PDA

View Full Version : Animal Cruelty?


roy reali
October 21, 2009, 07:59 AM
I am a hunter as most of you know. I kill animals. I have no qualms about anyone killing an animal in legal and ehtical manners. What I can't stand is seeing people treating animals in a cruel manner. The way some poeple treat animals makes my blood boil.

I have always wondered if this makes me a hypocrite?

If I am walking through a field and a game bird takes off I'll try to kill it. If I see chickens being kept in a pen of filth I get angry. If a rancher asks to shoot a coyote I'll galdly do it. If I see someone kick a dog I want to kick him. I have a mountain lion tag I want to fill. When I hear of someone setting a cat on fire I want to set that person on fire.

Anyone else here think the way I do?

tyrajam
October 21, 2009, 08:08 AM
I live to hunt. But torturing an animal is completely different. I agree with you. To kill something quickly and cleanly for the table, its pelt, or whatever, is a part of life that has gone on for thousands of years, and will continue for thousands more. To intentionally cause an animal to suffer, however, has no purpose, and I agree it is a sign of a sick person.

hogdogs
October 21, 2009, 08:10 AM
I feel pretty much the same way...

Brent

.284
October 21, 2009, 08:34 AM
I think what you're talking about makes perfect sense. The scenarios you have laid out are as different as apple and oranges. There is a purpose in your actions, whereas kicking a dog or setting a cat on fire is just what you said, crueltly.

FrontSight
October 21, 2009, 09:24 AM
Of course you feel this way, because you are normal.

Taking animal life, for a purpose, be it sport or food or pelt or money is a normal & QUICK act, not a dreanged & DRAWN OUT one.

Causing an animal to suffer over a long period of time is where the deranged part comes in.

Very different.

And kicking a dog (for no good reason), is akin to kicking a 4 year old child, as dogs are as intelligent as children of that age & are loyal creatures, helping millions of humans a year and also saving thousands of human lives as well.

simonkenton
October 21, 2009, 09:24 AM
Yeah, I think the way you do.
If you are going to kill a creature to eat it, do so quickly and as painlessly as possible.
People who torture animals deserve to be tortured.

I can't even stand to see those lobsters in the tank at the restaurant, I say, if you are gonna kill 'em, kill 'em.

FrontSight
October 21, 2009, 09:30 AM
I can't even stand to see those lobsters in the tank at the restaurant, I say, if you are gonna kill 'em, kill 'em.

Well, there's a very practical reason for that: To keep them alive & fresh until they are ready to cook. Otherwise they spoil quickly, or you have to freeze them, both of which severely undesireable.

That would be akin to killing a steer as soon as it has reached the right weight even tho there is no one willing to buy the meat in the foreseable future...you have to have a ready market before you can butcher them or you wind up freezing them for who knows how long & then no one wants the frozen meat.

ZeroJunk
October 21, 2009, 09:38 AM
What is it they say? I can't describe it, but I know it when I see it.

simonkenton
October 21, 2009, 10:30 AM
I can't stand to see those lobsters, sitting confined in that tank and looking at the people who are going to eat them, sometimes for weeks.
That is torture.

If it doesn't bother you, then fine, go buy a big fresh lobster for dinner tonight.

koolminx
October 21, 2009, 10:55 AM
The reality of it is, the Lobsters do not have any idea what's going to happen to them... So it's not cruel in the slightest. Anyone that thinks it is cruel, just think of the slow death they get from being eaten by a starfish... That's cruel! ;)

About the cruelty... I am with you man. Quick death = good eats and no cruelty.

hogdogs
October 21, 2009, 11:06 AM
Simon, On the flip side... If you would do your part buying them live lobsters, they wouldn't suffer so long in the tank staring at you wishing you would help them expedite their demise:D
I see no difference in the lobsters and cattle in a barn... So long as they ain't starved to death.
Brent

ZeroJunk
October 21, 2009, 11:32 AM
Good point HD. Kind of like being morally against baiting and having no problem with domestic hogs, which are a lot smarter than a deer is ever going to be, fed on a slab of concrete until they are big enough to be slaughtered and shot in the head.

I doubt the hog sees any mystical extra value in a deer.

All in the mind of the hunter trying to make something harder so he can feel proud of himself I suppose.

FrontSight
October 21, 2009, 11:42 AM
simonkenton, I think you may be overlooking something: lobsters do not have self-awareness. They do not even realize that they themselves exist.

Place a lobster in front of a mirror, and they will think it's another lobster.

Only higher, more intelligent animals like apes, dolphins, man, etc. are aware of their own existence and look at themselves in a mirror and realize that they are looking at themselves.

So a lobster, sitting in a tank, doesn't even realize that it exists, let alone that the people looking at it are going to eat it.

All just reflex and instinct when they are grabbed. Kind of like a 3 month old baby...they instinctively know to cry when hungry and then feed on a boobey, but they have no idea they exist.

Not saying that babies are the same thing as lobsters, but just giving you an example that hopefully explains it a little better.

schutzen
October 21, 2009, 11:58 AM
I think you will find most hunters have the same regard for animals that you do. Hunters strive for a quick, clean, humane kill. Most hunters I know keep their hunting dogs in clean pens, keep them well feed, and exercise them often. How many of the "animal rights do gooders" allow their pet to run freely? How many house pet cats needlessly kill song birds because they are allowed to roam freely in the yard? How many deer are run to death by pet dogs running free?

Many of the people who criticize hunters have never lived outside a metropolitan area. Most have not seen wildlife except on TV and fewer still have lived to watch nature's majesty unfold through the seasons of the year.

Pahoo
October 21, 2009, 12:34 PM
I think you will find most hunters have the same regard for animals that you do.
I feel that all "Hunters" feel this way and folks that don't, have other issues and in need of professional help. Just as I'm aware that there are ethical hunters out there, I am aware that there are killers. Not much you can do about the other guy; is there ??? ... :mad:

Now, on a realated issue, PETA is really missing the boat on the treatment of chickens. How many times have you eaten chicken and found broken legs and wings or seen the presence of bleeding? Last night I boiled some chicken and when I trimmed off the meat, there was evidence of bleeding. We all know that a dead animals doesn't bleed like that. Have to stop watching CSI.


Be Safe !!!

wyobohunter
October 21, 2009, 01:31 PM
I guess it says something about the duality of man:cool:

Although I will not try to say I never buy meat, I really don't care for factory farming and much prefer getting my own hands bloody over buying that stuff that "grows on the shelf at the grocery store". I also don't like cruel animal experimentation and try to avoid products that use this practice.

ninjatoth
October 21, 2009, 02:08 PM
I can understand not wanting animal cruelty,and a good hunter should make it a priority to kill his game without alot of suffering.But,I could go either way when it comes to cats.If someone has a stray cat problem and wants to shoot them,so be it.I am more concerned with the possible kid that is losing a pet than the cat itself.I even seen a story about how the humane society was offering a $500 reward for finding the person that shot a lost cat in the head with an arrow.I am not saying that shooting the cat with an arrow is right,and I sympathize with the owner of the cat,but look at the law and the probable home owner that had his trash being torn up.It is a homeowners right to shoot a stray looking cat,with no consequence,so what is the $500 reward going to do?Nothing.Again,it is cruel to choose an arrow to do pest control,but obviously they were going for a kill shot to hit it in the head.I know my remarks sound terrible,but I grew up on a farm with a huge wild cat problem,and I would never use an arrow to try to kill a cat,but lighten up on controlling stray animals,if you can take out a few humainly,so be it,if you don't,the animal control will with gas,then burn them,that's what they do.

ninjatoth
October 21, 2009, 02:36 PM
I want to clear up that I do not believe in cruelty twords any animal at any time.But I believe simply this:I do not see a pest cat or dog any differently than a raccoon or opossum when it comes to defending your property or animals.Just because humans have tamed certain animal like cats or dogs,does not make them better than other animals,and are subject to lethal force when out of line or dangerous.I will never be a person who puts an animal up there with humans,I simply believe humans are much more valuable.

orangello
October 21, 2009, 02:52 PM
I agree on the theme of a quick kill & humane hunting being OK while senseless violence against an animal is not OK.

I make an exception in regards to deer of any kind; i hate them and wish them whatever kind of death gets them first be it quick and relatively painless or slow and excruciating. I'm not saying that is "right" or "proper"; i'm just saying that is how i feel. I was riding in a truck that accidentally ran over a racoon many years ago, and i insisted we stop and put the 'coon down the quickest way possible. If it had been a deer, i wouldn't have asked that we stop and put it down, but i wouldn't have insisted on watching it twitch out either. Deadliest animal in North America for how many years now?

