Hunting Debate

[sdbest]

Quote by: Anmon I take any pleasure in killing something thats a pest, or if its for food, I don't hunt for sport, or because I get great pleasure simply from killing.

Why would you 'enjoy' killing a 'pest' even if it was necessary to do so. As I say, if killing for whatever reason, no matter how justifiable, gives you enjoyment, you have a psychological problem, by definition, in my view. There should be no joy in death, no joy in killing, no joy in inflicting suffering.

[The Bacon Guy]

Quote by: Matt He has never said all trends, but he does comment that most trends that have been happening for a while will continue.

Source?

Quote by: Matt How is my arguement based on religion? Look at my previous posts.

If you believe that wolves are a superior predator to humans based on the belief that God created wolves to hunt deer, then that aspect of your argument is based entirely on religion.

Quote by: Matt Do you understand what 'population control' is? If some deer come onto 'our' land, that does not mean the cougars and wolves are not doing a good enough job. It means the deer are just moving about grazing, like they would have before we came here. You can't expect an animal to say "Oh, this is human land, I better go back into the bush".

Of course we can’t, which is why we have to keep the population low enough that this is not an issue.

Quote by: Matt Deer eating our gardens or walking in the local park does not mean they are overpopulated. So if we re-introduce wolves and cougars, they bring them down to levels where no deer is starving, everything is good, even if they go eat our gardens or walk around in the local park. Since, if you remember, the meaning of the word overpopulated, deer would no longer be technically overpopulated, since they aren't starved.

A species is overpopulated when it exceeds its habitat’s ability to cope. If the deer are leaving their own habitat to find food on ours, then their needs are obviously not met by their own habitat.

Quote by: Matt They don't know it is our property, do they? They would normally roam around across North America, and we are restricting them greatly. So we should not kill them just because they are on 'our' property. Unless you believe deer have the mental capacity we do, then they would know, and it would be then illegal to hunt them.

It doesn’t matter if they are aware that they’re damaging our property. An intrusion of cockroaches infesting my house isn’t aware that it’s doing so, but that doesn’t change my right to call in pest control.

Quote by: Matt Hunting may sometimes work at keeping the population down of deer, but it is no way necessary. See dictionary meaning: being essential, indispensable, or requisite: a necessary part of the motor. Hunting is not necessary, since I have proven re-introducing natural predators could work too (it may be more money, but it would work).

Of course there are other ways of keeping the population under control. The point is that hunting is a perfectly valid and in many ways superior method of doing so. We don’t make something illegal simply because it’s not deemed to be unconditionally necessary.

And don’t say that you haven’t been arguing for a ban on hunting because your posts would suggest otherwise.

Quote by: SD As I say, if killing for whatever reason, no matter how justifiable, gives you enjoyment, you have a psychological problem, by definition,

What definition?

[Anmon]

Quote by: sdbest Why would you 'enjoy' killing a 'pest' even if it was necessary to do so. As I say, if killing for whatever reason, no matter how justifiable, gives you enjoyment, you have a psychological problem, by definition, in my view. There should be no joy in death, no joy in killing, no joy in inflicting suffering.

So your one of these catch and release guys?
Thanks for making the pest problem worse.

[sdbest]

Quote by: Anmon So your one of these catch and release guys? Thanks for making the pest problem worse.

"Catch and release" is torture, at least the "catch" part is. What else can it be characterized as?

[Gods_Mercenary]

An alternative to killing that I'm sure the mouse prefers. Anyway, I really don't care, I don't need to be finding dead mice all over the place or my nephew dying from the little pellet he found under the radiator.

Taking pleasure in death may be wrong, but Humans have a decidedly sadistic streak. Gladiator games, dog fights, humans have always enjoyed death and killing. I don't think it necessarily makes you mentally ill, horrifically barbaric, maybe, but humans are that too.

[Anmon]

Quote by: sdbest "Catch and release" is torture, at least the "catch" part is. What else can it be characterized as?

haha torture? Thats being a little over dramatic isn't it?
Do you think theres a guy inside the trap giving the mouse water torture or something?

[Anmon]

=Gods_Mercenary;498830]An alternative to killing that I'm sure the mouse prefers.

tough, its a pest, and if you release them they will just come back with more mice from having sex with another mouse.

