Should hunting for sport be outlawed?

[Didymus 34,380]

The only reason anyone is stil talking about it is because some people can't admit that our culture of meat consumption is wrong and inhumane on the same basis as hunting for sport is deemed to be the same. Anyway, that's the last I'll say about this. Just clarifying my intentions for bringing it up.

[Jjang 2,262]

Habit and natural trait... Sort of go hand in hand.  It's hard to develop a habit when nature didn't provide you the means.  Could fish develop the habit of walking through woods though they have gills and fins instead of arms and legs?

Myth? Is this some legend from a faraway land or was this a means of how countless people survived whether choice or otherwise?  

I really dislike this debate, because we're not talking about safeguarding animals hunted for sport, are we?  While y'all wait for society to chance age old "habits," I'd like to tackle one practical issue at a time, one being the banning of hunting for game. I think we can all agree is wrong and not humane.

As for your last paragraph : I agree, hunting for sport is immoral and unacceptable in my book and it should be outlawed.

[Shadow 6,697]

The only reason anyone is stil talking about it is because some people can't admit that our culture of meat consumption is wrong and inhumane on the same basis as hunting for sport is deemed to be the same. Anyway, that's the last I'll say about this. Just clarifying my intentions for bringing it up.

Understood. I'll tell you what. If we could get hunting for sport banned, perhaps the goal of changing the meat eater's diet could be closer to possible at least in the Western world.

[SychosSoChic 9,995]

America is always developing. We do rely on tourism and commerce from other countries. We don't watch the price of doritos, we watch the price of stocks. Yes I won't deny the fact we have it way easier in the United States and it makes us very spoiled at times. But I'm not sorry we worked hard to get here. We learn from our mistakes. 

BUT

I find it incredibly disturbing at the fact that a citizen of a less developed country would be okay with the practice of charging a tourist $50,000 to kill an innocent living thing. I just feel that some innovative thinking is required. Hopefully Africa can learn from it's mistakes but considering that there is a civil war there every other year my hope is faint. Best of luck to you. Someday Africa will learn that life is valuable. 

1) "It makes us very spoiled at times" Judging from the condescending tone in this entire post, clearly.

2) "I'm not sorry we worked hard to get here" Nor should you be. However don't you dare try compare hunting to slavery. Not even remotely similar. Selling innocent Africans as servants =/= innocent Animals being hunted.

3) "We learn from our mistakes" If you learnt from your mistakes you wouldn't have such a huge racial issue in your country or a huge gap between the poor and the rich. Nor would your country have started meaningless wars for no good reason. But hey, you learnt from your mistakes right?...I mean you learnt from Vietnam...Right?

4) You find it disturbing we'd allow a tourist to kill an animal (for a HUGE fee. Like 50 grand is not pocket money) so we can keep our country's economy going? I'm sorry to tell you that this is not Narnia. This is real life. Take off your rose-tinted glasses. Sacrifices MUST be made.

5) "Innovative thinking" Oh you want innovative thinking...Well you're the one with the issue with hunting. We have laws set up. We make tourists pay out their ass. You best come up with a solution better than "Kill the hunters" or "Throw the hunter in a cage with a lion". The hunters aren't the problem, the poachers are. You're just so animal sensitive you refuse to see the difference. You want people to stop hunting elephants? Where do you suggest we put the elephants? The impala? The springbok? Where do we put all these animals? You're more than happy to demand we outlaw it, but you're not looking at the long-term for us. Where do WE put them? There is no space.

6) "Hopefully Africa can learn from it's mistakes" Firstly, you used "It's" wrong. Second, we'll learn from our mistakes when you learn from yours over there in the America you're so proud of. Hypocrisy at its finest.

7) "Considering that there is a civil war there every other year my hope is faint" Oh you want to talk about war? Sweet summertime child, Vietnam. Iraq. Please, don't even try it.

Honestly, the arrogance you exhibit is exactly what we expect from a stereotypical American tourist and I honestly expected better from someone on this site. But whatever, you obviously don't care about the lives of Africans. You're more than willing to sacrifice our economies in order to save OUR animals, which WE are sacrificing so WE can eat, but you offer NO solutions to the economic downturn that would follow. 

I'm done with you. You're not worth my internet bandwidth, you're no longer worth the effort and I am ignoring you. Thanks for coming, drive on through ^^

Bye o/ 

[Kayla 7,595]

The mentality of someone who would kill another living being for fun is one I have never been able to link up with. It truly baffles me how you could be PROUD to have your picture with a dead creature you just killed. 

In the case of Cecil the Lion, what I gather is the method was illegal. Regardless of the legality, it was cowardly.