Ninjatoth, not to argue the value of cats vs. opossums, but i do think that the history of cats and dogs as associates of humans makes destroying them acceptable in fewer situations/circumstances. IOW, a wild animal knows to run away from a human as a potential threat (just based on personal experience), while a feral cat or dog may not realize that it should be avoiding humans and their homes. That is not to say that i don't believe feral animals can be a threat or be in need of population control; more than once i've been warned by a land owner to shoot any un-collared dogs while hunting due to problems with feral dog packs damaging deer herds. Of course, i'm sure those dogs just migrated to the woods all by themselves :rolleyes: . No offense.

wyobohunter
October 21, 2009, 03:15 PM
I make an exception in regards to deer of any kind; i hate them and wish them whatever kind of death gets them first be it quick and relatively painless or slow and excruciating

Really, you hate Deer... Why?

orangello
October 21, 2009, 03:37 PM
"Really, you hate Deer... Why?"
I guess i might hate fluffy bunnies if i knew as many people who had been injured in fluffy bunny-related car accidents, not to mention the damage to the cars. I also don't know anyone, me personally not "know of", who has been fatally or seriously wounded while dove hunting; while i have known a few people who were accidentally shot while deer hunting or by a deer hunter. Surely my attitude is colored by my experiences. I certainly do not oppose deer hunting as an unsafe activity, no more so than driving, and i have hunted deer many times and enjoyed it without being injured in any serious or memorable way. If i were ever rendered unable to hunt deer, i would be glad to buy my nephews some ammo for their deer hunting use.

I'm sure lots of people are injured dodging dogs on the road too, but i see & hear about far too many deer strikes to like deer.

I am not a big fan of non-animated coyotes either, but for different reasons.

edit* I should disclose that since i don't eat much meat, deer don't have much to offer me as a reason to want them around.

simonkenton
October 21, 2009, 04:24 PM
The comparison to lobsters in the tank would be, if you went into a restaurant that sold fried rabbit, and they had a pen in the lobby with 20 bunnies in there.
And you just picked out your bunny, and the cook took it in the back and chopped its head off, and then fried it up.

Fresh fish is better than frozen, and I bet fresh bunny would taste better than frozen.

How can y'all say that lobsters don't know that they exist? How in the world could you know that. Have you given a lobster an IQ test?
Hell a dog will look in a mirror and think it is another dog.

Playboypenguin
October 21, 2009, 04:37 PM
...it does not make you a hypocrite at all.

I am a huge animal rights activist. I donate a large amount of money to the humane society every year and hold multiple benefits for animal causes. Still, I am pro-hunting. What I am not is pro-sport hunting...and I would just as soon punch anyone in the face as speak to them that supports trophy hunting of large game such as bears, lions, etc.

I grew up hunting and I have no issue with killing something you are going to eat or give to someone else to eat. I also understand the usefulness of hunting in regards to population control (although I would rather just see predators reintroduced).

There is also no rules against enjoying the act of hunting while you are engaged in it for proper reasons. If you enjoy taking down a deer that is one thing. Turning dogs loose an adolescent bear is another thing. I always tell guys like that "if you are so insecure that killing a large animal (in a safe manner from a distance) makes you feel like a real man then come see me and see if you can take me down."

hogdogs
October 21, 2009, 04:37 PM
The rabbit analogy sounds mighty tasty and if this bunny hutch were at a regular affordable restaurant, I would order it at least once. :)

I agree that even dogs have little capacity to reason. Lobsters are just slightly more advanced than spiders biologically speaking.

Brent

L_Killkenny
October 21, 2009, 04:48 PM
Animal cruelty is a very blurry line. Under the OP's original post, most of us would consider those acts cruel. Well, all except kickin the dog. I try to do that once a day if I can :D . But the majority of the people who openly fight animal cruelty think that unless you treat any animal better than you treat your kids you are committing animal cruelty. I know of no one who thinks animal cruelty isn't bad. But that subject is GOING TO be an end to trapping, hunting with dogs, etc etc. If the animal rights activist get their way, pets and livestock would be a thing of the past. Is shooting a dog or clubbing a cat a bad thing? To them it is. But in reality, it's no different than putting them down with a syringe. It may even be quicker and better.

The main thing to remember is they are not people. They are a tool, clothing or a food group. Putting the slightest bit of emotion into this subject is a bad thing. Either that or get used to giving up your "meat and potato's" dinner (not by YOUR choice) and instead eating "something green and potato's" every night.

LK

ninjatoth
October 21, 2009, 05:30 PM
The thing that bothers me the most is when someone donates a huge amount to the humane society,but if you mention "feed the children",they don't know what you are talking about.Cruelty is bad,everyone can agree on that,but the definition of cruelty is going to be so far different between different people.To me,cruelty is intentionally beating an animal,or starving one,to someone else,cruelty might be as slight as not letting the dog in when it's 40 degrees outside.

hogdogs
October 21, 2009, 05:42 PM
HSUS??? You mean the ones that employ felon terrorists? The illegal use of explosives by their employees is enuff to keep me from fallin' for their hype. Not to mention the killing of animals and jumping them in grocery store dumpsters illegally.

They do not have rescue shelters, they do not have a way to help pets. Their agenda is strictly trying to ban all things animal. No pets, no hunting, no meat farming.... humaniacs pure and simple.
I have had run ins with one of their top goons... John JP Goodwin...
Brent

Playboypenguin
October 21, 2009, 06:11 PM
The thing that bothers me the most is when someone donates a huge amount to the humane society,but if you mention "feed the children",they don't know what you are talking about.
Why would those things be mutually exclusive? Also, by your logic if someone donated money to hurricane relief in Mississippi they are bad people for not also donating money to flood relief in Kansas. One right does not equal a wrong.

ninjatoth
October 21, 2009, 07:31 PM
Why would those things be mutually exclusive? Also, by your logic if someone donated money to hurricane relief in Mississippi they are bad people for not also donating money to flood relief in Kansas. One right does not equal a wrong.

Absolutely ridiculous!I stand by what I say because people are more important than animals,so yes,it absolutely bothers me when someone helps animals more than their fellow man.

JohnKSa
October 21, 2009, 07:40 PM
By that logic the only moral way to donate to anything would be to find all the charities in the world and then only donate to the one that was the most deserving.

If you gave any money to a less-deserving charity before all the needs of the most deserving charity were fulfilled you would be open to criticism by people who point out that you're donating to something that's less important than the most deserving charity out there.

No one would be able to contribute anything at all to help animals until there were absolutely no needy/suffering persons in the entire world...

Kreyzhorse
October 21, 2009, 07:43 PM
I am a hunter. I've killed a lot of animals. I am also an animal lover and dog owner and cannot stand to see any animal, pet or wild critter mistreated in any way.

To me, real hunters strive to kill quickly and painlessly. People who hurt animals for their own enjoyment (Vick) are simple monsters.

2DaMtns
October 21, 2009, 08:52 PM
Good topic. I got a couple things I'd like to speak on.

Is shooting a dog or clubbing a cat a bad thing? To them it is. But in reality, it's no different than putting them down with a syringe. It may even be quicker and better.

I beg to differ here in one regard. I am a veterinarian and in the job I keep, I have euthanized countless animals. It is truly humane, and there are a very small percentage of cases where the animal does not expire peacefully. I know that it is much more reliable than clubbing and (in most cases) gunshots, because I see animals that have been subjected to both of these injuries in my line of work. The reaction to euthanasia solution is much more predictable and repeatable. That being said, I am not going to argue that a properly executed gunshot or "clubbing" isn't effective, it's just that it's much easier to properly perform a humane euthanasia via injection. However, last I heard, a gunshot to the head was still a completely accepted form of humane euthanasia for horses and cows, and if it works for them, of course it will work for cats and dogs. Again, it all goes back to the proper application. Now, I am not a proponent of shooting an animal or clubbing it to death when controlled, humane euthanasia is available, but if a person can quickly and humanely dispatch a suffering animal when veterinary care is not available in an acceptable time manner, I am all for it.

The second thing that it brings to mind is that I have not hunted since I became licensed. I have not killed a deer since before I started veterinary school, I don't believe. I fully intend to get back into hunting this fall, and I have wondered how differently it will feel this time out. I know there are people who think I am a hypocrite because I am a veterinarian who hunts (or at least used to and soon will again). I have many arguments for these people. Firstly, and this is not a knock against other hunters, but people should rest more assured that a veterinarian will only take ethical shots and will go the extra mile to track an animal if it is only wounded rather than quickly killed. Also, the anti's don't want to consider it, but what is the alternative for these game animals? They can fall quickly due to my bullet, or they can starve, freeze to death, be killed and eaten by a large cat, bear, wolves, coyotes, or other predators, or they can be hit by a car, semi, bus, or some other motor vehicle. Once all those things are considered, a quick death from a bullet doesn't seem so bad.

Secondly, the people who have accused me of being a hypocrite in my situation, but who are non-hunting meat-eaters themselves, are the ones that really tick me off. Somehow, it is better to them to eat a piece of beef that someone else killed for them, and that came from an animal that was raised for the sole purpose of feeding someone. At least the deer, squirrels, bear, rabbits, and any other game animal have a chance, and at least they get to live until they die, rather than "live" in the concentration camps that are livestock yards. Finally, I don't know why they think it is acceptable for me to euthanize a dog to prevent suffering, yet it's so wrong for me to kill a deer humanely to prevent it suffering by the aforementioned ways of certain, painful death.

