Killing animals?

[Redcoat-Mic]

Hunting must be inherently bad, since the lives that animals of the wild are SO much worse than the lives of animals raised on intensive farms!



At least wild animals are running around free, free to do what they like, free to move around mostly unrestrained. Intensively farmed animals? Not so. Pigs farmed in such a fashion not only produce  much lower quality meat (as almost any meat connoisseur will tell you), but tend to chew off the tails and ears of nearby pigs due to, presumably, stress (hence why pigs' tails are often chopped off at birth).

Is that a dig at my opinions based on nothing I've said? Please don't start doing that, it winds me up no end.
I would have no problem with hunting if it was necessary, I.E. the Meat industry collapsed overnight. I'm not saying that animals that are bred for killing have a good life either, you seem to have presumed my opinions again, which again I ask, you do not do. I do not agree with the conditions of most of the animals, to a reasonable to degree, they have to be processed with efficiency to meet demand so I understand they can't all be gently put to sleep, but to cut costs for the company is wrong.
I try to buy from companies with good standards when possible.
This was my point. Don't read anything else from it.

Hunting is not necessary because whatever you kill has already been killed for you, so you're needlessly taking away one more animals life.

 

[Balinux]

When an animal kills an other animal for sport it's on a different level, a human in my opinion should have
more compassion than for example a cat playing with a mouse.

People that call themselves "modern civilized" should understand that killing for sport, thrill and excitement
is a downright barbaric act.

In a perfect world, there would be no need for any weapons or killing, but the world is far from it.
For thinking, aware and capable of feeling compassion humans.

This is the first time I write anything about this topic so know that this based only from my experience.
And I'm by no mean an activist in any way or area.
I've got more to write but I leave that for tomorrow, I'm quite tired right now. Sorry if anything wasn't coherent.
(03:26 AM here)

In a perfect world there would be predator and prey , life and death. Its ok for human beings to play the part of predators, as long as we do it with in a controled fashion. Like the native americans and the bufalos.

 

[Llew2]

Humans were set to rule over the animals, so I don't believe it is bad to kill them out of necessity. As for sport? Probably not.

 

[Guan_Chung]

@Redcoat: You're ignoring what other people have been saying. Meat you kill yourself is of better quality and it's cheaper.
So why wouldn't you do it? Understand, I am an animal rights activist and I'm saying this.

 

[Cleaning agent]

Killing for sport annoys me because it's pointless and a waste. Killing for sport then eating the meat as well is alright, but the kill should be clean and as painless as possible.

I see what Redcoat means here, since we already have huge supplies of meat going to waste, we don't need to hunt for our food any more, and indeed doing so creates more animal death that is unneeded.

There is no solution to this problem though. People who kill for sport don't see animals as having any reason to live and they follow the rules of everything exisiting for their own purposes. It's a philosophy and they'll stick to it, I defy anyone to persuade someone like that otherwise.

Anyway, we're all repeating the same thing over and over here

Oh, by the way Redcoat, I don't think Spider was actually saying anything about your opinions there, at least I can't see anything that he said being aimed at you.

 

[calandale]

No no, I see people have misunderstood me on this one. I'm not saying it's better for the animals at all. Either way they end up dead. But there's no need for hunting anymore, it's all been done for you. Killing something for food is just an unnecessary death if you've already got some perfectly good corpse-in-plastic already prepared for you.
It's like getting the same present twice, one of them you won't use. Waste.

No. I haven't misunderstood you. Look, death is MINOR
in comparison to a life of misery which is assured to end
in slaughter. I'd MUCH prefer killing some wild animal, than
knowing that I'm helping to fuel an industry based upon
such torture.

 

[Toxicity]

I like Tankai's way of thinking.

All I had to say.

 

[Redcoat-Mic]

@Redcoat: You're ignoring what other people have been saying. Meat you kill yourself is of better quality and it's cheaper.
So why wouldn't you do it? Understand, I am an animal rights activist and I'm saying this.

