quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

Unless you're a vegan, in which case I guess you can claim the moral high ground (if there is any), what's the difference between shooting a duck that is then eaten and buying ground beef in the store?

I'm not a hunter, personally, and if someone kills something just to kill it, but not to make good use of the animal, I look askance. But there's nothing superior about raising a cow with drugs and an unnatural diet only to be slaughtered. Just a different venue for the same thing, that's all.

Again, I'm not a hunter, just isn't my thing. Not about to look down on those who enjoy it responsibly, though.

I can understand his point.

Todd isn't talking about the killing for food - he's talking about "the enjoyment of mowing down life".

There is a difference between a farmer that raises livestock for the sole purpose of "creating food", vs someone that goes hunting for the sport of the hunt and the game is fortunately put to good use - but as an afterthought.

I think its fantastic that all the kills went to needy people. I really do think that's an amazing thing. But I doubt that is the reason most hunters go on these hunts. Its a byproduct.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

Unless you're a vegan, in which case I guess you can claim the moral high ground (if there is any), what's the difference between shooting a duck that is then eaten and buying ground beef in the store?

I'm not a hunter, personally, and if someone kills something just to kill it, but not to make good use of the animal, I look askance. But there's nothing superior about raising a cow with drugs and an unnatural diet only to be slaughtered. Just a different venue for the same thing, that's all.

Again, I'm not a hunter, just isn't my thing. Not about to look down on those who enjoy it responsibly, though.

I can understand his point.

Todd isn't talking about the killing for food - he's talking about "the enjoyment of mowing down life".

There is a difference between a farmer that raises livestock for the sole purpose of "creating food", vs someone that goes hunting for the sport of the hunt and the game is fortunately put to good use - but as an afterthought.

I think its fantastic that all the kills went to needy people. I really do think that's an amazing thing. But I doubt that is the reason most hunters go on these hunts. Its a byproduct.

Possibly, although most hunters I know also happen to be the most passionate conservationists I know. Small sample size (whee!), but I get the impresion that there is a large chunk of hunters who aren't just out there to shoot an animal wihtouth thinking more about the larger picture of what they're doing.

And in any event, I don't know that there really is a difference as compared to a Gold'n Plump raising chickens in lousy conditions. In fact, I'd say there's an argument that it's worse.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

Unless you're a vegan, in which case I guess you can claim the moral high ground (if there is any), what's the difference between shooting a duck that is then eaten and buying ground beef in the store?

I'm not a hunter, personally, and if someone kills something just to kill it, but not to make good use of the animal, I look askance. But there's nothing superior about raising a cow with drugs and an unnatural diet only to be slaughtered. Just a different venue for the same thing, that's all.

Again, I'm not a hunter, just isn't my thing. Not about to look down on those who enjoy it responsibly, though.

I can understand his point.

Todd isn't talking about the killing for food - he's talking about "the enjoyment of mowing down life".

There is a difference between a farmer that raises livestock for the sole purpose of "creating food", vs someone that goes hunting for the sport of the hunt and the game is fortunately put to good use - but as an afterthought.

I think its fantastic that all the kills went to needy people. I really do think that's an amazing thing. But I doubt that is the reason most hunters go on these hunts. Its a byproduct.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

Unless you're a vegan, in which case I guess you can claim the moral high ground (if there is any), what's the difference between shooting a duck that is then eaten and buying ground beef in the store?

I'm not a hunter, personally, and if someone kills something just to kill it, but not to make good use of the animal, I look askance. But there's nothing superior about raising a cow with drugs and an unnatural diet only to be slaughtered. Just a different venue for the same thing, that's all.

Again, I'm not a hunter, just isn't my thing. Not about to look down on those who enjoy it responsibly, though.

I can understand his point.

Todd isn't talking about the killing for food - he's talking about "the enjoyment of mowing down life".

There is a difference between a farmer that raises livestock for the sole purpose of "creating food", vs someone that goes hunting for the sport of the hunt and the game is fortunately put to good use - but as an afterthought.

I think its fantastic that all the kills went to needy people. I really do think that's an amazing thing. But I doubt that is the reason most hunters go on these hunts. Its a byproduct.

Possibly, although most hunters I know also happen to be the most passionate conservationists I know. Small sample size (whee!), but I get the impresion that there is a large chunk of hunters who aren't just out there to shoot an animal wihtouth thinking more about the larger picture of what they're doing.

And in any event, I don't know that there really is a difference as compared to a Gold'n Plump raising chickens in lousy conditions. In fact, I'd say there's an argument that it's worse.

"the enjoyment of mowing down life".

quote:

ORIGINAL: CPAMAN
Good comments but it all seriousness, none of this hunting would be permitted if not for responsible donation of the birds to needy families for subsistence. I just spoke with the outfitter this afternoon and he indicated that the only resident hunters in Argentina who hunt are the wealthier landowners who hunt to feed some of their workers. Hunting in Argentina is generally not done for sport but as an alternative food source for those who are in need. Wanton waste of harvested game is condemned by 99 out of 100 hunters. Sure, there are always a few exceptions that lead to the preconceived notions that all hunters are killers. A perfect example of how 1% of the population can stereotype an entire group in a negative way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

Unless you're a vegan, in which case I guess you can claim the moral high ground (if there is any), what's the difference between shooting a duck that is then eaten and buying ground beef in the store?

I'm not a hunter, personally, and if someone kills something just to kill it, but not to make good use of the animal, I look askance. But there's nothing superior about raising a cow with drugs and an unnatural diet only to be slaughtered. Just a different venue for the same thing, that's all.

Again, I'm not a hunter, just isn't my thing. Not about to look down on those who enjoy it responsibly, though.

I can understand his point.

Todd isn't talking about the killing for food - he's talking about "the enjoyment of mowing down life".

There is a difference between a farmer that raises livestock for the sole purpose of "creating food", vs someone that goes hunting for the sport of the hunt and the game is fortunately put to good use - but as an afterthought.

I think its fantastic that all the kills went to needy people. I really do think that's an amazing thing. But I doubt that is the reason most hunters go on these hunts. Its a byproduct.

Possibly, although most hunters I know also happen to be the most passionate conservationists I know. Small sample size (whee!), but I get the impresion that there is a large chunk of hunters who aren't just out there to shoot an animal wihtouth thinking more about the larger picture of what they're doing.

And in any event, I don't know that there really is a difference as compared to a Gold'n Plump raising chickens in lousy conditions. In fact, I'd say there's an argument that it's worse.

"the enjoyment of mowing down life".

Point is -- even if that's an accurate description, which I'm not sure it is -- that it's not morally inferior to a company raising animals in miserable conditions, killing them "humanely," and making a buck.

Distinction without a difference.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Todd G

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

Unless you're a vegan, in which case I guess you can claim the moral high ground (if there is any), what's the difference between shooting a duck that is then eaten and buying ground beef in the store?

I'm not a hunter, personally, and if someone kills something just to kill it, but not to make good use of the animal, I look askance. But there's nothing superior about raising a cow with drugs and an unnatural diet only to be slaughtered. Just a different venue for the same thing, that's all.

Again, I'm not a hunter, just isn't my thing. Not about to look down on those who enjoy it responsibly, though.

I can understand his point.

Todd isn't talking about the killing for food - he's talking about "the enjoyment of mowing down life".

There is a difference between a farmer that raises livestock for the sole purpose of "creating food", vs someone that goes hunting for the sport of the hunt and the game is fortunately put to good use - but as an afterthought.

I think its fantastic that all the kills went to needy people. I really do think that's an amazing thing. But I doubt that is the reason most hunters go on these hunts. Its a byproduct.

Possibly, although most hunters I know also happen to be the most passionate conservationists I know. Small sample size (whee!), but I get the impresion that there is a large chunk of hunters who aren't just out there to shoot an animal wihtouth thinking more about the larger picture of what they're doing.

And in any event, I don't know that there really is a difference as compared to a Gold'n Plump raising chickens in lousy conditions. In fact, I'd say there's an argument that it's worse.

"the enjoyment of mowing down life".

Point is -- even if that's an accurate description, which I'm not sure it is -- that it's not morally inferior to a company raising animals in miserable conditions, killing them "humanely," and making a buck.

Distinction without a difference.

But McNuggets taste good.

quote:

The parakeets are a different story - they're even more insidious pests - they clip the head of grains like milo and wheat and create a catastrophic amount of waste. The farmers wanted them dead even more than the doves, but they considered them as we might rats - locals had no interest in eating them. That bothered me for a bit, until one of the field hands on a farm we hunted approached me to thank me for killing the birds. We had a significant language barrier, but I'm pretty sure he told me to bring more shells the next time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Todd G

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

Unless you're a vegan, in which case I guess you can claim the moral high ground (if there is any), what's the difference between shooting a duck that is then eaten and buying ground beef in the store?

I'm not a hunter, personally, and if someone kills something just to kill it, but not to make good use of the animal, I look askance. But there's nothing superior about raising a cow with drugs and an unnatural diet only to be slaughtered. Just a different venue for the same thing, that's all.

Again, I'm not a hunter, just isn't my thing. Not about to look down on those who enjoy it responsibly, though.

I can understand his point.

Todd isn't talking about the killing for food - he's talking about "the enjoyment of mowing down life".

There is a difference between a farmer that raises livestock for the sole purpose of "creating food", vs someone that goes hunting for the sport of the hunt and the game is fortunately put to good use - but as an afterthought.

I think its fantastic that all the kills went to needy people. I really do think that's an amazing thing. But I doubt that is the reason most hunters go on these hunts. Its a byproduct.

Possibly, although most hunters I know also happen to be the most passionate conservationists I know. Small sample size (whee!), but I get the impresion that there is a large chunk of hunters who aren't just out there to shoot an animal wihtouth thinking more about the larger picture of what they're doing.

And in any event, I don't know that there really is a difference as compared to a Gold'n Plump raising chickens in lousy conditions. In fact, I'd say there's an argument that it's worse.

"the enjoyment of mowing down life".

Point is -- even if that's an accurate description, which I'm not sure it is -- that it's not morally inferior to a company raising animals in miserable conditions, killing them "humanely," and making a buck.