I think it's part ignorance, part denial. The ignorance is that they don't understand there is such a thing as a quick, humane kill via gunshot when performed appropriately. The denial is that they never stop to think about what happens to those animals that are not taken humanely, and they don't see the horror in starvation, freezing, falling prey to lower predators, or dying from some infectious disease they catch due to overcrowding. What really kills me is when they cuss about all the #$*@&* deer when they hit one with their car.

shortwave
October 21, 2009, 10:13 PM
Killing just for the sake of killing or torturing an animal just does not compute. Since I was old enough to remember, we always had dogs,cats, pets in general. Was raised hunting and was dared by my father to take less than the most ethical shot possible. I`ve had to let some massive bucks walk simply cause they wouldn`t present themselves for a clean shot. Sometimes very hard to do but if you`ve ever lost many nights sleep cause you couldn`t find an 'ill-shot' deer, it makes it easier to let one walk if you don`t get that good shot. Laying at night thinking how that animal is suffering at the hands of what I did, to say the least, is not a comfortable feeling. Living in the country has also taught me that certain animals are raised/ hunted for the table and certain ones are for other purposes. Herding, protecting lifestock or mousing in the barns. Problem is ,the country is also a dumping ground for many unwanted dogs/cats that will eventually pack-up and create havoc for a livestock farmer and wildlife. Not much left to do with these animals but to exterminate them but they, as with anything that has to be exterminated, should be killed as humanely as possible.

Farmland
October 21, 2009, 10:44 PM
First off there is no reason to doubt anything about animal cruelty. It is wrong. Just don't blur the lines between hunting and what I do raising beef cows and hogs.

I don't think any reasonable person regardless of being a hunter or not likes to see animal cruelty. However be careful how you define it because those that define it broadly include hunters and farmers.

I have enjoyed hunting and even the thrill of the kill. I have never enjoyed dispatching a farm animal even though it is done on a regular basis. It is just part of what I do but I have never found pleasure in it. That is the difference in hunting where your intent is to kill a game animal and then killing a farm animal getting beef and pork ready for the market.

JustKev55
October 22, 2009, 05:11 AM
Quote: "I can't stand to see those lobsters, sitting confined in that tank and looking at the people who are going to eat them, sometimes for weeks.
That is torture.

If it doesn't bother you, then fine, go buy a big fresh lobster for dinner tonight."

Lobsters are not very intelligent, if at all. They're on the same level as bugs. Tasty bugs, but bugs just the same.

wpcexpert
October 22, 2009, 06:01 AM
would just as soon punch anyone in the face as speak to them that supports trophy hunting of large game such as bears, lions, etc

hunting in regards to population control (although I would rather just see predators reintroduced).

PBP, now your crossing lines of why do you hold a few animals lives over those of humans? Not hunting lions, I'm sure there are many folks in Cali that would be glad several Mt lions aren't there to attack their kids. Reintroduction of predators? Nah, we are to much of a society that like to expand and live right next to nature, but have a cow when nature crosses those lines. With hunting bears, they are already comming into neighborhoods and tearing stuff up.

If you really want a cause to persue, or get so viloent over, prevent the over expansion into to nature. Every new 400+ acre subdivison, house, and city is taking up land and homes that used to house critters. Bears and large cats have a vast ranging territories. With humans taking their homes, they have no choice but to become a nuisance. Then folks like you go up in arms and punch people in the face when we are capable of doing something about it. And have to fix the problem that the un-humane society, other animal rights activist, and society creates.

If the OP is looking for hipocracy...that is it.

DRice.72
October 22, 2009, 06:39 AM
I agree that cruelty is very wrong and it makes me blood boil to see cases of it. Either human or animal, its just wrong. Any person who willfully inflicts harm against a weaker subject is just plain ol' sick in my book. Two drunks in a bar beating the hell out of each other is one thing, but take a man who beats his animals, wife or children and that is a whole different story.

Hunting is completely different. Not only is a properly executed shot humane as far as the particular animal being shot is concerned, the taking of game in itself is humane. As cities and farm land and logging have squeezed the natural ranges of game animals, it has put double the pressure on their natural predators. We tend to reduce the population of big predators more as we find them a threat to livestock and our pets and our selves. This population reduction results in an overpopulation of deer and other game. The ONLY humane way to keep that population in check is hunting. I remember a few years ago in Florida and Virgina there was an over population of deer, so the state wildlife management decided the best way to reduce the population was to poison the animals in large numbers. This absolutely burned my hide! I know for a fact there are large numbers of hunters in both states that would have been happy to apply for additional tags, and removed those animals for FREE! Not to mention a bullet through the heart or head is much much more humane than an animal dying of poison.

2DaMtns
October 22, 2009, 08:46 AM
Farmland,

I was not directing anything towards farmers. Most of my little rant was directed at people who think it's fine to eat their steak that they never had to lift a finger to get, yet think that I am a hypocritical barbarian because I like a little venison here and there. Oddly, I have never had to have this conversation about fishing. Anyway, I didn't mean to offend, and I think that anything I said that could be misconstrued as offensive was directed more at the huge feedlots. A few head of cattle out in the back field is totally different, and I hope to have a couple myself one day soon.

tyrajam
October 22, 2009, 11:34 AM
I do agree with ninjatoth. Animals are not humans, and our laws are blurring those lines. While animal cruelty is wrong, is it as wrong as abusing a child? Of course not. I remember the story of the gradeschooler stepping on a mouse and killing it. It was a felony. Torturing animals is definitely wrong, but Ihave a problem with cops tracking down someone who shot a cat and throwing him in jail. To me it is hypocritical that Vick is looked at like pond scum for wrongly killing dogs while there are other convicted murderers and rapists playing in the NFL.

I guess my point is being cruel to animals is wrong, but should it be a felony? Some posters said that those sick kids who lit a cat on fire should be set on fire themselves. Their actions were sick and wrong and make my stomach turn, but come on guys, we can't equate animals with people!

Playboypenguin
October 22, 2009, 01:31 PM
I guess my point is being cruel to animals is wrong, but should it be a felony? Some posters said that those sick kids who lit a cat on fire should be set on fire themselves. Their actions were sick and wrong and make my stomach turn, but come on guys, we can't equate animals with people!
People are animals...just a little smarter. Nothing more nothing less. Of course it is wrong to abuse a child, but that does not lessen the fact that it is wrong to abuse an animal. That is weak and backwards logic. That is like saying it is not so bad to break an innocent strangers arm because it is much worse to break their leg.

And as for the person that referred to animals as tools...tools do not have feeling or emotions. Animals do. In fact, that statement would make many people say that anyone who would actually say it is more of a "tool" than any animal.

hogdogs
October 22, 2009, 01:42 PM
People are animals...just a little smarter. Nothing more nothing less.
I can agree 100% on the above... rare for me to agree with Ol' PBP...
But Animals other than humans are not people.

I also feel to a great degree that domesticated animals are the property of the owner and can be treated or used however the owner feels comfortable doing so...
Brent

Farmland
October 22, 2009, 02:00 PM
I didn't take anything personal 2D. I was just trying to point out some of the blurring between animal cruelty and how far it can be pushed. I in fact feel differently when it comes to killing a wild animal and one that I have raised. That is the human side of me.

However I realize that people are different than animals.We have a conscious and I do not believe animals do. I believe we have a sole and animals do not. People and animals are mammals but we are not the same.

Everybody wants to define animal cruelty to their own point of view and the only problem is that some people want to extend that beyond just the senseless beating or torture of an animal.

People and hunters even start to split and fracture on this issue. One may not have a problem with killing a deer but does if they kill a Lion. I don't get this because I see no difference. They are both dead and in some culture I'm am sure both can be eaten. Another sees it as torture to have life lobster in a grocery store. If they were dead and frozen would there be a real big difference?

I can't pass judgment on how others think. Because I have a conscious it does come into play when you get to close to a farm animal like you would a pet. That is dangerous and I have warned my daughters not to treat them as pets. It is dangerous because it makes the killing of that animal more emotional.

But the plain truth is that animals have been harvested for food long as long as man has walked the earth. Others have been killed because they damage crops or prove to be dangerous to man. We are no different than the animal who will kill for the same things.

I will never pick on the sportsman for doing something he loves and I certainly will not look down on a grocery store of the fisherman who provides the live lobster to them. However I will do anything to prosecute a person if they treat any animal with cruelty. But that is the problem what do we define as cruelty?

I may define it as the senseless slaughter of an animal that involves some type of torture for no purpose. Another may define it as hunting for sport and not meat. Many more will define it as farmers raising their livestock.

The topic is complicated and widely divided which in the end makes me a mass murder in some peoples eyes. In any event I am a hunter and see nothing wrong with the killing of animals. I am a hunter and if you torture animals for pleasure then I'm against it. I am a hunter and I don't blur the issue of animal cruelty to include what most animal rights people include. I am a hunter and I support others who may hunt the larger game animal for trophy. I will note that is not what I like to do but I see nothing wrong with those that like to do it.

orangello
October 22, 2009, 02:05 PM
"I also feel to a great degree that domesticated animals are the property of the owner and can be treated or used however the owner feels comfortable doing so..." HD

I don't disagree about the domesticated animals being the property of the owner, and would agree with the second part except for the many examples of people lacking in the common sense needed to own/manage/care for their animals (animal hoarders, dog fighting, etc).

edit*
I am hesitant to point this out, because i don't want to insult the earlier poster. However, i can't help but notice that your statement is reportedly an accurate reflection of a commonly-held attitude toward slavery in the early 1800's (& many other times in human history). Not many people hold with that opinion any longer; i wonder if their opinion toward animals as property will change too?
No offense to the poster; i've seen many wonderful and helpful threads by HD & i doubt he considered the analogy.

tyrajam
October 22, 2009, 03:13 PM
People are animals...just a little smarter. Nothing more nothing less.

