts, sunflower seeds and whatnot - we get it at the local WalMart (they call it Squirrel food) Anyway - the turkeys love it.


Here is a photo from last late last summer. These boys are even bigger this year. Oh - there were two others in the yard, just off-camera.
http://i281.photobucket.com/albums/kk219/WhisperFan/Deer3sm.jpg

Caliban
September 17, 2008, 04:31 PM
brucerducer: i think you may have misinterpreted this line:

"you can totally eat what you love, have you ever had a girlfriend?"

look closely, there's an innuendo in there.

hecate
September 17, 2008, 04:39 PM
I shoot A LOT but don't hunt. I've done Greyhound rescue and adoption for over 20 years, fostering over 400 dogs in my home. Three of my horses are permanently unsound (http://hecatescrossroad.blogspot.com/2008/05/outstanding-in-their-field.html) thanks to stupid people who broke them down. I bought them knowing this, and they have a safe home with me for the rest of their lives.

My 28 year old Thoroughbred mare, who I had for 27 years, survived a life-threatening injury at age 22 but had manageable problems for the rest of her life. OF COURSE she had to do her final crash-n-burn when my vet was out of town and her substitute wasn't answering his pages. It took me almost five hours to find a vet who would do an emergency euth for somebody who wasn't a regular client. Had I not been able to find one, I was prepared to shoot her myself. Yes, I do know the correct technique.

I once heard a stand-up comic say, "Hunting...the only sport where one of the teams doesn't even know they're playing."

Actually they do. Very little in nature dies of old age in its sleep. What difference does it make to the prey what species the predator is? You want to learn about how to live in Condition Yellow, just study prey animal behavior.

We're just another apex predator. All life feeds on death. The humaniacs who force their dogs to be vegans strike me as the ultimate in selfish arrogance. It's part of the whole lie that we are somehow apart from nature. We're not.

If I wanted to hunt small game, my Greyhounds would be the way to go. My first adopted ex-racer could catch running pheasants. I once watched another of my dogs, while on leash, grab a suicidal rabbit by the back of the head faster than the eye could follow, DRT. Too bad she did it while I was roadworking three of them down the ditch between the local high school and a busy 4-lane highway. Ever try to get a dead rabbit away from three Greyhounds playing make-a-wish?

KBintheSLC
September 17, 2008, 04:44 PM
In the big scheme of things, something will eat everything, even if you don't.

On that note, the only animals I kill that I do not eat are the damn pigeons that infest my yard. They are filthy, repugnant creatures that breed like insects and destroy the carport/vehicles. I shoot them with my pellet rifle, and place their carcasses in the trash.

Besides pests of this nature, I would never kill a wild animal unless I was going to eat it.

JWarren
September 17, 2008, 04:52 PM
gun lover, animal lover, and hunter here.


-- John

Savage Shooter
September 17, 2008, 04:55 PM
Oh I love animals...love to eat them:D
mmm....taste like chicken

Fleetwood_Captain
September 17, 2008, 04:59 PM
I love animals too, they're delicious.

I do think it's annoying when people treat their pets as if they were their children. Or how people like my ex would make me "say hello" and feed her soup hound every time I'd come over. I'd just be like, "do I really have to get slobbered on today?"

I can understand the "family" thing with senior citizens that live alone. But some of these pet owners just take things too far.

Caliban
September 17, 2008, 05:06 PM
i forgot about one of my favorite t-shirts:

"vegetables are what food eats"

Justin
September 17, 2008, 05:12 PM
I do not believe this is the proper place for discussing sexuality or relationships. Do you?

The guy with access to the "ban user" button certainly doesn't.

AgainstThaGrane, I'm looking at you.

Colt46
September 17, 2008, 05:20 PM
I'm an animal lover. Love my dog for what he is, my chickens for what they are and game for what they are.
When my chickens reach the end of their useful laying career I look forward to eating Coq Au Vin. Damned tasty with the older birds.

Killing things you don't eat I can understand as well. Some things just aren't that desirable to have around. Coyotes are one. Certain varieties of ground squirrel being another. I despise raccoons and won't hesitate to kill them around my house. They think chicken tastes just like chicken.

JWarren
September 17, 2008, 05:21 PM
I do think it's annoying when people treat their pets as if they were their children.


I'm one of those people that annoy you.

Hey, what do you want.... maybe if Jenn and I haven't been trying to have children for 5 years and paying tons of money to specialists, we may be differently.

Nothing like your wife coming home in tears when yet another friend of hers turns up pregnant.

Walk a mile, and then get annoyed.


-- John

jordan1948
September 17, 2008, 05:26 PM
Deer, geese, ducks, doves, basically any game animal
If someone asked me to take care of a predator I'd do it for sure to help them out, I recently moved into the city but when I was out in the country we had 21 sheep an a piece of property about 2 miles away, coulple unkept dogs and 3 weeks later we were down to 13, I have nothing against shooting a dog like THAT but not just a dog that's passing through or not causing any harm, as far as cats go in my area they loved the taste of chicken and I didn't like that fact, opposoms as well, skunks got to liking the chickens after all the d@mn cats ate all the mice, coons eat 'em no matter what, had a bobcat getting the chickens had to take care of him yada yada yada so many different predators just seemed to like our animals better than their normal diet, as far as hunting bears go well I wouldn't hesitate and I'd try the meat sure but I'd have to say that I'd give the meat to someone who needs it more than I do

BruceRDucer
September 17, 2008, 07:17 PM
/

brucerducer: i think you may have misinterpreted this line:

"you can totally eat what you love, have you ever had a girlfriend?"---AgainstThaGrain

look closely, there's an innuendo in there.---Caliban

Yeah, yeah, yeah Caliban, I got it, but:

(1) It isn't appropriate in the context of publically discussing another person's private life

and

(2) It isn't appropriate as a sexual innuendo either.

and

(3) It is not specifically relevent to the issues introduced by AgainstThaGrain as a topic of discussion.

What it does indicate is that the discussion is not sincerely introduced as subject related to firearms useage, and the the person posting the topic is drifting so far afield in thought that little sensibility can be made of the statements regarding issues either legal or moral.



/



/

James T Thomas
September 17, 2008, 07:20 PM
I love my little dog; I can't help it.

I really like other dogs, with some nasty exceptions.

And I very much admire most other animals. Horses are magnificent creatures.
Owls and hawks facinate me. Cows and sheep. Well I stopped counting them when I stopped being a passenger in dad's car and got my own car.

But, I don't love my guns! Any of them. I take care of them and value them and know their importance to me, but would not call it love.

Sean Dempsey
September 17, 2008, 07:41 PM
Wow, it's not often that someone can make me go for the "ignore posts from this user" button, but at the same time go for the "view more posts by this user" button.

BruceRDucer has done that.

againstthagrane
September 17, 2008, 08:21 PM
Wow, it's not often that someone can make me go for the "ignore posts from this user" button, but at the same time go for the "view more posts by this user" button.

BruceRDucer has done that.
__________________

haha, that's what i'm saying.

to justin, if you're going to ban me for cracking a joke then you should seriously re-evaluate what is important. ridiculous.

jonmerritt
September 17, 2008, 08:34 PM
My dogs and cats are 100% pure spoiled. And they let me in to say that.

Loomis
September 17, 2008, 08:34 PM
"ignore posts from this user"

YOu can do that here? Where's the button?

Javelin
September 17, 2008, 08:40 PM
I love animals and I have guns. I also like corvettes but I am not sure if there is any real reason why you can't like all these things as guns are not only meant for hunting. They are also for protection and the protection I have is from 2 legged critters more than anything.

:)

Lonestar49
September 17, 2008, 08:48 PM
...


http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc306/Lonestar49/Picture150.jpg


Ls

Aran
September 17, 2008, 09:03 PM
The guy who owns the local exotic pet store here in town is an avid hunter.

Rmart30
September 17, 2008, 09:43 PM
Im a animal lover for the most part, dont really care for cats but I love dogs.

Im a casual hunter and not die hard into it as some are. I may go 3 times a year. I havent taken a deer in over 10 years but I will shoot every wild hog I see in a heart beat.
Wild hog population is exploding around here and you cant shoot them fast enough. Sows have their first litter when one year old. The gestation period is three months, three weeks and three days (110-115 days). Weaning occurs at eight to 12 weeks (56- 84 days). Litter size averages three to four piglets for their first litter increasing to up to 10 in older sows.

Thats possibly 30 piglets a year from one sow, if half of those are female and have their litter at one yr old thats 15x4 or 60 additional pigs from one original mating pair in 2 years time :eek:...

Ask anyone in Texas what they think of wild hogs...... they are over run with them.

Kind of Blued
September 17, 2008, 10:01 PM
I don't want animal heads on my walls, but I do want to eat the rest of them. I'm thinking elk and hogs. I don't care for venison.

Little critters are a different story. I can shoot pests on private land if I have a reason. I can shoot squirrels and not feel bad if they need to be thinned out. I'm fine shooting prairie dogs and not eating them because they're simply stupid beyond belief.

It's incredibly difficult to sympathize with an animal who will see my car from 100 yards, stand on its hind legs, become frightened, run across the road four times, stop, look again, run toward my car, veer off, then backtrack right in time to be squashed by my tire.

They're apparently completely suicidal. I might as well get some target practice out of it.

machinisttx
September 17, 2008, 10:45 PM
I love animals. They're usually tasty, and their fur keeps me warm when I make clothing from it. Their stuffed skins make excellent decorations for my home as well. :D

cliffy
September 17, 2008, 10:49 PM
I might be classified as a Predator Hunter. Feral Hogs are also predators; don't let them fool anyone. They make a delicious addition to my list of otherwise inedible critters that kill nice animals. I love nice animals, but dislike predators. After a wolf kills one's favorite pet dog, perhaps one might agree. cliffy

jaholder1971
September 17, 2008, 11:14 PM
3 house rabbits, 2 cats (everyone gets along, too) and 40+ guns.

