I don’t like turkey, but my sisters do. If one of them asked me to bring in a wild turkey–say, for Thanksgiving–I would, even though for otherwise I decline to kill animals I don’t intend to eat.
Moose, if you stopped to think instead of just spewing kneejerk platitudes, you’d realize that most hunters hunt because it’s cheaper to shoot your own than to buy it from the butcher.
But you won’t.
This bears repeating.
Killing for fun is repellent, so I understand that aspect of the anti-hunting argument. But would it really be better to herd the deer onto a truck and haul them to the slaughterhouse and kill them there before eating them? The idea that the slaughterhouse is kinder is weird to me.
Why is it wrong to enjoy hunting/bringing down an animal?
It’s wrong to inflict cruelty on an animal, but what’s wrong with making a clean kill and enjoying the process?
Oh, well, in that case, could you bag one for me, too, while you’re at it? 
Thx!
Then it’s rancid and/or wasn’t cooked well.
That rarest of things, a thinking man’s belch joke. Good job.
Try using the word ‘localvore’ and your town/county as search terms. Might be able to find something that way.
How about this compromise.
Skald is a murderer, and mutantmoose is guilty of conspiracy to commit murder. 
Hey, hey, hey!
I for one don’t give a damn about how foie gras is produced. Ducks are used for domestic foie gras. So a woman(the ducks respond better to women, IIRC) has a gaggle of ducks in upstate NY that follow her around and she has a feeding pack on her back with a tube coming off of it whereby she inserts it into their throats, and they eat and eat and eat a bunch of grains.
They get very thirsty from overeating, then they go to a trough and drink like crazy. Rinse, lather, repeat, the duck eventually has an oversized liver that is harvested in due time.
How is that any more inhumane than massive chicken farms, pig farms for bacon, etc?
It’s not. And who cares about a stupid food bird anyway. It’s fucking good. So good it’s…evil?
Most deer hunters don’t take “potshots” as they are skilled marksmen, and don’t want their kill to suffer. Not to mention it’s a pain in the ass to chase down an animal that you didn’t get a clean shot on, so you try for that every time.
Then there’s flavor…wild animals have a much more varied diet, and their taste is much gamier (desirable to some) than any farm-raised animal or fish.
Is it murder to kill fish, too? Or are they too stupid to count?
You call it weird; I call it something a bit more repulsive: Hypocritical.
No way. No way you can eat meat, and then pretend to be on some kind of moral high ground because your meat died stressed the fuck out in cramped quarters and the hunted meat died at the hands of someone that was ‘enjoying’ themselves.
I mean, press pause on that idea for one looney minute. I was at work and so had to read this thread from my phone, but did I actually read some posters say that it is worse to hunt than to buy meat in a store because the hunters are enjoying the kill?? I have to go back and read the thread again.
Even if hunters “enjoyed the kill” (which to me amounts more to “great shot, Bob!” than “oooh, I just killed something, neato, lookit those guts oozing out! Awesome!”), it still doesn’t matter much to this argument.
I agree with Skald in the literal sense: murder is a word used by humans to define the premeditated killing of other humans. That’s it. I don’t really care what the dictionaries say.
“Killing” and “murder” are NOT analogous in that regard.
Hunters that I am friendly or acquainted with are better conservationists than the so-called and self-proclaimed “environmentalists”, whom tend to allow words to be louder than their actions, don’t fully understand issues regarding guns/hunting/etc and mostly pay lip service to Greenpeace and PETA efforts without bothering to walk in the other side’s shoes.
Why doesn’t it matter? I think that’s really the whole point. The perception that anti-hunters have of hunters, unfortunately, is that they do enjoy killing animals and putting their stuffed heads up on the wall as proof of their masculinity. I know this is the impression I got growing up watching cartoons/popular tv (I’m in my thirties). For the record tho, I don’t have any problem with hunting in general.
If there’s anything that doesn’t matter in these online arguments, it’s the hunters you know. Like it or not, this isn’t the perception that many people have of hunters. Maybe there is some way to convince the anti-hunters that most hunters are like the ones you know?
Agreed. As I stated before, if an animal is going to get killed, and the animal isn’t a hominid, it doesn’t give two shits whether the killer is enjoying the process. It doesn’t want to suffer pain, and I think that’s a desire worth respecting. It doesn’t understand what it means to die, so it has no opinion on whether it dies. But it doesn’t want to suffer.
There’s a line from “The Walrus and the Carpenter” that’s relevant here, as the Walrus and the Carpenter are feasting on the young oysters they’ve taken out for a walk:
Lew was mocking precisely the hypocrisy of mutantmoose: the Walrus bemoans the suffering of the oysters even while he’s eating the biggest ones, acting as though his tears mean jack shit to his dinner.
I consider the gleeful hunter who thoroughly enjoys being the Angel of Death–and who shoots cleanly and quickly–to be far more ethical than the hair-pulling-out shopper at Wal-Mart who buys factory-farmed pigs.
Except that mutantmoose and the other rabid anti-hunters hereabout have given no evidence of knowing any hunters personally, and every evidence of having opinions based on no data whatsodamnever.
I ain’t rabid, my friend - you’re the killer here, not me.
I agree that animals don’t care whether the hunter is enjoying the process. But I’m not talking about the animals, I’m talking about the killers.
Why kill?
Just answer me that one simple question. Why kill? Surely it’s easier not to kill than to kill.
Because you’re morally responsible for the foreseeable outcomes of your decisions.
If you decide to eat bacon at Denny’s, it’s foreseeable that they’ll order some replacement bacon. And that bacon is going to come from an industrial hog farm, where the pigs have their tails sliced off to avoid the cannibalism that results from the tremendous overcrowding, where moms are strapped down 24 hours a day so they don’t, in the course of shifting position in their tiny cramped cells, crush their nursing piglets, where workers are numbed by the suffering and so they often inflict further suffering with little thought given to it. You’re paying to make that happen.
Why do YOU do that? Just because it’s easier for you to pay for such suffering than it is to go on a hunt?
Monster.
It seems to me that there are negative things associated with factory farming and fishing that are not found with hunting and fishing as an individual.
Large scale fishing is very inefficient, killing a significant bycatch which goes to waste, and in the case of draggers, damaging the seafloor. Individual fisherpeople however, produce a relatively small bycatch and minimal environmental damage.
Large scale livestock production uses grains that could be used for human food, produces a lot of methane (a greenhouse gas) as well as runoff and eutrophication . Hunting involves occasional accidents, and some lead pollution.
So…shouldn’t we be banning factory farming and commercial fishing as unethical, and encouraging large well-regulated tracts of land for hunting and fishing?