Poll: When is Hunting Acceptable?

[OneOfTheMichael's]

Hunting isn't the most popular pastime in this day and age but I think a lot of people still do it. Some people seem to condone hunting for food while others don't condone it in any case. So what do you think? When (if ever) do you consider hunting acceptable?

EDIT: Just to clarify I only placed the option to choose hunting only for sport in the name of fairplay. I'm honestly not expecting many people to vote for hunting only for sport.

What about a option like "Only if the animal attacks first?"
Like if your just walking around in the woods with a permit for a stag and a rifle when suddenly a cougar comes out of nowhere and you shoot it. You know? like under certain circumstances.

 

[DPutna17]

I said other because I you can hunt for sport but still eat what you catch. My dad likes to hunt because he enjoys hunting but, he still eats what he catches.

 

[WolfThomas]

When done for food, when done to protect livelihood, when done to protect the environment and when done to control animal numbers.

 

[Stalk3rchief]

Hunting isn't the most popular pastime in this day and age but I think a lot of people still do it. Some people seem to condone hunting for food while others don't condone it in any case. So what do you think? When (if ever) do you consider hunting acceptable?

EDIT: Just to clarify I only placed the option to choose hunting only for sport in the name of fairplay. I'm honestly not expecting many people to vote for hunting only for sport.

You forget that in past cases when certain animals were put on a list that made them illegal to hunt ,their population blew up so much that they literally all started starving to death. Hunting may not be popular but in the end it can be necessary.

OT: Personally I just think the meat is good and I support hunting rather than buying meat from an animal that dumbly walked into an 'ambush' of sorts... silly cows.

 

[Brawndo]

Personally: Only in dire need of food, because I don't want to kill anything if I don't have to. I shoot at paper targets

Other people: Whenever they want. I'm not arrogant enough to impose my values on others. My best friend hunts and I could care less, I just don't go with him.

 

[Ham_authority95]

For food: In my opinion, always. It's food for fucks sake. Much better for the environment than the methane-fart producing beef and poultry industries, anyway.

For sport: Only when they aren't poaching or endangering a species.

 

[Typecast]

It's acceptable for population control, eradication of pest species. Unfortunately in Australia, we have a rabbit problem, but the other week two kids were out shooting rabbits on a farm, and one accidentally shot the other killing him. So although I would advocate hunting, as a means of exterminating pests, especially ones as damaging to farming and the environment, it's still dangerous, and probably best left to the experienced and methodical. As opposed to a couple of lads, who should probably be playing Xbox with each other, not accidentally shooting their friends in the medula.

 

[Icarion (aka Stockholm)]

It is okay to hunt murders for sport. But hunting of animals for sport should only be done if there is a overpopulation of said animal. And it should be regulated. I voted for food

 

[dementis]

I'm all for hunting so long as you don't do it like the british. I fail to see how fifty guys on horses and thirty something dogs vs. one fox is fair game. If you wanna be a real man, you'll hunt with nothing but a bow and arrow. Good stuff right there.

1. It's the English that hunt that way.
2. Only the upper class people do that, not the whole hunting community.

Ah, well I stand corrected. My inner ignorant American kicked in there for a minute. However, I still think that is a lame way to hunt.

As do I, So does the governemnt I believe as it's been made illegal, too right, i'm with you on bow hunting

 

[FoolKiller]

When done for food, or to reduce a dangerous, overgrown population of animals to safe levels for humans. Like wolves near habitation areas, moose/deer populations near major roads etc.

With your logic, I should start playing the most dangerous game.

 

[Obrien Xp]

I hunt. I love it. I almost always eat the animal (sometimes there are certain conservation hunts where you don't want to eat the animal). I follow the rules. What is wrong with that?

What is wrong is random people going out into the woods and using machine guns on random animals:This is the kind of conservation hunt I would like to be apart of:

Spoiler: *WARNING: ACTUAL HUNT WITH HITSHOTS*

 

[s0p0g]

for food, to keep diseases in check, and population control... i guess...

 

[isao]

When done for food in a zombie apocalypse, of course!

 

[Xan Krieger]

Only when done for food, if you say you can do it for population control then why not bomb China to control the population?

Hunting for sport is a lesser version of being a military sniper. at least the sniper is achieving something by bringing the world closer to peace. The hunter is expending a bullet and nothing get accomplished. Also in the military how are points determined when you shoot someone? I know there are like 6 point bucks so are there like 3 point corporals and 7 point officers?

 

[Tanis]

What's wrong with hunting?
It's not like animals are reluctant to kill other species, so why should we be?
Don't try to turn this on me by saying something like: "We are the more evolved species, we should not lower ourselves to their level."
That's grade A elitism right there.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDDDDDddd....the 2nd post wins it.

 

[VanityGirl]

Well, when I lived in Georgia we had a big increase in the alligator population. TO combat the growing population and to keep people safe, the state issued an alligator season. During alligator season, hunters could legally kill alligators.

This came in handy when a 6ft alligator came up to my porch in hopes of eating my dalmation.

 

[spartan231490]

It's always acceptable. getting shot, even in the gut, or by an arrow, is much less painful than almost any death an animal will suffer in the wild. I generally disaprove of wasting the meat, but I still condone it because wildlife will feed on the carcass just as if it had died of natural causes.

 

[Singularly Datarific]

I'd normally not accept unnecessary violence against animals, but I'd kill every polar bear on earth if that is what it takes to save someone, well, not hitler, but you get the idea.

 

[spartan231490]

Hunting isn't the most popular pastime in this day and age but I think a lot of people still do it. Some people seem to condone hunting for food while others don't condone it in any case. So what do you think? When (if ever) do you consider hunting acceptable?

EDIT: Just to clarify I only placed the option to choose hunting only for sport in the name of fairplay. I'm honestly not expecting many people to vote for hunting only for sport.

What about a option like "Only if the animal attacks first?"
Like if your just walking around in the woods with a permit for a stag and a rifle when suddenly a cougar comes out of nowhere and you shoot it. You know? like under certain circumstances.

That;s not hunting. If you mean killing animals you don't have tags for, that's a different issue, poaching, not hunting. but killing an animal that attacks you isn't hunting.

 

[Free Thinker]

Mainly food. The deer in my area eat very well, thus giving a better flavor to the meat. Apples, pears, acorns, and various other farm foods due to the proximity of forests to farming land. But if the deer is a buck and has a large enough rack, you bet he's hanging up above the fireplace.