Gunnerpalace
September 17, 2008, 11:18 PM
Yes,

againstthagrane
September 18, 2008, 12:07 AM
that last picture bring back memories of tagging rabbits off hand with my AR :)

Sommerled
September 18, 2008, 12:08 AM
I love animals and would never shoot one that i wouldn't use for food. This doesn't apply to vermin though.

I eat the chickens and cattle I raise, pet my three dogs, and love to watch birds....

But find varmints unappetizing.

againstthagrane
September 18, 2008, 12:12 AM
rabbits taste like chicken. no joke. i was surprised at how much a rodent can taste like a bird.

sixgunner455
September 18, 2008, 01:52 AM
I hunt.

My Brittany and I love it. Doves last Saturday. Quail soon. And I may get an archery deer tag this fall. Probably go with some friends to call coyotes, too.

Stevie-Ray
September 18, 2008, 03:06 AM
I have a fondness for animals. Strange, though, there is a complete disconnect when it comes to strays, especially battle-scarred ones. I have 2 cats and it really pisses me off when stray cats come up on my deck to torment them. It has caused me to shoot several. I love my own animals but have little tolerance for others that venture onto my property and cause disturbances of any kind. Dogs are another thing altogether. I like dogs around here, usually far more than their irresponsible owners. Right now we have a family of rabbits under the deck. They're OK though, since I don't have a garden.:D

chris in va
September 18, 2008, 03:34 AM
I got ridiculed in my hunter's safety course last year for basically asking how people have the fortitude to field clean a deer after shooting it.

Honestly, I don't know if I could shoot an animal. But tell you what with all the deer running in front of cars and motorcycles, I might be more inclined to cull a few.:scrutiny:

brigadier
September 18, 2008, 08:29 AM
HECK YEAH!
I am crazy about Bunny Rabbits, Chipmunks, Skunks and Mice. I am actually crazy about anything cute.

I don't hunt, but my reason has to do with eating habits. IMO, there is less room for guilt killing an animal in the wild and eating it then eating a cheese burger at MacDonald's.

BruceRDucer
September 18, 2008, 08:47 AM
/

haha, that's what i'm saying.

to justin, if you're going to ban me for cracking a joke then you should seriously re-evaluate what is important. ridiculous.---AgainstThaGrane

Point the First:

The moderator is never at issue in a forum. Whereas a poster is.

If you are going to critique the moderator regarding "what is important" you could at least rationally indicate what is or is not important. Neither of which you have done with any sensibility.

Jokes are usually welcome. However, when you initiate the specific topic, and then reduce it to entirely unrelated topics, which have no identifiable purpose but to be blathering about girlfriends and so forth, it makes no sense.

Your topic started with suggestive questions regarding killing game that is not for eating. Now, your ethical propositions have switched to identifying the moderator as "ridiculous".

The only sensible proposition you have so far, is:

haha,

Your initial issue, regarding shooting animals not for consumption, is most pointedly a legal right. Nobody is challenging you personally as to whether or not you have a legal right to love or not to love what you eat or shoot; so why should you challenge the legality whereby somebody else shoots an animal that he is not going to eat or love?

That is, de facto, an Animal Rights Activism proposition.

/

/

:what::scrutiny:

Ben Shepherd
September 18, 2008, 08:53 AM
Chris in va: I teach hunter ed. Have for years. Your question WAS NOT out of line. I hope the instructor didn't participate in criticizing you. If you can't clean it, don't kill it.

And yes, rabbits do indeed taste like chicken.

Did you know that nationwide, 80% of the money used for wildlife management comes from hunters and shooters? It's true. Most of it through an excise tax on hunting/shooting supplies via the Pitman-Robertson Act.

I think you left out an important angle- Most hunters have far more RESPECT for animal life than most other folks.

willbrink
September 18, 2008, 09:55 AM
"does anyone on this board share my point of view or am i in the minority?"

Personally, I would much rather take a picture of a bear or other animal then shoot it full of holes. My guns are for defensive uses only as a rule, and if the animal, two legs or four, is not bothering me, I am not inclined to bother it. Most of my friends who hunt only hunt what they can eat.

BruceRDucer
September 18, 2008, 10:08 AM
/

Ask anyone in Texas what they think of wild hogs...... they are over run with them.


That's what I'm learning too. I was told that in a single night, a herd (however large?) can root up an acre and a half of crops easily in a single night. That's 45 acres a month in lost crops, plus other damage. :what::what::what:

/

AntiqueCollector
September 18, 2008, 10:58 AM
I trap and hunt animals like coyotes, bobcats, beavers, foxes, etc. I have absolutely no problem with using fur from these animals, and taking them for fur. It's a natural, renewable resource, unlike the synthetics from oil and impacts the environment far less than growing cotton or such. And yes I love nature including the animals I target. I'd never want them over-hunted or over-trapped but taking them at sustainable levels is perfectly fine and helps the environment by preventing overpopulation and the diseases it brings.

toivo
September 18, 2008, 11:08 AM
Not only do I love animals, I'm a tree-hugger. Wilderness is sacred to me, and I believe we need to hang on to every scrap of it we have because when/if it's all gone, we're going to suffer as a species in ways we can't even begin to imagine. I also believe that there's nothing wrong with sustainable hunting: We're predators. It's our nature. We have a developed brain that has given us the technology to be almost too successful, but as long as we use that same brain to moderate (that is, to avoid hunting any species to extinction), then the cycle continues.

Animals in the wild don't die in bed surrounded by their loved ones. A clean kill from a bullet is often quicker and less painful than the death that animal would have suffered "naturally."

Halo
September 18, 2008, 12:00 PM
I am not against ethical hunting, but it's not something I personally have any desire to do.

However I do have a problem with trophy hunting, I think it is disrespectful of nature. By this I don't mean someone who takes the antlers of an animal they killed for meat, but the "great white hunter" who kills exotic animals just for the "sport" of it, to put an exotic head on the parlor wall.

Loosedhorse
September 18, 2008, 12:10 PM
I think this covers it:

Loosedhorse
September 18, 2008, 12:45 PM
Halo--with all respect, not sure how you've come to your decision that trophy hunting is not part of ethical hunting. I think you may find that yours is a minority opinion.

As I said previously (post #36 in this thread), in some areas trophy hunting provides employment, food, and the monetary wherewithal to preserve the habitat and discourage poaching. It is often used as a profitable way to keep game herds from over-populating their territory. Not sure how that's unethical.

I think we can agree that there's illegal hunting (poaching, hunting over the limit, etc.) that no ethical hunter can approve. Most hunting laws cover situations--hunting does when they're likely to be pregnant or nursing their young--that would also make the ethical hunter queasy.

Violating safety rules (ridge-line shots) or trespassing also sits poorly with ethical hunters--though I'm not sure these are truly ethical considerations as much as legal, politeness and safety ones.

I would consider UNethical hunting things like taking a shot when the risk of wounding and losing the animal (or another animal in the herd, if applicable) is substantial. That risk is always there, to some extent, but minimizing it (get closer, wait for a clear opening or don't take the shot) is always a high hunting consideration. And shooting a chained bear (as Teddy Roosevelt so famously refused to do) is the epitome of unethcal hunting--not even worthy of the word hunting, actually.

Everyone may, within the law, choose what they would and would not feel comfortable hunting, and by what manner they'd like to hunt. But personal preference does not define ethical and unethical. (I choose not to bow-hunt, mostly because of lack of skill with the bow, but partly because the slowly-bleed-to-death result of a good shot makes me personally uncomfortable. But I recognize the long tradition of bowhunting, and any bowhunter who is within the law and only takes the shots he feels WILL collect the animal IS an ethical hunter in my book).

john917v
September 18, 2008, 01:00 PM
To respond to the OP's question, I am DEFINITELY a lover of both! I love firearms, cartridges, and so on, but I also love animals, helping them, and preventing unnecessary cruelty to them. One example is this little freak here in town who would get cats, and throw them under passing cars to run them over.

againstthagrane
September 18, 2008, 01:16 PM
brucerdeucer, for someone who is always begging for specifics you sure do you like to infer a lot of points from my posts effectively putting words in my mouth. get a life, dude. either contribute to the post or don't. nobody wants to read your overly loquacious posts. put the thesaurus down and learn some social skills.

Acheron
September 18, 2008, 01:17 PM
I love animals-I've had cats all my life. While I've never been hunting personally (but I would like to), I have no objection to hunting for food or even for sport. I draw the line when the kills become excessive, i.e. when an individual goes out and shoots 3-4 deer 'just because he can.' I'm sure that such individuals are a very small minority among hunters.

My .02


P.S. I love my guns too!

againstthagrane
September 18, 2008, 01:18 PM
were the stray cats causing your cats physical harm? i think it's kind of cold to shoot a stray that was just looking for some company or food.

Halo
September 18, 2008, 01:21 PM
Halo--with all respect, not sure how you've come to your decision that trophy hunting is not part of ethical hunting. I think you may find that yours is a minority opinion.

I don't think it's ethical to kill something solely for home decor. I don't care if my opinion is in the minority or not.

edited to add: I want to be clear about what I mean by "trophy hunting", I mean the purposeful killing of an animal just so that part or all of its body can be made into some kind of adornment. I don't consider having a deer head on the wall to be trophy hunting unless that was the only reason the animal was killed. When I was a kid I went walking through the woods with my dad once and we discovered a complete deer carcass with the head removed. That struck me as an almost perverse disregard for life. I hold that practice in the same regard as shark finning.

