A little bit :thumbleft:

---

Yes. That's nature's way. It's better that way. :thumbright:

I don't think I could kill an animal, but you'd think that some people would see the necessity in it in some cases.

I bet that they have some great alternatives like nutering half of the population, costing millions and and one hell of an effort.

Greg Jennings once killed a grizzly with his bear hands.

Ooh, nice pun.

Me neither. Unless I NEEDED it for food, i couldn't. I don't see the joy in it.

---

Is that such a surprise? PETA has run ads advocating for the euthanization of non-purebred dogs. PETA animal shelters have the highest kill rate in the industry -- almost 97%.

PETA doesn't give a shit about animals, any more than most environmentalists truly care about the environment. Their movements are about political control, and that's why I have little respect for them.

---

Do you eat ANY meat? Beef? Chicken? Pork? Fish? ANY?
If you do, you shouldn't be against hunting. You do realize that any meat you eat was once a living, breathing animal. SOMEONE had to kill it in order for you to eat it. Just because you didn't do the deed yourself doesn't mean you are guiltless.
Tell me.......how "defenseless" is a deer in the wild as compared to say, oh, a cow or chicken raised only for us to eat it? Killing a deer takes a whole lot more work then going to the grocery store and buying a nice, clean, packaged hunk of meat. It's not like you just go out and pick which one you want and shoot it. Trust me, there were alot of seasons i didn't bring home a deer.
How much "danger" does it take for you to go to a restaurant and order up some prime rib? So.....because you don't see any "danger", you shouldn't do it?
And.....is it better to just let the deer herd grow until there are too many deer, and hundreds of thousands of them die a long horrible death of starvation that would take months? That is not a "worst case sceneario, thats what WOULD happen. So taking out some of the deer so that the ones left have a chance of surviving is bad? Meat going to feed people instead of rotting in the woods is bad HOW exactly?
Oh.....and lets not forget all the millions of other animals that would suffer if the deer herd gets too high. All the grazing animals would suffer. Deer eat alot of food. What would be left for the rabbits, racoons, skunks, and other small animals if the deer over brouse the state? They would have nothing to eat either. Thus, more starvation.
So.......don't hunt, cause it's cruel.
Stop hunting, then pat yourself on the back for being so "caring"......but don't dare walk into the woods the next spring to see how many dead animals you find because of your "kindness". It might make you face what you have done.

---

Poor, poor defenseless animals!

If they really didn't want to die, they could defend themselves. Like, you know.. Shoot back or something. Natural selection, my friends. It's at work here.

The guns/bows make up for the lack of pure instincts the deer/hunted have that we don't. Not to mention there are regulations on how many deer you can hunt, and where you can hunt them. It's not like it's a poaching problem. You want to feel bad for an animal? Fine. Go to Africa where there's HUGE poaching problems that are taking out SPECIES of animals versus some overpopulated and regulated whitetails.

I don't hunt. I've never hunted. But I most certainly don't have an issue with hunting. Especially deers. They are the stupidest beings I've come across.. You guys ever freaking seen a deer run out on the highway, barely miss one car to stop and run DIRECTLY into the car behind it? All it had to do was continue it's path and it would have been fine. The effing things deserve to die.

NOTE: That story I just said was a personal one that almost killed my wife. Yeah, I have an issue with the deer. And if I get a chance, you better believe I'm takin' them down.

---

LOL Formo!!!
I really don't mind if people don't want to hunt. That doesn't bother me one bit. What bothers me is the "holier then thou" non hunters that try to act like they are better then others cause they CHOOSE not to go out and take their own food. That somehow makes them better then hunters.
Yet at least 90% of those same people that look down their noses at me eat meat themselves. Yet they don't see anything hypocritical in it.
I'd LOVE to see them out in the woods, trying to get a deer. It's not as easy as they think. They would probably starve if they had to depend on what they could kill. Deer are prey animals, and in the woods they can spot movement all around and even behind them. Their sense of smell can detect a hunter over a football field away. Their hearing also can detect sounds that we can't even hear with hearing aids. God designed them that way. They are PREY animals. Their eyes are on the sides of their heads, their ears rotate so they can hone in on sounds. They are built to outwit predators. It's NOT easy to get a deer. It's sure nothing like they show on TV in hunting shows.

---

Seeing as PETA was brought up, i want to share a few of my thoughts on them. First, i am against animal abuse. No one should abuse animals.
But PETA goes WAY too far. There is a huge difference between abusing animals and hunting or owning animals.
If you own a pet, PETA will be coming after you. Love your dog, cat, bird, horse whatever? If they get their way, they will make it illegal for you to own ANY domesticated animal. So before you decide to jump on their bangwagon, PLEASE take the time to find out their TRUE motives.

Here's another thing that bothers me. They will LIE or do anything to get their way. To them, the end justifies the means. I'll give you a TRUE example. 10 years ago, i was driving on my way up north to go deer hunting. I was listening to the radio. They had a representitive of PETA on the radio. What she said SHOCKED me. She said "For every deer killed by hunters, 2 to 3 deer are wounded and left to suffer in the woods." My first thought was "No WONDER anti hunters hate us! Thats unacceptable!" Then i did something that i bet 99% of people didn't do, or didn't even know the numbers to be able to do.
I did the math.
We had an estimated deer herd of 1.7 million. Hunters killed just over 500 thousand. That left 1.2 million deer.
Now....multiply 500 thousand killed by 2 and 3. What do you come up with? On the LOW end, 1 million, on the HIGH end, 1.5 million.
So according to PETA, on the LOW end 10 out of every 12 deer left should be hobbleing around, wounded. On the HIGH end, 300 thousand more deer then are even ALIVE are wounded.
Anyone see the problems with that? So where did they get that from? Thats right, where they get most of their "facts".....out of thin air.
They depend on the fact that most people take what they hear as fact, without ever bothering to check them out to see if they are valid.

Also....with just over 600 thousand deer hunters, if what PETA said was anywhere even CLOSE to true, then EVERY hunter would have to wound at LEAST 1 deer, and many would have to wound 2. EVERY SEASON.
I have been deer hunting 38 years. You know how many deer I wounded and did not recover in those 38 years? ONE. And even that one bothered me terribly. But according to PETA, i SHOULD have wounded around 54 in that many years.....so i guess i shouldn't feel too bad.
If you are going to be against hunting, at least use honest reasons why. Thats how i feel.

---