Anyway, I really don't care, I don't need to be finding dead mice all over the place or my nephew dying from the little pellet he found under the radiator.

Yeah pellets aren't the go, of course you could just explain to your nephew not to touch them and why.
But I am against all poisons, so I'm with you there.
The mouse, just twist its neck around, dead in a split second, wont even know it.

Taking pleasure in death may be wrong, but Humans have a decidedly sadistic streak. Gladiator games, dog fights, humans have always enjoyed death and killing. I don't think it necessarily makes you mentally ill, horrifically barbaric, maybe, but humans are that too.

Not me, killing for sport is one thing I really hate.

[Matt]

Quote by: Anmon Prove it? Millions of people world wide enjoy shooting animals birds etc, for sport or food, thats proof enough. I win.

Wow, great reason *roles eyes*. If you expect to win this debate, that is not good enough.

Millions of people also think the law that kills woman if they are not faithful to their husband, is good. Does that mean it is right? No.

Quote by: sdbest You believe that killing for fun is a good thing? Millions of people world wide doing something isn't necessarily a justification for anything. Millions of people believe Vishnu created the world, but that doesn't necessarily mean Vishnu is real or created the world. Ask a Christian. In my view, killing for enjoyment is a mental illness. Only someone with a psychological disorder could take pleasure in killing.

I agree.

Quote by: Anmon I take any pleasure in killing something thats a pest, or if its for food, I don't hunt for sport, or because I get great pleasure simply from killing.

How do you take pleasure in it? I'm just curious.

Quote by: The Bacon Guy Source? If you believe that wolves are a superior predator to humans based on the belief that God created wolves to hunt deer, then that aspect of your argument is based entirely on religion. Of course we can’t, which is why we have to keep the population low enough that this is not an issue. A species is overpopulated when it exceeds its habitat’s ability to cope. If the deer are leaving their own habitat to find food on ours, then their needs are obviously not met by their own habitat. It doesn’t matter if they are aware that they’re damaging our property. An intrusion of cockroaches infesting my house isn’t aware that it’s doing so, but that doesn’t change my right to call in pest control. Of course there are other ways of keeping the population under control. The point is that hunting is a perfectly valid and in many ways superior method of doing so. We don’t make something illegal simply because it’s not deemed to be unconditionally necessary. And don’t say that you haven’t been arguing for a ban on hunting because your posts would suggest otherwise. What definition?

I don't have a source to link to, but if you watch Dr. Phil enough you should hear that.

Yes, but my entire arguement against hunting is much more diverse.

We don't have to keep the population down to levels were they become rare in the suburbs or the park. That is being selfish.

No, not true. A deer's habitat is technically everywhere. Since they were here first and they roamed everywhere. By them going onto our lawns and grazing, that means they are roaming their natural turf. The deer's habitat is everywhere. Aslong as no deer are starving, the habitat is coping with the deer populations and they are not overpopulated.

Would you kill a two year old kid since it didn't know any better to dig in your garden? No, you wouldn't. Don't punish thing unless they know they are doing bad or if you told them before. If you don't want deer on your lawn, get a dog.

You said hunting is necessary to keep the deer populations down. Why are you back tracking now? I can show where you said that if you want.

If you remember my first post, I stated hunting is not needed. It is not needed, and it has been proven in this debate.

Quote by: Anmon tough, its a pest, and if you release them they will just come back with more mice from having sex with another mouse. Yeah pellets aren't the go, of course you could just explain to your nephew not to touch them and why. But I am against all poisons, so I'm with you there. The mouse, just twist its neck around, dead in a split second, wont even know it. Not me, killing for sport is one thing I really hate.

I use live traps (for packrats, mice, ect.) and once caught I re-locate them to a more natural place.

[The Bacon Guy]

Quote by: Matt I don't have a source to link to,

Then it's worthless.

Quote by: Matt We don't have to keep the population down to levels were they become rare in the suburbs or the park. That is being selfish.

No, it's protecting our property.

Quote by: Matt No, not true. A deer's habitat is technically everywhere. Since they were here first and they roamed everywhere.

But now we're here and we've created our own habitat in which deer are not welcome. We have every right to defend our territory against invading animals.

Would you kill a two year old kid since it didn't know any better to dig in your garden?

A two year old kid isn't a deer. There are better ways of keeping the kid off my lawn than killing it.