Officers'Wife
September 18, 2008, 01:25 PM
God in his wisdom has given us dominion over the beasts of the field. This dominion places a heavy responsibility on us. When coyotes become too numerous the smaller species become overhunted. When those species' numbers dwindle the coyotes are doomed to stravation. By the same token remove too many coyotes and the population of the smaller species increase more than the food supply and they are doomed to starvation. As caretakers of the land and beasts we are charged with controlling the population of both.

Likewise with deer, in small numbers deer fill a niche in God's plan. In large numbers they are incredibly destructive both to crops and our fellow humans via traffic accidents. We are charged with controlling those populations.

Man is a predator, this is simple fact of biology. We were also blessed with reason and intelligence. We can use that reason to protect other creatures or we can use our fear of death to cause undue suffering. The earth is a good place and I am part of it.

Selena

Intune
September 18, 2008, 04:40 PM
to justin, if you're going to ban me for cracking a joke then you should seriously re-evaluate what is important. ridiculous.Ridiculous indeed. After a post such as yours he shouldn't have to re-evaluate. His first impression was spot on. Methinks you forget your manners in someone's house. Tread lightly, Grasshopper. :banghead:

Justin
September 18, 2008, 04:50 PM
haha, that's what i'm saying.

to justin, if you're going to ban me for cracking a joke then you should seriously re-evaluate what is important. ridiculous.---AgainstThaGrane

What is important is that THR maintains a particular cultural tone that is derived from our members who are willing to conduct their activity here with a particular level of decorum and civility.

If you intend to remain a member of THR it's probably not the brightest notion to go about making fun of this forum's culture and those who admirably choose to abide by it.

If you find yourself unable to meet a basic level of civil discourse, THR may not be a forum that suits you.

Loosedhorse
September 18, 2008, 05:31 PM
Halo--I would suggest that your narrow meaning of the phrase "trophy hunting" is at odds with what it is generally taken to mean. I have trophy hunted (yes, I have the heads), but I can tell you that other than the offal there was NOTHING left behind for the scavengers.

What you describe (killing but not collecting from the field all or most of the usable animal) is generally called "wastage." It is not only unethical, but frequently illegal.

That having been said, MY MAIN PURPOSE when I trophy hunt is to HUNT, and secondarily to GET THE TROPHY. I would not hunt in a situation that allowed wastage, but that doesn't change the fact that the goal of my hunt was not the meat (which I couldn't travel with, but which did get eaten locally), but the trophy.

To get more to the point of the OP: In squirrel season, I'm happy to legally hunt squirrel (no squirrel heads on my wall, by the way :) ). But off the hunting field, I always try to avoid squooshing squirrels when they run in front of my truck. Is that inconsistent? It makes sense to me. And my braking for squirrels could fool someone into thinking I love animals. I sure think so.

Officers'Wife
September 18, 2008, 06:44 PM
Hi againstthagrane,

Sometimes jokes are taken badly in certain context. The custom is to apologize to those offended and take the lesson of what is unacceptable in that particular place. This is not only the 'high road' but common decency.

Selena

Halo
September 18, 2008, 07:13 PM
Halo--I would suggest that your narrow meaning of the phrase "trophy hunting" is at odds with what it is generally taken to mean. I have trophy hunted (yes, I have the heads), but I can tell you that other than the offal there was NOTHING left behind for the scavengers.

What you describe (killing but not collecting from the field all or most of the usable animal) is generally called "wastage." It is not only unethical, but frequently illegal.

I may not be using the term "trophy hunting" in the way it is understood by the hunting community, that's a point I can certainly concede. The "wastage" you mention is what I'm referring to here. By whatever term it is known, the practice of killing solely for a trophy to me seems an affront to nature, and I reckon it is also an affront to the dignity of the hunting culture as well.

BruceRDucer
September 18, 2008, 08:17 PM
/

brucerdeucer, for someone who is always begging for specifics you sure do you like to infer a lot of points from my posts effectively putting words in my mouth. get a life, dude. either contribute to the post or don't. nobody wants to read your overly loquacious posts. put the thesaurus down and learn some social skills.----AgainstThe Grane

Well thank you very much AgainstThaGrane.

________________________________________


You finally got around to doing precisely what you set out to do in the beginning, which is postulate an Animal Rights ethic for the purpose of judging others.

Now, you have arrived at the point wherein you bluntly start telling others what they must do:


get a life, dude. --AgainstThaGrane.



either contribute to the post or don't.--AgainstThaGrane.


You started with Animal Rights, and when you can make no progress with that advocacy, you attempt to retaliate by any means possible.

If to post here in a loquacious manner, equates to not having a life, what are you doing posting a topic here?

I don't know, I'm just asking:

(1) Why you get personal?

(2) Entirely off-topic?

(3) And assume an imperious tone?

I just don't know, but what I do know is that for someone who begins a topic with specific questions about a controversial issue, attempting to introduce a DIVIDE & CONQUER issue into the forum regarding lawful hunting, by substituting a personal ethic for American law, you seem to have brought little improvement to the public understanding.

It just seems that other highly charged emotions seem to be driving an external pleasantry and disaffected manner.

For myself, I only wish to indicate that hunting species that are not to be consumed is lawful in the United States and elsewhere. Having introduced the issue, you seem unable or unwilling to discuss the lawful aspects of the issue in any depth.

As far as I can tell, respectfully, you have an agenda that you are not making entirely clear.

/:):):):):):)

JCMAG
September 18, 2008, 08:53 PM
Those who hate hunting--ergo, humane population control--hate wild animals. Human beings saw it fit to eradicate most of the natural predators in the spirit of preserving themselves.

Fair enough.

But if we want to maintain a healthy ecosystem that can sustain itself, we must become the predators.

To me its not about sport or health. It's about tradition and good stewardship. And free meat.

:D

subierex
September 18, 2008, 08:58 PM
I'm an animal lover and non-hunter. I don't disparage anyone for hunting though. I'm a little less understanding of hunting the large predators (e.g. Kodiak's), but if I were king, wouldn't prevent anyone from doing it.

I'd hunt too if times got bad enough.

turnyourback
September 18, 2008, 09:46 PM
i love guns, don't hunt, and am vegan. the majority of the people i know here who love/have guns are also vegan.

anything can happen.

murph50
September 18, 2008, 11:42 PM
I hunted and trapped a bit when I was a kid. In my late teens I decided that I did not like taking the life of other animals. At age 23 I became a vegetarian and I still am and pretty much vegan for many years ( I'm now almost 60).
I am a licensed wildlife rehabilitator and make my living doing non-lethal wildlife control.
I believe that hunting is a means of survival--not recreation, entertainment or sport.
I'm also really into guns. For self defense, target shooting and for the enjoyment of just having them. It's a mechanical device that involves explosives and fires projectiles--who can't love that?
So no hunting for me but that's my decision--to each their own

Stevie-Ray
September 19, 2008, 01:23 AM
were the stray cats causing your cats physical harm? i think it's kind of cold to shoot a stray that was just looking for some company or food.Think what you like, doesn't matter a whit to me. If you've seen your cats nose to nose through a doorwall screen with a street fighter, you don't just let the fight go on. In fact if you're smart, you get sick of it and take out the perpetrator, which is illegally on your property, illegally out of it's owner's home, and basically raising hell so nobody within a 5 house radius can get any sleep. No better than a common rat if you ask me, and I used to shoot those for sport at the dump. Opossums rate about the same, IMO. But, cat owners that scorn leash laws should pay huge fines for this type of crap. Same with dog owners.

NotSoFast
September 19, 2008, 01:39 AM
I love guns and I love animals. Except for two accidents, I have not killed any animals,nor do I plan to.

I would kill and eat if my life depended on it though. Or if I was threatened by an animal, including the two legged kind (except the eating part).

halfbreed808
September 19, 2008, 01:52 AM
I love animals. But I really love to eat. I've hunted and would love to go again as soon as possible. Nothing like fresh deer from Molokai, or goat, or boar from the Waianae mountains.;)
It really boils down to what choice you decide for yourself. My life motto, "IT'S ALL ABOUT CHOICES." What you choose for you is what you deem the best for you.

Nematocyst
September 19, 2008, 01:52 AM
I'm a biologist. I love life.
Not just animal life, either.
Plants, fungi, microbes ...
I find them all fascinating.

In fact, I find the very concept of life (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life) fascinating.

I'm neither vegetarian nor vegan
though I love both kinds of cuisine
(along with my burgers and fish and chips).

Like many (most? I wish this was a poll) here,
I only hunt what I'll eat.

But mostly, reading sporadically in this post this week
- mostly lurking during a very, very busy week at work -
I once again realize I'm proud to be part of the THR community.

Our diversity and civility
(a few squabbles not withstanding)
never ceases to amaze and please me.

I'm also reminded of a quote from a famous biologist
(even if I can't remember which one :uhoh: ):
without death (as in eating living things), life is impossible.

Nem

Joist
September 19, 2008, 01:57 AM
I have raised cattle, sheep, pigs, chickens, dogs, cats and vegetable gardens.
I have shot foxes, coyotes, woodchucks, fluffy bunnies in defense of same.
I guess my love of animals is conditional

jackdanson
September 19, 2008, 02:35 AM
I am vegetarian. I love my dogs. I love my guns. I don't have a problem with someone who hunts for food, although I'm not particularly fond of "factory" farms. I would eat meat if it was neccessary, but it isn't for most Americans and I don't have an overwhelming craving for it. I hate the 2nd amendment/gun rights being tied to hunting, they have nothing to do with eachother. (not that I have a problem with hunting either)

to each his own.

