Is hunting animals sports or crime ?

That's why I stick to chicken, beef, and fish. I don't see the need to hunt and kill anything else "for food"...unless you're a Jeremiah Johnson type that lives out in the wilderness away from society where access to "normal" food is not possible.

@jasean79: "It's hard to call hunting a "sport" when the competition's only defense is to FLEE"

Indeed

I don't hunt. But, I go fishing or crabbing whenever I'm at the West Coast. Whatever fish/seafood we catch we cook and eat.

Hunting is a crime if you are hunting out of season. Withing season however there is certainly nothing wrong with hunting. At least humans have the decency to kill and animal before we gnaw on it's flesh.

You're mincing words. Hunting, in and of itself within the confines of hunting laws, is not a crime. Killing an endangered animal, whether hunting or even accidentally, is a crime. I said nothing about hunting endangered animals.

I'm sorry if I wasn't painfully specific with my original post. You seen to be the only poster in this thread that had trouble understanding it in its original context.

.. It depends.. Poaching and hunting endangered species is a crime... Hunting also is a important tool to ensuring certain animal populations do not get out of hand within the region.. I personally don't care to ever go hunting in less it is for sustenance, but I have nothing against it.

Unless you buy a permit to hunt it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/10566507/Permit-to-hunt-endangered-African-black-rhino-sells-for-350000.html

If people hunt just for fun, the only hunting they should do is in Duck Hunt and Cabela games.

It's not about necessity, it's more about giving purpose to the kill.

Looking at the food industry, you can point out any individual chicken, pig, or cow that was slaughtered and say "That death was unnecessary. Surely, no one would have starved if they spared this animal's life." The food industry bases how many animals it kills on how much people will buy, i.e., how many animals will be eaten. The eating of the animal is the purpose of the kill. Is it unnecessary? You could certainly argue that, but as long as the kill has purpose, I don't really see an ideological difference between hunting and a slaughterhouse.

Food is food, whether you buy it in a store or kill it yourself; so if people take joy/sport in killing their own food, more power to them.

Well there is licensed hunting which is supposed to be closely monitored or controlled to ensure population control. Though, I don't really see the sport in hunting, I've watched some of those hunting shows and there's nothing to be proud about in some of those kills, so I don't really see the sport in taking trophies of something that wasn't more effort than a long hike. If you wanted to be sporting about it, go hunting with nothing more than a knife and a bow and arrow, and hunt something that has a good chance to fight back; that's sport.

Hunting should always be for food...and even then should only be done with a bow.

Hunting deer with a high powered rifle, for example, isn't hunting.....it's waiting and then shooting at a stationary target.

Not really something to boast about.

I'm lol'ing at people who think deer hunting involves nothing else than a hike and shooting at a stationary target.

Because they sell all that camoflague and scent maskers for fashion reasons.

As long as you're eating the animal, then its okay. If your hunting just to stuff the animal and put it on your wall, its not okay.

What's also not okay is the fact that people bitch about killing animals, but then go to the grocery store and pick up a steak. The shit must just appear from the sky.

And to sidebar with that, the process in which meat goes from the animal to the grocery store is much, much less humane.

Hunting for sport is something I don't support, whether or not it could be seen as a crime. Hunting for food or self-defense, I'm okay with. You should just have a good reason to hunt.

Even then, that doesn't really address the ethics of killing a living animal. Sure, if it's farmed then it's not longer "in the environment" and you're no longer screwing up the ecosystem (assuming that we ignore all the ways that farming pollutes the environment). But that's still killing a living thing for the purpose of pleasure. I ate a steak today. One can argue that I need to eat meat, but I already eat too much meat. Let's not delude ourselves here: I didn't eat it in order to survive, I ate it for enjoyment. The fact that it was eaten doesn't make it stop being an unnecessary death, and the fact that the animal was farmed instead of wild-caught doesn't necessarily make it any better either.