No, you wouldn't. Don't punish thing unless they know they are doing bad or if you told them before. If you don't want deer on your lawn, get a dog.

So you would allow a rat or cockroach infestation in your house?

Quote by: Matt You said hunting is necessary to keep the deer populations down. Why are you back tracking now? I can show where you said that if you want.

I've said that keeping deer population under control is necessary, but I don't remember ever saying that hunting is the only way of doing this (though I was pretty drunk when I wrote some of those posts). In fact, I could probably find you two dozen instances in which I've said that natural predation is also a possible (though inferior) method of population control.

Quote by: Matt If you remember my first post, I stated hunting is not needed.

I also remember the variety of posts in which you have been arguing for a complete ban. I've argued several times against your idea that hunting should be illegal, and it is only now when your position is untenable that you deny this to be your argument and change it to an argument that hunting is not unconditionally necessary.

Of course this is a totally redundant position to take, since any leisure activity is unnecessary. That doesn't mean it's undesirable, functionless or that it should be banned. So if your argument is now that hunting is not unconditionally necessary, then I agree. But so what?

[Matt]

Quote by: The Bacon Guy Then it's worthless. No, it's protecting our property. But now we're here and we've created our own habitat in which deer are not welcome. We have every right to defend our territory against invading animals. A two year old kid isn't a deer. There are better ways of keeping the kid off my lawn than killing it. So you would allow a rat or cockroach infestation in your house? I've said that keeping deer population under control is necessary, but I don't remember ever saying that hunting is the only way of doing this (though I was pretty drunk when I wrote some of those posts). In fact, I could probably find you two dozen instances in which I've said that natural predation is also a possible (though inferior) method of population control. I also remember the variety of posts in which you have been arguing for a complete ban. I've argued several times against your idea that hunting should be illegal, and it is only now when your position is untenable that you deny this to be your argument and change it to an argument that hunting is not unconditionally necessary. Of course this is a totally redundant position to take, since any leisure activity is unnecessary. That doesn't mean it's undesirable, functionless or that it should be banned. So if your argument is now that hunting is not unconditionally necessary, then I agree. But so what?

It is not our property really, we bought it with money...and we can really say it is our property to other humans, who understand. Wildlife doesn't, and they shouldn't be treated like they do, unless you put them on a equal level as humans.

The habitat in some areas the deer have been crammed into cannot hold them, because it wasn't meant to, since before human developement the deer could move around in many more places then they could now. That does not constitute as overpopulation, it accounts for us taking over.

Yes there is, and there are better ways for keeping a deer off a lawn too. A) A motion detected sprinkler B) A dog C) Some clanging pots.

I like rats personally, they have can have the intelligents level of a dog, so if I had them in my house, I would live trap them, and re-locate them to a more natural setting. With cockroaches, it would depend on the number. I would most likely try to collect them in a container and move them to somewhere they wont cause issues.

I don't mind debating if it should be banned or if it is needed or whatever. I've said my points why it should be banned and why it is unnecessary, a couple have been proven wrong, I admit, but most really haven't.

If you want to get back to the wolf/cougar thing and how I showed they would actually kill less deer but the deer populations wouldn't be overpopulated, be my guest.

How is my postion untenable?

Deer would rather natural predators (see my previous posts), and natural predators would keep the deer population from getting overpopulated, but would kill less then if hunters were doing it.

[The Bacon Guy]

Quote by: Matt It is not our property really, we bought it with money...and we can really say it is our property to other humans, who understand. Wildlife doesn't, and they shouldn't be treated like they do, unless you put them on a equal level as humans.

It doesn't matter if someone knows they are doing something wrong. The damage is still being done and we still have a right to prevent it. Ignorance is not an excuse.

Quote by: Matt The habitat in some areas the deer have been crammed into cannot hold them, because it wasn't meant to,

That doesn't change the fact that it's still their habitat. If it can't hold them, it's because they're, by definition, overpopulated.

Quote by: Matt Yes there is, and there are better ways for keeping a deer off a lawn too. A) A motion detected sprinkler B) A dog C) Some clanging pots.

A) Expensive B) Some people don't like dogs and would require the dog to be in the garden 24 hours a day C) Requires people to be in their house, on the lookout, 24/7.

Keeping the deer population down is by far the best way of protecting our property from them. Prevention is better than cure.

