The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Hunt

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 21, 2017, 11:05 AM   #26
buck460XVR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 3,790
Quote:
Originally posted by Pahoo:

In Iowa, it is illegal to shoot a deer that has been hit by an automobile.
Same here.....like putting down a deer during hunting season when you do not intend to legally tag and claim it.

Quote:
Originally posted by Blindstitch:

With the cellphone age it would be easy to take a quick video of the animal suffering to cover yourself if it comes to it. Then dispatch of the animal.
With that same cellphone, one can contact the necessary officials and get the permission to dispatch or told to wait.

I help teach Hunter Safety. This question comes up nearly every time we have "Warden Night". Comes down to the fact that what is ethical, is not always legal and vice-versa. Ethics tells us that putting down an injured animal is ending it's suffering. According to the wardens, not everyone with a gun is capable of determining if that injury warrants being euthanized. A warden hears a gunshot in the woods and goes to find a hunter without a tag standing over a dead deer they just shot, what are they to suspect? Even if the deer was wounded previously, how does the warden know if that same hunter isn't the one that originally wounded it and was actively trailing it. While a car hit deer can be different, do we really want any Joe Blow with a CWC license trying to put down a injured and moving deer with his occasionally shot CWC gun with other folks standing around? Is it not the right thing to do and inform authorities of an animal in distress first and being told how to progress? Does one want to take the risk of an $1800 fine, and the loss of their weapon and hunting privileges to end the suffering of an animal a few minutes earlier? These are not my thoughts and opinions, but the thoughts and opinions of our state and the Wardens working in it. I don't always agree with them, but I do consider them if and when I am faced with the scenario. Over the 50+ years of hunting deer, I have arrowed a coupla bucks that I thought were dead deer walking after seeing the hit and following the blood trail. I never recovered those animals and thought for sure they were coyote bait. Both of them were seen later in the season and acting as if nothing had ever happened to them. Even tho at some point, odds are they were sick enough to be unable to get up and run very far. Would someone else, hunting with a shotgun the next day, finding them laying in their bed, fevered and weak, legitimately be putting them out of their misery? How many of us have watched loved one suffer for months with a terminal disease and wanted for it somehow to end? What keeps us from helping them, other than the law? Is it more ethical to allow a human to suffer than an animal or is it the law that prevents us? Why are animals any different?

I am not preaching ethics to anyone. Ethics are personal. Ethics is doing the right thing when no-one else is around. What I am preaching is knowing the laws in your state and the consequences you may face if you break them, even if in your heart you know you are right. Every scenario is different and every one needs to be seriously considered before one takes out their gun and pulls the trigger. While I don't know how I would handle every scenario, I do know I would do what I thought was right.......and if it turned out to be illegal, I certainly wouldn't brag about it on the internet.

Just sayin'.......
buck460XVR is offline  
Old January 21, 2017, 11:32 AM   #27
huntinaz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 21, 2010
Location: az
Posts: 1,259
Quote:
That being said, I take no issue with the humane dispatching of an animals be it stock, game or simply a suffering animal. I have killed for all three reasons, life has taugh me to do it swiftly and as painlessly as possible. Is there empathy for the death of an animal, yes for me, for you maybe thats not the right word. Would I take issue in the future of dispatching a wounded, no.
Me too. Have no issue with it at all. Have killed for all 3 reasons as well and will for all 3 reasons again and with a large emphasis on making it as swift as possible. I find the killing of stock and injured animals unpleasant but necessary, if I can't do that then I shouldn't eat them. I have empathy for the animal; sucks to be stock, sucks to be injured, sucks to get caught but that's the game. (That is the human point of view, the animals seem content to be what they are)

Empathy IS the right word for me, I just don't confuse my feelings with the animal's feelings (anymore, seems to be quite natural to do that). I can separate them, and they are indeed separate and different, and to people who cannot do this I appear calloused and lacking of empathy.


