hunting and politics

[Amerie]

And to think that many hunting elites have often killed hunting dogs when they are no longer of the strength expected of them. I think we should legislate if there is a danger involved - whether it be to an animal or a human.

[xris]

The false regard they have of their own hunting dogs is representative of their inhuman attitude. They say our poor dogs will have to be shot because of the hunting ban, what drivel, if they are treasured animals you dont kill them for monetary reasons.

My question about the whole scene of hunting asks, why does society have these schizophrenic views on animals and the torture of them. What mentality would put a man behind bars for skinning his dog alive but allows hunters do to the same to wild animals..It is bit difficult to comprehend..

[Amerie]

I just fail to reach a decision on how people can think themselves more superior than animals anyway. You're right though it is very difficult to comprehend and just shows how humans often do what suits them rather than what is right by the animal.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by Amerie

And to think that many hunting elites have often killed hunting dogs when they are no longer of the strength expected of them. I think we should legislate if there is a danger involved - whether it be to an animal or a human.

I often wonder what is thought happens to the great majority of wild animals who are not hunted. Many of them die, of course, of disease, and are killed and eaten by other animals. But what about those who do not die violent deaths or painful deaths by disease and accident? They do not live into their golden years taken care of by their sons and daughters and grandchildren, nor are there happy nursing and assisted living homes set up for them. Those who survive (very few) to old age, also die miserably. It is not as if by killing them that we are depriving them of a happy old age.

[Aedes]

the question is really whether it's worth the fight, and the answer is probably not

if we can't even bridge the gap with assault weapons and handguns, then it's not worth even trying with hunting

there are some circumstances in which hunting is encouraged to eliminate an 'exotic' species that is endangering native species, like rabbits in Australia, pigs in Hawaii, and deer in New Zealand. Also, there is pretty good evidence that the exploding deer population in coastal New England is greatly amplifying the risk of Lyme disease, so liberalized deer hunting is promoted by some as a means to control this disease (both my moral and scientific opinion are mixed on this one).

[xris]

I have no problem with the culling of animals for certain benefits to the animals but so often its done for the benefit of man. What I question in ethical terms is the blood lust that is excused for those hunting wild animals. The joy of killing is the question that im asking, why is it acceptable ?

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by xris

I have no problem with the culling of animals for certain benefits to the animals but so often its done for the benefit of man. What I question in ethical terms is the blood lust that is excused for those hunting wild animals. The joy of killing is the question that im asking, why is it acceptable ?

So you think that the problem with the hunting of animals is the motives and the feelings of the hunters? I have never before heard that as an objection to hunting, and it seems to be rather puritan. Why does it bother you if other people are made happy, and it harms no one, or nothing? It sounds like an aesthetic objection rather than a moral objection.

[xris]

Originally Posted by kennethamy

So you think that the problem with the hunting of animals is the motives and the feelings of the hunters? I have never before heard that as an objection to hunting, and it seems to be rather puritan. Why does it bother you if other people are made happy, and it harms no one, or nothing? It sounds like an aesthetic objection rather than a moral objection.

If you cant see the moral objections to killing for pleasure then my explaining will not help. Maybe it is rather puritanical but it is feeling that has many supporters in the UK. How does this objection to the blood lust have anything to do with taste, aesthetics? i can kill if required but if my feelings became one of happiness for the death, then ide be really worried.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by xris

If you cant see the moral objections to killing for pleasure then my explaining will not help. Maybe it is rather puritanical but it is feeling that has many supporters in the UK. How does this objection to the blood lust have anything to do with taste, aesthetics? i can kill if required but if my feelings became one of happiness for the death, then ide be really worried.

It is just that I thought that the killing part was what was objectionable. Not the pleasure part. It bothers me aesthetically when someone stuffs himself and overeats, but as long as he is not ruining his health (which he may be doing) I have no moral objection. I may be repelled by the blood lust, but not morally distressed. Why should I be, unless it is harmful?

[Zippo]

Originally Posted by xris

I have no problem with the culling of animals for certain benefits to the animals but so often its done for the benefit of man. What I question in ethical terms is the blood lust that is excused for those hunting wild animals. The joy of killing is the question that im asking, why is it acceptable ?

For most hunters the joy is in the chase, not the killing. I know plenty of people who hunt, but none of them do so because they need an outlet for their blood lust.