That's a non-argument. ANY deliberate kill clearly has a purpose, otherwise the hunter wouldn't have gone out of his way to kill the animal. Now, i agree that illegal hunting of animals (particularly endangered species) is in a class of its own since we want to conserve the population (maybe so that we can keep killing it). So I'm not gonna talk about killing rhinos for their horns.

But shit, in a lot of places, deer are FAR from endangered. In many places, hunting permits are issued just to thin out the population so that the deer don't screw up the environment. If I legally obtain a hunting permit and legally kill a deer and then stuff it as a trophy and throw away the meat, that is a purpose. The deer was killed for a purpose, and that purpose was so that I could decorate my home with a sweet-ass trophy.

It's not about the killing being done for a purpose. The argument for "it's only okay if you eat it" is stating that the purpose doesn't make it okay UNLESS that purpose happens to be for food. And I'm asking why that is. There are all sorts of purposes that a dead animal might serve, but somehow "I wanted to eat it" is the only one that almost unanimously gets approval. Why does that purpose get the okay when it's so often just as much "killing for pleasure" as if if you had mounted the animal's head on a wall or simply killed it for the thrill of the hunt?

@MrGeezer:

Why is that? Can you explain why eating the animal makes it okay to hunt it? Can you explain why hunting for purposes other than food is not okay?

I used to think this but then I realized it makes no difference to me because the animal carcass will get used either way, whether it be from the nutrients going into the ground as fertilizer or eaten by scavengers. I think it's much more important that if you hunt an animal it should be a quick kill so the thing is dead before it hits the ground.

I don't disagree with what you're saying, however the "farm raised" animals are specifically bred for the purpose of human consumption. So, how is that wrong, exactly? While steak may be a luxury to some, other parts of the cow are not. Red meat contains a lot of nutrients and proteins not found in other foods and since we are omnivorous by nature, I don't see how consuming it on a weekly basis is such a bad thing.

I don't understand why people wouldn't ok ok with hunting. It's pretty controlled here in US you buy a license. You are only allowed at certain times with certain weapons and can only tag a set amount. I don't know anyone who hunts that doesn't get the meat processed. Sure they may also use the head and or antlers as a trophy but that's only part of it. We are ok with eating animals that are forced to eat food to fatten them and take hormones and packed into cages or fenced areas.

Well to be a crime it has to be defined as such. Crime is specific. I think you are arguing more along a morality here though I agree in principle to what you are trying to say.

Killing purely for the thrill or for a trophy is senseless imo. Shooting an animal just for the sake of saying "hey look, I killed that,"is meaningless, nothing of value is gained.

I see no reason to support what I consider to be senseless killing.

I saw that Spielberg dude killing the last known dinosaur. Fucker.

Something may indeed have been gained. Some people gain a trophy head, some people gain a sense of satisfaction. What you're really saying here is that what has been gained doesn't justify the death of the animal.

Which again brings us to food. In many cases, what has been gained is entirely unnecessary and is purely for satisfaction. I like venison, I like rabbit meat, in much the same way that I like having a trophy head hanging on my wall. An animal has still died for my enjoyment, not out of necessity. So, what is it about the act of eating that makes it okay to kill an animal purely for pleasure? How is that a valid reason to unnecessarily kill an animal?

I hunt, but I only use my bare hands and my teeth. So far, I have not caught any big game, but I'm optimistic about the future.

That's interesting. I've never really thought about it that way. I also very much agree with your last sentence.

Not a crime, but I think it should be as it's disgusting and cruel to animals. Taking a "selfie" of it is despicable to be honest and she deserved to lose her opportunity.

I don't see anything wrong with hunting. It's pretty much the only way to control the populations of certain animals without having to spend obscene amounts of money.

ehh, quit making me think about it!

Like I said before, you can look at any individual animal that was killed and call it an unnecessary death, but with each of those individual deaths, we have a great sum of food that we're all alive because of. Hunting is a part of that sum; if all of the people who hunt food were to stop, they'd have to buy chicken, cow, pig, etc. and there would be more of those animals killed. Animals die so we can survive; to spare one is to kill another, that's the nature of life.