Quote by: Matt I like rats personally, they have can have the intelligents level of a dog, so if I had them in my house, I would live trap them, and re-locate them to a more natural setting. With cockroaches, it would depend on the number. I would most likely try to collect them in a container and move them to somewhere they wont cause issues.

And you expect other people to take this course of action?

Quote by: Matt I don't mind debating if it should be banned or if it is needed or whatever. I've said my points why it should be banned and why it is unnecessary, a couple have been proven wrong, I admit, but most really haven't.

If you want something to be made illegal, the burden of proof is on you.

You haven't proven that hunting is unsustainable.
You haven't proven that deer would prefer to be killed by wolves.
You haven't proven that deer would prefer to be neutered.

Quote by: Matt If you want to get back to the wolf/cougar thing and how I showed they would actually kill less deer but the deer populations wouldn't be overpopulated, be my guest.

But you didn't show that. The only way wolves and cougars would kill less deer is if we allowed the deer to remain overpopulated (i.e. still allowed them to come onto our territory and damage our property).

Quote by: Matt How is my postion untenable?

Because you haven't been able to prove that hunting is any worse a method of population control than natural predation or neutering.

[Matt]

Quote by: The Bacon Guy It doesn't matter if someone knows they are doing something wrong. The damage is still being done and we still have a right to prevent it. Ignorance is not an excuse. That doesn't change the fact that it's still their habitat. If it can't hold them, it's because they're, by definition, overpopulated. A) Expensive B) Some people don't like dogs and would require the dog to be in the garden 24 hours a day C) Requires people to be in their house, on the lookout, 24/7. Keeping the deer population down is by far the best way of protecting our property from them. Prevention is better than cure. And you expect other people to take this course of action? If you want something to be made illegal, the burden of proof is on you. You haven't proven that hunting is unsustainable. You haven't proven that deer would prefer to be killed by wolves. You haven't proven that deer would prefer to be neutered. But you didn't show that. The only way wolves and cougars would kill less deer is if we allowed the deer to remain overpopulated (i.e. still allowed them to come onto our territory and damage our property). Because you haven't been able to prove that hunting is any worse a method of population control than natural predation or neutering.

It is not ignorance, since they don't have the chance to know what they are doing.

No, not by definition. Their habitat is all of North America, therefore, if they come onto 'our' land, that does not mean their habitat can't hold them and they are coming onto ours. Since 'our's' is actually there's.

Seriously, if you put money above a intelligent life form, that is sad. People have many options to keep deer of their property, I just suggested a few. If people are not willing to do any effort or spend any money on keeping deer away, then I would say tough *&%$.

Yes, I agree. And that can be done with re-introducing natural predators or neutering them.

No, I don't. You asked me a question, I answered what I would do.

I have proven hunting is unsustainable.
I have proven deer would rather be hunted by natural predators then hunters.
I have proven through common sense deer would rather be neutered then killed.


If you want, I can repeat all my reasons for those for the 10th time

You haven't proven most of my points wrong that hunting is unstustainable, and that deer would rather be hunted by natural predators then humans. All you have done is responded to some of the points you think you can crack, and leave the rest. Or you lead them in different directions.

That does not mean they are overpopulated, look in the dictionary please.

[Matt]

Just wnated to let people know I'll be away from the computer for the upcoming week or so. I may be able to check in sporadically though. So don't think I'm ignoring you, I will be back to answer however many posts there are.

Matt

[Technosoul]

I am not for hunting animals relative to my personal stand.

I grew up with so many pets from crows to rattlesnakes that do not find any of them a threat.

In highshool a friend of mine had his garage converted with wire cages for mice. We would catch them in the nearby fields and keep them in these large cages, they had tunnels to run in and branches to climb onto and food to eat. We would kick back after school in the evening and watch them run around all busy like, they soon became friendly and could be taken around places in our pocket if we wanted too. They are somewhat intelligent for being so small and for having such a short life span. I lived in a city like environment then, so soon the fields were covered over with houses and roads and shopping centers.

The mice were forced to seek food in warehouses where people would set traps and poison to kill the "pests" which would not have been pests if it were not for the fact people cannot live in harmony with nature.

They also killed the birds and trapped the stray cats that came onto thier property. Because all the food belongs to people only, and it is all profits for their bank accounts.

It is a shame how we miss-used our ability to dominate the earth.