Distinction without a difference.

But McNuggets taste good.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Corleone

Not sure what this adds to the conversation, but somehow I agree with both seemingly opposing viewpoints.  Or maybe I just found "<hawk patoo> I'm awesome" to be extremely funny. 

Also - "look askance"?  C'mon, man. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

They really don't.

And I love fast food.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

quote:

ORIGINAL: CPAMAN
Good comments but it all seriousness, none of this hunting would be permitted if not for responsible donation of the birds to needy families for subsistence. I just spoke with the outfitter this afternoon and he indicated that the only resident hunters in Argentina who hunt are the wealthier landowners who hunt to feed some of their workers. Hunting in Argentina is generally not done for sport but as an alternative food source for those who are in need. Wanton waste of harvested game is condemned by 99 out of 100 hunters. Sure, there are always a few exceptions that lead to the preconceived notions that all hunters are killers. A perfect example of how 1% of the population can stereotype an entire group in a negative way.

That has been my experience as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CPAMAN

quote:

ORIGINAL: twinsfan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pete M.

Huh. And here I was expecting at least one or two stories involving public defecation.

You asked for it, and now I'm sure we will get it.

My hunting partner John sharted in his waders.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SoMnFan

And you too, Ed!
We're in the middle of those two orange and red and yellow masses.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

Unless you're a vegan, in which case I guess you can claim the moral high ground (if there is any), what's the difference between shooting a duck that is then eaten and buying ground beef in the store?

I'm not a hunter, personally, and if someone kills something just to kill it, but not to make good use of the animal, I look askance. But there's nothing superior about raising a cow with drugs and an unnatural diet only to be slaughtered. Just a different venue for the same thing, that's all.

Again, I'm not a hunter, just isn't my thing. Not about to look down on those who enjoy it responsibly, though.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

Unless you're a vegan, in which case I guess you can claim the moral high ground (if there is any), what's the difference between shooting a duck that is then eaten and buying ground beef in the store?

I'm not a hunter, personally, and if someone kills something just to kill it, but not to make good use of the animal, I look askance. But there's nothing superior about raising a cow with drugs and an unnatural diet only to be slaughtered. Just a different venue for the same thing, that's all.

Again, I'm not a hunter, just isn't my thing. Not about to look down on those who enjoy it responsibly, though.

I can understand his point.

Todd isn't talking about the killing for food - he's talking about "the enjoyment of mowing down life".

There is a difference between a farmer that raises livestock for the sole purpose of "creating food", vs someone that goes hunting for the sport of the hunt and the game is fortunately put to good use - but as an afterthought.

I think its fantastic that all the kills went to needy people. I really do think that's an amazing thing. But I doubt that is the reason most hunters go on these hunts. Its a byproduct.

Possibly, although most hunters I know also happen to be the most passionate conservationists I know. Small sample size (whee!), but I get the impresion that there is a large chunk of hunters who aren't just out there to shoot an animal wihtouth thinking more about the larger picture of what they're doing.

And in any event, I don't know that there really is a difference as compared to a Gold'n Plump raising chickens in lousy conditions. In fact, I'd say there's an argument that it's worse.

"the enjoyment of mowing down life".

Point is -- even if that's an accurate description, which I'm not sure it is -- that it's not morally inferior to a company raising animals in miserable conditions, killing them "humanely," and making a buck.

Distinction without a difference.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Todd G

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave E

Unless you're a vegan, in which case I guess you can claim the moral high ground (if there is any), what's the difference between shooting a duck that is then eaten and buying ground beef in the store?

I'm not a hunter, personally, and if someone kills something just to kill it, but not to make good use of the animal, I look askance. But there's nothing superior about raising a cow with drugs and an unnatural diet only to be slaughtered. Just a different venue for the same thing, that's all.

Again, I'm not a hunter, just isn't my thing. Not about to look down on those who enjoy it responsibly, though.

I can understand his point.

Todd isn't talking about the killing for food - he's talking about "the enjoyment of mowing down life".

There is a difference between a farmer that raises livestock for the sole purpose of "creating food", vs someone that goes hunting for the sport of the hunt and the game is fortunately put to good use - but as an afterthought.

I think its fantastic that all the kills went to needy people. I really do think that's an amazing thing. But I doubt that is the reason most hunters go on these hunts. Its a byproduct.

Possibly, although most hunters I know also happen to be the most passionate conservationists I know. Small sample size (whee!), but I get the impresion that there is a large chunk of hunters who aren't just out there to shoot an animal wihtouth thinking more about the larger picture of what they're doing.

And in any event, I don't know that there really is a difference as compared to a Gold'n Plump raising chickens in lousy conditions. In fact, I'd say there's an argument that it's worse.

"the enjoyment of mowing down life".

Point is -- even if that's an accurate description, which I'm not sure it is -- that it's not morally inferior to a company raising animals in miserable conditions, killing them "humanely," and making a buck.

Distinction without a difference.

But McNuggets taste good.

They really don't.

And I love fast food.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SoMnFan

We're beatin Panama and you can actually watch it!
Is that a good thing, guys?
We seem to be winning more. Can't be bad.