Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Hobbies & Interests
Hunting & Fishing
Tip of the day: Take non-horrific hunting pictures
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow" data-source="post: 1321299" data-attributes="member: 7123"><p>Hmmm, I dunno - you'll have to explain to me why we want to eliminate signs of violence in hunting..... when seems to me that doing so helps to feed into and perpetuate the very idea that anti-hunters and fence-sitters buy into - the idea that there is NO VIOLENCE in obtaining meat - deer just die instantly and fall in the woods with no blood when you shoot them -- just like the meat that shows up in their grocer's freezer and display likewise came from cows and other animals that just wandered out of the free-range woods, walked up to the slaughterhouse, and offered themselves by instantly dying of diseaseless natural causes on their 3rd birthday with no blood (that IS what happens with grocery-store meat, right?)</p><p></p><p>Why are we trying to deceive, when it just reinforces the idea that meat eating is violent-less (which in turn feeds into the stupid anti-hunting mindset)? Deer tongues hang out - that's just what they do. Seems to me that making the city folks understand that all meat-getting is violent, including that which they eat, by showing the reality of hunting (which in turn will make them more accepting and supportive of hunting, or at least agnostic on it) is more likely to be accomplished, than some sort of deception that either: (a) no meat getting is violent - not likely to be accomplished seems to me, when the anti-hunting types are out there screaming in their ears about how horrible hunting is, leading to the belief that hunting is violent, but THEIR meat in THEIR grocer's freeze is not violent, or (b) actually trying to convince them that hunting is somehow LESS violent than slaughterhouses. Certainly hunting is LESS CRUEL over the life of the animal, as the hunted animal is free range until its death, whereas the slaughterhouse meat animal is captive it's entire life, but at the moment of slaughter / harvest, neither one is really more or less violent than the other - in that they're both quite violent - the skull-air-gun vs. hunter's gun - yet neither are unduly violent, if talking about the majority / ethical hunter. I dunno. </p><p></p><p>Only deception I engage in is to pull the corn chunks off their lips and color over the tan spots with a brown magic marker. Maybe saw off the antlers if it's a doe-only hunt. I kid, I kid. <img src="/images/smilies/new/laugh6.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":laugh6:" title="Laugh6 :laugh6:" data-shortname=":laugh6:" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This..... <img src="/images/smilies/smile.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow, post: 1321299, member: 7123"] Hmmm, I dunno - you'll have to explain to me why we want to eliminate signs of violence in hunting..... when seems to me that doing so helps to feed into and perpetuate the very idea that anti-hunters and fence-sitters buy into - the idea that there is NO VIOLENCE in obtaining meat - deer just die instantly and fall in the woods with no blood when you shoot them -- just like the meat that shows up in their grocer's freezer and display likewise came from cows and other animals that just wandered out of the free-range woods, walked up to the slaughterhouse, and offered themselves by instantly dying of diseaseless natural causes on their 3rd birthday with no blood (that IS what happens with grocery-store meat, right?) Why are we trying to deceive, when it just reinforces the idea that meat eating is violent-less (which in turn feeds into the stupid anti-hunting mindset)? Deer tongues hang out - that's just what they do. Seems to me that making the city folks understand that all meat-getting is violent, including that which they eat, by showing the reality of hunting (which in turn will make them more accepting and supportive of hunting, or at least agnostic on it) is more likely to be accomplished, than some sort of deception that either: (a) no meat getting is violent - not likely to be accomplished seems to me, when the anti-hunting types are out there screaming in their ears about how horrible hunting is, leading to the belief that hunting is violent, but THEIR meat in THEIR grocer's freeze is not violent, or (b) actually trying to convince them that hunting is somehow LESS violent than slaughterhouses. Certainly hunting is LESS CRUEL over the life of the animal, as the hunted animal is free range until its death, whereas the slaughterhouse meat animal is captive it's entire life, but at the moment of slaughter / harvest, neither one is really more or less violent than the other - in that they're both quite violent - the skull-air-gun vs. hunter's gun - yet neither are unduly violent, if talking about the majority / ethical hunter. I dunno. Only deception I engage in is to pull the corn chunks off their lips and color over the tan spots with a brown magic marker. Maybe saw off the antlers if it's a doe-only hunt. I kid, I kid. :laugh6: This..... :) [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
Hobbies & Interests
Hunting & Fishing
Tip of the day: Take non-horrific hunting pictures
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom