Anti-hunting gun owners

[aerod1]

First, I am a 2A supporter of our RKBA. I am also a hunter, shooter, and collector!
I also varmint hunt for sport. It is fun and I make no apology. Look up the definition of varmint. I also like to target shoot every week or so.
There are also hunters out there that don't care for shooting military style rifles and see no need for a person to own a military style rifle or a handgun.
If they want to feel this way that's OK with me. Just don't criticize me for doing either. There is room enough for all of us in the gun world.
I like guns......all guns!

 

[.cheese.]

Titan - Godwins Law just happens to be a coincidence.

I only mentioned the ethical/unethical Holocaust example in this case because it keeps popping up in law class textbooks (at least in my classes). Don't misunderstand me, I'm not intending to call anybody here a Nazi or anything like that. That's really what Godwins law is about. I just was citing it as the most referenced, and most identifiable distinction of legal vs ethical.

I actually hesitated to mention it because I even thought about how it could be construed as Godwins law, but I couldn't think of an easier example.

 

[Tigerclaw_x]

Hunting and gun ownership are DIFFERENT THINGS.

I do not hunt. I do not wish to hunt. I just like guns. High capacity, military style guns. What do I shoot from them? Paper targets. Hope I never have to shoot at anything else. I don't wish to kill anyone unless I have to. I do not want to kill a deer, neither do I want to kill a human. Not unless I have to.
To me, having a gun is like having a motorcycle - a recreational device.
Do I need my pistols and my shotgun to survive? Probably not. Do I need the AK that I got to survive? Not really. Do I enjoy shooting it? Yes.
Do you have the right to have any guns you want up to and including a cannon? Sure. If you can afford it - it is your money.
Same thing as with cars and motorcycles. Do you need a sports car? No, but it is fun. Do you need to have a HONDA 1800? Not really, but it is fun.
Same for guns. If you consider it nessessary to buy a consealable pistol - it is your business as long as you do not hurt others with it. You consider it nessessary to have a M2HB on your backyard or DShK on your boat? Your business, as long as you do not hurt anyone, and understand the responcibility.
I do not get my kicks from hunting. I get my meat from Whole Foods. I am happy with it. If you want to shoot a goose and eat it - that is fine and well, as long as you don't kill 20 of them. If you want to kill a goose only to make a stuffed dummy out of it and throw the meat out - thats when we begin to have differences.

 

[JesseL]

All legitimate uses of a gun are relevant.

Including the ones I overlooked.

I don't disagree with you, but just to play devil's advocate:

What if someone doesn't happen to feel that hunting is legitimate? I've known a few vegetarians that enjoyed shooting and thoroughly supported the RKBA. Doesn't that make relevance subjective?

 

[.cheese.]

1911ShooterTJ - you bring up an interesting point which I have actually thought about.

I only care that hunted animals don't go to waste. To kill without using the meat just seems useless and unethical.

So long as somebody eats it, and I don't care if that's extended family, the homeless (I think a hunting for the homeless program could be very interesting), or somebody else - it's fine with me.

 

[obxned]

'Eat what you kill' is a nice thought, but do you eat mice, rats and bugs?

 

[.cheese.]

eat what you kill - as it applies to hunting. Do you hunt rats, mice, and bugs?

Rats - I've had to kill them when they were in my attic because they were causing damage and they carry disease.

Mice - I don't kill. I use humane traps and release them away from my home.

Insects I don't make a point to kill unless I have to. If it's a flying insect, I try to get it to fly out (flies, bees, etc). Cockroaches cause disease if they get into your food - so yes, they have to go.

However, none of those do I go out of my way, setting aside a weekend, to kill?

Bad argument imo.

And if you are doing that and hunting them, I'd have to say you might want to take up a hobby if you're that bored.

 

[HuntCast]

I don't support just going into the woods and putting holes in animals that haven't done anything to you, your property, and that you don't intend to eat, then just keeping a part of them as a trophy or something. That's just unethical in my opinion.

I said all LAWFUL uses of arms. Why is that hard to support??
What you mention is against the law, and not utilizing what you take is almost unheard of. People stop and pick up ROAD KILL venison. Not much antler hunting going on in the real world.

 

[torpid]

I've been attacked on here for saying I'd hunt hunters. All of a sudden the hunters are the ones screaming murder! When the hunters in Wisconsin were gunned down like 'varmints' by Vang I applauded it, it's about time a hunter looked down the barrel of a gun. When I see human suffering it doesn't bother me in the least, but when I say this all of a sudden I'm the one that has a problem.