I'll assume this is for me. I'm not intentionally ignoring anything, I can't respond to everyone, seeing as how a lot of people disagree with me.
As I've said, I don't agree with wasting another life. Not for having a better tea or saving 50 bob on a sandwich. If the situation demands it, fair enough, you're poor and you need to eat. But I don't get how anyone can buy a gun and ammo and then say they need to save money.
Just out of intresting, how much would ammo for a typical hunting rifle cost? I'm British so I'm pretty much ignorant on the topic.

 

[calandale]

Hunting is not necessary because whatever you kill has already been killed for you, so you're needlessly taking away one more animals life.

If I never bought meat again,
then there would be some minuscule
effect on the overall demand. IF enough
people did this, the meat industry would
collapse. A good thing.

I'm a carnivore, and a poor one,
so I don't really follow my moral
beliefs on this, but the suffering
of animals through agribuisiness is
disgusting.

 

[Guan_Chung]

@Redcoat:

I'll assume this is for me.

Nothing gets past you does it? Also, I'm not exactly sure about the cost. All I do know is that it is cheaper. Considering that he freezes the whole deer and saves it to eat.

 

[Archonsod]

**** that, my ancestors worked damn hard to be top of the food chain, anything entering my territory is a prospective lunch.

 

[calandale]

**** that, my ancestors worked damn hard to be top of the food chain, anything entering my territory is a prospective lunch.

Yeah. My mom got in trouble about that though,
when some neighbor's kids complained about
being shot at.

 

[Redcoat-Mic]

Hunting is not necessary because whatever you kill has already been killed for you, so you're needlessly taking away one more animals life.

If I never bought meat again,
then there would be some minuscule
effect on the overall demand. IF enough
people did this, the meat industry would
collapse. A good thing.

I'm a carnivore, and a poor one,
so I don't really follow my moral
beliefs on this, but the suffering
of animals through agribuisiness is
disgusting.

Everyone stopping eating meat though isn't realistic, I for one wouldn't as I love meat. True enough, conditions are disgusting, and they should be improved. I don't disagree with it's a horrible industry, it's an industry making money from death and corpses. But the point is if people carry on hunting, this too will make no dent on the meat industry what so ever. The hunter has killed one animal and eaten it, but the abattoir has still killed one animal at the same time.

 

[13 Spider Bloody Chain]

Hunting must be inherently bad, since the lives that animals of the wild are SO much worse than the lives of animals raised on intensive farms!



At least wild animals are running around free, free to do what they like, free to move around mostly unrestrained. Intensively farmed animals? Not so. Pigs farmed in such a fashion not only produce  much lower quality meat (as almost any meat connoisseur will tell you), but tend to chew off the tails and ears of nearby pigs due to, presumably, stress (hence why pigs' tails are often chopped off at birth).

Is that a dig at my opinions based on nothing I've said? Please don't start doing that, it winds me up no end.
I would have no problem with hunting if it was necessary, I.E. the Meat industry collapsed overnight. I'm not saying that animals that are bred for killing have a good life either, you seem to have presumed my opinions again, which again I ask, you do not do. I do not agree with the conditions of most of the animals, to a reasonable to degree, they have to be processed with efficiency to meet demand so I understand they can't all be gently put to sleep, but to cut costs for the company is wrong.
I try to buy from companies with good standards when possible.
This was my point. Don't read anything else from it.

Ah, but when someone says that hunting/killing is bad without stating specifically that the current meat industry is bad, I must assume that said person is satisfied with the status quo of the meat industry or is unaware of it.

I apologize for making straw men, but please specify your points a bit more in the future.

 

[Redcoat-Mic]

@Redcoat:

I'll assume this is for me.

Nothing gets past you does it? Also, I'm not exactly sure about the cost. All I do know is that it is cheaper. Considering that he freezes the whole deer and saves it to eat.

