davlandrum
New member
T - I don't think the people that would "hunt" like that actually would be reading this forum.
Just because it does not meet your definition of hunting does not mean it is wrong. Maybe I think the "style" of hunting you do is not hunting because it doesn't meet my "definition". So then do you think it would be right of me to try to have your style (whatever that may be) banned? I also have to ask what is wrong with putting an animal in a cage and shooting it? If you own that animal you have (or should have) the right to do with that animal as you please. Farmeres kill animals all the time. Do you think they let the animal out to run free then stalk and shoot it.I'll tell you why it is wrong dustoff....it isn't hunting. That is like putting the animal in a cage and then shooting it.
davlandrum, I am glad somebody else finally stepped up and expressed the same opinion I have. Your example of the bear and cougar hunting is exactly what I fear. When you say one type of killing of an animal is bad then the logical steps take you to the thought that all killing of animals is bad.I don't agree with this practice, but I also firmly believe that it is not the place of the government to make the world "perfect", and especially to further infringe the rights of land owners to make a living from thier land.
If you look back you can see that I have clearly stated that I would never participate in this type of hunting. I guess though that I am a horrible person because I see nothing wrong with other people trying to use their personal property to make a living.So, IMO if you can't see anything wrong with this, oh bad.
Art,Let's say that the law was re-phrased such that "Computer Hunts" were illegal as a COMMERCIAL action.
Is that a right that you really want?
Animals are a natural resource (wild) or property (domestic). They are worthy of respect and our empathy, but I don't believe in any concept of "animal rights".
Abuse/neglect/abandonment of animals shows base immorality, a gross lack of empathy; at the very least, it shows poor stewardship of resources. [...] Still, we've gone a little overboard in ascribing to animals the rights of Man.
Sorry for this off topic note but I can't help but share. When I was stationed in Korea I watched an American soldier eat an entire plate of dog. I believe it is called Gaegogi. I was curious as to its taste but couldn't bring myself to try it. At $60 a plate it was a little to expensive for my taste.A dog may be a beloved pet to me, a tasty dinner to a man in SE Asia
Art, I would think that most of the "citified ignorant folks" who do not hunt do not care about hunting. And I must point out that when a person in the city sees a hole in a road sign it is most likely not from the gun of a hunter.What bothers me most about this sort of thing is the way it affects the views of the "citified ignorant" folks about hunting in general. Computerized hunts, caged or small-pen hunts, commercial poaching or bullet holes in road signs: None of that makes life easier for any of us.
I would like to point out that the NRA is not a hunting group but rather a right to own guns group. Their opinion in this matter is mentioned in this article and said to be a unity between the antis and hunters on the subject. This is completely wrong, since when was the NRA the defacto word in the world of hunting. As we can see obviously not all hunters are united with the antis on this one. Does anyone know (and can provide proof of) what hunting lobby groups such as SCI and others have to say about the activities Art mentioned (Computerized hunts, caged or small-pen hunts, commercial poaching ). Art can you please explain what you mean by commercial poaching. The word poaching seems to imply it is illegal and for a commercial business to get away with this seems unlikely. I am taking your "caged or small-pen hunts" to mean any "Canned hunt". If this is wrong please correct me.The legislation had been sponsored by Sen. Robert Creedon, D-Brockton, and the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. The National Rifle Association opposes the practice, and animal rights groups have complained it is unsportsmanlike.
"This is an issue that has unified both sides of the hunting debate," states Scott Giacoppo, deputy director of advocacy for the MSPCA-Angell. "Pending the governor's signature, Massachusetts can stand with much of the nation against this despicable activity."