Okay...

So if human suffering doesn't bother you in the least, then why is animal suffering any different? Why the glee at dead humans just because they previously killed animals themselves?

In your opinion, if humans are no better than animals (as humans are animals), then why not accept all animals as equal in the evolutionary chain, and not care about either one's suffering?

I mean, if you want to knock humanity off of it's human-created pedestal, that's your prerogative, but why not leave things equally on the same ground?

No need to build a human-created pedestal for animals.

The animals don't care what humans think, and don't care about being "championed". They do what animals do, and if you think of the human animal, so do we.

We didn't get to this point in our evolutionary history by not hunting.

 

[TCB in TN]

I couldn't agree more with this. It's common knowledge that serial killers enjoy killing animals and enjoy watching them suffer. I have a problem with watching animals suffer, I can't stand it and would gladly torture any human that does unethical things to animals. That goes for breeding and training cocks or pit bulls or whatever. I've been attacked on here for saying I'd hunt hunters. All of a sudden the hunters are the ones screaming murder! When the hunters in Wisconsin were gunned down like 'varmints' by Vang I applauded it, it's about time a hunter looked down the barrel of a gun. When I see human suffering it doesn't bother me in the least, but when I say this all of a sudden I'm the one that has a problem.

As this is the Highroad, I cannot even begin to describe what I felt when I read this. There is just to much wrong with this to even begin.


I grew up hunting, and fishing, and even though I don't hunt these days, I still do varmit control, although many of those varmits are not "natural" one. Living in the country we get lots of dump offs. Lots of people drive out of town to "get rid" of the unwanted creatures they have. I guess since they figure since we have the "room" we will only to happy to take care of the crap they don't want. Those creatures end up on our farm, chasing our animals, eating our ducks, geese, chickens, goats etc. Ever seen a horse ran though a barb wire fence by a bunch of strays? How about goats after a bunch of dogs get in? Geese, chickens etc? Not pretty, but you get the idea. And don't even start with animal control. Good folks, spread way to thin, and by the time they get here, all that is there to see is what ever is left. Sorry about the rant, but it is a sore point here.

As for wild game, I have 2 points. 1st is that most of us eat meat, myself included. If you eat it from the store, from your own barn, or harvested legally from the woods, then I have NO problems with it. BTW I love horses, and dogs, but if you want to eat them along with what ever other animal you prefer, then it's fine with me too. 2nd. I have seen the results of over population, "a few years back there were deer dying in a wildlife area in FL that weas pathetic." Managed hunting is saving widelife. End of story.

My take on all of this is simply this, America is supposed to be a free country, if you want to do something then it should be fine as long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights on another PERSON.

 

[HuntCast]

Huntcast? Are you sure you want to go that way? That would be a whole new thread and a much uglier one to boot.

I don't see why it would be ugly, here of all places. This is The High Road after all........ a bastion for the 2A absolutists of the world.

I'll say it again. If you do not support ALL lawful uses of arms, then you do not support the 2A, and in fact, you are working to undermine it's guarantee.
Let me emphasize the word LAWFUL again. Why would anyone here have a problem with agreeing to that?

BTW, The 2A says nothing about "fire"arms. Just arms. Archery and knives count in that statement too.

 

[Titan6]

LOL:

Mice - I don't kill. I use humane traps and release them away from my home.

I wonder what happens next? I bet they just go away....

However, none of those do I go out of my way, setting aside a weekend, to kill?

How about I just go out to my back porch and shoot thumper who is eating my peas and carrots? Is that morally okay if I don't eat him? Because you kind of need more than one rabbit to make a stew anyway.

Huntcast: Just to give you an idea of the size of the issue what about use that is legal in one state and not another?

 

[HuntCast]

Huntcast: Just to give you an idea of the size of the issue what about use that is legal in one state and not another?

I must be missing something. Lawful means lawful.
I don't understand why you ask that?

 

[Hunt4life]

As noted, however, the existence of a law does not create reality, just as 'gun-free zones' don't become places of safety and virtue.

Nor do people follow this law out of the goodness of their hearts - if it was all about proper herd management, conservation, and eating what you kill, we would need neither the laws referenced nor enforcers of them, would we?