I couldn't disagree more. If you really believe that, then what is the difference between killing an animal and an idiot? My 15 month old son is not as smart as my lab, my mentally handicapped younger sister is probably not as smart as some chimps. But people are different, people have a fundamental right to live and to be free. Animals cannot and do not. We would live in a very scary world if people really believed what you said.

ZeroJunk
October 22, 2009, 04:48 PM
But people are different, people have a fundamental right to live and to be free. Animals cannot and do not.


Only because they are advanced enough to force their dominion over dumber animals, or a religious belief.

If I have to save my dog and somebody I don't know from some catastrophe they had better hope I still have time after I get my dog out. I would expect the same from them.

Playboypenguin
October 22, 2009, 05:06 PM
I also feel to a great degree that domesticated animals are the property of the owner and can be treated or used however the owner feels comfortable doing so...
I disagree completely. If I saw someone abusing an animal they own simply because the feel they have some right to do so I would very clearly and quickly pointing out the error of their ways.
Only because they are advanced enough to force their dominion over dumber animals, or a religious belief.
Yup. Biologically speaking the only thing that sets us aside is a higher intellect that has allowed us to force our desires onto the other animals. It is a simple case of might makes right. People have no rights they do not imbue upon themselves. People that live in this country seem t forget that.

James R. Burke
October 22, 2009, 06:24 PM
I pretty much agree with you. I hate to see any animal miss treated. Hunting is a whole other ball game. It is not done to be cruel. When a animal does happen to get wounded most of us fee real bad about it, and try very hard for clean kills etc. You sound like your a good sportperson, and I wish more were like that.

L_Killkenny
October 22, 2009, 07:18 PM
PBP, you're so far off base it's not even funny. We are not just animals. If we were "only" smart critters it wouldn't make a difference if we were cruel or not.
Yup. Biologically speaking the only thing that sets us aside is a higher intellect that has allowed us to force our desires onto the other animals. It is a simple case of might makes right. People have no rights they do not imbue upon themselves. People that live in this country seem t forget that.

Doesn't a wolf just force itself on a caribou? Doesn't the fox do it to a rabbit? By your reasoning we are only doing the same thing that nature intended. Only for some BS reason we have decided that it's wrong to be mean about it. Heck, at least we don't start munching down before the critter is dead like every other animal on this earth.

I've never known you to be a troll but you're trolling. What the heck are you coming onto the Hunting forum and spewing this crap for anyway?

LK

wpcexpert
October 22, 2009, 08:10 PM
PBP, you are one of the Premier folks to come to for handgun related topics, and I have. You knowledge of firearms is a huge additive to this forum. But you blurred the lines in your first post from agreeing with the OP about hating animal cruelty, to hunting bashing, and your opinion that animals should have more rights than humans.

I don't think any right minded person would agree that being overly cruel to an animal is OK. In any sense, but to bring up the other stuff is just asking for an off topic discussion that will never get anywhere. I went way off topic in my last post only in response, but that wasn't right. And I didn't mean to attack you like that.

But everyone can agree with you, the OP, and just about anyone that animal cruelty is wrong. But I don't feel that most "Animal Rights Activists" have the slightest inclination of how the natural order of things run in the Wild animal world...what-so-ever. Save the all puppies and little kitties but leave the wild outdoors to those who are willing to understand, do the research, and to fix the problem. If they're not willing to fix the problem, then they shouldn't have a say so in the solution.

Art Eatman
October 22, 2009, 08:19 PM
I was raised in a mix of farming/ranching as well as city living. One of my chores as a youngun of sevenish-eight or thereabouts was catching the chicken for Sunday dinner. My grandmother showed me how to wring its neck. My grandfather wasn't a vet, but he showed me how to doctor screwworms in a calf's navel. About the same age range...

But nobody ever beat on a plow horse, and the dogs and cats got fed and petted.

I don't know how much a vet charges to euthanize an animal. I do know that a poor man's .22 bullet into the brain does in a dog as quickly as one did in Bobby Kennedy.

Hunting? I don't care if an animal is wild or domestic. If you're gonna kill it, do it quick and clean. That's why I worked pretty busily to create a package to enable me to bust Bambi in the white spot. My skill, my rifle's reliability, all that stuff. And why I'm picky about choosing my shots...

I've never seen many folks ever turn down a really good steak or roast. Folks seem to enjoy that meat. Okay, I guarantee you that the meat didn't come from a bull. So: Is using a sharp knife or a pair of Burdizzos cruelty? :D:D:D (There's a really non-PC joke about "cowboy psychology" and this particular action.)

When I was a kid, my grandmother made money from selling eggs. To keep varmint populations down, she'd leave piece of bread where the pets wouldn't get to it, but varmints could. Back in the WW II era, you could go to the drugstore and buy a toothpaste-size tube of strychnine poison--of which she'd put some on the bread. Was that cruel?

Ever seen a hawksbill shrike eating on a not-yet-dead bird? I have. Is the shrike cruel?

Leaving hunting out of it, I sorta figure that if you don't cause some sort of pain and grief to any animal, you're doing okay. Similarly in the other direction: If you're taking care of food, water, sanitation and providing a friendly atmosphere, you're doing okay.

Politically, the SPCA and animal-shelter folks do a bunch of unappreciated good. PETA and HSUS, well, bleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep.

MTT TL
October 22, 2009, 09:24 PM
People are animals...just a little smarter. Nothing more nothing less.

How bizarre. By your logic we should be cannibals. I am going to have to disagree.

ZeroJunk
October 22, 2009, 09:50 PM
About the only animals that I know that kill just for the joy of it is a house cat, and a few humans.

We condemn it because it needs to be condemned.

Thinking since we are human that we have some special right to be cruel is what is bizarre.


Has nothing to do with killing what you and those you provide for need to live, or controlling a population where other checks and balances don't.

Playboypenguin
October 22, 2009, 09:53 PM
Doesn't a wolf just force itself on a caribou? Doesn't the fox do it to a rabbit?
yes, they do...but not for sport or pleasure. They do it for survival and they do not do it in a cruel manner just to inflict pain or to see which animal is stronger. They do not do it to make themselves feel superior. They do it to eat or to defend themselves. That is the very core of the difference between hunting and trophy hunting.

Farmland
October 22, 2009, 10:17 PM
I had a coyote hit the chicken coup. He killed all of the chickens but only one was missing. Why did he kill all of the chickens when he couldn't possibly eat them all? There was no sound reason for this. I have had a bull kill a younger bull, he didn't eat this younger bull but he sure did show his power and he seamed to enjoy his status as the leader. At other times he would have no problem pushing other cows around sometimes pinning them between objects.

I really don't think we can say an animal only kills for needs. BTW I culled this bull for safety reasons.

I have other examples and there is a known fact of the pecking order for chickens. Even the free range chickens will do the same as a cage chicken. They will keep pecking on a single chicken until they kill it. Animal on animal violence is some of the must cruelest killing that I have ever personal seen.

So I don't buy the animals are natural and only kill for sound life sustaining reasons. Because that is not true.

However let us not loose sight of what we were asked to ponder. As hunters do we feel animal cruelty is bad and I think the majority answer is yes. However be very careful on what you want to list as cruelty.

Trophy hunting is not cruelty. The animal is killed the same as any other animal hunted. A trophy hunter doesn't beat, smash (for fun or thrill) or do anything different than a regular deer hunter does. You may not be a trophy hunter, which I am not but I'm not going to segregate them into criminals.

ZeroJunk
October 22, 2009, 10:34 PM
I think hunting is pretty much hard wired in to us. You can enjoy the hunt and view the kill as a reality to be satisfied and thankful for.

Making distinctions whether you own the animal, or whether cruelty to animals is like cruelty toward humans is the typical forum tangents that will get you off where you forgot what you were even talkng about.

I eat all that I kill, always have and always will. Works for me.

MTT TL
October 23, 2009, 06:52 AM
About the only animals that I know that kill just for the joy of it is a house cat, and a few humans.

I Have always had problems talking to cats and other animals, they never want open up and tell me what they are feeling and thinking. Therefore I have to ascribe feelings, emotions and motivations to them based upon self-referential information. Wrong I know, but short of being Dr. Doolittle it is my only option. I am glad after all this time someone was able to talk with the animals and find out what they were thinking and why they do the things they do. :rolleyes:

hogdogs
October 23, 2009, 07:01 AM
Wolves are verified "THRILL KILLERS" yet PBP wants them left alone (from another thread)... They trill kill depleting the deer and elk herds as well as cattle and sheep herds. They DO NOT kill humanely and are on video taking bites of meat while the wounded animal is still alive...
I have no use for any tree hugger as I ain't met one yet that has an ounce of understanding in regards to the real world!
Just to maintain my TFL membership, I will leave it at that.
Brent

ZeroJunk
October 23, 2009, 07:02 AM
I Have always had problems talking to cats and other animals, they never want open up and tell me what they are feeling and thinking. Therefore I have to ascribe feelings, emotions and motivations to them based upon self-referential information. Wrong I know, but short of being Dr. Doolittle it is my only option. I am glad after all this time someone was able to talk with the animals and find out what they were thinking and why they do the things they do.

Did you ever watch a cat torment a mouse for a hour before he kills him, or do you live in the city and think they eat cat food. They routinely play with their prey until it is dead.