Quote:
If I had just been hit by a car and my guts were strune across two lanes I sure are heck hope someone would put the barrel behind my ear and be done with it.
Were you an animal, a human would be by shortly to do just that. Since you are a human though, nobody would dare do it, even though we are the only creature that can reason out the scenario and wish for death. Ironic eh?

I can say I've never killed an animal that wanted to be killed, no matter how bad it was already hurt. I feel justified for dispatching the animal but I'm clearly overriding any input it may have.

Quote:
Ive watch many animals die many different ways and so try to pursued someone to think that animal doesnt know whats going on is absurd.
Me too, and when I approach they know exactly what's going on and they don't like it. Prey knows the game. I think humans have a hard time understanding it. Also ironic.
__________________
"When there’s lead in the air, there’s hope in the heart”- Hunter’s Proverb
"Feed me, or feed me to something. I just want to be part of the food chain." -Al Bundy
huntinaz is offline  
Old January 21, 2017, 11:36 AM   #28
huntinaz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 21, 2010
Location: az
Posts: 1,259
Quote:
Ethics tells us that putting down an injured animal is ending it's suffering. According to the wardens, not everyone with a gun is capable of determining if that injury warrants being euthanized. A warden hears a gunshot in the woods and goes to find a hunter without a tag standing over a dead deer they just shot, what are they to suspect? Even if the deer was wounded previously, how does the warden know if that same hunter isn't the one that originally wounded it and was actively trailing it. While a car hit deer can be different, do we really want any Joe Blow with a CWC license trying to put down a injured and moving deer with his occasionally shot CWC gun with other folks standing around? Is it not the right thing to do and inform authorities of an animal in distress first and being told how to progress? Does one want to take the risk of an $1800 fine, and the loss of their weapon and hunting privileges to end the suffering of an animal a few minutes earlier? These are not my thoughts and opinions, but the thoughts and opinions of our state and the Wardens working in it. I don't always agree with them, but I do consider them if and when I am faced with the scenario. Over the 50+ years of hunting deer, I have arrowed a coupla bucks that I thought were dead deer walking after seeing the hit and following the blood trail. I never recovered those animals and thought for sure they were coyote bait. Both of them were seen later in the season and acting as if nothing had ever happened to them. Even tho at some point, odds are they were sick enough to be unable to get up and run very far. Would someone else, hunting with a shotgun the next day, finding them laying in their bed, fevered and weak, legitimately be putting them out of their misery? How many of us have watched loved one suffer for months with a terminal disease and wanted for it somehow to end? What keeps us from helping them, other than the law? Is it more ethical to allow a human to suffer than an animal or is it the law that prevents us? Why are animals any different?

I am not preaching ethics to anyone. Ethics are personal. Ethics is doing the right thing when no-one else is around. What I am preaching is knowing the laws in your state and the consequences you may face if you break them, even if in your heart you know you are right. Every scenario is different and every one needs to be seriously considered before one takes out their gun and pulls the trigger. While I don't know how I would handle every scenario, I do know I would do what I thought was right.......and if it turned out to be illegal, I certainly wouldn't brag about it on the internet.
Great points
__________________
"When there’s lead in the air, there’s hope in the heart”- Hunter’s Proverb
"Feed me, or feed me to something. I just want to be part of the food chain." -Al Bundy
huntinaz is offline  
Old January 21, 2017, 12:07 PM   #29
tahunua001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 7,789
legality and ethics do not go hand in hand. there is a lot of overlap in some areas but also a lot of divergence.
for example(keep it hunting related), I know I can make just as clean of a kill on a turkey with a 223, as I can with a shotgun, and in that instance it's either a hit/kill or a complete miss, rather than the turkey catching a few pellets and surviving in pain despite it, yet the state I live in says I am only allowed to use a shotgun. similarly, I am allowed to hunt grouse with a 22lr, yet a pheasant which is the exact same size and is way more skiddish and harder to get within effective shotgun range, is shotgun only... lots of double standards and pointless arbitrary limitations.

