i think the point being about the tools is, boys playing with sad toys, if they did not have there guns ex ex , they would not be so keen to hunt for (sport.)
Sure, I don't like yahoos with guns blowing away bambi for fun and games anymore than the next person. I actually feed my family with what I hunt and I find the argument about it not being OK if I use a tool tiresome. I live a subsistance lifestyle as much as I can, providing up to 60% of all of our food from our land. I grow food with tools and hunt food with tools and I cut firewood with tools. It's a senseless argument if used only with respect to hunting and not to cultivating and processing vegetarian food.
dusk, thank you. That is what I was trying to say. I understand that people use tools for eating, but hunting isn't exactly a sport if one side has an advantage over the other side. That is fine if you choose to hunt and eat meat, but it is my opinion that we'd be better off without doing both. Have a great night. I love the way you think, too, dusk .
I respect your opinion much more than any gun toting yahoo out there, but look at it from an environmental point of view. Is it better to eat something off the shelf that was shipped from miles away, packaged etc, etc. or something that only involves me and the moose? It seems to me that anything I can use off the land is much more in line with what the mother intended. And mind you someone like me is definately more in tune with the land I am relying on that most others. I am curious, how will the world be a better place if I don't hunt and buy the things I need from the store, contributing to normal economics practices that involve marketing, purchasing, shipping and executive salaries? I don't know why I even get involved in these discussions anymore. How many times just on these forums has this very thing been beat to death. "You can't care about the earth because you hunt and eat meat" blah blah blah. I would dare say I care a great deal since I actually rely on the mother for my subsistance and don't go and buy it from a store. peace and love
At the end of day, most people, and i said (most people) in the world do not eat meat to survive, they eat it because it tastes good. (Question) for people who do eat meat. do you have a pet dog or cat ex -ex-, and if so would you consider eating it. Of course you wouldn't. So to some this all up, why is the life of, lets say a bear, mean less than the life of your cat or dog ex ?
If it was the only meat available then yes I would. I have friends who hunt but also have pet deer that they wouldn't eat. Forming an attachment with something is different. That is where you are confused. The life doesn't mean any less to hunters. Its not like the experience is in the killing. I guess you would have to do it to understand. If you eat meat then something is going to die to provide it. It makes you respect the lives of the cows just a little more when you know what is involved in making the packets of meat at the grocery. I am sure your case here though is that no meat should be eaten and I just don't agree. If you eat a plant based diet you are still killing for your food. Death is a part of the cycle of life. That bear would have killed many more fish to eat in its life.
The only problem is that plants do not have a brain and nervous system, unlike animals. One of the reasons people choose not to eat meat is because they want to limit the pain and suffering. Of course, the animals will eventually die of predators in the wild or old age, but I would rather see them die at least having a chance in life rather than having bullets in their hearts or living the miserable lives that factories provide for them. There is a difference between the intelligence of a human and a bear. Humans have developed enough mentally to know what is right and what is wrong. There are animals who happen to eat their own kind, too. Does this mean that we should allow cannibalism?
Well if you have ever grown a garden you know that plants do react to "bad stimulus" and will bend to avoid it. So they do react to negatives in their environment. At what level of brain function does something become too smart to eat? How about shrimp? snails? fish? starfish, they don't have brains? or does it just have to be a mammal? Obviously the fact that it is "alive" isn't the determining factor for you. Then you would think that if eating meat is wrong the vast majority of humans wouldn't do it, but thats not the case. What one human decides is wrong a lot of other humans think is right. I think you forget we are animals not some special being.
plants react they dont act, get a grip dood. threre is a massive difference between a reaction and some thing thats takes action.
if u dont need food so badly that u need to hunt or if you dont need to thin out the #'s of an annimal that is taking over their habitat then dont hunt. hunting is cruel. We derived from cavemen, yet we live in houses. Just because our ancestors were hunters doesnt mean we have to be as mindless.
id say its more mindless to go trudging around a supermarket with no clue where our food comes from a caveman had to know everything about his food where it ate where it drank where it slept. just because a caveman didnt build factories that pump waste into our atmosphere doesnt make him mindless in my eyes it makes us mindless.
I hunt and fed my family. Sport it is not, it's a lot of work to track down a moose, field clean it and haul it out on your back. Here I am tuning up my skills for the spring bear hunt.. .........Dennis
punctuation, stig! it really helps on the net (or simply hitting return at the end of your sentances) to answer your original question, yes luring is done, but most Divisions/ Departments of wildlife have rules against it. I'm thinking in particular of created salt licks for deer here in Colorado. oddly these same DOW slaughetered wolves (and still go after coyotes and prairie dogs) for the benefit of livestock owners. So the farmers get deer/elk hassles. We took it out of balance, and I personally think we have an obligation to put it back in balance as much as possible, systemically. I also think if you are going to eat flesh, you should be connected to it in some meaningful way: by raising it, or hunting/ catching it. I carried a PeTA card for a year. I am at 180 degree odds with their methods, but have a decent cook book or two from their press. I'm lacto veg, orienting to vegan, and I can CHOOSE do that because of the bounty in the WESTERN world. I dare say the Massai and Lapps eat flesh because it is dense, sustaining food in lands where plants are scarce or very seasonal. For people to make grand sweeping generalizations is not only patentkly untrue, but shows a chink in their logical armor. That said, for many people vegetarianism is a heart's decision as much as a brain's decision.
yeah sorry about the punctuatoin im dislexic and dont really understand it but im getting my girlfreind to punctuate for me now
here's what I do. You think in complete phrases. peck out that thought, hit return like that sometimes, if there a longer need for division of the thought, i'll skip two lines often between questions see? also the newest firefox underlines misspelled words! now that is cool, and I'll post far fewer teh and sadi
or the best way... say what you want to say aloud and add punctuation when you pause for breaths / when you start to inflect your words (e.g in British English we always let our pitch go down when we're nearing the end of a sentence, unless it's a question when the pitch goes up). Just start with basics like commas (,) full stops (.) colons ) questions marks and exclammation marks I tried to teach some arabic students this once, only they tried to read as much as they could in one breath. Twas funny