|
For animal lovers...
In article ,
says... On Fri, 4 May 2012 12:06:26 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 5/4/2012 11:42 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 5/4/2012 9:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On Thu, 03 May 2012 12:54:44 -0400, John wrote: ...and those who find hunters despicable. http://dribbleglass.com/images/billboards/animals.jpg More species are saved by hunters than all the PETA and "save the animals" kooks combined. Hunters put their money where their mouth is and they actually do things to preserve habitat and encourage species survival. They don't just whine about it. BTW I don't hunt. Yeah, killing animals saves them. Got it! Finally... Well it figures that you'd think that killing an animal is saving it. Figures you would bring it down to the single animal level to make a point, when the conversation is about hunting in general... Frekin' engineers... snicker What engineers came up with the notion that hunting in general is a good thing? But, it DOES come down to the single animal. It's that simple. I guess, that because of overpopulation of humans on the earth, then you should be okay with killing off people, abortion, etc. right? We do it all the time. It is called war. The US has killed about a million brown people, either directly or by proxy, since 1991(Iraq, Afghanistan and any number of smaller little skirmishes). So we should be able to go take a hunter's safety course, pay a license fee and start killing people for sport? |
For animal lovers...
On 5/4/12 1:09 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 12:39:56 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 12:25 PM, wrote: Well it figures that you'd think that killing an animal is saving it. I do think it is funny that these avid fish hunters draw the line at killing a deer or a rabbit. Maybe if we rigged an ear of corn with big treble hooks. snagged the deer, dragged the deer up to the truck with a winch, kicking and bleeding. Then put him, live, in an air tight box to slowly suffocate it would be OK. I won't even talk about what fishermen do to the bait. That is down right medieval. I have some issues with "sport hunters," the most significant probably being their referencing what they do as "sport," implying there is something "sporting" about shooting animals with a firearm. I don't do much fishing anymore. I do, however, think it is more sporting than hunting. There's nothing sporting about seeing an elk or a moose a few hundred yards away and then shooting it with a high powered rifle and scope. How is that any less "sporting" than sitting in the lounge of your sport fish, sipping a cold drink, waiting for a tuna to hit one of the ballyhoo you are trolling? The mate probably rigged the bait and struck the fish. All you did was reel it in. Well, it is less sporting because fishing for big pelagics is a lot more dangerous than shooting a moose or an elk, but I'm not a fan of that sort of "hunting," either. |
For animal lovers...
In article ,
says... On Fri, 4 May 2012 12:06:26 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Well it figures that you'd think that killing an animal is saving it. Figures you would bring it down to the single animal level to make a point, when the conversation is about hunting in general... Frekin' engineers... snicker What engineers came up with the notion that hunting in general is a good thing? But, it DOES come down to the single animal. It's that simple. I guess, that because of overpopulation of humans on the earth, then you should be okay with killing off people, abortion, etc. right? Without the money hunters pump into the system you might actually come down to that single animal, starving to death and bringing on extinction. The animal lovers barely collect enough money to support their own bureaucracy and put virtually nothing into conservation efforts. The best example is the hunting ranches in Texas that hold the largest populations of endangered African animals on the planet. Without the incentive of allowing someone to shoot one now and then for outrageous amounts of money, they would simply go extinct. These ranchers ensure that there is always a healthy breeding population and suitable habitat for them. That is a lot more than the Africans are doing. I find it strange that the animal rights people would rather see an entire species go extinct than to allow them to be managed for profit. I wonder what our grand kids would say about that after the animals are gone forever. I know that in the imaginary utopia you lefties live in, animal lovers would buy and maintain millions of acres of pristine habitat for the animals to live in peace but the fact is, the animal lovers want someone else to pay for that. Those people are hunters. They do it via a surcharge on all hunting equipment, license fees, private club dues and direct payments to land owners for the right to hunt there. Well, kill 'em all then. |
For animal lovers...