with that said, I hate to see animals suffering and I have made illegal finishing shots, to end the suffering of wounded animals. it's rough, but letting the animal suffer while the county spends 30 minutes dispatching a cop to do the same thing is far less ethical in my opinion.

now although I agree with a lot of the quoted post above, I would like to address a few key portions.
Quote:
While a car hit deer can be different, do we really want any Joe Blow with a CWC license trying to put down a injured and moving deer with his occasionally shot CWC gun with other folks standing around?
on the flip side of that, do we want some police officer who fires his gun once a year to show he knows where to point the gun doing the exact same thing? not this is just arguing semantics and citing euphamisns, and anecdotes, but it seems like where I'm from, most cops really are not gun guys, and shoot only when the dept makes them to prove competence. is joe blow with a CWC any less practiced? I've taken a few CWL classes and they were absolute travesties to the art of firearms instruction, but anyone I know who has also taken them has also recognized this and continued to practice on their own time to improve, even if the class did not give any firearms instruction. I would take any of their skills to put down a wounded animal over officer blow anyday.
Quote:
I have arrowed a coupla bucks that I thought were dead deer walking after seeing the hit and following the blood trail. I never recovered those animals and thought for sure they were coyote bait. Both of them were seen later in the season and acting as if nothing had ever happened to them. Even tho at some point, odds are they were sick enough to be unable to get up and run very far.
this is a good point. my younger brother has shot elk with completely atrophied legs that were shot the year prior, as well as deer with large puss sacks inside the ribcage where poorly placed shots went through without hitting any vitals and got infected. I've shot deer that had both legs on one side taken out with a single poorly placed shot. some animals can handle a lot of punishment. I've also killed animals that had no discernable wound track at all, no blood, no bruising, no broken bones, just a shot followed by a dead animal. the amount of suffering is really at the discretion of the beholder. personally I would like to put down half of the poor animals that are constantly being dragged to the vet with injuries and health conditions that obviously cause the animal to suffer, but the owners refuse to let their pets go, and instead make them suffer on.

now here is where I get preachy.
Quote:
Ethics are personal
actually they are not. I've been forced to take so many ethics courses I can just about quote every possible definition of ethics that exists. Ethics are not personal. Morals are personal. your morals are your personally held beliefs which guide your behavior and cause you to make decisions based on what you think is right. Ethics are an agreed upon set of morally acceptable behaviors among a group of people based on the most prolifically held sets of morals. as an example, in large cities like NY, it is very common to basically use interns as slave labor, no pay, no benefits, and having 10 people competing for one open position. just about everywhere else in the country, interns are very well paid, almost on par with the people who hold permanent positions and there are rarely more than 2 people competing for one open position. although me might find it morally reprehensible to have someone work for 12 weeks for a company completely without pay only to get the boot, this is ethically acceptable in the cities where this is common practice.

given this definition of ethics, I think there is a common set of hunting ethics that everyone agrees to, even though our personal morals might differ greatly.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the stuff people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin

Last edited by tahunua001; January 21, 2017 at 12:28 PM.
tahunua001 is offline  
Old January 24, 2017, 09:25 AM   #30
Deja vu
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 14, 2010
Location: Border of Idaho & Montana
Posts: 2,532
as some one that has put down a hit bull elk and got a fine for it I can tell you that the line is very grey and with out clear boarders.

I was in Oregon coming home from a fishing trip. Some one had hit an elk and left. The bull spine was broken. it was trying to run away but with out back legs it was not doing well. One of its front legs was also broken it was not doing the bull much good as it was a visable compound fracture. This was on a freeway on a rainy day with lots of cars going by. The only gun I had at the time was a Ruger 10/22. I stopped the car and put the elk down and dragged it off the road (not an easy task in heavy rain and still feeling a little sick from traveling).

I then called the police and reported it (I have been told this was my mistake). I was told that they all ready had to reports and to stay there. I did as I was told.