Killing for trophies and pleasure without eating it, on the other hand, is truly unnecessary as the food they kill is wasted while they eat the animals that were killed for them - causing two deaths where only one was necessary.

But couldn't you make the same claim about ANYONE who "caused two deaths where only one was necessary"? Wouldn't this also apply to people who don't hunt and simply eat twice as much meat as they need?

B/c it presents more of a challenge.

Then one guy argued that there are scents and camo sold and theres more to it than sitting in a tree.....he just made my point more clear.

Now you don't even have to worry about being down wind...just throw some deer crap scent on you and no deer will smell you.....don't worry about being seen.....thats what camo is for.

He literally made it clear that you worry about little to nothing when you're hunting in todays world. Go sit in a tree and wait.

At least with a bow you have to "try".....as it is with a gun....it's falsifying this sense of accomplishment some dudes have when hunting.

I'm okay with hunting. I think it's pretty entertaining.

I think that enjoying killing a non-human animal is a sign of psychopathy. But then again people should be more concerned about how the food industry is treating the animals we eat daily than with individual hunters. Although hunting endangered animals from a helicopter is and arrogant and cowardly act.

Thats the dumbest comparison I've seen in a while.

If I go buy meat from the grocery....I'm obviously not hunting. If I go hunting...then I'm obviously hunting.

I can't believe you actually expect me to respect that statement.

@indzman said:

On FIFA WC 2014 a belgian fan by name of Axelle Despiegelaere lost Loreal modelling contract for a hunting pic on her facebook profile.

Isn't hunting animals considered sports ? Kill for food ? Or is it crime nowadays ? Can one be arrested on hunting animals like deer or birds ?

Hunting rare/endangered animals for nothing but your own enjoyment is sick and should be outlawed and banned for good.

Hunting animals like this belgian blond for sports is sick and shows a lack of moral strength. But as long as its not rare/endangered, it would be to great a attack on personal liberties.

Ok dude....you keep spinning this conversation. I'll just take the stance that this is the level of intelligence of conversations that go on here. I'll just be a prick from now on if I'm going to treated like I'm stupid.

THE TOPIC WAS TE SPORT OF HUNTING.

BUYING GROCERIES IS NOT CONSIDERED A SPORT.

And considering how lame it is to sit in a tree with no worries about wind, sound, or anything else and shoot a deer standing still with a high powered rifle....yeah....hunting shouldn't be considered a sport either.

Sport requires competition and challenge....there is none in hunting like that ^.

I think it's ridiculous she got fired. The strange part is those stuck up people don't even realize that hunters care for, and love nature, more than any other type of person.

My vote is neither. I don't have a problem with it but don't call it a sport.

I live in Alabama...it's considered a sport.

YOU might not consider it a sport....but unless you are starving you DO NOT need to kill for food. You might WANT to kill a deer for it's meat...therefore since it's not a necessity it's a sport.

Just b/c you're ignorant and trollish don't lump an "us" in there.

I'm not talking to anyone but YOU. I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone. There are enough ppl that think you guys are complete idiots for essentially: put on smell masker > walk to tree > climb tree > wait for deer > shoot stationary deer > make a huge deal about it as if you're Dirty Harry.

And just to shut your ignorant mouth up....wherever you're from needs to get out of the 60's and join the rest of us in 2014....we have better schools here than in LA. My fiance moved here b/c the graduation rate there is crap.

Here ya go: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/alabama/districts/vestavia-hills-city/vestavia-hills-high-school-358/test-scores

http://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/alabama/districts/mountain-brook-city/mountain-brook-high-school-289/test-scores

Thats just 2 school around my area.

I bet you anything you wouldn't even have the balls to tell me where you live....it's easy for anyone to say something negative about any place do to any stereotype or personal experience....and you want to keep your image as a perfect little troll.

Whatever.