Oh yeah, I'd shoot hogs/other pests if I owned property where they caused trouble. Make some good jerky for the dogs.

Dr. Fresh
September 19, 2008, 03:13 AM
BruceRDucer, you write like a fresh grad student who can't get over their supposed "mastery" of the English language. Yes, I do realize my use of the word "their" is incorrect in context.


But seriously, there is an art to writing good prose, in a forum or anywhere else, and your attempts at dazzling us with your pseudo-fancy language have failed. Get over yourself.

JWarren
September 19, 2008, 06:10 AM
I would eat meat if it was neccessary, but it isn't for most Americans


Wait.... are you suggesting that most Americans are vegitarians?

Kinda confused me there.


-- John

Ben Shepherd
September 19, 2008, 07:44 AM
No, we just have a wide enough spectrum food wise here in the states that we can get almost all our proteins from other sources.

I still prefer steak, myself.

Creade
September 19, 2008, 07:58 AM
i hear a lot of people on this board talking about hunting coyotes and bears and other "non-edible" game

I didnt know there was "non-edible" game!

Lamb of Gun
September 19, 2008, 08:31 AM
Hunting seems boring to me and I would probably never get up the courage to shoot an animal that poses no threat to me. So I probably will never go.

So I guess I am an animal loving gun lover.

buzz_knox
September 19, 2008, 09:15 AM
Count me among those who enjoy firearms and love animals, and see no conflict between the two.

My dog is a better person than most humans I've ever met, so what's not to love?

BruceRDucer
September 19, 2008, 10:11 AM
I do try to appreciate them, though. I've even been trying to appreciate spiders and harvestmen lately. That hasn't been easy. Some insects just seem to have come from the black pit of damnation. Some fish, too.--Cosmoline


You know, for the past five years, when I find a huge spider in the basement bathtub...(and it happens about once a week)...I make a toilet paper "rope" for him to climb out with.

[Sheesh...I've gone totally cuckoo!]:):):):)

/

MinnMooney
September 19, 2008, 10:22 AM
Not sure what you mean by "Animal Lovers". I'm not protective of wild animals to the point of actually doing harm to them by letting their population get out of control where they'll die horrible deaths by starvation, road kills and hunam harm. I'm all for having hunting seasons to cull the herds but want hunters to use utmost care in dispatching the animals as quickly and humanely as possible.

I have had 3 dogs in my life that I've treated great, to the point of slight spoilization, I think. Had a cat, also. Treated it very well but never cozied up to the cat.

Animals need our love and attention so they can survive on earth along side us. We have the power to care for or annialate almost any species on earth (except mosquitos). That's a HUGE responsibility and one that can't be taken lightly.


P.S. I love firearms!

BruceRDucer
September 19, 2008, 10:22 AM
/

BruceRDucer, you write like a fresh grad student who can't get over their supposed "mastery" of the English language. Yes, I do realize my use of the word "their" is incorrect in context.


But seriously, there is an art to writing good prose, in a forum or anywhere else, and your attempts at dazzling us with your pseudo-fancy language have failed. Get over yourself.----Dr. Fresh

Thank you for the comment Dr. Fresh.

Essentially, your remarks are AD HOMINEM, or an attack upon the person, and not a discussion of the legalities or ethics which would be the proper subject per the original post.

Your interest in ridiculing a person for the useage of the English language and the employment of reason, indicates that you prefer to establish something other than a dialogue, in which ideological propositions amount to nothing more than exchanges of mutual invective and a fundamental failure to recognize either a citizen's rights at law or merely his right to a public opinion.

In any context, I do not find those appropriate. Many advocacies, and this is certainly true with Animal Rights Activism, rely upon a simple DIVIDE & CONQUER tactic and it typically engages in efforts to marginalize any individual in a group who openly and rationally addresses the flawed ethics of Animal Rights advocacies.

Moreover, that you use the word "us," which identifies yourself as a plurality, rather than identifying yourself as a single person expressing a personal view, shows that your remarks are further still, removed from ordinary reason.

I think it fair to indicate, per your initial sentence, that we do not employ these forums for the purpose of making public determinations such as you indicated by writing:

BruceRDucer, you write like a fresh grad student who can't get over their supposed "mastery" of the English language.----Dr. Fresh

We are here to neither praise grammar, nor to denigrate it. Your comments shows the tactic of SCATTERING all commentary into total irrelevency to create confusion in the minds of any who encounter your vague, disparate, and entirely disconnected propositions.

/

Blofeld
September 19, 2008, 11:09 AM
First, excellent idea for a thread. I'm vegetarian as well, have an overdeveloped reverence for life, and have no qualms about quelling a threat in a vigorous fashion. I'm also NRA and several animal charities, and sort of had to reconcile that in my head.

I support responsible hunting. Taking all you can eat, eating all you take. Sadly, the season approaches where I'll find headless carcasses all through the woods.

I've read this whole thing, not sure where all the personal attacks are coming from, as I said, I thought this was an excellent idea for a thread.

againstthagrane
September 19, 2008, 03:29 PM
blofeld,

like i said, there is one in every thread. brucerducer thinks he can start a flame war by trying to make this thread about animal rights activism when no one else in the thread other than him has said anything regarding the rights of animals. the thread was supposed to be about people who love animals but still see the merit in hunting for food and sport (as long as the remains will go to good use).

Larry E
September 19, 2008, 03:44 PM
I love my dog, and every dog I've ever had, and most other dogs as well (too bad most people aren't as pleasant as most dogs are) Because of messed up knees I don't hunt deer, etc anymore, but still shoot varmints. Don't know anyone/thing that eats prairie dogs except coyotes, badgers, rattlesnakes, and birds of prey. Ranchers and farmers will poison them, which IMHO is dangerous because poison is fairly indiscriminate, so shooting them is good practice environmentally.

My Cairn Terrier is also a varmint hunter, but loves most other dogs and people. :D

kwelz
September 19, 2008, 04:31 PM
I am a cat lover. I have no use for Dogs but I have 2 cats. I had 4 but the ex took 2 of them in the divorce.
That being said I have no problem with anyone choosing to hunt as long as they are not doing it just for the kill.

Blofeld
September 19, 2008, 05:19 PM
Legal in my state is the dreaded English Sparrow. Can someone give me the rationale?

Again, I think the vast majority of hunters do more for conservation than most animal rights groups, and if there is a logical reason for some of the animals on the menu, I'm curious as to how those animals impact their environment.

Does anyone eat racoon or groundhog? Are squirrels worth the effort? And the sparrow, really, why?

I'm not trying to stir what seems to be an already volatile issue, I am genuinely curious.

Thanks in advance.:)

bhk
September 19, 2008, 05:42 PM
The English Sparrow is a non-native invasive species that clogs gutters and nests in barns, sheds, and purple martin houses. It is not a part of the natural fauna of this country, and therefore on the 'ok' to kill list in most states. Consider it the 'dandelion' of the bird world. If you live in the city/suburbs you can kill the dandelions, but must tolerate the english sparrows. Those of us that are blessed enough to live in the country can kill both. Same situation for the non native starling and Norway rat. We have dozens of wonderful native sparrow species who's environment we to support.

BTW, I have studied ornithology, feed birds, worked on state/federal bird censusing projects, and regularly fill my bird feeders.

Blofeld
September 19, 2008, 05:46 PM
Thank you, Bhk. I assumed there was a reason, but couldn't find it, and therefore couldn't justify it.

bhk
September 19, 2008, 06:09 PM
You are welcome, Blofeld.

To many rural folks, squirrels are considered good eating. I remember when my then five-year old daughter told my wife that squirrel and home grown broccoli was her favorite meal for dinner (we thought it a little strange). She then changed her favorite meat to venison, then to beef. Now, as an adult, she became a vegeterian! Go figure. Athough she now states if she had to eat meat it would be hunted meat, not the stuff raised on a farm.

Groundhogs are shot because they dig their dens in farmers' fields and eat their crops. I had a local farmer call me for help last year due to a family of groundhogs that had pretty much leveled a half-acre of soybeans - he was not happy. Groundhogs also regularly dig their dens under the foundations of farm buildings and on pond dams (not good).

Raccoons are generally killed (shot and trapped) for their pelts. Whether one agrees with this practice or not, it is both a big business and a recreational pastime in rural America.

I consider myself fortunate. I grew up in the upper-middle class suburbs, and was blessed enough to have financing to pursue advanced college degrees. As a teenager, I was exposed to hunting/shooting mostly through my grandparents. When it became time to get a 'real' job, I chose to live in the country and have never looked back. I know many city dwellers who may visit the country on weekends. My wife and I do the opposite: live in the country and do 'country things,' and then go to the big 'city' ounce or twice a month for a touch of so-called 'culture.' We greatly appreciate both!

scythefwd
September 19, 2008, 06:45 PM
rabbits taste like chicken. no joke. i was surprised at how much a rodent can taste like a bird.

Just FYI , rabbits aren't rodents. They don't belong in the rodenta family.

BruceRDucer
September 19, 2008, 06:46 PM
*ISSUE THE FIRST*

brucerducer thinks he can start a flame war...etc---AgainstThaGrane

In point of fact, you fail to provide a single quote wherein my remarks are characterized by FLAMING anyone.

________________________________________

**ISSUE THE SECOND**

"...by trying to make this thread about animal rights activism when no one else in the thread other than him has said anything regarding the rights of animals."-----AgainstThaGrane

It seems that you like to keep the subject void of all contextuality. That way, it is possible to engage in an Animal Rights Advocacy by way of popular opinion which serves to marginalize those who employ firearms to engage in lawful activity regulated by the States and Federal Gov't, as well as the laws of other nations.