I ended up going to court. They dropped the poaching charge and the charge of discharging a fire arm with in a city limits. but they kept the charge of hunting elk with a 22 (cant remember the name right now).

The prosecuting attorney threatened many things. I was facing jail time and several thousand dollars in fines. I ended up getting the minimum fine of $75.00 for the 22.

Would I do it again? I am not sure I would. I know its the ethical thing to do. But Feeding my family is also the ethical thing to do.

I have also been told that I should of put the bull down and left but if I ran I am sure things would have been worse, the police already had my licence plate number from some one that reported me.

Ethics and the Law do not always match up.
__________________
Shot placement is everything! I would rather take a round of 50BMG to the foot than a 22short to the base of the skull.

all 26 of my guns are 45/70 govt, 357 mag, 22 or 12 ga... I believe in keeping it simple. Wish my wife did as well...
Deja vu is offline  
Old January 24, 2017, 11:52 AM   #31
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 18,797
Quote:
The study stated there was no evidence of coyotes killing a healthy deer. Healthy was specified because there were plenty of cases of them taking wounded animals.
Either the study was inadequate, deliberately lied, or most likely, the person writing the repost has a FLAWED understanding of English.

The lack of a single word can change the entire meaning of a sentence, and the way people react to it.

As written, it leads people to believe that coyotes do not kill healthy deer. Many of us know that to be untrue, from direct personal experience. Healthy deer, being harder to catch, means it happens less often, but it still happens.

if the person writing the report had included the single word "found" then their statement would be fact, not fiction.

"NO EVIDENCE OF ...WAS FOUND.." or "We found no evidence..."
this is NOT saying anything more than the study (or court, or whatever) didn't find certain data. It does not mean the that what they were looking for does not exist. It means they didn't FIND it. That's ALL it means.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old January 24, 2017, 01:46 PM   #32
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 5,733
Quote:
Ethics and the Law do not always match up.
Drop "ethics" and insert "common sense" and it is equally true...
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Karma. Another word for revolver: because what goes around, comes around!
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old January 24, 2017, 08:11 PM   #33
johnwilliamson062
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,996
Quote:
“There’s no evidence coyotes prey on adult deer,” says Kilgo. The concern is with fawns, particularly in their first week of life when they are most vulnerable.

Read more: http://www.petersenshunting.com/pred...#ixzz4WjOrwrCA
The study discussed in that article is not the one I saw before. When one is discussing the "evidence" in a study on wild animals, I think most accept the found as implied/assumed. It is obviously impossible to perform an exhaustive study on every deer in an area. I did omit the bit about fawns, which I was aware of, but in the study I read specific to Ohio I believe they indicated the fawns taken were believed to have been separated from their mothers prior to coyotes being involved.
The study in that article is much more recent than the one I read and seems to have used better methodology in tracking fawns.
Not to say it NEVER happens, just as I am sure a hook off the number ten tee has at some point killed a mature deer. The evidence(found if you need the clarification) simply doesn't support it occurring at a significant frequency.
My point is they found evidence of many injured deer being taken by coyotes. The injured deer weren't dying over the course of a month from excruciating infections. That simply isn't how nature works.

Last edited by johnwilliamson062; January 24, 2017 at 08:52 PM.
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old January 25, 2017, 09:31 AM   #34
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA
Posts: 24,638
The bottom line, seems to me, is to know the pertinent laws. Your first priority is to protect your freedom and billfold, above any ethics of ending the suffering of a wounded animal.

Absent legal restrictions, end the suffering ASAP.
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Old January 25, 2017, 10:07 AM   #35
MarkCO
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 1998
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 2,592
I have killed several wounded animals, hit by cars and by slob hunters.

I killed 2 elk with my 10mm pistol, during an elk season when I had no tag. I called DOW ASAP. One officer was all jacked up and wanted to arrest me, the other would not let him and I did not even get a written warning. In fact the senior officer thanked me for my actions.