I don't care what they are thinking.

roy reali
October 23, 2009, 07:08 AM
About the only animals that I know that kill just for the joy of it is a house cat, and a few humans.


There was an animal show that studied the physiological rsponse of predators after a kill. They did blood work and heart rates. The lab work showed that lions might actually get some sort of pleasure from killing. Endorphines were found in blood after the kill. We know how they make us feel. Now it is impossible to ascertain with one hundred percent certainty whether an animal has any pleasure in killing other animls, but no one can say they don't with any certainty either.

I also saw that in the study of chimps, they found that they were not the peaceful gentle creatures that they had thought they were. In fact, Jane Goodall(sp?) was shocked when she saw them hunt for smaller monkey species to eat. She even saw them form gangs and murder fellow chimps.

We humans are not so unique!

Now, want to talk about cruel. Anyone ever see how wolves bring down large animals. the literally disembowl them while they are alive. It is not a quick and painless death by any means. Even cougars suffocate deer to death. I don't want to die, but if I had to, a bullet would be prefered to any of those methods.

ZeroJunk
October 23, 2009, 07:12 AM
I agree 100% Roy. I hate cats anyway.

But, if the only way you can kill something is with your teeth it ain't gonna be pretty.

A man has a choice to make it as painless as he possibly can.

hogdogs
October 23, 2009, 07:23 AM
I wonder how many American Humans consider themselves to be "Apex Predators"? I know I do... I consider myself to be "A natural born killer with a little restraint"...
Brent

roy reali
October 23, 2009, 07:32 AM
A natural born killer with a little restraint"...


Has anyone ever witnessed a sweet dog change into a killer? My dog does not have a mean bone in her body. However, one day we were taking a nature hike. For some reason a squirrel ran up to us. She reached down and grabbed the dummy. I told her "put it down." The animals was dead, crushed in an instance.

When people tell me that hunting and killing are cruel, I remind them that mother nature is cruel. I really think that some folks believe that the movie Bambi is a documentary.

Another example that I just tought of.

Have any of you seen those nature clips of Killer Whales going after seals? They throw them around like rag dolls. They release them and follow them to shore. At the last second they grab the animal and start over. If that ain't cruel, I don't know what is.

hogdogs
October 23, 2009, 07:38 AM
I told her "put it down." The animals was dead, crushed in an instance.
Sounds about as "soft mouthed" as my catch dogs...:D
Brent

roy reali
October 23, 2009, 07:41 AM
I was actually shocked at first. This is a dog that is worthless as a guard dog. She has never growled at anyone or hurt anyone. She has had little kids climbing all over her and she just tolerates it. But, she killed that squirrel just like that. It did remind me that deep inside she is a predator. She has the instinct to kill. Just like I do.

I heard a statement once that at first sounds silly. But if you really think about it, it makes sense. Football, is probably the most popular sport in America. I heard someone say, that if we were not predators by nature, that the game of tackle football would never have been developed. Watch the game, it is a game of predator versus prey. When the quarterback is in the pocket with the ball he essentially becomes the prey. The defensive players are the predators. A tackle is not that different of an act then a lion bring down a zebra.

We humans are killers, plain and simple.

ninjatoth
October 23, 2009, 07:43 AM
Has anyone ever witnessed a sweet dog change into a killer? My dog does not have a mean bone in her body. However, one day we were taking a nature hike. For some reason a squirrel ran up to us. She reached down and grabbed the dummy. I told her "put it down." The animals was dead, crushed in an instance.

we have a sweet little sheltie mix,and she is so calm and does nothing wild.But when another dog comes around,things change.A rotweiller came over and was playing with her,and they were both dragging around a green opossum.

hogdogs
October 23, 2009, 07:48 AM
Yes it is the natural instinct for all animals with their eyes facing forward... And most with canines and incisors. More folks would do themselves good to see what you seen. I have had numerous dogs in my life that surprised me with this instinct.
Never had one that wouldn't growl at strangers but we had a shep mix that knew she needed to acquire food for her pups as we were broker than broke. I was a young kid and momma sent me out with some thawed food from the freezer and I found a freshly killed cock pheasant in the puppy pen with only a wrung neck... How in the heck this house dog caught it, we will never know. I plucked it and cleaned it and we cooked it for us as it was still warm. The pups got the leftovers later...:D Yeah we were hungry too...:eek:
Brent

roy reali
October 23, 2009, 08:03 AM
This young woman I knew years ago had just adopted a Jack Russell Terrier. Some how it had gotten a hold of her neighbors pet bunny. If you know anything about dogs you know the outcome of this encounter. She was horrified by what her dog had done. I tried to explain to her that it was a natural reaction, espically considering the breed. She even gave her dog away.

I suggested that she get a fish bowl and some goldfish.

She then got rid of me.;)

hogdogs
October 23, 2009, 08:18 AM
She then got rid of me.
Probably the best thing to happen to you:D
I also had a dog that managed to get to a litter of kittens in the closet...
I came home to "kitty parts" all over the master bedroom... even had a "back half" on my pillow:mad: she was another shep mix. Friendly as all get out but that instinct is always there and only humans have a chance to control it 100% of the time.
I have a North Carolina buddy who's wife will wreck numerous cars each year running down animals of all size... She will hit a tree just to run down a bunny and she takes down several deer per year with the "Chrome Bullet" as she calls it:eek: Don't even mess with her man!:D
Brent

cat9x
October 23, 2009, 08:28 AM
About the only animals that I know that kill just for the joy of it is a house cat, and a few humans.


Killer Whales toy and play with seals once they've caught them out in the open by tossing them out of the water with their tails. This is done for sport (or could be debated as "pleasure") and not for survival. There are many other instances of this in the animal kingdom.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0qMT2YBIcg

ZeroJunk
October 23, 2009, 08:47 AM
I still hate a cat. My wife spent $7000 trying to keep one of the bastards alive.:)

hogdogs
October 23, 2009, 08:53 AM
My wife spent $7000 trying to keep one of the bastards alive.
And a nickel spent on a .22 lead aspirin could have saved all that dough!!!:D
Never mind me... I am the guy who will do free varmint control on a "cat job"...:rolleyes: Feral cats are the devil's pet and it is my duty to rid the earth of them! A cuddly INDOOR cat is fine and I like to cuddle them (at my friend's houses) but outdoors un-tethered is nothing but a target... and a collar with bell makes such a sweet jingle when they do the "red mist polka":eek: Did I mention I consider myself a predator;)
Brent

Uncle Buck
October 23, 2009, 09:05 AM
Very interesting topic and I am glad to see it being discussed. I have to agree with Farmland and Hogdogs.
There is a difference between inflicting cruelty for YOUR pleasure (including neglecting house pets)and hunting. If you kill the animal as humanely as possible, then I have no problem with it.

Like Farmland, I also raise cattle and pigs and goats and all kinds of poultry. We eat and sell what we raise. We sometimes butcher here at the farm, sometimes we take it the local slaughter house.

But what is cruel? I castrate piglets. They scream and squirm and try to get away from me. Is that cruel? If I do not castrate them, they no longer have any value as a meat animal and what should I do with them? Turn them loose? I can not afford to feed pigs that will not give me a return on my investment. I castrate the bull calves that will not be used for breeding. They grow quicker making it cheaper to feed them. Not many animals will stand calmly by to let you snip or band their testicles.
I wish you could see the damage done to my farm every year by the coyotes, foxes, raccoons, possums and cats. How long am I supposed to sustain this financial drain?

My neighbor is a tree hugger like you would not believe. She must have more than 50 cats running around her place (and mine). She takes a five pound bag of cat food and just pours it on her front porch to feed the cats.
The cats bring in the coyotes and foxes and bobcats. When they run out of food, they follow the stream to my place and start in on my poultry and goats. So yes, I also shoot cats around my place. (SIDE NOTE: I have noticed the song birds have increased since I began culling her cats.)
I think it is cruel that she has all these cats and they have to stay outside in the freezing weather, but she thinks she is doing a good deed by feeding them. She has no idea what the consequences of her actions are. People are always dropping off cats, and occasionally dogs, at her place or along the road by the farm. I feel my only responsibility to these animals is to end the suffering they are going to face.
I can not trap them and take them to the animal shelter because then I have to pay to put them in the shelter. (The last time I took a cat and her kittens to the shelter, I think they wanted me to pay $15 for each animal.)
What about the damage these animals cause to our gardens?
The animal rights activist have no idea what they have created. PETA is bunch of hypocritical jerks. Look how many shelters they actually support verses the amount of money they raise. Look how many ranchers and farmers are loosing livestock to re-introduced predators. We all can not live in the city and buy our food at the local store.

To sum it up, I feel if an animal is dispatched with the least amount of pain you have available, then that is not cruelty. What you do with the animal carcass afterwards in your business.

4406v
October 23, 2009, 09:16 AM
I can only wish my own death to be as quick as some of the animals I have killed.My worst fear would be to suffer a long and lingering death.

ANYONE who intentionally tortures an animal for thier own pleasure is sick and deserves to die a similar fate.I don't care if you kill an animal or not but it's your responsiblilty to end it quickly without the animal suffering.

