I run into this argument every once in a while. The argument is usually that " I dont think its ok to kill for “fun”".
How would you respond to this position?
Depends on what is being hunted dunnit? Here in the UK I have no problem with eating meat and being opposed to *fox *hunting – the unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible.
Fair point. Lets say you go hunting in Africa for the “big five”.
Just don’t call it a “sport”, and I’ll turn a blind - but slightly annoyed - eye to your shenanigans.
I would agree with it. A lion that kills for food is natural, but a lion that kills just to kill is a rogue lion.
Offended? No. Indifferent? Yes.
I suppose an argument can be made that killing and eating an animal specifically bred and raised for that purpose is fundamentally more ethical than killing an animal that is otherwise going through its “Normal” life.
However, I have never encountered this argument in the wild.
Added; Oh. Sport hunting. No, I see no reason to kill something you are not going to eat, or which is not directly threatening your family or property.
Lion, rhino, hippo, elephant, giraffe? Or maybe cape buffalo instead of giraffe?
If it’s the killing itself that’s fun, then yeah, it’s reasonable to be offended by that.
The hunters who bother me, morally, are the ones who actually enjoy the killing (or worse, causing to suffer) of a living creature; but not all hunters fall into this category.
Yes, but they are all demonstrably indifferent to the feelings of the animal they are shooting, no?
If the animal being hunted is a food animal, that will be used for such, then I don’t see the argument. Would the potentially less humane denouement, not be offset by the animal’s having lived free up to that point?
Meat for food may be arguably a luxury, but on the continuum of “pure need <----> pure luxury” it probably comes closer to the “pure need” end than does killing for fun. True, some vermin need killing, but you don’t see people getting all dressed up to go ratting, or at least not where I come from, and even then I’d argue there’s a distinction between “kills things that need killing, incidentally deriving satisfaction and enjoyment from it” and “kills things for satisfaction and enjoyment, incidentally getting rid of things that need killing”.
I’d also be suspicious of a slaughterman who enjoyed his work - other than, say, the satisfaction of a job well done with the least suffering caused - even though people need the meat.
I don’t find the cencept offensive as much as the execution.
Someone who stalks a deer with a bow and arrow or knife, brings it down and takes it home to feed his family is to be admired.
A fat git sitting around with a high-powered rifle until he gets a deer in his sights to kill for fun and mounting is offensive.
You have too many variables, which one makes the difference?
Have you seen bows these days? Most have ultra-high tech sights and equipment. The sitting around? Some forms of hunting are more amenable to moving around then others, based upon the behaviors of the game.
Purely sport hunting is sometimes bothersome (fox). Sustainable hunting is well good, whether for food or varminting like for coyotes. Poachers suck though.
Do we have to fire any slaughterhouse workers who don’t demonstrate a proper dislike for their jobs? Do I have to chew my steak glumly so as not to have fun from the death of an animal?
If you are sitting in a steakhouse enjoying your meal you have no room to complain about people killing animals. Just because you’ve had it done for you by professionals where you can’t see or hear it doesn’t mean that you’ve been kind to that animal. I would claim that throwing way meat is worse than hunting. How is leaving 3/4 of a T-bone on your plate any different than a hunter killing an animal and leaving it by the side of the road?
Hunting, at least in the US, is pretty well regulated and is supposed to prevent exess and cruelty. Of course that’s not always the case but it’s not like hunters are just blazing away at anything they want.
I personally think for most people the big appeal of hunting has something to do with finding fun in exercising power, control, and in ‘playing God’. As such, it really turns me off and strikes me as disrespectful to life.
What other animals besides man kills for fun, if their environment is safe and they are sufficiently fed?
That shows how much you know about fox hunting. I’ll guess you’re a city-dweller.
But back to the OP. For me, a confirmed carnivore, it depends upon the method of hunting and what happens to the hunted. A creature should be only be killed for the resources it provides, not pleasure. Where possible, kills should be swift and not cause undue distress. Traps should kill quickly.
Sure. There’s a number of reasons why someone may dislike hunting besides a disapproval of killing and eating animals. Some examples (not all “logical”, as such):
-
Cruelty; animals killed in hunting are less likely to die quickly.
-
The “killing for the sake of killing is creepy” argument.
-
It’s bad for the prey species; human hunters tend to kill the biggest, prettiest, healthiest individuals instead of the weakest. Hunters essentially selectively breed animals to be small, sickly and ugly.
-
Hunters are often dangerously irresponsible. I recall the example of the man who lost several cattle to hunters, even after painting “COW” on the side of one. And the Michigan law allowing for legally blind hunters.
-
The “it’s unnecessary argument”; you can get meat at the supermarket without bothering the wildlife.
-
“Hunters are jerks and poseurs”; people who go on like what they are doing is all manly and brave and challenging when in fact it’s horribly onesided are offensive. One of the more extreme examples being shooting caged animals.
Dogs, cats.
For certain things we hunt, overpopulation is the problem, because we have essentially become their only natural predator. I honestly think it’s inhumane to be against all forms of hunting.
But my answer to the OP is that, of course it can be logical: besides what has already been said, hunting is not he only way to get meat. One doesn’t hunt a cow that they are raising for beef.
Most mamalian predators, I suspect. I discount non-mammals because they are too alien to us to make any plausable claims about what they find “fun”.
Certainly cats do. Outdoor cats are well known to do this - they get fed the best primo kitty chow indoors, which they eat with gusto, and go out to spend their leasure hours stalking and killing (but not necessarily eating) rodents and birds. While it is impossible to say whether an animal has “fun” - that’s a human concept and we must be wary of anthropomorphosis - this observer can only conclude that if cats can have “fun”, they find hunting to be “fun” and do it even though they are safe and fed. Indeed, some make the argument that you should not let cats out, for this very reason - that they will for fun hunt birds.
Also in terms of purely wild animals - foxes, coyotes, wolves, etc.
Foxes are notorious for this - they on occasion get into a hen coop, and kill every bird, far more than they can eat, apparently for the sheer fun of it (again, a perhaps justified anthropomorphism).