I have also tracked wounded animals that other people hit, and killed them, reported to DOW and never had an issue.

I hit a 4 pt bull with my truck, it was not dead and I shot it. CSP and DOW had no issue with it. They only asked if I shot in a safe direction...being on a highway and all. My Mom said it was the best tasting elk we ever got.

I even shot a Deer in the middle of a city with an officer standing right beside me who could not pull the trigger on her pistol.

I hate to see animals suffer and if I can get LE or Wildlife there in a reasonable time, fine. If I can not, I will end it and report it. Legally, many of the things I have done were not acceptable. I will admit I was pretty tense the first time I was in this type of a situation, but now, not as much. Hunting as much as I do, I am sure it will happen again. I teach my boys and the folks I teach to hunt in the same way. One of my hunting friends shot an illegal deer (not enough points) and called DOW, self reported and got a $61 ticket and went on to kill a legal deer. He told me that if it was not for hunting with me and how I deal with things, he might have gotten jammed up. But, IMHO, you do the right thing, all the time, every time. It might cost you a tad here and there, but in the long-run, you will come out ahead.
__________________
Good Shooting, MarkCO
www.CarbonArms.us
MarkCO is offline  
Old January 25, 2017, 10:15 AM   #36
Doyle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 20, 2007
Location: Starkville, MS
Posts: 6,780
Here is a link to a website that has information regarding road-kill for most states. It appears that in most cases, contacting the state game commission is either required or highly recommended.

I actually keep the cell numbers of a few wildlife officers in my cell phone. Handy thing to have.

http://www.stoneaxeherbals.com/2016/...50-states.html
Doyle is offline  
Old January 25, 2017, 12:00 PM   #37
bamaranger
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2009
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 6,543
coyote

Likely going to sidetrack this thread....

I have personally, on more than one occasion, seen coyotes running deer, both fawns, yearings and mature animals. They hunt in packs, they run them in relays and with "flankers and drivers", and they are good at it. They are especially hard on birthed fawns, despite natures gift of allowing the fawns to get moving shortly after being dropped. What ever wildlife outfit says they are not is not keeping up.

In an attempt to get back on track, when working, I went to many, many, car v. deer accidents, and occasionally, there would be a stricken deer still on scene. Legally, no one could put the animal down, in fact, it was prohibited for many years, for anyone to even possess a firearm in a NP/Parkway unless it was stored according to law. If someone dispatched an animal, I never raised an eyebrow if all else was on the up and up. Not everybody operated that way, but I did.

A story....I went to a call for a deer v. car, and when I arrived, there were two vehicles present, the striking vehicle with some college girls, and a bubba truck with 2 good ol'boys. As I swung into the parking area, a deer got up in the headlights, ran about 30 ft, and turned tail over tincups.....it was tied to a flagpole with a length of rope. The boys wanted the deer, but knew it was illegal for them to put it down and haul it off, so they tied it up and waited for the Rangers. I told them I could not shoot it with the angles and facilities nearby involved, but to release it and I would shoot it as it ran off and got in the clear. They agreed. I struck my best Marshall Dillon pose, and said I was ready.....they wrestled it down and released it...and I went back to doing the paperwork....never drew nor shot. They were REALLY upset and roared off.

Looked like it was getting along just fine .!!!!!
bamaranger is offline  
Old January 25, 2017, 10:18 PM   #38
TheFriendlyMarksman
Member
 
Join Date: January 25, 2017
Posts: 33
1. There is nothing wrong with dispatching a mortally wounded animal to keep it from dying a lingering death.

2. Wounded and sick prey animals are often eaten. This is part of natural selection. It helps keep populations healthy.

Hope that helps.
TheFriendlyMarksman is offline  
Old January 26, 2017, 09:04 AM   #39
ZeroJunk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 14, 2006
Location: Browns Summit NC
Posts: 2,589
I have seen several deer operating fine on three legs over the years. Not sure whether it was from a car or poor shot.