2DaMtns
October 23, 2009, 09:31 AM
[QUOTE]yes, they do...but not for sport or pleasure. They do it for survival and they do not do it in a cruel manner just to inflict pain or to see which animal is stronger. They do not do it to make themselves feel superior. They do it to eat or to defend themselves. That is the very core of the difference between hunting and trophy hunting.[/QUOTE

In most species, being the dominant male/female in a group of the population is as good as it gets in the hierarchy. So yes, animals do kill just to make themselves superior. I can't say it's a conscious act, but it happens nonetheless.

L_Killkenny
October 23, 2009, 11:02 AM
Threads like these are always the worst possible scenarios. Ethics are, and always should be, ones own. As long as a person operates with-in the law they are good to go. No one here (I hope) is gonna say it's good to torture animals. But in hunting there is death. There is also suffering. You can't hide from and YOU SHOULDN'T. Animals in the wild DO kill for the sake and fun of killing. They will play with half dead critters. They will do things like killing whole groups of chickens just to do it. If you don't believe that you need to get ones head outta the sand. Nature is nature and I am an ultimate predator. I'm not gonna hide from it. There is nothing to be gained from BS like this. You're not gonna change any body's mind no matter which side of the argument you are on. You can only call it an argument, to call it a debate would mean the possibility to sway someones mind. Not gonna happen. Any death that I deal out to a critter, no matter how long and painful, is not as bad as many animals suffer in the wild. It's also not nearly and long and painful as the death that critter dishes out to it's prey. I could wound a coyote or coon, let it linger to die a long and slow death, and in the grand scheme of things, actually reduce the amount of suffering in nature. Bunny huggers think that we should evolve beyond our natural instincts. To do so would be unnatural. Any thread involving ethics should be closed IMO. Nothing to gain.

LK

ninjatoth
October 23, 2009, 11:09 AM
I wonder if it was cruel to save a cats life like I did.I walked out to the barn and found a litter of ice cold kittens,there was about 4-5 kittens,all stiff.I went to pick them up and all the sudden one just came alive,it was cold,almost stiff,but meowing loud,so I took it in the house and warmed it up and began drop feeding it with milk,it was only a day or 2 old.Well,it survived,and 6 years later that cat is still around going strong,but,it is very slow.It is retarded,can't purr,can't meow now,it's just dumb,I have seen it run right into the path of dogs,etc.Luckily we got it fixed so that she couldn't have babies.If she had babies she probably wouldn't be able to take care of them.It's nickname is dumdum,but what have I created?

orangello
October 23, 2009, 01:59 PM
^^^ Tough call in my opinion; i wouldn't want to live life at half speed, mentally speaking. Of course, i seriously doubt the cat realizes it is dumb, and i doubt the other cats are smart enough to make fun of its lack of mental abilities. Does this mean all mentally ill children should be "put down"; certainly not. It's probably good i don't have kids. :D

hogdogs
October 23, 2009, 02:19 PM
I have done CPR on new born pups knowing they might "not be all there upstairs" from oxygen loss... thus far none have gone on to survive more than a few days so i don't know but I tried my best. The ones born to sorry mothers were the last as I won't continue to feed a gyp dog that is a poor mother.
To me it shows they lack a genetic trait required of superior specimens of any specie...
I guess mrs.h-dogs spoiled me there...
Brent

ninjatoth
October 23, 2009, 02:27 PM
one thing I forgot to mention about the cat is,that it's mother was abandoned,and needed shots to save it's life,so her mother was a small cat stunted,so when that little mother had kittens,she abandoned them,which is how we got dumdum.

wyobohunter
October 24, 2009, 12:14 AM
My wife called me at work because she couldn't find our dog... She was worried that she may have ran down to the highway & got hit. I came home early (for my wifes sake) to look for the dog. She caught me stuffing shells into the shotgun and was extremely alarmed. "She might be lost in the woods and the bears have been gettin' the guy down the roads' chickens" I explained. Yeah, that was true, but (also) a single slug is way cheaper than a vet bill can be. Not that I'd have shot the dog if it were a minor injury, but if we're talkin' intensive care treatment I've put her out of her misery. My wife is from the city part of Florida and hasn't been around farms, ranches or hunting right up until she moved to Wyoming. She actually cried (sobbing cries) when she saw me stomp on a wounded Grouse's head to finish it off. I didn't know she was watching me out the window. Again, not cruel IMO, fast and effective. The wife will eat game and fish I bring home, but she'll take no part in the harvest. She, as many on this forum do, feels that it is cruel to shoot/kill animals that I have no intention of eating. I'm not at war with varmints at all, but I'll shoot the occasional Coyote and would like to take one each of a really nice Wolf, Lynx and Wolverine. I'm hopin' & prayin' that my two daughters aren't quite as "tender hearted".

tyrajam
October 24, 2009, 10:44 AM
People have no rights they do not imbue upon themselves. People that live in this country seem t forget that.


That is the new progressive thinking that is ruining our country. When our founders wrote our constitution, they deliberately decided to add that we are "endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights". It doesn't matter if anyone is religious or not, the brilliance of this is that if God gave us our rights, only God can take them away. If our rights come from people, then people can take our rights away. This whole new philosophy is about giving people (government) the power to take away our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

shortwave
October 24, 2009, 11:03 AM
wyobohunter, IMO, thats sensible. Cruelty would be not putting that animal out of its misery. Again, IMO, sometimes people get so attached to their pets they fail to foresee the quality of life the pet will have after repairs are made by a vet on an injury/illness sustained by the animal. Its almost a since of thinking with your heart instead of your head which usually translates into human selfishness. A friend of mine has a 16yr. old lab thats does nothing but lay and whine due to its arthritis. Also dogs all but blind. Friend has to carry dog outside to do its business and more often than not, friend has to hand feed dog cause dog hurts to bad to get up and make it to its bowl. He can`t bring himself to take dog to vet and do the responsible thing and has even told me it needs to be done. I've offered to take dog to vet but to no avail. To me thats cruel.

MLeake
October 24, 2009, 11:04 AM
... with regard to the .22 to the head being an efficient, instant killer, the Bobby Kennedy assassination is a really bad example.

After being shot in the head, and after Sirhan Sirhan was subdued by Rafer Johnson and Rosey Grier, among others, Kennedy was still not only alive but conscious. He asked, "Is everybody safe, OK?" He was conscious for several minutes thereafter.

This is not a good argument for the quick, humane effect of a .22.

As far as veterinary euthanasia goes, we've learned through unpleasant experience that a bit of planning goes a long way. With a little prior coordination, the vet now prepares a painkiller and soporific mix of drugs. The initial shot calms and quiets the dog, and there's no pain reaction whatever to the lethal injection.

All things being equal, the only way my pets would be put down by a firearm would be if there were an accident or attack involving massive, unsurvivable trauma in a remote location.

Uncle Buck
October 24, 2009, 12:20 PM
Any thread involving ethics should be closed IMO. Nothing to gain.


I have to disagree with you on this one. So long as their are no personal attacks and the dialogue remains on topic, it is not only interesting (at least to those of us who have posted), but also tries to get someone else's point of view into question.

I wonder if ethics should be taught in schools, but then the problem is, whose ethics do you teach.

What better place to discuss ethics about firearms and hunting than a forum dealing with this topic?

I have stated my feelings on the ethic of hunting and I look forward to hearing everyone else's. I think some of them are misplaced or misunderstood, but I respect their right to voice the opinion. Some of the folks here I would love to hunt with, others I would shoot with, but not hunt.

It helps us explain and understand things like "I am a farmer, a hunter and a conservationist." A lot of people think a conservationist should not hunt. I feel a true conservationist needs to hunt, or allow hunting, because there are a great many stories of dear herds starving because of overpopulation. I remember as a kid they did something about hunting in Mass., basically stopping it, and the next year the power companies where having a hard time because the squirrel population had gotten out of control and were shorting out transformers and things.

I would love to see a mountain lion or a wolf. But I know what a bobcat and coyotes do to my livestock. Again, for me it comes down to finances. I can not afford to let wild animals eat my livestock, but I can afford to plant grasses and bushes that encourage quail to nest along the fields. (I do not hunt quail.)

I could cut the dead trees down on the property and sell the fire wood, or I can leave them there and let the wild birds and bats nest in them when they begin to rot.

I put up bird houses and bat houses around my place and give them to friends. We all have our little way of helping the wildlife and be conservationist.

But unlike some people I will never believe it is OK to burn down a housing development to stop people from moving in to the country (Their version of it). I do not believe any animal has more rights than a person. I also believe that a person who owns animals or hunts animals have certain responsibilities to the animals they keep or hunt.

So again, so long as we keep the name calling to something reasonable and the discussion intelligent, I feel I at least benefit from it.

cat9x
October 24, 2009, 12:36 PM
Its almost a since of thinking with your heart instead of your head which usually translates into human selfishness.

Does it not bother people that pets in this country experience a better quality of life, better medical treatment, better nutrition, and more legal rights than millions of human beings in third world countries? To me that's cruelty.

shortwave
October 24, 2009, 01:15 PM
:confused::confused::confused:. cat9x, please explain.

2DaMtns
October 24, 2009, 09:17 PM
As far as veterinary euthanasia goes, we've learned through unpleasant experience that a bit of planning goes a long way. With a little prior coordination, the vet now prepares a painkiller and soporific mix of drugs. The initial shot calms and quiets the dog, and there's no pain reaction whatever to the lethal injection.


This is the way I usually recommend to have it done also. It makes a huge difference, better for the animal, better for the owner, better for the vet.

