D.Duck wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:
Why do you have such disdain for folks that hunt air breathing creatures
but find fishing acceptable?

Because I can. I don't think stalking animals in the woods, and then
shooting them from 200 yards away with a high-powered rifle and scope is
"sport." I'm also disgusted these days by those who fish for sharks and
other mostly inedible pelagics for the "sport" of it.

There's absolutely nothing "manly" about shooting deer or doves or most
other harmless creatures.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with *thinning* the herd. It's good
conservation. I don't condone the killing if the meat is wasted.

What isn't *harmless* about the creatures of lakes/sea that are fished from
the end of a line where the creature cannot see his enemy?

Seems a bit hypocritical to me.




My point about hunting and it has been the same for years is that it is
not sport, not in the way I would define sport. It's just semi-organized
slaughter of harmless animals.

The few times I have watched hunting shows on TV I've been astonished by
the "mystique" of the hosts, who think it is something miraculous to
stalk the woods, climb up into a tree, call in a male deer with scent or
sound, and then...shoot it. That's sport? Even worse are the brave white
hunters who stalk sheep. Sheep? Jesus.

Now, hunting with a longbow, that is something that requires lots of
skill and some balls, because you usually have to get close enough to an
animal to risk getting injured.

I've never claimed fishing was "manly," although fishing successfully
where you cannot see your potential catch does seem to require more
skill than looking through a scope and pulling a trigger. Fly fishing
requires a good deal of skill.

I don't fish very seriously these days. Sometimes I don't even bait my
hook.

Boater wrote:
D.Duck wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:
Why do you have such disdain for folks that hunt air breathing
creatures but find fishing acceptable?

Because I can. I don't think stalking animals in the woods, and then
shooting them from 200 yards away with a high-powered rifle and scope
is "sport." I'm also disgusted these days by those who fish for
sharks and other mostly inedible pelagics for the "sport" of it.

There's absolutely nothing "manly" about shooting deer or doves or
most other harmless creatures.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with *thinning* the herd. It's good
conservation. I don't condone the killing if the meat is wasted.

What isn't *harmless* about the creatures of lakes/sea that are fished
from the end of a line where the creature cannot see his enemy?

Seems a bit hypocritical to me.




My point about hunting and it has been the same for years is that it is
not sport, not in the way I would define sport. It's just semi-organized
slaughter of harmless animals.

The few times I have watched hunting shows on TV I've been astonished by
the "mystique" of the hosts, who think it is something miraculous to
stalk the woods, climb up into a tree, call in a male deer with scent or
sound, and then...shoot it. That's sport? Even worse are the brave white
hunters who stalk sheep. Sheep? Jesus.

Now, hunting with a longbow, that is something that requires lots of
skill and some balls, because you usually have to get close enough to an
animal to risk getting injured.

I've never claimed fishing was "manly," although fishing successfully
where you cannot see your potential catch does seem to require more
skill than looking through a scope and pulling a trigger. Fly fishing
requires a good deal of skill.

I don't fish very seriously these days. Sometimes I don't even bait my
hook.

That's just dumb. Join PETA and get lost, WAFA.