But, that was before coyotes came in to the area so I don't know how they deal with that.

At any rate, if they don't appear to have any internal injury and they can get around I don't take it upon myself to do away with them.
ZeroJunk is offline  
Old January 26, 2017, 09:05 AM   #40
Doyle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 20, 2007
Location: Starkville, MS
Posts: 6,780
Quote:
1. There is nothing wrong with dispatching a mortally wounded animal to keep it from dying a lingering death.
I realize you are new to this forum but this is the 3rd time today you have posted bad advise (2 times it was bad legal advise). In this case, dispatching a wounded animal in many states IS a criminal offense.
Doyle is offline  
Old January 28, 2017, 05:08 PM   #41
Husqvarna
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 7, 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 990
not written in our laws but as a hunter over here you are almost obligated to dispatch it. I am a designated tracker for game involved in accidents.

I once got stuck in a cue due to an accident further up on the road. and the phone rings. turns out there was a moose hit by a semi and that was the reason for the cue. the cops and fireman were mighty surprised when I just strolled up on the freeway

Didn't have a rifle/shotgun with me, not even a knife, regardless I wouldn't want to wrestle a bullmoose like some teddy roosevelt so I asked the cop if I should strangle it or if I could borrow his firearm, he looked at me for so long but finally let me
Husqvarna is offline  
Old January 28, 2017, 06:47 PM   #42
buck460XVR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 3,790
Quote:
given this definition of ethics, I think there is a common set of hunting ethics that everyone agrees to, even though our personal morals might differ greatly.
If there really "is a common set of hunting ethics that everyone agrees to" there would be no legitimate reason to have laws and regulations. If ethics were really agreed on by all hunters why would there be so much division among hunters over the ethics of baiting, shooting captive animals behind high fences, use of dogs for deer, etc, even tho the use of all, are legal in many parts of the country? No our ethics are personal, and when it comes to hunting they are generally set by ourselves and influenced by those that are personal to us....Fathers, Grandfathers, brothers, friends and other hunting mentors/partners. Many times our ethics will change as those around us change. Unlike our morals. If one group of hunting friends does not think ground swatting gamebirds is ethical, then we probably won't either. Next week we may be out with other friends at a game farm shooting released birds and swatting them before they run into someone else's field is acceptable. This is unlike "workplace ethics" which are company policy set by others and does not change.

We can argue all day over what our definition of what is ethical, or if it's ethics or morals. My point was to know for sure that what you are doing is legal or not and what the consequences may be if it is not, before you do it. Otherwise your argument may be with a judge.
buck460XVR is offline  
Old January 28, 2017, 08:03 PM   #43
Pahoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 7,356
We all have a personal Hunting Code !!!

Quote:
Quote:
I think there is a common set of hunting ethics that everyone agrees to
We all have a personal hunting code and even though some elements are common to all of us, they differ greatly. When I state that "We All" have a personal hunting code, I mean every human being. Even the anti-hunting group has a personal hunting code; They don't hunt. That is probably on the low end of the spectrum and the opposite end might be; "If it swims. runs or flies, it dies". Frankly some personal hunting codes are unethical. Even though I teach that a good foundation for one's hunting code is to obey "all" listed hunting laws, I have to admit that I stray and would, depending on the situation, like dispatching a wounded animal. Example, I once came across a wounded hen Pheasant. I tried to get it to flush and as it rolled over, saw that is was loaded with maggots. Nuff said. ......