Does it not bother people that pets in this country experience a better quality of life, better medical treatment, better nutrition, and more legal rights than millions of human beings in third world countries? To me that's cruelty.

I bet your car, guns, house, or any other item you may own gets better care than most people in these same third world countries. Does that also constitute cruelty to you? Also, the reason we are so advanced in our medical care has a lot to do with veterinary medicine. Had any rabies, black plague, intestinal parasites, or anything like that lately? No? Then thank a vet. Have you had to pay $50 a pound for ground beef lately? No? Then thank a vet. We do a lot more to help you than you probably realize. And it's up to the owner of the animal to decide how to spend their money. If you think it's ridiculous that someone will spend $2000 to save an animal's life rather than donate it to a charity to help a person in a third world country, then make the sacrifice the next time your car needs a new transmission, or you want a new gun. Then, I will give creedence to your argument. Until then, it is meaningless and only has to do with how people elect to spend their money.

wyobohunter
October 24, 2009, 09:48 PM
the only way my pets would be put down by a firearm would be if there were an accident or attack involving massive, unsurvivable trauma in a remote location I was living in Ninilchik at the time so, it was over an hour to any vet. Also, I think a shotgun slug to the brain is likely just as painless as anything a vet can administer, but a whole lot cheaper.

cat9x
October 25, 2009, 12:51 AM
I bet your car, guns, house, or any other item you may own gets better care than most people in these same third world countries. Does that also constitute cruelty to you? Also, the reason we are so advanced in our medical care has a lot to do with veterinary medicine. Had any rabies, black plague, intestinal parasites, or anything like that lately? No? Then thank a vet. Have you had to pay $50 a pound for ground beef lately? No? Then thank a vet. We do a lot more to help you than you probably realize. And it's up to the owner of the animal to decide how to spend their money. If you think it's ridiculous that someone will spend $2000 to save an animal's life rather than donate it to a charity to help a person in a third world country, then make the sacrifice the next time your car needs a new transmission, or you want a new gun. Then, I will give creedence to your argument. Until then, it is meaningless and only has to do with how people elect to spend their money

I never said I was not guilty of this, only pointing out the obvious, sad, truth.

Art Eatman
October 25, 2009, 10:34 AM
Watching perceptions is fun, whether animal cruelty or lifestyle needs.

PETA and HSUS go berzerkoid against our system which spends billions of dollars per year on animal care and vet bills, etc. Why don't they go to northeast Asia? After all, the Korean word for "dog" is "supper". (I'll never forget my startlement, back in 1954, seeing a Korean man carrying a smallish dog. The four paws were tied together like a suitcase handle, making it an easy tote.)

Mleake, okay, but I've read for years that the brain doesn't feel pain. Regardless, I wouldn't drive the 90 miles from my house to the nearest vet.

ZeroJunk
October 25, 2009, 10:41 AM
If you shoot an animal in the head the muscle spasms can go on for a while. Matter of fact a hog can almost break your leg if you start messing with him too soon. Personally, I don't want to look at it on a pet whether my mind says they can't feel it or not.

hogdogs
October 25, 2009, 10:55 AM
Personally, I don't want to look at it on a pet whether my mind says they can't feel it or not.
I do not want to look on at the demise of any animal especially a pet or hunting dog. But I do feel the responsibility is mine and mine alone to "take care of business" for the purpose of gathering meat or easing the suffering of a pet.
Brent

ZeroJunk
October 25, 2009, 11:15 AM
I do not want to look on at the demise of any animal especially a pet or hunting dog. But I do feel the responsibility is mine and mine alone to "take care of business" for the purpose of gathering meat or easing the suffering of a pet.
Brent


I know. But, if it doesn't need to be done right that second the vet is only two miles away and I had just as soon give him sixty bucks. That's whay my wife did with the $7000 cat or $7060 cat, I suppose.:)

shortwave
October 25, 2009, 03:03 PM
I never said I was not guilty of this, only pointing out the obvious, sad truth. To bring up the demise of third world countries or to apologize for how the U.S. spends its money,right or wrong, is not only thread veer, its an insult. The trillions of dollars and blood spent in third world countries by the U.S. has been astronomical. I`ll stop for now as I just watched 'We Were Soldiers' and am a bit sideways. Don`t want to offend anyone!

ninjatoth
October 25, 2009, 03:37 PM
Does it not bother people that pets in this country experience a better quality of life, better medical treatment, better nutrition, and more legal rights than millions of human beings in third world countries? To me that's cruelty.

This sums up my attitude on things.Don't get me wrong,I have no problem with someone helping animals,but what I do have is a problem with is when someone who won't give to human charities,but will give to animal ones.If someone gives to an animal charity and also gives to human charities,that's fine,but people are first.

2DaMtns
October 25, 2009, 04:01 PM
I still maintain that it's just about how people spend their money. Would you rather someone spend $5000 gambling in Vegas before they donate it to the animal charities? If you buy a friend or family member a gift and spend $500 on it and don't donate an equal amount to a charity, then you are as much at fault as the people who donate to animal charities before human charities.

zahnzieh
October 28, 2009, 12:52 AM
I have known hunters who "hunt" cruelly. There are other psychological issues going on with these people - issues of control, blood lust, anger. They also project that cruelty oftentimes to their pets, even children. I refuse to hunt with people like that.

orangello
October 30, 2009, 10:27 AM
"Does it not bother people that pets in this country experience a better quality of life, better medical treatment, better nutrition, and more legal rights than millions of human beings in third world countries? To me that's cruelty."

"This sums up my attitude on things.Don't get me wrong,I have no problem with someone helping animals,but what I do have is a problem with is when someone who won't give to human charities,but will give to animal ones.If someone gives to an animal charity and also gives to human charities,that's fine,but people are first."

Tolerance guys, tolerance; not everyone shares the same values for different things such as people in foreign lands or pets or feral cats & dogs. Why should everyone have to share the same values for such things? This is my personal problem with certain religions or more precisely with the more conservative parts of some religions (not politically "conservative", more like "less tolerant of differing opinions"); people have the right (whoever/whatever gave it) to their own opinions and beliefs. I personally don't much care about the starving children in Africa, though hunger in this country matters to me greatly. I personally don't feel the need to support Bible ministry to other countries, as i am not a Christian myself (though i do appreciate that the Bible provides very good guidelines for living).

Should i have to support the foreign ministry of Muslim groups even though i am not a Muslim? I don't think so; i think i should support whatever causes I deem needy or appropriate. To do otherwise is basically a lie in my opinion. If a group went door-to-door demanding that all decent people pitch in to help build a levee system in Death Valley to save its inhabitants from the risk of astronomically unlikely flooding, would i be wrong to say "no thanks"? Free will FTW.

Brasscatcher84
October 30, 2009, 10:35 AM
I've never subscribed to the notion that animals have rights, but I may have to change my opinion after the last election. I'm pretty sure there were some animals that voted for Obama with ACORN's help.

zombieslayer
October 30, 2009, 10:38 AM
I've save many animal's lives. I hunt, but animal cruelty just gets under my skin. My dad raised walker hounds for hunting deer, and I can't hunt with dogs to this day. After hunting season, you can drive out and find starving, lost, abandoned dogs that either couldn't be found or were just left cause they weren't useful anymore. I have a retarded cat that was recued, too:o. I was raised to eat what I hunt (for the most part).

OJ
October 30, 2009, 03:16 PM
I think we're all in general agreement here-

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y25/kmastf/CJ.jpg

The only cruelty I see is not getting seconds for dinner - or, at least, treats on request.

:D

pwillie
October 30, 2009, 10:14 PM
When I was a kid ,growing up was quiet an experience,dog control was a pound,and if the dog wasn't picked up,the truck was backed up to a big airtight box,and the animals were put to death through carbon monoxide poisoning.Cat control was taken care of by my father.In todays world,people have money to take care of animals,and cruelty is not accepted.But if this depression that our country is going through,stays the course,animal care will be less important.AS far as killing a lobster while he is looking at you,hmmmmmm.your not hungry!WE boil live crabs all the time,and none of them have ever objected.Cruelty is in the mind of the beholder.To me, Keeping a good hunting dog in an apartment all day while your at work is just as cruel as killing the dog.

zombieslayer
October 31, 2009, 12:29 AM
I just went down to the keys for lobster season, they ARE delicious!

sgray
October 31, 2009, 12:44 AM
I try to explain this to my nonhunting friends. I hate seeing any animal killed by a car, mistreated etc. Hunting and using the animal, as long as it is done as quickly as the means legal at the time allows, is fine. I explain, I do nto mind killing an animal, even though, I admit I feel bad about it sometime, but that;s how the circle works, right. But, I hate the thought of hurting them, that's why I only take good shots, that I know the chances of wounding only are minimal. The couple of times, in my 40 years, when I have thumped a deer hard, not been able to get the followup, and then not recovered them - after hours of searching, have made me sick to my stomach.

shortwave
October 31, 2009, 09:45 AM
Keeping a good hunting dog in an aptartment all day while your at work is just as cruel... Can`t agree with you more. Nothing makes me shake my head more than seeing certain high strung breeds of dogs(especially larger breeds) owned by people living in places where the dog can`t/doesn`t get the right exercise. Then the dog gets unruley and the owner can`t figure out why eventually deeming the dog 'no good':rolleyes:. When in fact the owner was to ignorant to have a dog in the first place. People need to consider their housing/yard space,how much time they`re willing to spend with dog, along with researching the breed of dog BEFORE buying. To do less is cruelty! I think we`re all in general agreement here OJ, thanks for some more pics of your mal-nourished, mis-treated mastif`s:D:D:D. We(I think I can speak for the rest) always enjoy looking at them, they`re beautiful;).

