Quote:
|
Originally Posted by twins
If it's legal in your area, no argument from me.
If it is not, then I would recommend you seek psychiatric help. Why kill innocent animals to get your thrill? Is it the act of killing or shooting? If shooting gives you the same thrill, go to a range and poke holes in paper.
|
This suggests that all hunting restrictions are malum in se in nature, i.e. because the prohibited behavior is inherently bad and is legally prohibited because the act runs afoul of some greater ethical framework. That is not a sound assumption. Some acts are prohibited simply because they are illegal, and not inherently bad.
Someone who acts ethically but in contravention of a simple or arbitrary legal prohibition would not need psychiatric help.
Moreover, the behavioral differences between animals and paper can make hunting animals more interesting and challenging.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by twins
There's nothing ethical about hunting/shooting animals for the fun of the hunt. There are purposes to hunting (food, protection, disease control, etc.) and killing for fun isn't one. If one seek it, they're just a cold-blooded animal killer.
|
There is nothing wrong with cold-bloodedly killing an animal. On the contrary to entertain sentimentality over a correct act could indicate that one has not correctly assessed the act itself.
If I see a fly, I swat it. If I find a groundhog near my home, I shoot it. In fact, I had a whole Elmer Fudd/Bugs Bunny routine with a very large groundhog over the course of months and regretted only the loss of the ongoing challenge when I finally killed him.
One of the older fellows and my firm used to shoot rats at the city dump for fun. That sounds enormously entertaining to me.
I understand that in my state deer are legally a game animal, however in my area they really function as a larger mosquito or groundhog (except of course that a groundhog does not ruin your car if you hit one). Killing one out of season would be illegal, but not an act inherently evil, so the act would not be an indicator of psychological pathology.
None of the above acts appear to be ethically distinguishable, so unless one is prepared to chide the fellow with a flyswatter, chiding a fellow with a rifle and a sense of entertainment appears to be a choice in fashion, not ethics.