Be ethical and;
Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing.
Pahoo is offline  
Old January 28, 2017, 09:02 PM   #44
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 11,928
Quote:
I have seen several deer operating fine on three legs over the years. Not sure whether it was from a car or poor shot.
Back in the 90s, I was doing a paper on animal pathologies and came across a British study on deer killed in that country. Sometime like 10% of the dead deer recovered for analysis showed skeletal evidence of having been hit previously, healed (at least partially) and were subsequently hit at a later date. Some had well healed fractures.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange
Double Naught Spy is online now  
Old January 28, 2017, 09:05 PM   #45
Buzzard Bait
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 502
I saw

I saw a three legged deer in the wild that had been that way long enough that it was healed
Buzzard Bait is offline  
Old January 29, 2017, 09:38 PM   #46
tahunua001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 7,789
Quote:
If there really "is a common set of hunting ethics that everyone agrees to" there would be no legitimate reason to have laws and regulations. If ethics were really agreed on by all hunters why would there be so much division among hunters over the ethics of baiting, shooting captive animals behind high fences, use of dogs for deer, etc, even tho the use of all, are legal in many parts of the country? No our ethics are personal, and when it comes to hunting they are generally set by ourselves and influenced by those that are personal to us....Fathers, Grandfathers, brothers, friends and other hunting mentors/partners. Many times our ethics will change as those around us change. Unlike our morals. If one group of hunting friends does not think ground swatting gamebirds is ethical, then we probably won't either. Next week we may be out with other friends at a game farm shooting released birds and swatting them before they run into someone else's field is acceptable. This is unlike "workplace ethics" which are company policy set by others and does not change.
sighs... ok lets just go off the dictionary then.
Ethics...


Quote:
Definition of ethic
1 ethics plural in form but singular or plural in construction : the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation
2 a : a set of moral principles : a theory or system of moral values
b ethics plural in form but singular or plural in construction : the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group
c : a guiding philosophy
d : a consciousness of moral importance
3 ethics plural : a set of moral issues or aspects (as rightness)
moral

Quote:
Definition of moral
1 a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ethical
b : expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior
c : conforming to a standard of right behavior
d : sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment
e : capable of right and wrong action
2: probable though not proved : virtual
3: perceptual or psychological rather than tangible or practical in nature or effect
you just got it completely backwards. ethics are for groups of people, morals are for individuals. you said it yourself. if your friends don't like something, you probably don't like it either, that's ethics, if you don't like it despite everyone else liking it, that's ethics. you might also consider ethics as acting on moral grounds, while morals are your beliefs that drive your actions. either way, ethics are not unique to each individual, morals are. as for there being no legitimate reason for laws and regulations, there are plenty of people out there now who feel that there is no real legitimate reason as it is. again, ethics and laws have nothing to do with it. there are still laws on the books in some places that state that you can beat your wife on sundays, while in my city where I currently live there is a law on the books that says I can't walk my elephant without a leash. laws do not have any bearing on ethics.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the stuff people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin

Last edited by tahunua001; January 29, 2017 at 09:43 PM.
tahunua001 is offline  
Old January 30, 2017, 12:01 PM   #47
Pahoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 7,356
Personal Hunting Code

Personal Hunting Code;
Doing your best, in your own best ways, when no mortal is watching.


Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing.
Pahoo is offline  
Old January 31, 2017, 04:08 AM   #48
buck460XVR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 3,790
Quote:
you just got it completely backwards. ethics are for groups of people, morals are for individuals.
I don't see that stated anywhere in the definitions you have provided. Rather I see this, and this contradicts your argument.....

Quote:
Definition of ethic:
the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group
Then there is this....
Quote:
Definition of moral
1 a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ethical
So according to the definition you have provided, morals=ethics. IOWs, Not enough difference to argue about.

Quote:
laws do not have any bearing on ethics.

I never said laws were ethical, as a matter of fact, I said just the opposite quite a while back in a previous post.

Quote:
Comes down to the fact that what is ethical, is not always legal and vice-versa.
Again, I am not the one who wants to argue someone's definition of ethics vs morals or anyone's particular ethics/morals. My point is and always has been, one needs to know the law and it's consequences if the law does not agree with your ethics.
buck460XVR is offline  
Old January 31, 2017, 10:07 AM   #49
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA
Posts: 24,638
"...one needs to know the law and it's consequences if the law does not agree with your ethics."

Good summary comment.
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.16048 seconds with 8 queries