True. But if that's an argument against hunting its an argument against gun ownership as well.

I mean, I could say if the 2nd-A was all about keeping arms for the defense of self and state we wouldn't need laws against murder.

But as a hunter, it is important to me that people know "shooting 10 deer just for their heads and horns and leaving the meat to waste" is:

1) an aberration
2) has been illegal for generations
3) Hunters passed those laws because they wanted the wasteful practice to end
4) stating it as if it is the norm does the image and future of hunting as much good as stating "assault weapons" and "saturday night specials" are used to mow down police officers and children in the streets.

Certainly you would stand to clarify the latter, right? So it should come as no surprise that I stand to clarify the former.

Simply, its unfair and dishonest to point toward an aberration and state it as if it's the norm.

 

[KMBRTAC45]

I agree with everything said here. I have been a hunter for 22 years, and have NEVER shot anything I did not eat. I have no tolerance for people who poach. I am a pro-gun, pro-hunting, pro-target shooting, pro-self defense, pro-trap & skeet(even though I don't do it),pro-mind your own business and I'll do the same.

Well, chilluns, having done a fair amount of hunting over these last 60-some years of being big enough to be a hunter, I tend to have a few comments on the issue.

No game animal species is anywhere near being endangered by the actions of hunters in today's world. Nowhere. I hope it's obvious I'm not seeing poachers as the same thing as hunters.

The near-demise of the bison was due to deliberate U.S. government policy, to "...destroy the commissary of the Plains Indian," per the War Department. The demise of the passenger pigeon was due to the mix of market hunting for restaurants and cafes, and clearing forested habitat areas for farming.

Today's game laws are a direct result of hunters' efforts to ensure an ongoing huntable populations. The Dingell/Johnson excise tax on firearms was called for by hunters. Same for the Pittman/Robinson tax. That money is allocated to state wildlife agencies, pro-rated by the numbers of licenses sold. Non-shooters get a free ride.

A birder can get a thrill from seeing one of the few remaining members of an endangered species. A hunter has a much stronger vested interest in the health of a species, in that there must be a surplus or he cannot hunt. The hunters' fundings, then, benefit all those who cherish wildlife. Some may not realize it, but it's rather difficult to do things which benefit one species of wildlife without benefitting all others in that habitat.

Morality? Well, meat's meat. The only difference between the hunter and one who buys meat in a grocery or eats meat at a restaurant is that the hunter is a do-it-yourselfer. The same holds true for a gardener and his veggies, of course. Those who don't provide their own are merely hiring others to do their scut work for them.

Opinion: A deer is no more noble than a cow. A wild turkey is no more noble than a barnyard chicken.

Philosophically? Well, when I'm hunting, I feel connected to a few hundred (few thousand?) generations of forebears. Same when sitting around the fire at hunt camp. I'm proving myself to myself, that I'm not condemned to be some sort of hapless couch potato who relies on somebody else to provide for me. I'm also thinking about yummy-tasties. I'm a natural food freak, loving the taste of backstrap, or quail breast or javelina hams. Those aren't sold in my local A&Poo Feed Store.

Practical: I once offered a $1,000 challenge to a guy who said there's no big deal to killing a deer with a scoped rifle: I'd rig a camera on a rifle stock, with crosshairs on the focal plane. The deal is, find a really nice buck, and bring me a picture with the crosshairs in the right place for a clean kill. Ya got two frames of film available. Good picture? Get a $1,000. No picture? Pay me. All he had to do was come go hunt with me. No cost to him for the deal, food, travel, lease, whatever. Seems like it didn't look all that easy, after all.

I'll never put any bumrap on somebody who doesn't want to hunt. It's not my business. But I won't tolerate a bunch of mouth music from an anti-hunter. In the last half-century or so, I've yet to hear an argument that sounded anywhere near like something I'd expect hear from a mature adult.

Art

 

[Art Eatman]

From Tigerclaw X:

"To me. Sport hunting is getting your kicks from death. Pretty much in the same area as snuff style porn and sadism. A person gets kicks from death of living beings."

That's merely an uniformed opinion; it in no way matches the attitude of the many hunters I have known.

"I do have a problem if someone takes a rifle. Kills 20 deer, chops the head off the biggest one and dumps the rest of carcasses in the forest to rot."

Who doesn't? That's at best called poaching. But that sort of behavior has nothing to do with the activities of millions of the hunters who are honorable and ethical about seasons and bag limits.