[The Bacon Guy]

Quote by: Matt It is not ignorance, since they don't have the chance to know what they are doing.

That’s still ignorance.

Quote by: Matt No, not by definition. Their habitat is all of North America, therefore, if they come onto 'our' land, that does not mean their habitat can't hold them and they are coming onto ours. Since 'our's' is actually there's.

It is no longer theirs. We claimed it and it is therefore ours, just as would be the case with any other animal. It may have originally belonged to deer, many years ago, but then America originally belonged to the Native Americans many years ago. Times have changed, humans are here now and they have the same right to territory as any other animal.

Quote by: Matt Seriously, if you put money above a intelligent life form, that is sad. People have many options to keep deer of their property, I just suggested a few. If people are not willing to do any effort or spend any money on keeping deer away, then I would say tough *&%$.

You expect people to spend their entire lives on their lawns with two saucepans?

Quote by: Matt Yes, I agree. And that can be done with re-introducing natural predators or neutering them.

And for keeping the deer population at a level which doesn’t affect our property, hunting is the superior method, both as far as the deer are concerned (less deer killed overall*) and as far as humans are concerned (fun pastime).

*And yes, this is the case because we’re talking about keeping the deer population at a level which doesn’t affect our property; not simply at the level which they would naturally have been at before humans arrived.

Quote by: Matt No, I don't.

So you acknowledge that people have the right to kill pests which invade their house and cause damage?

Quote by: Matt I have proven hunting is unsustainable. I have proven deer would rather be hunted by natural predators then hunters. I have proven through common sense deer would rather be neutered then killed. If you want, I can repeat all my reasons for those for the 10th time

And I can repeat my counter arguments again and you can ignore them again.

Your “proof” that hunting is unsustainable is that most trends will continue indefinitely. You haven’t sourced this claim or provided anything of substance to back it up.

Your “proof” that deer would rather be hunted by natural predators than hunters relies on us giving up our territory to the deer. Not going to happen.

Your “proof” that deer would prefer to be neutered than killed relies on a false comparison between the mind of a human and the mind of a deer.

Quote by: Matt You haven't proven most of my points wrong that hunting is unstustainable, and that deer would rather be hunted by natural predators then humans.

I don’t have to prove them wrong because I’m not the one proposing that something be made illegal. The burden of proof is on you.

Quote by: Matt That does not mean they are overpopulated, look in the dictionary please.

My garden is no longer a deer’s habitat; it’s mine. If they stray into my habitat and therefore into potential danger to find food, then their own habitat is clearly not able to meet their needs.

And also, using your own definition from earlier in this thread, the deer damage people's property and the population is therefore at a level which causes environmental damage. Overpopulated.

[another day]

Yeah matt, look you seem to have trouble accepting that humans exist. Why should the deers hold such an important place in the world that they trump our right to land and habitat? By nature's law, the strongest survive, that being us, and I'm sorry but our priorities are just more important than the deers.

Would you offer to have your house knocked down and made into deer habitat? You can go die in a cave since your just a lousy human and we need more space for the REAL animals that actually come from nature and therefore matter, like deer.

[gela]

I take any pleasure in killing something thats a pest, or if its for food, I don't hunt for sport, or because I get great pleasure simply from killing.

Hunting is the reason that the pests are here in the first place.

Rabbits and foxes have destroyed Australia's ecosystems, for the sake of a sport.

People are stupid.

[Anmon]

Quote by: gela Hunting is the reason that the pests are here in the first place. Rabbits and foxes have destroyed Australia's ecosystems, for the sake of a sport. People are stupid.

Rabbits were not bought out specifically for hunting, they were bought out as a food source.

[Anmon]

=Matt;498864] Millions of people also think the law that kills woman if they are not faithful to their husband, is good. Does that mean it is right? No.

Thats people not rabbits.

How do you take pleasure in it? I'm just curious.

Mostly getting accuracy in a kill, knowing I'm doing my country a favour by helping rid it of a pest, that shouldn't be here.
And I just love rifles I guess.
I'm not that keen on pistols, and I hate automatic weapons of any sort.

I use live traps (for packrats, mice, ect.) and once caught I re-locate them to a more natural place.

And in doing so you increase and continue the problem for everyone else, because you cant handle killing a pest, well done.
Just close your eyes and break its neck, after the first one it gets easy if that helps.