OJ
October 31, 2009, 10:45 AM
OJ, thanks for some more pics of your mal-nourished, mis-treated mastif`s. We(I think I can speak for the rest) always enjoy looking at them, they`re beautiful.

Thanks for the kind words - sadly, we lost Charley's little (205#) beautiful litter mate sister to bone cancer in July just after her 5th birthday -

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y25/kmastf/DOGS/LadyKatie01.jpg

She was the "alpha" dog in the litter - we've had trouble accepting her loss and I think its been hardest on him - he is still learning to make his own decisions on things like when to eat - where to sleep - etc.

shortwave
October 31, 2009, 11:46 AM
OJ ,sorry for your loss. Always very hard and only time will heal. Be thankful for the goods memories as I`m sure she was thankful for the 5 yrs. of excellent care.

OJ
October 31, 2009, 12:07 PM
Thanks - we've lost many dogs in the past but had a chance to accept the passing - due to age and/or length of disability coming on - Katie went from a slight limp to being unable to do steps in less than two weeks. Hard for all of us.

MLeake
October 31, 2009, 01:35 PM
... because I've written off the other party as wearing rose-tinted glasses (which in my more mature moments I realize could be a counter-productive perception)...

... I like to point out "cute" animal behaviors to the rose-tinted-glasses hugger, and let them know what they really mean.

Such as the kitten, on its back, playing with the ball of yarn.

"Know what he's doing? Practicing holding his prey with the front claws, and raking out its guts with the rear. Cute, huh?"

Or the puppy, shaking a stick.

"Cute, isn't it, how he practices breaking a rodent's neck?"

The huggers tend to be deeply offended, but it quickly becomes obvious that most of them actually have no understanding of the animals they so dearly wish to protect.

I like cats, and I love dogs, but I don't view them through a Bambi or The Fox and the Hound Disney lens.

Then again, my cute little JRT loves to turn mice, moles, rats, frogs, and lizards into a pink mist at every opportunity...

Farmland
October 31, 2009, 02:16 PM
My cats have a pretty short life cycle, of course they are barn cats and never have been in the house. They will greet me at the front door and walk between my legs as I make my way down to the barn. But these are working cats and not pets.

At any one given time we have around 10 cats but that can go much lower and a little higher. The coyote's and fox keep the cat population under control while the cats keep the rat and mice population under control.

Every once in awhile my daughter will become attached to one of the cats, that's fine but it becomes less of a hunter. I enjoy watching them stalking the fields and I am amazed how they can sneak up on birds.

We have not had much luck with dogs, they have all been house dogs but they are not as smart as the cats. Our last dog lasted two years until he found the road and was at the wrong end of a passing truck.

The cats are important and they keep me from having to use traps and poison. I am sad when I have to put one down because it was on the losing end of a battle with a larger animal. When the cat population takes a sudden drop we also know we have a larger predator problem.

Para Bellum
October 31, 2009, 03:55 PM
Anyone else here think the way I do?
I do. I am a hunter and a frontline-mebmber of Greenpeace.
Animals die. We die. A clean and sudden death after a good life with kind-fitting conditions is all this world can offer, it's a gift.

Bigfatts
November 1, 2009, 10:58 PM
There is no excuse for causing any living thing- be it an a bug or a stray cat- intentional pain/suffering. Doing so is the sign of a sick person. I have no problem with hunting and have hunted regularly for the past several years.

I may be the unpopular one here but I do not see anything wrong with trophy hunting in many cases. Africa is a perfect example. I hope to hunt Africa one day (Cape Buff, Wart Hog and a land Hippo) and some people may have a problem with that, but I know the fees from my licenses/permits will go towards the conservation that will ensure those animals (that btw have no purpose/value to most locals and would otherwise be killed off to make room for cattle and sheep) are there for my children to hunt. It has already been proven that countries that outlaw big game hunting like Kenya see drastic reductions in animal numbers.

Uncle Buck
November 6, 2009, 09:45 AM
Biggfats, are you saying that hunters contribute to the welfare of animals? That hunters contribute to the conservation of habitat and wildlife? You made a wonderful point with your post.

I wish more people would understand how much money hunting actually pumps into these animal.conservation programs. Even the guys who do not hunt, but just shoot, put money into the conservation program through the tax dollars they pay when they buy their ammunition.
You are correct when you mention the money used in the African countries that go towards wildlife conservation. But it is a dirty little secret that the animal rights people do not want to admit or acknowledge.
I am too lazy to look up the federal act that taxes all our hunting supplies for conservation. I am also too lazy to look up how much money we, as hunters, raised for these programs.

Edited to get over my laziness:
OK, here is a quick look at what we (hunter/fishermen/outdoor sportsmen and women) have raised.
Info taken from: http://www.nraila.org/issues/factsheets/read.aspx?id=124

Hunting is an integral part of the fabric of our economy and cultural heritage and it is also an important wildlife management tool. Everyone benefits from the excise taxes that hunters voluntarily pay on guns, ammunition and outdoor equipment. Since 1937, hunters have contributed over 4 billion dollars through the Pittman-Robertson Act for the benefit of all wildlife species. These dollars have been used to purchase millions of acres of public lands.

Through over 10,000 clubs and organizations such as NRA, Ducks Unlimited, Safari Club International, National Wild Turkey Federation, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and Quail Unlimited, sportsmen contribute an additional $300 million each year to wildlife conservation activities.

From the same article:

Hunting is an essential component of effective wildlife management, in that it tends to reduce conflicts between people and wildlife and provides incentives for the conservation of wildlife habitats and ecosystems on which wildlife depends.

Through legislative programs designed to channel funds back into the conservation process, hunters have restored populations of deer, elk, antelope, turkeys and ducks to record numbers.

Hunting contributes over $30 billion to the economy each year, supporting over 1,000,000 jobs. (National Shooting Sports Foundation)


Hunters and fishermen fund nearly 75% of the annual income for all 50 state conservation agencies. Through license fees and excise taxes on arms and gear, sportsmen contribute $200 million per year for wildlife conservation. (U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service)


Now just think what people would say if they really knew the facts and what they would say if the government did not tax us and instead spent this money out of the general fund.

Dallas Jack
November 7, 2009, 02:49 AM
Cruelty of any kind (against animal or humane) should not be tolerated. (although I admit I have had to kick a few dogs in the tookus to break up a fight)

People are animals...just a little smarter.

Not even close. We have the same needs but that's about it. Still humanes are part of the food chain and luckily at the top.

And that phrase "only humanes kill for___" is the biggest bucket of pig crap as ever been spoken.

I hunt and eat what I shoot except for ferals and predators. In the hunting fields (where I hunt anyway) a feral dog or cat is shot on site.

Coyotes and feral dogs will kill as many goats as they can catch and leave em lay.
Dallas Jack

Uncle Billy
November 7, 2009, 07:00 AM
I posted this story here last spring. A friend of mine who was with me when we saw this happen and read my post corrected me on a few details. I'll never forget how I felt after seeing this little drama play out:

About 40 years ago a friend and I were driving on the freeway well out of town, in farm country. We were behind an old pickup with an elderly man (70's or so) and a kid in it, and a dog that looked like a Labrador Retriever and some large sacks in the back. A rifle lay in the rack across the rear window. We were all going about 70 or so; the pickup was in the left lane passing a semi; I was about 5 car lengths back of the pickup in the same lane.

When the pickup got next to the tractor, the kid in the pickup made the universal hand sign for "blow your horns" out his window. The semi driver gave a couple of toots on his air horns, which so startled the dog that it leapt out of the pickup bed and went under the semi's trailer. The semi pulled over, the pickup pulled over ahead of him, and I pulled over too, behind the semi.

The farmer got out of his truck and walked purposely back toward the semi, where the driver was halfway out of his cab. I didn't see that he'd taken the rifle until he was very close. We all froze when we saw it, waiting to see what the farmer had in mind. He walked past the semi without speaking or even looking at the truck driver, past me without looking at me to where the dog was laying, I followed a few yards behind.

The dog was all mangled and obviously hopelessly injured. It was trying to get up but its back was clearly broken- its hind legs were inoperative, a front leg was nearly severed, and it had deep, bloody wounds on its head and body. The farmer squatted down next to the dog, touched the dog's head gently with his hand which calmed the dog a little, then stood up and shot the dog with the rifle. He turned, his face wet with tears, and wordlessly walked back to the pickup, again without looking at the truck driver or me, got in and drove away. The semi pulled out and left as well; I had to stay for a moment until my eyes dried.

I have subsequently heard of a number of incidences just like this one. I would have thought it to be an "urban myth" but I saw it actually happen.

shortwave
November 7, 2009, 08:54 AM
Uncle Billy, having twice been in that situation with pets myself, IMO, farmer did what had to be done. Owning an animal has many responsibilities, a few not at all pleasant. As a owner of pets we have the responsibility to keep our animals in as safe an enviroment as possible but whether its city or rural life,things happen.