On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:09:14 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 12:39:56 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 12:25 PM, wrote: Well it figures that you'd think that killing an animal is saving it. I do think it is funny that these avid fish hunters draw the line at killing a deer or a rabbit. Maybe if we rigged an ear of corn with big treble hooks. snagged the deer, dragged the deer up to the truck with a winch, kicking and bleeding. Then put him, live, in an air tight box to slowly suffocate it would be OK. I won't even talk about what fishermen do to the bait. That is down right medieval. I have some issues with "sport hunters," the most significant probably being their referencing what they do as "sport," implying there is something "sporting" about shooting animals with a firearm. I don't do much fishing anymore. I do, however, think it is more sporting than hunting. There's nothing sporting about seeing an elk or a moose a few hundred yards away and then shooting it with a high powered rifle and scope. How is that any less "sporting" than sitting in the lounge of your sport fish, sipping a cold drink, waiting for a tuna to hit one of the ballyhoo you are trolling? The mate probably rigged the bait and struck the fish. All you did was reel it in. LOL! |
For animal lovers...
On 5/4/12 2:52 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:31:00 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 1:09 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 12:39:56 -0400, X ` Man I don't do much fishing anymore. I do, however, think it is more sporting than hunting. There's nothing sporting about seeing an elk or a moose a few hundred yards away and then shooting it with a high powered rifle and scope. How is that any less "sporting" than sitting in the lounge of your sport fish, sipping a cold drink, waiting for a tuna to hit one of the ballyhoo you are trolling? The mate probably rigged the bait and struck the fish. All you did was reel it in. Well, it is less sporting because fishing for big pelagics is a lot more dangerous than shooting a moose or an elk, but I'm not a fan of that sort of "hunting," either. It is basically the same as the canned hunt you are talking about on a game ranch and I am not sure where the danger is ... unless the boat sinks. I wasn't making a comparison to a canned hunt but to "regular" hunting, and if you've never been aboard a boat targeting 500-pound fish, you have no idea of the dangers involved...that have nothing to do with the boat sinking. |
For animal lovers...
On 5/4/12 2:54 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 4 May 2012 13:50:50 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Fri, 4 May 2012 12:06:26 -0400, wrote: In , says... Well it figures that you'd think that killing an animal is saving it. Figures you would bring it down to the single animal level to make a point, when the conversation is about hunting in general... Frekin' engineers...snicker What engineers came up with the notion that hunting in general is a good thing? But, it DOES come down to the single animal. It's that simple. I guess, that because of overpopulation of humans on the earth, then you should be okay with killing off people, abortion, etc. right? Without the money hunters pump into the system you might actually come down to that single animal, starving to death and bringing on extinction. The animal lovers barely collect enough money to support their own bureaucracy and put virtually nothing into conservation efforts. The best example is the hunting ranches in Texas that hold the largest populations of endangered African animals on the planet. Without the incentive of allowing someone to shoot one now and then for outrageous amounts of money, they would simply go extinct. These ranchers ensure that there is always a healthy breeding population and suitable habitat for them. That is a lot more than the Africans are doing. I find it strange that the animal rights people would rather see an entire species go extinct than to allow them to be managed for profit. I wonder what our grand kids would say about that after the animals are gone forever. I know that in the imaginary utopia you lefties live in, animal lovers would buy and maintain millions of acres of pristine habitat for the animals to live in peace but the fact is, the animal lovers want someone else to pay for that. Those people are hunters. They do it via a surcharge on all hunting equipment, license fees, private club dues and direct payments to land owners for the right to hunt there. Well, kill 'em all then. You will if you shut down the hunting ranches where these exotics are raised. It is certain that the Africans are not going to save them. I suppose to pseudo machomen, "canned" hunting is real. |
For animal lovers...