_________________________________________________________________________________________


***ISSUE THE THIRD***

"the thread was supposed to be about people who love animals but still see the merit in hunting for food and sport (as long as the remains will go to good use)---AgainstThaGrane).

So? How does that disinclude legal and ethical propositions which do not specify that the remains are put to any specific use?

For that matter, what specific "good use" are you recommending?

/

Rmart30
September 19, 2008, 07:11 PM
Not sure what you mean by "Animal Lovers". I'm not protective of wild animals to the point of actually doing harm to them by letting their population get out of control where they'll die horrible deaths by starvation, road kills and human harm. I'm all for having hunting seasons to cull the herds but want hunters to use utmost care in dispatching the animals as quickly and humanely as possibl

I agree with that.....there was a show on this weekend about the overpopulation of snow geese. They said it had grown almost 4 times the # of what it was 15 years ago. If Im not mistaken it was like 10 million birds. They said the population was to the point of pushing other migratory birds out of their native areas and eating all their resources. In cases like that and the wild hog I see no problem in harvesting them.
The deer population is way larger than it was 20 years ago in most states and most of that is due to hunters creating and managing food plots and habitat for them.

And the poster who asked about eating racoons, yes, there are people who still eat them.....myself NOT included but I do know several people who eat them as well as possum and nutria (big rats)...

KP89
September 19, 2008, 07:16 PM
I am a vegetarian and a gun owner, but not as obsessed with the issue as many here seem to be.

I don't really have a problem with real hunters, who obey the laws and respect the wildlife, its not the act of death that bothers me when people hunt - its when people wound or don't have a clean shot and the animal dies suffering.

People who trap or run around the woods shooting things just to shoot I personally hate, they show such disrespect it almost makes my head want to explode.

I also don't view real hunters to be the ones who put out salt licks and camo boxes, that's the same as going to a shooting range, the only difference is what you are shooting at is alive.

All the "hunters" I personally have ran into have been real jackasses, but I am sure not all are like that.

Officers'Wife
September 19, 2008, 07:48 PM
Hi Blofeld,

Sparrows, or for that matter any bird in large numbers, are a threat to both health and safety. When they roost in the crevises of the roofs of grain bins their guano contaminates the grain stored. In storage shed that guano is very high in both nitrogen and phosphates. When it rots in large quanities the heat given off is capable of causing fires. Especially in buildings where the owners are careless of cleaning up petroleum products.

Groundhogs leave very large and very deep burrows in fields. When the guide wheel of a tractor or combine or even worse a grain wagon breaks through one of those there is a good chance of upseting the machinery with grave danger to life and limb.

Item last: I know quite a few people that will eat groundhog and consider it a delicacy. As for raccoon, the pelt is still a valuable commodity though not worth as much as- say -when my Dad was a boy. I've met people that considered the lowly muskrat proper table meat as well as horse, dog and even rat under certain conditions. While I personnally would not eat muskrat, horse, dog or rat it's not for me to tell them they are wrong to do so.

Selena

moooose102
September 19, 2008, 08:38 PM
i love dogs, and like most animals, other than cats. i still shoot, hunt, sometimes i eat what i shoot, sometimes i dont. i went through a stage where i wouldnt shoot anything i wouldnt eat. but i have gotten over it. woodchucks, crows, skunks, possoms, etc., beware!

Blofeld
September 19, 2008, 08:57 PM
Thanks for the legit responses to my legit question. But the last post, skunks? Forget the moral/ ethical reasoning, why would you even attempt that? Why risk it? I wouldn't care if it was the tastiest critter with the worlds most valuable pelt, some things aren't worth the possible consequences.:)

scrat
September 19, 2008, 08:58 PM
i love guns.


love animals too. They taste good.

AntiqueCollector
September 19, 2008, 09:09 PM
But the last post, skunks? Forget the moral/ ethical reasoning, why would you even attempt that? Why risk it? I wouldn't care if it was the tastiest critter with the worlds most valuable pelt, some things aren't worth the possible consequences

Keeps the nosey neighbors away for good the first time they smell that skunk. "What are you doing...what's that smell? (nosey neighbor runs away)..." LOL

Seriously though, skunk fur is quite nice. It is bad if you put the knife too deep while cutting and get that nice skunk smell really strong...

Blofeld
September 19, 2008, 09:12 PM
Ewwwwww!!:barf:

Mrs. Armoredman
September 19, 2008, 09:45 PM
EWWWWWW Yuck :barf::barf:

BeltfedMG
September 19, 2008, 09:49 PM
Why wouldnt we love animals and Guns? Have all kinds of critters as pets. 15ft pythons, Cobra, copperheads, Boas, Turantulas, Scorpions, Alligator, Opposums, Dogs but NO CATS!!

BruceRDucer
September 19, 2008, 10:06 PM
NO CATS!!

There's a feral cat that comes around in the winter begging for food, and I give it some to keep it from starving....but do you think that cat would come when I say, "Here Kitty, Kitty!"?

No. She goes: :neener::neener::neener::neener:

Which serves to show that some of the human species probably don't exactly qualify as intelligent! Heh heh!
:what:

Boris
September 19, 2008, 10:25 PM
I was actually a vegetarian for some time, not because I'm necessarily against eating meat, I love it. I'm against the kind of treatment that most livestock and poultry have to go through, even cows and chickens used for milk and eggs.
Just look at some of the undercover videos taken by members of the ALF. I am no longer a vegetarian because it's getting harder and harder, but i keep my meat consumption to a minimum. Try the MorningStar veggie-chicken patties and nuggets, really do taste like chicken. :p
Having said that, i have no problem hunting, only if i intend to eat what I kill. Atleast if i shoot it, I can make sure I kill it properly. When it's for your own consumption, then it's only natural.

BruceRDucer
September 19, 2008, 11:18 PM
/

Just look at some of the undercover videos taken by members of the ALF.----Boris

Thanks for the comment Boris.

Would you please identify who the ALF is?

There are so many groups and so many acronyms that I don't immediately know who this is. :)

/

squadfounder
September 19, 2008, 11:41 PM
I like and respect animals, but at the same time I am a realist. People have hunted and eaten animals since the beginning of time, and I see no reason to change now just to accede to someone's idea of what is politically correct. That and I enjoy hunting, and understand its importance in controlling animal populations. I think hunters in general are a lot more respectful and supportive of wildlife and natural resources than some hippie liberal in Berkeley, because the hunter actually uses and enjoys these resources, and wants to preserve his hobby and way of life. He is not doing it out of some touchy-feely PC notion. Ever wonder why lumber companies plant far more trees than environmentalists? It's because they want to preserve their business, much like the hunter/fisher/camper.

Nematocyst
September 20, 2008, 01:17 AM
Would you please identify who the ALF is?ALF is the Animal Liberation Front (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Liberation_Front).

American_Pit_Bull
September 20, 2008, 02:25 AM
Since when did bears become inedible?
People shoot coyotes because they are a problem animal... Same reason that we shoot ground hogs and crows.

Boris
September 20, 2008, 12:58 PM
Nematocyst is right, they are the Animal Liberation Front.
I don't know if discussing them here is Ok, since the goverment does consider them a terrorist organisation.
They carry out various actions like rescuing animals from cruel conditions at farms, fur factories and testing labs, also causing havoc in those places to create financial loss for the companies. the animals are then either released back into the wild, or placed in proper care, depending where they should be. Those who carry this out make sure that noone is harmed in the process, including the people that work at the target area, the purpose is to try to save lives. Theres no real organization or leader in the ALF which is why the government is having such a hard time catching them.
the closest thing to a central organization there is the ALF Press Office, but they simply report and cover the actions, they dont organize or plan anything.

Deadmanwalking_05
September 20, 2008, 01:28 PM
I love my guns and pets,but still go hunting when the season rolls around.

rswartsell
September 20, 2008, 02:00 PM
What a ridiculous question. As if they are not compatible? I would think that even stereotypical impressions of "outdoorsmen" include their beloved dogs.

Forgive me for I mean no offense but what were you thinking to post this?

Blofeld
September 20, 2008, 02:13 PM
I think it was a legitimate post in that it has eroded some of the "go to the woods, guns blazing" stereotype that the antis usually put out there.

Sadly, often times those who are pro 2A are the first to call hunters "Fudds".

Personally, I've actually learned things in this thread.

rswartsell
September 20, 2008, 02:25 PM
OK, so be it, I stand down. In a thin skinned mood I just wondered why the need to question. As if people hunted to eradicate the world of those hated animals?

AntiqueCollector
September 20, 2008, 04:24 PM
Nematocyst is right, they are the Animal Liberation Front.
I don't know if discussing them here is Ok, since the goverment does consider them a terrorist organisation.
They carry out various actions like rescuing animals from cruel conditions at farms, fur factories and testing labs, also causing havoc in those places to create financial loss for the companies. the animals are then either released back into the wild, or placed in proper care, depending where they should be. Those who carry this out make sure that noone is harmed in the process, including the people that work at the target area, the purpose is to try to save lives. Theres no real organization or leader in the ALF which is why the government is having such a hard time catching them.
the closest thing to a central organization there is the ALF Press Office, but they simply report and cover the actions, they dont organize or plan anything.

They do indeed harm people. Some recent bombings and arsons attest to that fact. And most animals released from fur farms/etc. will die in the wild as they aren't able to survive on their own, and, cause havoc on the environment in the meantime. They are a terrorist group and they should be treated as such, namely, tried and imprisoned or executed (if they harm a person).

