Luke wrote:
In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:
I agree with that.
Also,
Osterkraut wrote:
Who's more interested in the preservation of the White Rhino: the man who loves hunting them, or some armchair environmentalist back in the states who hasn't ever seen one?
Some months back I read about a proposal to breed endangered animals (rhino, elephants), in reserves, specifically for the purpose of hunting. It seems like backwards ecology at first, but the idea of course is that wild populations would be completely unaffected.
Read Teddy Roosevelt's bio - this is exactly why he set aside so much of the country for National Parks. He loved hunting - but he was also a student of biology and a conservationist. He understood that he could use his authority to preserve the things he loved and still use them... just not all at once. The loggers were not big fans of his.
Luke
UberDork
5/30/12 12:56 p.m.
In reply to Osterkraut:
Although, species loss now, is largely due to anthropogenic impact.
N Sperlo wrote:
Luke wrote:
Some months back I read about a proposal to breed endangered animals (rhino, elephants), in reserves, specifically for the purpose of hunting. It seems like backwards ecology at first, but the idea of course is that wild populations would be completely unaffected.
Sure they do. They increase the population and instantly decrease it. What in God's name makes you think that since they were bred in captivity they aren't wild? A wild animal is a wild animal captive or not.
I hope that anyone who breeds wild animals to hunt them gets berkeleying mauled to death by them.
/rant
Hey man, I didn't say I was necessarily for it. Also, that should read 'natural' populations, rather than 'wild'.
Curmudgeon wrote:
I'm of the opinion that a real sport hunter will strip to his BVD's, stick a Bowie knife between his teeth and bring back a buck or lion or etc to prove how great a hunter he is.
Why is a knife more sporting than a .30-06? They are both tools that are extensions of our greatest asset. You wouldn't ask the Lion to hunt his food w/o his claws or teeth would you? It isn't my fault deer can't figure out how to smelt ore and happen to be delicious.
Hunting only what you need (even if you could go to the grocery on the way back) is much more humane and decent than industrialized farming. I would, though, reserve a special room in the dungeon for thumb screwing people who shoot game and leave it. Them and litterbugs. Thumb screws.
dculberson wrote:
Due process is in place for a reason, things are not always clear in the heat of the moment. If you're out in a field with a gun - or if the ranger has an extra gun he can plant - you are now able to be killed without the ranger facing any punishment. Does that sound like a healthy situation to you?
This is no different from modern law enforcement across this great nation of ours. What's to keep police from planting a gun. This is why it is important to elect trustworthy people.
Three reason I support what you don't (200% which is impossible btw 
) is because the current system they use is useless. The endanered animals need to be protected as humans are. If their life is threatened, deadly force can be utilized without fear of imprisonment.
It is similar to Missouri's law that disallows any lawsuit resulting from a clean self defense shoot which, yes, can include protecting ones own pet.
Mmmmm... 30.06 vs Bowie knife.
30.06 effective range approximately 400-500 yards.
Bowie knife approximately 3 feet, unless you throw it in which case its range increases but its potential effectiveness drops drastically.
Consider the knife the human equivalent of one big-ass claw. The rifle is to an animal like an A bomb would be if we were to invade Lichtenstein.
I used to hunt wild hogs with my dad when I was a kid, those damn things were fearless, cunning, sneaky and dangerous even if you had a gun. The deck is not so stacked with them.
Up close with no weapon in hand, a human is no match for a deer. There's plenty of video to back up that assertion. But hunting deer for sport from 500 yards away, gee. Doesn't seem real even to me, I'd say the deck is stacked. I guess it's I always hear about how hard it is to hunt deer etc and in reality it's no contest.
Really, 200% is impossible? I did not know that.
(It was a joke, hyperbole to make a point.)
In reply to Luke:
I wasn't ranging against you, just any supporter of that idea. Clearing the air with that, my debating tactics may appear more targeted than they are. Not targeting you Luke, just quoting.
