On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 06:48:31 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/18/14 9:49 PM, wrote:
On 19 Nov 2014 01:52:03 GMT, F*O*A*D wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 20:27:12 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:
I'm not drawing lines. I'm merely stating I have no objections to
subsistence hunting as it is generally described.
It does sound like you are saying homeless people could corner a fawn
in your neighborhood, beat it to death with baseball bats and that
would be OK if they were hungry enough.
You are trying much too hard.
I am just trying to figure out where the line is drawn with you. Is it
only that you do not like the idea of anyone on Rec Boats doing
something you don't do?
You have created this straw man of subsistence hunting but you don't
seem to be able to define it. Wouldn't a homeless person killing a
deer for food be subsistence?
Why isn't Tim doing it OK if he is eating the deer?
I assume fishing is morally repugnant to you too?
I don't do either one so I don't really have a dog in the fight but I
am curious about the rules.
I previously have stated over the years here my disdain for so-called
"sport" hunting. A homeless man without resources who kills a deer to
eat because he has no reasonable way to get food is not sport hunting.
Subsistence hunting as I am using the phrase is not a difficult concept
to understand except, perhaps, to you and a few other right-wingers here.
TOAD - you seem to forget, you brought up the lack of morality in
non-subsistence hunting. I agree that you are an expert in 'lack of
morality', but you don't seem to have much knowledge of why folks
hunt, other than to put down those who do so.
Is all your fishing 'subsistence fishing'?
http://tinyurl.com/kmv32tf