"if a hunter knows that he has many shots in reserve, he will be sloppy, trying to get off as many shots, aiming for entire herd, crippling and wounding animals instead of killing them." I agree with him wholeheartedly."

You and your grandfather are both mistaken. Not only have I hunted with numerous people over these last several decades, but I've moderated hunt forums here and at TFL since 1999. One thing that stands out is the pride that is taken in making one-shot kills.

"Frankly, we do not have enough animals left as it is."

Insofar as game animals, this is factually incorrect. Not only are game-animal populations generally expanding, in some areas they are becoming pests. This includes whitetail deer and geese.

"Plenty of the animals already went extinct because of us."

Again, this is not a problem for game animals in today's United States. It's not happening. It's certainly not happening because of hunters.

One may have reasons to not care to partake of some endeavor. That's all well and good. It is one's right. However, in order to try to persuade others to have the same view, make sure you know the facts.

Pleasure in the hunt? Well, of course! It's quite natural: You have the challenge of finding the animal you want. You then have the challenge of getting into position for a shot. You then--I hope--make a clean, accurate hit, killing the animal. Ideally, DRT. There is always pleasure when one accomplishes one's goal. If not, don't do it. Isn't that simple?

Hey, I don't exit a grocery store with a big case of the sours. I'm thinking about supper, and maybe dessert* afterwards. Puredee pleasure. The Big Outdoors ain't nothin' but a big grocery store. But grocery stores don't have campfires and friendly folks telling lies on each other's goofs on those hunts from long, long ago.

Art

* WalMart carries a chocolate icebox pie deal that is just plumb totally sinful.

 

[Titan6]

must be missing something. Lawful means lawful.
I don't understand why you ask that

Okay so where all hunting is illegal, say duck hunting along the Potomac on the DC side... You agree that is good? And since you are still not allowed to buy or carry a gun despite whatever the court said that is okay also? And since you are only allowed certain types of guns in say CA and NJ that is okay? And since CCW is not allowed in many states but is in others you have no problem with that? And militia training is illegal in some states and not in others....

Because to do or have these things is illegal. And I think that they should be legal everywhere.

So to go to the next logical step what if they were made illegal everywhere? Would you still support the activity even though it were illegal or would you dump and run?

Because if I buy a new 30 round magazine in California I go to jail this is an unlawful use... If the California or NYC or DC view of the world were imposed on us would you still limit yourself to what was lawful and what was not?

 

[HuntCast]

PETA managed to get Dove hunting banned here, even though it is legal in almost every state they exist. I have 40 of them a night on the power lines outside my house. Just because I think I should be allowed to hunt them during season, doesn't mean I wouldn't want anyone who shot them in Michigan arrested for poaching.
I won't break the law, or advocate anyone else do it, even if in an extreme case, it is an egregious infringement on rights.

I would certainly do everything I can to change it, however.

 

[Barbara]

I'm an omnivore. I eat meat. My ancestors ate meat, my children's children will most likely eat meat..Because I'm willing to eat an animal, I'm also willing to kill it.

If you eat meat at all, you're silly to complain about hunting.

Flesh is what you're eating.

That red stuff on the bottom of the styrofoam container you get at Piggly-Wiggly? That's blood. It flowed through the veins of an animal that was trapped in a pen and eventually taken in a crowded truck to a slaughterhouse where it was killed in the most efficient manner possible, hung, its skin pulled from its muscles and then its muscles sliced into roasts and steaks and burgers.

It's then wrapped in plastic wrap and you buy it and never think about the animal whose very existence was planned around your eating habits.

Hunters don't disillusion themselves about what they're doing. They're killing another creature to feed themselves. Kroger shoppers are pretending their ribeyes are the same as their Oreo cookies.

 

[HuntCast]

I'm an omnivore. I eat meat. My ancestors ate meat, my children's children will most likely eat meat..Because I'm willing to eat an animal, I'm also willing to kill it.

If you eat meat at all, you're silly to complain about hunting.

Flesh is what you're eating.

That red stuff on the bottom of the styrofoam container you get at Piggly-Wiggly? That's blood. It flowed through the veins of an animal that was trapped in a pen and eventually taken in a crowded truck to a slaughterhouse where it was killed in the most efficient manner possible, hung, its skin pulled from its muscles and then its muscles sliced into roasts and steaks and burgers.