Now, and I've done research on this (scholar.google.com is your friend), sport hunting actually DOES bring a lot of money to conservation.
But this is only positive when the hunting is done
A) Legally, and
B) With respect to population control.
(Not just stabilizing populations, as with deer, but with the money being used to fund conservation; the idea of "killing one to save one hundred" type of thing)

So, as much as I cringe at the mentality, I think sport hunting actually does a lot of good for the environment overall, despite the debatable nature of how that comes to be. 

 

[Kayla 7,595]

And I will also agree with @Didymus about the food argument. Let's be real- the treatment isn't humane. We don't need as much meat as we eat. We can gather protein sources from other foods. I'm not saying everyone should be vegetarian, but if we just ate the portion of meat we ACTUALLY need, do you know how much meat production would go down?
And if meat production drastically went down, do you know how much more likely it'd be that animals WOULD be treated better?
Proof? You're more likely to get humanely treated lamb meat because we consume less of it. 

Not to mention, people like to get all intense about nutrition because they know what PROTEINS! are, but I rarely ever hear people preaching about how we NEED half a plate of vegetables for THIS nutrient and THAT nutrient, which are also important. But for some reason we get our panties in a bunch defending protein, like it's the end-all-be-all nutrient that trumps all others or something....
And it's not like the USA has a very good track record when it comes to nutrition or obesity, so maybe rethinking how we value individual nutrients is important....

The whole "But we need food!" argument is ridiculous too. Yeah, we do. But there are so many alternatives. And no- you don't need sausage at breakfast, a burger for lunch, and a chicken breast for dinner. The amount of meat your body actually "needs" (if you're choosing to get those nutrients from meat) is ONE of those things per day, at most. Oftentimes even our "one" serving of meat actually exceeds proper serving sizes. 

It's easy to be outraged by someone killing a lion. But we need to think of all the factors that play into these things, and if you're outraged by this, I encourage you to take those feelings and think of ways you could positively impact animal well-being in YOUR daily life. 
It's easy to say "I would NEVER hunt animals!", but can you say "I'm going to limit my meat consumption and only eat what I need to get proper nutrients!"? 

[Shadow 6,697]

 Let us be real.

You're referring to the abundance of food today as opposed to pre-Industrial Revolution standards when food was scarce and people needed to eat every day. 

Having the choice to eat produce over meat is a luxury we enjoy today, because I guarantee on the day when you're starving, you may consider other possibilities for substance when crops and produce stock are low to minuscule. 

As omnivores, humans have a choice, whether they deem it morally right or wrong is a political debate that comes when you're well fed and nourished to even think along those lines.

And I will also agree with @Didymus about the food argument. Let's be real- the treatment isn't humane. We don't need as much meat as we eat. We can gather protein sources from other foods. I'm not saying everyone should be vegetarian, but if we AT LEAST ate the portion of meat we ACTUALLY need, do you know how much meat production would go down?
And if meat production drastically went down, do you know how much more likely it'd be that animals WOULD be treated better? With lower demands you decrease the need to shove a ton of animals into tiny spaces, which leads to better living conditions. Proof? You're more likely to get humanely treated lamb meat because we consume less of it. 

Not to mention, people like to get all intense about nutrition because they know what PROTEINS! are, but I rarely ever hear people preaching about how we NEED half a plate of vegetables for THIS nutrient and THAT nutrient, which are also important. But for some reason we get our panties in a bunch defending protein, like it's the end-all-be-all nutrient that trumps all others or something....

The whole "But we need food!" argument is ridiculous too. Yeah, we do. But there are so many alternatives. And no- you don't need sausage at breakfast, a burger for lunch, and a chicken breast for dinner. The amount of meat your body actually "needs" (if you're choosing to get those nutrients from meat) is ONE of those things per day, at most. Oftentimes even our "one" serving of meat actually exceeds proper serving sizes. 

It's easy to be outraged by someone killing a lion. But we need to think of all the factors that play into these things, and if you're outraged by this, I encourage you to take those feelings and think of ways you could positively impact animal well-being in YOUR daily life. 
It's easy to say "I would NEVER hunt animals!", but can you say "I'm going to limit my meat consumption and only eat what I need to get proper nutrients!"? 

[Didymus 34,380]

 Let us be real.

You're referring to the abundance of food today as opposed to pre-Industrial Revolution standards when food was scarce and people needed to eat every day. 

Having the choice to eat produce over meat is a luxury we enjoy today, because I guarantee on the day when you're starving, you may consider other possibilities for substance when crops and produce stock are low to minuscule. 

As omnivores, humans have a choice, whether they deem it morally right or wrong is a political debate that comes when you're well fed and nourished to even think along those lines.

What

No one is denying that we're in a position of luxury. The position of luxury makes us able to see exactly what Kayla is promoting: we can actually start thinking about what our body needs to live a long healthy life (guess what: a protein-based diet only leads to faster aging and age diseases) because we can actually choose from a large variety of foods. Is that a bad thing? Are you saying that we should indulge in all our options because we have it better than the people before us?

