The ethics of hunting

[RagnorakTres]

Basically my question is obvious by the title: Is hunting (for meat, not just to hunt) morally wrong? I would also like to know if using a bow is crueler than using a gun.

The reason behind all this is that i am considering taking this up for some outdoor activity. Note that I would never hunt simply for the sport of it, I would always eat what of the animal I could and bury the rest (not like a burial service, but like a dump spot for the stuff you can't eat). What of the edible parts I did not eat, I would store in some fashion for later eating.

 

[Flap Jack452]

Depends on the situation, If you use that meat instead of the kind you can buy at a grocery store than I see no problems. But if your killing a deer, or whatever, and still buying meat at the store it makes it rather pointless, no?

Now is the time to bust out Kohlberg's Scale of Moral Development.

 

[kommando367]

Short answer: No, Long answer: No and *insert constructive defense here*.

 

[Mr. Blond]

is it wrong to wear only fur?...i mean like socks and hats and belts...everything fur...if it's a renewable resource?

 

[Citrus]

Hunting for meat isn't morally wrong at all. It isn't really necessary anymore, but if you put the corpse of your kill to good use, then I don't see a problem with it.

And when it comes down to it, I don't think any weapon you use (with the exception of really impractical ones, like chainsaws or flamethrowers) can be considered cruel. Since their purpose is to kill, it's bound to be seen as unethical in someone's eyes, but both bows and guns are practical for their purpose and do their job well. Although I guess it depends a lot on the person wielding them.

 

[Mookie_Magnus]

I hunt, both with gun and bow. I can personally tell you that hunting is much less cruel than the treatment some of the meat you will buy at the store had while it was alive... Also, I read The Ethics of What We Eat by Peter Singer and Jim Mason(?)

One, becuase it lived a full life before you killed it. Two, you will(hopefully) kill it instantly, or very shortly after downing it. Three, If you respect the animal for the gift that it gave to you, its life and its flesh, than you will feel morally better for it.

 

[ExaltedK9]

Eat or be eaten.

 

[RavingPenguin]

Basically my question is obvious by the title: Is hunting (for meat, not just to hunt) morally wrong? I would also like to know if using a bow is crueler than using a gun.

The reason behind all this is that i am considering taking this up for some outdoor activity. Note that I would never hunt simply for the sport of it, I would always eat what of the animal I could and bury the rest (not like a burial service, but like a dump spot for the stuff you can't eat). What of the edible parts I did not eat, I would store in some fashion for later eating.

Nope, its not wrong. Though, if your just starting out skinning some animals can be a bit creepy. I remember the first time I skinned a bear (yes, I eat bears Im just that awesome) it looked so close to human it was spooky. Rabbits too, but to a lesser extent (except for the head, its just weird).
Just out of curiosity, What do you plan on hunting? Larger game can require a bit of preparation.

 

[RagnorakTres]

Nope, its not wrong. Though, if your just starting out skinning some animals can be a bit creepy. I remember the first time I skinned a bear (yes, I eat bears Im just that awesome) it looked so close to human it was spooky. Rabbits too, but to a lesser extent (except for the head, its just weird).
Just out of curiosity, What do you plan on hunting? Larger game can require a bit of preparation.

Probably deer, since that's what lives around the woods here, though there are some black bears. I might also go for some small game, rabbits and such, though I'll probably use snares for that size of animal.

 

[Clashero]

It's not wrong. But if the moralities are worrying you, then use a bow, definitely. Besides being a true gentleman's weapon, you give the animal a fair chance. Much fairer than shooting from many many meters away.

 

[Xrysthos]

Hunting for meat is most definitely not morally wrong. In most parts of the developed world it is a necessity to maintain populations of wildlife that can actually survive. In Norway, for example, deer is hunted by quotas (X deer per square kilometer of land) so that the population of deer in the general area can be maintained at a level where they do not need to compete for food etc. Hunting, as long as the hunter is skilled and responsible, is no more cruel than buying meat at the grocery store. As for the use of a bow, it's concidered equally deadly within it's range (let's say 50 meters, whereas a rifle can responsibly be used at distances up to a few hundred meters, depending on conditions) seeing as it hits the target with a similar force.

 

[Delicious]

If I was a deer, I'd rather be shot than eaten by a larger predator.

 

[DROPDEADNAKED]

Howstuffworks.com has a really good article on fair hunting and hunting methods. Check it out.

-Nich

www.myspace.com/TheLakesideIsForKillers

 

[APPCRASH]

There is sport in hunting!? I just do it to kill stuff and prove who the superior species is.

 

[Internet Kraken]

No. Hunting and not eating the animal is not morally wrong either. It's just wasteful.

 

[joe51498]

if you use close to every part like the natives american but yes dont just take the ebile parts there is a use for almost every part happy hunting! PS. yes guns are less cruel its faster bows is a slow painful death but yes your cullingthe heard and its part of nature

 

[Bofus Teefus]

Think of deer as locust with hooves (that's a quote, but I can't remember who said it.) Since their predators (wolves primarily) have been hunted out of many areas, there is an actual need to keep their population in check. When there are too many deer for an area, they strip the bottom six feet of vegetation from their habitat, then starve. There is nothing immoral about hunting deer.

 

[hippo24]

Would a deer think twice before tackling you and riping out your entrails through your chest cavity? hmm....would it.

In all seriousness though, I cant imagine why It would be bad, I mean hunting for sport is a little excessive(and not all that fun IMHO), but as long as you aren't causing unneeded suffering to the animal then I hardly think its bad. Of course that would mean you need to get a kill-shot...a feat that is a lot harder then you might think.
We'll settle with:

"as long as you do not intend to cause anymore pain or suffering then is necessary, and only hunt acceptable prey(appropriate size, no mother etc)"

Yea, that'll work.