Thats the nature of web forums.
Regardless, natural or wild, you can toss words around as much as you'd like, I would never support such an idea.
In reply to Curmudgeon:
You are kinda missing my point. The brain is the weapon.
Why not use it's potential? Would you be so bold as to hunt a Buffalo with a knife if you could throw a spear or trap them in a hole? If you hunt w/o using the tools that make you a predator - you are a E36 M3ty predator.
In reply to dculberson:
I realize that, hence the stab back. I like to do that to break tension and avoid unnecessary hostility.
I just read a little about the Indian judicial system. It is so screwed up, they might as well shoot the poachers.
In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:
Screw the knife. You want to be a tough guy, hunt with your bare hands. Otherwise you aren't any more of a hunter than dudes working in a slaughterhouse.
Be a man, you Bob Costas. Hunt with your hootus.
Otto Maddox wrote:
In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:
Screw the knife. You want to be a tough guy, hunt with your bare hands. Otherwise you aren't any more of a hunter than dudes working in a slaughterhouse.
I'm not a hunter at all. I just don't get why anyone would be "sporting" if the goal is to obtain meat. I don't want to fight the berkeleying thing - I want to eat it.
It isn't my fault deer can't figure out how to smelt ore and happen to be delicious.
Just wanted to make sure this wasn't missed.
And I too am 100% in favor of killing your own dinner. Livestock "production" is berkeleying disgusting. I don't think we should be murdering poachers, but what India does is there business.
If we're making special exceptions to the rule of law in the U.S., there's about a thousand other groups of people I'd advocate the sanctioned murder of before I got to "poachers."
In reply to poopshovel:
Its good to know I hold a special space in your heart.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:
In reply to Curmudgeon:
You are kinda missing my point. The brain is the weapon.
Why not use it's potential? Would you be so bold as to hunt a Buffalo with a knife if you could throw a spear or trap them in a hole? If you hunt w/o using the tools that make you a predator - you are a E36 M3ty predator.
Didn't miss it at all. I said right up front it's because we make tools.
Here's what I am saying: you are right, a predator that doesn't use everything at its disposal is not only a E36 M3ty predator, it will likely be a dead one soon. I do make a distinction between hunting for subsistence and hunting for sport.
Let's face it; hunting as practiced in America and Europe is sport hunting. To sport hunt by standing 400 yards away and popping a piece of lead in a deer that's munching grass is target shooting. Now, if you gotta sneak up close enough to stick a knife in him, that's a much more level playing field. The mighty sport hunter is risking more than just a bruise on his shoulder from the recoil.
That's why I like the idea of disarming the poachers and throwing them to the tigers. 
N Sperlo wrote:
Be a man, you Bob Costas. Hunt with your hootus.
Hey. I gotta give the prey a fighting chance.
N Sperlo wrote:
Be a man, you Bob Costas. Hunt with your hootus.
Hey, try that, and for some reason you'll be known as that weirdo who humps deer. Just can't win for trying.
Luke
UberDork
5/30/12 1:42 p.m.
Curmudgeon wrote:
N Sperlo wrote:
Be a man, you Bob Costas. Hunt with your hootus.
Hey. I gotta give the prey a fighting chance.
Perfect retort, that. Well done.
Somehow when I think of hunting, I don't think of "the ultimate sacrifice." I'm all for making sports more complex for the fun of it, but stupidity has its limits. If you die hunting because you tried to stab the deer or hump it or whatever. Congratulations, you're a dumbass.
In reply to N Sperlo:
Shouldn't hunting be a tiny bit dangerous? Soccer is more dangerous. Cheerleading is more dangerous. Hunters only get killed when their drunk brethren shoot them.
In reply to N Sperlo:
Or we could go the other way. Take the helmets away from football players. Put sharks with lasers on their heads in the ocean with the fishermen. And take the guns away from hunters. It would put some respect back into these activities.