On 5/4/2012 12:01 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 5/4/12 11:50 AM, JustWait wrote: On 5/4/2012 11:42 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 5/4/2012 9:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On Thu, 03 May 2012 12:54:44 -0400, John wrote: ...and those who find hunters despicable. http://dribbleglass.com/images/billboards/animals.jpg More species are saved by hunters than all the PETA and "save the animals" kooks combined. Hunters put their money where their mouth is and they actually do things to preserve habitat and encourage species survival. They don't just whine about it. BTW I don't hunt. Yeah, killing animals saves them. Got it! Finally... Well it figures that you'd think that killing an animal is saving it. Figures you would bring it down to the single animal level to make a point, when the conversation is about hunting in general... Frekin' engineers... snicker It takes a really brave man to shoot a deer. It's so...sporting. I remember when Harriet was bragging about catching fish, ripping their face apart and then throwing them back to be eaten by a larger fish. Quite the sportsman, that Krause dude. |
For animal lovers...
On 5/4/2012 1:10 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , says... On Fri, 4 May 2012 12:06:26 -0400, wrote: In , says... On 5/4/2012 11:42 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 5/4/2012 9:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On Thu, 03 May 2012 12:54:44 -0400, John wrote: ...and those who find hunters despicable. http://dribbleglass.com/images/billboards/animals.jpg More species are saved by hunters than all the PETA and "save the animals" kooks combined. Hunters put their money where their mouth is and they actually do things to preserve habitat and encourage species survival. They don't just whine about it. BTW I don't hunt. Yeah, killing animals saves them. Got it! Finally... Well it figures that you'd think that killing an animal is saving it. Figures you would bring it down to the single animal level to make a point, when the conversation is about hunting in general... Frekin' engineers...snicker What engineers came up with the notion that hunting in general is a good thing? But, it DOES come down to the single animal. It's that simple. I guess, that because of overpopulation of humans on the earth, then you should be okay with killing off people, abortion, etc. right? We do it all the time. It is called war. The US has killed about a million brown people, either directly or by proxy, since 1991(Iraq, Afghanistan and any number of smaller little skirmishes). So we should be able to go take a hunter's safety course, pay a license fee and start killing people for sport? How did your pea-brain come to that conclusion? |
For animal lovers...
On 5/4/12 3:44 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 15:24:53 -0400, X ` wrote: On 5/4/12 2:54 PM, wrote: On Fri, 4 May 2012 13:50:50 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Fri, 4 May 2012 12:06:26 -0400, wrote: In , says... Well it figures that you'd think that killing an animal is saving it. Figures you would bring it down to the single animal level to make a point, when the conversation is about hunting in general... Frekin' engineers...snicker What engineers came up with the notion that hunting in general is a good thing? But, it DOES come down to the single animal. It's that simple. I guess, that because of overpopulation of humans on the earth, then you should be okay with killing off people, abortion, etc. right? Without the money hunters pump into the system you might actually come down to that single animal, starving to death and bringing on extinction. The animal lovers barely collect enough money to support their own bureaucracy and put virtually nothing into conservation efforts. The best example is the hunting ranches in Texas that hold the largest populations of endangered African animals on the planet. Without the incentive of allowing someone to shoot one now and then for outrageous amounts of money, they would simply go extinct. These ranchers ensure that there is always a healthy breeding population and suitable habitat for them. That is a lot more than the Africans are doing. I find it strange that the animal rights people would rather see an entire species go extinct than to allow them to be managed for profit. I wonder what our grand kids would say about that after the animals are gone forever. I know that in the imaginary utopia you lefties live in, animal lovers would buy and maintain millions of acres of pristine habitat for the animals to live in peace but the fact is, the animal lovers want someone else to pay for that. Those people are hunters. They do it via a surcharge on all hunting equipment, license fees, private club dues and direct payments to land owners for the right to hunt there. Well, kill 'em all then. You will if you shut down the hunting ranches where these exotics are raised. It is certain that the Africans are not going to save them. I suppose to pseudo machomen, "canned" hunting is real. I am not a fan of canned hunts but I am more opposed to extinction. In fact most of these exotic hunts do not guarantee that the hunter actually gets anything. You mean, they let the animals out of their pens for the "hunt"? :) |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:08 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com