Boris
September 20, 2008, 05:14 PM
They do indeed harm people. Some recent bombings and arsons attest to that fact. And most animals released from fur farms/etc. will die in the wild as they aren't able to survive on their own, and, cause havoc on the environment in the meantime. They are a terrorist group and they should be treated as such, namely, tried and imprisoned or executed (if they harm a person).

Well first, as they say. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, so I will not bother arguing about that.
Second, The ALF is not so much an organization or group but an idea. As with all ideas, some follow it and all it's rules strictly, while others choose to make exceptions. Generally those who end up causing harm to others are considered as part of the ARM (Animal Rights Militia) and not the ALF. However those are the problems with a leaderless movement. There is no real way to prove who can be blamed for what, people can choose names and banners at will.
Thirdly: Most of the animals are not returned to the wild, unless they came from there (like some animals in fur farms) and would thus be able to take care of themselves. Most are either given to shelters or other places for treatment and then are found homes for.

Personally I applaud their actions as long as no-one is hurt.......as much as I believe some of the researchers deserve it.

BruceRDucer
September 20, 2008, 05:39 PM
Well first, as they say. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, so I will not bother arguing about that.
Second, The ALF is not so much an organization or group but an idea. As with all ideas, some follow it and all it's rules strictly, while others choose to make exceptions. Generally those who end up causing harm to others are considered as part of the ARM (Animal Rights Militia) and not the ALF. However those are the problems with a leaderless movement. There is no real way to prove who can be blamed for what, people can choose names and banners at will.
Thirdly: Most of the animals are not returned to the wild, unless they came from there (like some animals in fur farms) and would thus be able to take care of themselves. Most are either given to shelters or other places for treatment and then are found homes for.

Personally I applaud their actions as long as no-one is hurt.......as much as I believe some of the researchers deserve it.---Boris

This thread has pursued precisely the course I expected.

It operates within the context of several fallacies.

FALLACY THE FIRST:

The original post asks a question in the manner of a POLL; but it is not a poll of REASONS. It is a poll of private SENTIMENTS.

However, the issue is not a "private" issue. It is a public issue and a matter of law, whether a hunter makes "good use" of the meat from the animal he shoots.

By conducting a seemingly benign inquiry in the nature of a personal poll, the hunters in the group who eat edible game are invited to disenfranhise those who do not eat what they hunt, such as Prairie Dogs, Coyotes, as well as "Trophy" game. That's the Divide & Conquer tactic.

FALLACY THE SECOND:

The second fallacy proceeds directly from the first, because as the topic is a polling of personal sentiments, it is not a rational process of identifying the applicable laws.

The fact that it is not a rational proposition to begin with, but merely a sentimental and personal poll, shares a striking commonality with Gun Control advocacies such as we see in the implementation of "GUN FREE ZONES" where self defense is outlawed. Such Gun Control advocacies are not rational either. They dispense with reason and fact, and simply bar Americans from their civil rights.

That is precisely the problem today with getting Americans and their elected officials to recognize that the
Second Amendment already guarantees the right to keep and bear. Our difficulty, is precisely the public "sentiment" which goes against the proposition for civil rights, and the disregard of rational thinking.

THE THIRD FALLACY:

The Third Fallacy also derives from the first two, in that having elevated sentiment and disregarded rational foundations of dialogue, animal rights activism makes it possible to present a HALF-TRUTH which looks benign on the surface. After all, what could be more innocent that simply saying:

"I-Could-Never-Do-That."

If only mankind were so innocent, and human dialogue were more rational and gentlemanly.

I'm just not too surprised to see animal rights advocacy and its associated propositions for violence, violation of laws of property, and violations of privacy and ownership.

Animal rights activism never desires clarity in reason. It always opts for frothy sentiment and emotionality. Take away that non-rational basis, and such activism collapses like the ethical House-of-Cards it is.

In my opinion, it is a very smart tactic for those who advocate animal rights to co-opt a firearms forum. Its a kind of ideological piracy. However, I don't like to see it happen. The problem is a kind of BAIT-AND-SWITCH, in which personal ETHICS and mass-minded thinking are offered up as a replacement for the Rule-of-Law.

My personal "feeling" (let alone my reasoning) is that if a man obeys the law, he deserves our wholehearted support, and absolutely nothing less. If a man obeys game laws, I'm for that man, because he is a law-abiding citizen. It really doesn't matter how distant third parties "feel" about it.

The law does not require me to love my gun. The law does not require me to love the Prairie Dog. The law requires that we obey the law. So it doesn't matter if I hate "Bambi" or "Flower" or love them to distraction. My responsibility is to obey that law. I also respect those who obey the law, and I will not disrespect any hunter who obeys the law, for that is precisely the only requirement he or she need fulfill, this side of the Pearly Gates.


:what::what::what::what::uhoh::uhoh::uhoh::uhoh::)

/

KP89
September 20, 2008, 05:47 PM
Personally I applaud their actions as long as no-one is hurt.......as much as I believe some of the researchers deserve it.

Its pretty disgusting to be honest, in 100 years those people would more then likely be put on trial.

I am not for disobedience or destruction but, some things are just too f#cked up to let continue to happen.

rodensouth
September 20, 2008, 06:24 PM
some things are just too f#cked up to let continue to happen

What things are you speaking of?
Well said BruceRDucer.

R

Boris
September 20, 2008, 09:35 PM
Its pretty disgusting to be honest, in 100 years those people would more then likely be put on trial.

I am not for disobedience or destruction but, some things are just too f#cked up to let continue to happen.

Yes I am a bit confused as to which people you are talking about.

FALLACY THE FIRST:

The original post asks a question in the manner of a POLL; but it is not a poll of REASONS. It is a poll of private SENTIMENTS.

However, the issue is not a "private" issue. It is a public issue and a matter of law, whether a hunter makes "good use" of the meat from the animal he shoots.

By conducting a seemingly benign inquiry in the nature of a personal poll, the hunters in the group who eat edible game are invited to disenfranhise those who do not eat what they hunt, such as Prairie Dogs, Coyotes, as well as "Trophy" game. That's the Divide & Conquer tactic.

I don't see what this poll had to do with the law or with what people do with their kill after the hunt. It simply asks who here is an animal lover as well as a gun lover.
I won't comment on what kind of pall this was supposed to be since I am not the one that made it. i simply added my opinion and thoughts to it. That is I believe the purpose of this whole forum, is to share my opinions.

THE THIRD FALLACY:

The Third Fallacy also derives from the first two, in that having elevated sentiment and disregarded rational foundations of dialogue, animal rights activism makes it possible to present a HALF-TRUTH which looks benign on the surface. After all, what could be more innocent that simply saying:

"I-Could-Never-Do-That."

If only mankind were so innocent, and human dialogue were more rational and gentlemanly.

I'm just not too surprised to see animal rights advocacy and its associated propositions for violence, violation of laws of property, and violations of privacy and ownership.

Animal rights activism never desires clarity in reason. It always opts for frothy sentiment and emotionality. Take away that non-rational basis, and such activism collapses like the ethical House-of-Cards it is.

In my opinion, it is a very smart tactic for those who advocate animal rights to co-opt a firearms forum. Its a kind of ideological piracy. However, I don't like to see it happen. The problem is a kind of BAIT-AND-SWITCH, in which personal ETHICS and mass-minded thinking are offered up as a replacement for the Rule-of-Law.

My personal "feeling" (let alone my reasoning) is that if a man obeys the law, he deserves our wholehearted support, and absolutely nothing less. If a man obeys game laws, I'm for that man, because he is a law-abiding citizen. It really doesn't matter how distant third parties "feel" about it.

The law does not require me to love my gun. The law does not require me to love the Prairie Dog. The law requires that we obey the law. So it doesn't matter if I hate "Bambi" or "Flower" or love them to distraction. My responsibility is to obey that law. I also respect those who obey the law, and I will not disrespect any hunter who obeys the law, for that is precisely the only requirement he or she need fulfill, this side of the Pearly Gates.


Firstly, as I stated, the idea of the ALF (I won't generalize on the whole animal-rights movement since I do not know the details on all the groups in it) does not propose violence. But just like with firearm owners or any other group of people, some follow the idea and it's rules and some make exceptions. That is not to say that all animal rights activists condone violence.
The animal rights movement has plenty of reason to support it. Animals that are mistreated for experiments that are often just not worth it need to be helped. It's not a matter of sentiment or emotion, but just common sense that it is wrong. Not trying to put words in your mouth, but with your reasoning, most any other civil rights movement is nothing but sentimental nonsense because it went against the laws in place at the time.
Also your views on the subject of following the law being a person's primary responsibility seem to contradict what you said in your second fallacy.
You know that alot of laws (not just gun related ones) are based on "feelings" and irrational beliefs, and yet you believe in following them unconditionally.
I am not saying that laws should all be ignored at every opportunity, but that they do not always ensure what is best for those governed by them.
If the law stated that you had to turn over your guns to the government, would you still respect the man coming to take them simply because he is just following the law? This is a serious question, not trying to invoke some sort of guilt on you. What you do with your guns is up to you.
I would comply simply because I wouldn't have much of a choice, and would do whatever i can to arm myself again once he leaves.
The second amendment would never exist if people always followed the law and what it states.
And last, I'm not here really advocating animal rights, but simply stating my opinion on it and why I hold that opinion. If you see, I have never mentioned it here before other than now. And I don't see how it's such a great tactic, seeing as how my opinion is really opposed here.

Wow, I don't usually write so much even when I have to :p

AntiqueCollector
September 20, 2008, 10:24 PM
Thirdly: Most of the animals are not returned to the wild, unless they came from there (like some animals in fur farms) and would thus be able to take care of themselves. Most are either given to shelters or other places for treatment and then are found homes for.
The animals in fur farms didn't come from the wild. They're raised from birth like any other livestock. For example, the minks raised for their fur are much different than the wild mink, in many ways. And all of these animals, being born and raised as livestock, do not have the skills and ability to survive on their own. The only furbearers from the wild you will find are those trapped by trappers or, hunted by hunters, and they won't be alive when you see them. It is in fact illegal in my homestate (VT) to relocate wild animals alive (because it spreads disease).