I don't understand. Hunters killed animals for their hides to keep from freezing to death etc. but we managed to outdo that because, out of luxury, we found other ways to replace those needs without the necessary animal cruelty. Why can't we do the same with food, also out of a position of luxury? Hell yeah we can think along these lines now because there are better options - why not use them? If we should indulge in animal cruelty simply because the option is there and people like to eat meat (though for no good reason other than taste [and let's be real, it's more about the sauce and the seasoning etc. than the actual meat] and habit), why are you so opposed to hunting for sport? It looks like you're shooting yourself in the foot. The logic of people being able to choose to kill animals for their own selfish desires is shared by people who eat more meat than they physically need ànd hunters who simply want a real fur coat or a head on the wall. Both groups of people are, in modern society, faced with alternatives, but they simply choose to ignore them. Or do you see a distinction after all?

[MonsterOfSpain 8,331]

I can't believe people are comparing hunting animals for fun with eating meat like it's exactly the same thing. 

[Didymus 34,380]

I can't believe people are comparing hunting animals for fun with eating meat like it's exactly the same thing. 

Well, so far no one has succeeded in making a fair distinction (and yes, we already discussed that [white] meat has health benefits, but that meat consumption is still unnecessarily high so the point remains), so if you feel like giving it a shot, feel free.

[MonsterOfSpain 8,331]

Well, so far no one has succeeded in making a fair distinction (and yes, we already discussed that [white] meat has health benefits, but that meat consumption is still unnecessarily high so the point remains), so if you feel like giving it a shot, feel free.

I agree with you that we eat more meat than the one we actually need, but this topic wasn't about that, it was about hunting which is a highly debatable "hobby" nowadays. I still can't see a relation between that and eating meat, it's like two completely different things. The second is part of the food chains, it's been done for thousands of years SINCE humans first appeared, When hunting was practiced for surviving rather than as a hobby. I respect vegetarians but I think it's delusional to pretend that everybody has to stop eating animals, the part I agree with is that there are too many tons and tons of wasted food every day in the world, and that has to be stopped. For me it's an attrocity to know that thousands of people die every day because of malnutrition while we waste thousands of pounds of food in first world countries. That's why I always consume every meal I buy and I try to waste the minimal part. 

My point is that that's a different and complicated (and also very interesting) discussion, which maybe should be treated in a separate post. But this one is aimed at a different issue.

[uo111 5,282]

No.

Well, only if eating animals is outlawed. Otherwise no.

[SKANK 14,288]

I agree with you that we eat more meat than the one we actually need, but this topic wasn't about that, it was about hunting which is a highly debatable "hobby" nowadays. I still can't see a relation between that and eating meat, it's like two completely different things. The second is part of the food chains, it's been done for thousands of years SINCE humans first appeared, When hunting was practiced for surviving rather than as a hobby. I respect vegetarians but I think it's delusional to pretend that everybody has to stop eating animals, the part I agree with is that there are too many tons and tons of wasted food every day in the world, and that has to be stopped. For me it's an attrocity to know that thousands of people die every day because of malnutrition while we waste thousands of pounds of food in first world countries. That's why I always consume every meal I buy and I try to waste the minimal part. 

My point is that that's a different and complicated (and also very interesting) discussion, which maybe should be treated in a separate post. But this one is aimed at a different issue.

Hunting at one time was necessary for survival now it is largely done for pleasure, eating meat was at one time a necessity for survival but is largely done now for for pleasure. There are parallels between hunting and eating meat. Poaching a lion is gratuitous in the same way a quarter pounder is gratuitous.

[MonsterOfSpain 8,331]

 

Hunting at one time was necessary for survival now it is largely done for pleasure, eating meat was at one time a necessity for survival but is largely done now for for pleasure. There are parallels between hunting and eating meat. Poaching a lion is gratuitous in the same way a quarter pounder is gratuitous.

Well I disagree with your second affirmation. Pleasure may be one of the reasons it's done nowadays but it's still done for survival.

And there's no way you feel the same killing an animal than eating meat lol

Maybe I'm too close-minded or something, or I like eating too much, but I still can't see the paralelism you all are trying to explain  

[uo111 5,282]

Well I disagree with your second affirmation. Pleasure may be one of the reasons it's done nowadays but it's still done for survival.

And there's no way you feel the same killing an animal than eating meat lol

Maybe I'm too close-minded or something, or I like eating too much, but I still can't see the paralelism you all are trying to explain  

How, in the United States, is the meat industry for survival? If you actually try to answer that question you will understand a bit better (answer: it isn't)

Eating meat should feel like killing an animal. That's the point. People who like to hunt at least aren't in denial about what they are doing.