Well seeing as how I wasn't quoted how am I supposed to know. Please remain civil even if you don't agree with what I'm saying. All I'm saying is I can't imagine it making much of a saving that would make a difference.

 

[Redcoat-Mic]

Hunting must be inherently bad, since the lives that animals of the wild are SO much worse than the lives of animals raised on intensive farms!



At least wild animals are running around free, free to do what they like, free to move around mostly unrestrained. Intensively farmed animals? Not so. Pigs farmed in such a fashion not only produce  much lower quality meat (as almost any meat connoisseur will tell you), but tend to chew off the tails and ears of nearby pigs due to, presumably, stress (hence why pigs' tails are often chopped off at birth).

Is that a dig at my opinions based on nothing I've said? Please don't start doing that, it winds me up no end.
I would have no problem with hunting if it was necessary, I.E. the Meat industry collapsed overnight. I'm not saying that animals that are bred for killing have a good life either, you seem to have presumed my opinions again, which again I ask, you do not do. I do not agree with the conditions of most of the animals, to a reasonable to degree, they have to be processed with efficiency to meet demand so I understand they can't all be gently put to sleep, but to cut costs for the company is wrong.
I try to buy from companies with good standards when possible.
This was my point. Don't read anything else from it.

Ah, but when someone says that hunting/killing is bad without stating specifically that the current meat industry is bad, I must assume that said person is satisfied with the status quo of the meat industry or is unaware of it.

I apologize for making straw men, but please specify your points a bit more in the future.

Thanks, apologises in return. One poor thing about when I argue about what I feel strongly about, my structure tends to go out the window.

 

[calandale]

Everyone stopping eating meat though isn't realistic, I for one wouldn't as I love meat. True enough, conditions are disgusting, and they should be improved. I don't disagree with it's a horrible industry, it's an industry making money from death and corpses. But the point is if people carry on hunting, this too will make no dent on the meat industry what so ever. The hunter has killed one animal and eaten it, but the abattoir has still killed one animal at the same time.

Right. But I see NO wrong in stepping out of the
commercialized loop here. Anyone with the means
to kill wild animals for food, or to raise their own,
shouldn't be criticized on moral grounds.

Especially since most hunting licenses are given
in part for herd control measures.

Plus, there is the simple fact that one CAN'T buy
meat that tastes the same as wild venison or boar.
And, when it comes down to it, TASTE is the only
reason that the meat industry exists. One can have
a perfectly nutritious diet, without indulging in meat,
AND the food could be grown much more efficiently.

 

[13 Spider Bloody Chain]

Well seeing as how I wasn't quoted how am I supposed to know. Please remain civil even if you don't agree with what I'm saying. All I'm saying is I can't imagine it making much of a saving that would make a difference.

But why does that make the killing of animals so horribly wrong? I'm not sure if there is a strong connection there.

Edit: And as calandale has said above, it's nigh impossible to eat wild meat if it's not, well, wild. Sometimes people just want wild meat.

 

[Sir Saladin]

I love eating pigs and cows and all sorts of animals, if they don't like it they can kiss my ass.

 

[Redcoat-Mic]

Well seeing as how I wasn't quoted how am I supposed to know. Please remain civil even if you don't agree with what I'm saying. All I'm saying is I can't imagine it making much of a saving that would make a difference.

But why does that make the killing of animals so horribly wrong? I'm not sure if there is a strong connection there.

Edit: And as calandale has said above, it's nigh impossible to eat wild meat if it's not, well, wild. Sometimes people just want wild meat.

Well to take a life to save a couple of quid seems a bit... well horrible to me. Wasn't a main point I was making however, I was just counter arguing the "it's cheaper" argument.
I can see why people don't want animals pumped up on steroids and toxic waste, but not everything is done by evil soulless coperations, especially now that free range and organic is trendy, I don't see what the difference between that and wild would be personally.