Most of the attacks I've read about and seen footage of, were definately the animals being let loose. Thousands of chickens at a time, pigs, etc. Very bad for the environment and the animals' well being. PETA kills most of the animals it receives.

Personally I applaud their actions as long as no-one is hurt.......as much as I believe some of the researchers deserve it.

Legally I could shoot these terrorists if they attacked myself and my property, and I would. As a gun enthusiast you should be aware of this fact already (in many states anyways). Thieves and terrorists belong in prison or death row, respectively.

Not trying to put words in your mouth, but with your reasoning, most any other civil rights movement is nothing but sentimental nonsense because it went against the laws in place at the time.

This isn't a civil rights movement. These are animals not people. While I desire animals be treated humanely by people they don't have the rights people have. Animals and people are not equals, and if the animal rights argument was accepted, that they were equals and we have equal rights, it would be a defense of the right to hunt and use them, as that is what animals do to each other in the wild. It is perfectly acceptable for us to use animals for food and clothing. We should make efforts to treat them humanely but to make use of animals is not a bad thing. We were meant to.

And BTW, use of animals (often simply rats) in medical research has saved countless lives, human and animal, through making breakthroughs in finding treatments and weeding out bad treatments before being put to widespread use. In determining health effects of chemicals used in agriculture and other things, making us aware of problems, so we can limit the environmental and health damage caused. And more.

akodo
September 20, 2008, 10:36 PM
I am a big gun lover. I am also a big animal lover, especially dogs. However, I would have no problem hunting coyote, or wolves.

I guess I see hunting as part ofbeing a nature lover, of understanding the cycle of life and death. I realize whatever animal I kill would ultimately have met that same fate anyways, as would I.

I am reminded of a recent hunting question on Yahoo Answers about getting rid of problem cougar. I figured it would be someone legitemately concerned about livestock or overreacting to a percieved threat to livestock.

Turns out the person was upset because the cougar was eating fawns. To me, that is one kind of 'oh I luv the little cutzy animal-wanimal they are so huggable!' animal lover, and the NATURE lover is the one that says 'what? Cougars got to eat too, besides, it is good for the deer population!'

RancidSumo
September 20, 2008, 11:29 PM
I obviously love guns (otherwise why would I be here?) and I also love animals. I have dogs but no cats (allergic to them) and I like most other animals as well. I probably wouldn't shoot a bear or moose but dear and antelope are no problem. I shoot prarie dogs all the time for sport and being shot is a much better fate then what would naturally happen. They get hungry when the food supply starts going down and eat the weaker ones. They never go to waste, most of the time their bodies will be gone within an hour or two of shooting them. I have not gone coyote hunting but I might this fall. It puts money in my pockets and in my grandparents since it keeps their sheep alive. Hunting for sport is really not inhumane since they will be eaten one way or another and usually, there is more animals in any given species than nature can support.

akodo
September 20, 2008, 11:52 PM
I was actually a vegetarian for some time, not because I'm necessarily against eating meat, I love it. I'm against the kind of treatment that most livestock and poultry have to go through, even cows and chickens used for milk and eggs.
Just look at some of the undercover videos taken by members of the ALF.

Remember, if you look hard enough you can find a bad anything. There are nurses and doctors who see themselves as 'angels of death' and kill, yet that is far from the norm. There are clergy who sexually abuse, but that is far from the norm. There are teachers who sell drugs to students but that is far from the norm.

I would hope seeing a video of any of those activities would not lead you to believe that ALL doctors and nurses kill for the power rush, that ALL clergy members sexually abuse children and ALL teachers sell drugs to students.

I grew up in a rural area and can attest that what you see on such videos are isolated incidents, or all the facts are not being presented. How about this though, rather than being swayed by a video that is cherry-picked for it's shock value and then further edited, try visiting a local farm, see for yourself.

Thirdly: Most of the animals are not returned to the wild, unless they came from there (like some animals in fur farms) and would thus be able to take care of themselves. Most are either given to shelters or other places for treatment and then are found homes for.

Blatantly false. In most cases lab rats and rabbits are turned loose to starve, same with mink, chickens, and other critters when farms are hit. PETA has been caught killing pets after telling people they were providing a no-kill shelter, and in fact of killing abandoned pets at a rate much higher than county funded shelters. PETA was also busted for dumping the animal carcasses in local dumpsters rather than properly disposing of what would otherwise be a nasty disease vector.

Here at the U of MN a few years back a group burned down a few construction trailers on a new building sight and released a handful of lab animals but mostly just trashed things, but here's the kicker. They trashed an alzheimer's research lab, which was using 'artificial tissue' for it's research in the attempts of keeping animal tests to an absolute minimum, and all of those tests going on in petri dishes were destroyed.

chieftain
September 21, 2008, 12:49 AM
I read recently that Gov Palin's father had a bumper sticker on the back of his pick-up reading:

"Vegetarian" is an old Indian word for lousy Hunter.

Nuff said.

Go figure.

Fred

Boris
September 21, 2008, 02:47 AM
Blatantly false. In most cases lab rats and rabbits are turned loose to starve, same with mink, chickens, and other critters when farms are hit. PETA has been caught killing pets after telling people they were providing a no-kill shelter, and in fact of killing abandoned pets at a rate much higher than county funded shelters. PETA was also busted for dumping the animal carcasses in local dumpsters rather than properly disposing of what would otherwise be a nasty disease vector.


ALF and PETA are two separate groups, although on occasion might help each other in a common cause, most of the activists who aren't part of PETA really don't like them simply because they don't do anything to help other than give out pamphlets and stickers, and collect fees to buy more pamphlets and stickers.

Here at the U of MN a few years back a group burned down a few construction trailers on a new building sight and released a handful of lab animals but mostly just trashed things, but here's the kicker. They trashed an alzheimer's research lab, which was using 'artificial tissue' for it's research in the attempts of keeping animal tests to an absolute minimum, and all of those tests going on in petri dishes were destroyed.

Of course there will be some who go and destroy a lab just for the sake of destroying one without doing any research as to what they are destroying. Just like those hunters mentioned here who get drunk, and go to the woods to shoot stuff just for the sake of killing it, and not even doing that properly.

Some of those videos are pretty old and things have gotten for the better in alot of these places, not only because the attacks cost the companies money, but they bring bad publicity which costs even more money. Such as a research company called Huntington Life Sciences who lost a lot of business over the years from client companies who either don't want to be associated with animal testing, or attacked themselves for supporting it. They apparently have even been taken off the stock exchange.
There are some instances where animal testing is beneficial as long as it's done right, but in alot it's really just useless.
Cosmetics testing is really just pointless, they can use other alternatives, animals just seem to be the cheapest and most hassle-free. Fur and leather production is the same. You can get clothing from other non-animal materials which is just better in pretty much every way. Or if you need leather, then fake leather, looks just as real, is stronger, and can be made for you in pretty much any way you want.

saspic
September 21, 2008, 03:59 AM
Another vegetarian here (aah! they're starting to come out of the woodwork!:p). I had been thinking about it for a time, and then I encountered a bloody cow head for barbacoa. After getting over my squeamishness, I decided "I don't have to eat meat." So I stopped.

While I avoid meat, leather, etc. myself, I actually wish there were more hunters.

Too many today think of meat as something that comes in shrink wrap at the store or comes down the chute at McDonald's. Hunters understand better than anyone where meat comes from as they pursued the animal in its natural environment. Plus they are our best conservationists.

Maybe every meat eater ought to behead and pluck a chicken or something once to have a better appreciation of the animal's sacrifice. In the end, though, everyone's diet is a personal choice.

BIGRETIC
September 21, 2008, 06:58 AM
I am an animal lover.A human can make a choice,animals really can not.My world revolves around my dog.Hey,he is my son.And I will protect him as such.I also have cats and I would do the same for them.That being said,I keep large pythons.All of them will take thawed food but one.(the small one @9ft)I either have to put the prey animal in a pillowcase and whack it against a table or let the snake do the work.The reason I whack it is because I do not want my snake to suffer a bite.(Large rats are MEAN).It kills me to do this.I do not hunt.Could I?Yes..if it came down to survival.The supermarket gives me plenty of fresh meat...LOL!

wheelgunslinger
September 21, 2008, 11:21 AM
Too many today think of meat as something that comes in shrink wrap at the store or comes down the chute at McDonald's. Hunters understand better than anyone where meat comes from as they pursued the animal in its natural environment. Plus they are our best conservationists.

Maybe every meat eater ought to behead and pluck a chicken or something once to have a better appreciation of the animal's sacrifice. In the end, though, everyone's diet is a personal choice.

Great posts Saspic.

I'm a hunter. I've killed livestock on a farm and processed them.
I can tell you that I enjoy meat as a food, but I don't enjoy killing animals.
What I enjoy is being a part of the ecosystem.

I've mostly moved to eating produce these days, and really am moving toward only eating wild game. I'm very much opposed to the idea of farming livestock that spend their whole life with their head in a feed chute being pumped full of steroids and antibiotics. Hunting has taught me a level of awe and respect for nature and animals that I would not otherwise have.
In fact, I'm going Bowhunting tomorrow.

Blofeld
September 21, 2008, 11:38 AM
Saspic is dead on. I saw an episode of the Ted Nugent show where they had to do exactly that. You wouldn't believe how this turned into a giant emotional issue for those who had to kill the chicken.