It's then wrapped in plastic wrap and you buy it and never think about the animal whose very existence was planned around your eating habits.

Hunters don't disillusion themselves about what they're doing. They're killing another creature to feed themselves. Kroger shoppers are pretending their ribeyes are the same as their Oreo cookies.

I agree with all of that except the line where we are doing it to feed ourselves. While that is one reason, it isn't the only reason. You don't HAVE to eat something to make it ethical to hunt it. I used to feel this way...... till I realized it was a feeling, and not based on even the slightest bit of thought.
We in the U.S. don't eat coyotes. We don't eat crows, or bobcats, or a fox, but it is just as valid to hunt those things as it is a deer or elk or pheasant.

 

[.cheese.]

Titan - as for the mice, my guess is that they probably get eaten by something else when I release them. I just figure it's better to at least let the circle of life be the culprit than just killing it and tossing it in the trash (although I suppose some could make an argument that the circle of life takes place with the bacteria and such). It's just a personal thing.

As for your other question, I said in another post in this thread (my first I think), that that example is ok.

I mean, really given my standards even killing the mouse would be ok, but I just choose not to do it. Doesn't feel necessary. - but that's really a whole separate thread and not THR gun related.

Huntcast - I'm really not sure how much of the game that is legally taken is actually eaten. Like I clearly said, if it's eaten, I'm ok with it. I just get the impression that there is more trophy and pure sport hunting (in the sense of the sport of shooting the animal and that's it) going on than some want to admit. I could be wrong. Bottom line is that I'm no hunting expert as I'm just getting into it. However, I've overheard enough conversations in places like BassPro and even Walmart that got my blood boiling. Usually people who go out and just shoot animals for fun. I hold my tongue, but I really have wanted to give them a piece of my mind. THey're not talking about taking care of a varmint problem on their property, or hunting for food, or anything of the like. They're just talking about going out into a field or so and taking out pretty much whatever is around. I know it's illegal, but there are unfortunately some that would consider that hunting.

Hopefully not THR members.

 

[HuntCast]

Huntcast - I'm really not sure how much of the game that is legally taken is actually eaten. Like I clearly said, if it's eaten, I'm ok with it. I just get the impression that there is more trophy and sport hunting going on than some want to admit. I could be wrong. Bottom line is that I'm no hunting expert as I'm just getting into it. However, I've overheard enough conversations in places like BassPro and even Walmart that got my blood boiling. Usually people who go out and just shoot animals for fun. I hold my tongue, but I really have wanted to give them a piece of my mind. THey're not talking about taking care of a varmint problem on their property, or hunting for food, or anything of the like. They're just talking about going out into a field or so and taking out pretty much whatever is around. I know it's illegal, but there are unfortunately some that would consider that hunting.

There are idiots in every aspect of society, I'll grant you that, but I would say the number of people who actually go out in the woods and just shoot stuff that moves is roughly similar to people who go out in the city and shoot stuff that moves...... including cars and people.
Does it happen? Yes. Does it happen as much as the antis want you to believe it does?

 

[Barbara]

I just figure it's better to at least let the circle of life be the culprit than just killing it and tossing it in the trash (although I suppose some could make an argument that the circle of life takes place with the bacteria and such).

I'm arguing that I'm part of that circle of life and its better for me to eat an animal than for it to rot on the edge of a swamp.

 

[ptmmatssc]

poaching :

1. the illegal practice of trespassing on another's property to hunt or steal game without the landowner's permission.
2. any encroachment on another's property, rights, ideas, or the like.

to catch or kill (an animal) without permission on someone else's property, or to kill animals illegally to get (valuable parts of them)

At one time (in my state) you could hunt on your own property , take game , and not need a license to do it . Now , you MUST have a license to hunt your own property or it is considered poaching . I have known people that "poached" deer in order to feed their family . Is it wrong to sustain your family even if it means you are breaking the law? I am in no way endorsing poaching , but so far all the comments I have heard in this thread equate it with mass slaughter or trophy hunting . Would I personally poach? My answer is no , and I would hope that I could always provide for my family . It's to bad the days are gone that a man's home was his castle and he could do as he wished with and on his own land . But I digress.

 

[ptmmatssc]

Wow , 200 posts for this thread . Haven't seen so many since the last zombie thread lol . Can tell this is kind of a hot button issue with many people .