Hunt animals for population control using standard bullets.
Hunt animals for population control, but instead of bullets, use tranquilizer darts containing a mixture of time-release euthanizing agent and heroin. This way, the animal gets to have one last sojourn in the paradise of untarnished bliss before it dies.
Those who care about the feelings of animals may accept or reject (1). This depends on whether they agree with the arguments for population control – such as that animals will be left with a scarcity of food if not actively hunted. The question for the rejectors of (1) is then whether (3) is an economically and morally sound alternative to (2).
In safeguarding the welfare of animals, one must also ask a metaphysical question: does it mean anything for an animal to suffer before it dies? Suffering has a cognitive function. It initiates specific behaviors, the most notable of which is the future avoidance of the noxious stimulus. Philosophers such as Dan Dennett go so far as to claim that the “qualia” or subjective experiences of suffering reduces to behavioral impulses. Rob an animal – or for that matter, a human being – of the opportunity to learn through future avoidance, and what remains of suffering? Can suffering unrecognized as the basis for aversion even be called “suffering” at all? It is here to be understood that the animal will be long dead before it can take part in the remembrance of what made the suffering horrible.
Is it economically sound to let hunted game have a rush of untainted euphoria before they die? Is it morally desirable? Or, as behavioralist interpretations of suffering suggest, is the deep metaphysical contradiction in the senselessness of suffering before death enough heroin for anyone?
“Oops, I missed.” Pockets syringe
“Oops, I missed.” Pockets syringe
“Oops, I missed.” Pockets syringe
“Oops, I missed.” Pockets syringe
“Oops, I missed.” Pockets syringe
Excusez moi, m’sieur et madame, I would be how you say remiss if I did not interrupt your tête-à-tête to mention tonight’s especial. We have a limited number of beauuutiful steaks from venison that was the result of a very humane harvest. The animal it was stalked for days to ensure that it had already lived a full, contented life. It was then queeekly dispatched with a syringe containing a potent psychedelic. The result is a truly memorable dinner from a deer that was, at the end, what is the proper term? High, as, fuck.
Always reminds me of a good T-shirt. It had ATF in big bold letters vertically on the viewer’s left / wearer’s right. Training off horizontally from the ATF in smaller letters was
lcohol
obacco
irearms
Then underneath it says “Sounds like the start of a pretty good party”.
I was serious also. I dont think illicit drugs, firearms and hunters are ever gonna be a good idea. Hell, I don’t like the idea of alcohol at deer camps. As for the ‘redneck’ descriptor, I apologize.
Ha! I was almost offended by ‘redneck’, but then I saw you are from Arkansas, where in some places out in the forests there pretty much are people who fit that stereotype and figured you must know the difference. Not meaning to offend, I AR!
It’d be worse if every armed man in Arkansas had a pocket full of heroin syringes. I honestly agree with you. I also agree with the OP that the deer would be that much better off, assuming they actually get off on heroin (catnip doesn’t do it for me, so…)
Carfentanil, which is an opiate chemically related to heroin, is used for large-animal tranquilization, and it will take down an elephant in microgram amounts, one reason why it’s so popular as a drug of abuse. However, darting an animal is meant only to sedate it, not kill it.
They use Fatal-Plus or some other barbiturate derivative for that. :dubious:
Right. Not bad people, but rural and poor. Poor as in, hunting can be a necessary form of income. Just from a demographic POV, probably not a very good policy decision to distribute 1000s of doses of heroin here (or really to any population at large). Especially for a PETA kind of cause like this- the locals will be against the proposal and might consider mischief in response to this government intrusion.
I assume “heroin for deer” is to be a government program? And for all I know there are a lot of PETA fans in AR, but the hunters I know here aren’t that into these kinds of initiatives.
AR!