Modern urban man has so disassociated himself from nature that there is no reverance for animals. When you can buy chicken nuggets in the shape of dinosaurs and cartoon characters, you teach the young that the nugget is made from some material other than a chicken.

Responsible hunters at least look that animal in the eye and go through the whole field dressing process before it ends up on a plate.

Caimlas
September 21, 2008, 12:50 PM
Just because you want to hunt something for sport doesn't mean you're not an "animal lover", or are without a sensitive soul/are a cruel person. Sometimes, I think people take "animal lover" to religious levels - ie, like it's some sort of calling for humans to not eat (or more likely harm) another living creature. Or, often, a certain subset of wild creatures - for instance, mice and mosquitoes are usually exempt from protection by this lot. :P

Personally, I've got little interest in hunting large predatory animals. If predatory animals were in over-population or there was something said predators could provide me which I could not get elsewhere, that'd be another matter entirely, however.

I don't hunt for the antlers - I hunt for the meat and have yet to take a buck - though getting a large antlered buck would be a very rewarding experience for me, none the same. I feel it's my obligation - as someone who loves the outdoors and wants to do what I can do to preserve it and its inhabitants - to help maintain balance within the ecosystem ( and right now, does are a drastic majority here, locally).

We've got a dog and a cat, both of which are "a part of the family". We've got wild deer and turkeys in our yard, which we all enjoy watching ("loving"?). I also go out and look for animals and animal sign - not just the ones I can shoot, but the whole ecosystem. It takes a lot more time than I spend actually hunting, and I'm sure this is true for most other hunters as well. In my limited experience, I'd put most hunters in the same category as bird watchers, naturalists, and other knowledgeable outdoorsy people.

I enjoy shooting, hunting, and simply scouting for animals and sign. I'd shoot a wolf, trap a coyote, and do a lot of other things like that, though it's not for lack of love for animals. I'd like to go spear hunting for hogs one day, too - but there are none around here to hunt.

Human morality is complex, and to cast it in black and white as "you can't hunt for sport and love animals" is simple minded. The most avid sport hunters I've met have also been the people I'd say are most in love with the outdoors - all aspects of it and its preservation. They've certainly been more internally and externally consistent than your average "save the planet" PETA type.

AntiqueCollector
September 21, 2008, 01:05 PM
Fur and leather production is the same. You can get clothing from other non-animal materials which is just better in pretty much every way. Or if you need leather, then fake leather, looks just as real, is stronger, and can be made for you in pretty much any way you want.

Fur and leather come from renewable resources. Leather typically a waste product from butchering cows/etc. Fur comes from furbearers, wild or domestically raised. Wild furbearers would overpopulate if not managed, and trapping and hunting them keeps their population in check. You'd rather see them overpopulate, then starve or die of diseases, huh? Or, overpopulate, and people begin to think of these animals as nuissances and not something to be valued. Take MA for example, where trapping has been severely restricted by outlawing the most effective traps. It's caused severe overpopulation problems and human conflicts (notably beavers flooding property) leading more and more people to see these animals as nuissances that they want eliminated. Farm/ranch raised furbearers allow demand to be satisfied without over-hunting or trapping the wild furebearers.

The synthetic leathers and furs come from petroleum (non-renewable, frequently non-biodegradable, all around bad for the environment) and if plant based such as cotton, flax, hemp, etc., habitat is destroyed to raise those crops, killing far more animals than would be hunted or trapped each year. You may want to consider the full consequences of your decisions and not just the surface.

Officers'Wife
September 21, 2008, 08:55 PM
One of the stories my Uncle used to tell was of when a woman from PETA came to the farm when he was loading hogs and using a shock prod to move them. When she pointed out to him that use was cruel and unnecessary he told her to show him the proper method. Now, as you may or may not know, a hog is as stubborn and willful as a three year old. After twenty minutes with a particularly aggravating animal the PETA woman lost her temper and picked up a shovel with the intention of hitting the animal. My Uncle stopped her and made her leave.

He also wrote PETA and asked them if they were to continue to send people that would abuse his animals he would sue them over the attempted abuse. To my knowledge he received no reply.

Selena

wherestheham
September 21, 2008, 09:02 PM
Like a co-worker always says: "There is room for all God's creatures.....right next to the mashed potatoes."

On the serious side. Most gun owners and hunters I know have animals and really enjoy being around animals. I think being in out in nature gives you a better appreciation for the animals that God gave us.

Stevie-Ray
September 21, 2008, 09:30 PM
One of the stories my Uncle used to tell was of when a woman from PETA came to the farm when he was loading hogs and using a shock prod to move them. When she pointed out to him that use was cruel and unnecessary he told her to show him the proper method. Now, as you may or may not know, a hog is as stubborn and willful as a three year old. After twenty minutes with a particularly aggravating animal the PETA woman lost her temper and picked up a shovel with the intention of hitting the animal. My Uncle stopped her and made her leave.

He also wrote PETA and asked them if they were to continue to send people that would abuse his animals he would sue them over the attempted abuse. To my knowledge he received no reply.

Selena:D:D:D:DGreatest post yet!;)

evan price
September 21, 2008, 10:27 PM
I love animals. I am always bringing strays home. My wife is a veterinarian. She loves animals. I understand wild animals do what wild animals do. They need to eat and space to live.
That said, when the groundhogs at my friend's farm got so bad his tractor shed floor collapsed, we went over and started popping groundhogs. Not eating a groundhog. But we (humans) killed off the wolves and bobcats other things that ate groundhogs so we inherit their job of controlling the population of fast-breeding, destructive varmints.
I don't eat yellowjackets, hornets, mice and rats either, but I poison and trap hundreds of them every year.

I've noticed a tendancy amongst animal-lovers to be prejudiced, may I even say racist, towards critters like wolves and bears and other snuggly stuffed animals, and less so towards things like zebra mussles, leeches, Norway rats, and brown dog ticks.

ezypikns
September 21, 2008, 10:46 PM
I've sat and watched Bobcats and Coyotes hunt around my deer stand. I won't shoot them.....now. I'm over 60. There was a time though when I would have killed them in a heartbeat. After doing that a few times though, you finally come to the realization that you probably get more pleasure just watching them.
Oh, and another thing, if you loose off at every other creature in the woods, you probably won't kill many deer. And I still love venison.

rondog
September 21, 2008, 10:46 PM
I love guns and shooting, but I'm not a hunter. I have nothing against hunting, but I don't know any place to go, or anyone to go with, so I just don't do it. I'd like to, but I have no burning desire or need to. I love my Beagles to death, and if I could get deer and elk to eat apples out of my hand, I'd probably do that rather than shoot them. Guess I'm on the fence about it, but I really like to photograph them.

We rent a cabin in Estes Park every fall, and this big boy and his harem came through one year. Another time, about 30 walked by me while I was grilling steaks. Truly magnificent to just watch them.

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b150/rinselman/vacations/0000706-R1-020-8A.jpg

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b150/rinselman/vacations/0000706-R1-026-11A.jpg

KiltedClaymore
September 21, 2008, 10:50 PM
i love animals. i love to hunt, and was taught that if you shoot it you eat it. but if the animal is a pest/threat, i have no problem shooting it and leaving it. rattle snakes, coyotes, mountain lions, and extra-aggressive wolves all fall in this catagory in my mind.

NCMom
September 24, 2008, 10:11 AM
I like guns and love animals. Grew up with a father who hunted and used to tag along. Even helped field dress what he shot. I was taught never to kill anything that wasn't going to harm me or someone else or that I wasn't going to consume. I was also taught that I should take a certain amount of responsibility for my own safety and that included knowing how to use a gun accurately.
Fast forward a few years to marriage and a hubby who wasn't brought up around guns and didn't like them. We had no guns in the house until the morning I woke up and realized someone had been bold enough to enter our yard and steal a battery out of our truck. No, I am not going to shoot a battery thief, but it made me realize I may not be as safe as I would like to think in my own home. Time to have a gun. Made a trip to my parents' house, shot a few of Dad's guns and brought home a .32.
Fast forward a few more years to birth of our child, carjackings in the news and being threatened by an employee. Time to get serious about self defense.
Tried out a good many more guns, took a course for concealed carry, got permit and purchased S&W 3913LS and a Mossberg 12 ga. Around that time, certain politicians started talking gun control and hubby decided he didn't like his right to own and carry being messed with. He jumped on the bandwagon and took the concealed carry course with me.
OK...no laughing here guys, but I picked him out a nice CZ99. He learned to use it well.
I like guns and the practical applications of them for defense, ability to get rid of nuisance/threatening creatures and provide food if needed. Always thought they were one of the things a well rounded person should be familiar with.
The snake in our creek that became aggressive toward the kids playing in the water had to be removed. The little bunny rabbit who nibbled a bit of lettuce is ok but the ground hog who gobbled the cantaloupe and burrowed under our barn causing foundation damage had to go. The day the neighbor's long horned steer wandered around our yard snorting at my dogs, the Mossberg and I stood between him and our dogs while I called the neighbor and asked him to come get his steer or we were having hamburger for dinner.
Worked for many years as a psych nurse and twice had either a patient or visitor bring a handgun onto the unit. Not in a threatening way but they brought them. I was the only one on staff on the unit who felt comfortable asking them for the gun and holding on to it until our security staff could arrive. Practical applications.
I love animals, have 4 cats, 4 dogs and a cockatiel. All of them were rescues. I have guns for self defense and hunting if need be. I have taught our son to be familiar with and safe around them, and to shoot accurately if he ever needs to. Just makes sense to me!

If you enjoyed reading about "are there any people out there that are animal lovers AND gun lovers?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!