Amazon.com Widgets
  • It should not

    We should not hunt animals if u were a rabit how would you feel. Think about it s s s s s s s s s s f f f f f t t t t t t t t t t u j j j j j j k c c c

  • It is unnecessary

    Animals are just like humans. We should treat them equally and with respect. They have a life and sometimes even a family. They deserve to live just like us and not in cages or farms. Animals shouldn't be killed just for the enjoyment of human. Plus animal agriculture contribute to 51%of carbon emission which leads to global warming. With the advance in technology, we can get all the nutrients and energy we need from plants.

  • I i i

    I i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i

  • I i i

    I i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i

  • Fff g g

    Eeeeeeeeeeee h h hhhh hh h h h h h h h h h h hh h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h hh h h h h h h h h

  • No, banning animal hunting does not make sense

    Humans need to continue to hunt animals so we don't become overpopulated with certain species. Animals, like deer and rabbits, can easily outweigh the number of people in an area if population control is not exercised. A ban on animal hunting could result in a shortage of food and water for the people.

  • No, animal hunting should remain legal.

    No, it does not make sense to ban responsible animal hunting. First, hunting responsibly helps cull overpopulated species. This stops the potential for overgrazing and overcrowding, which causes disease to run rampant in animal populations. Secondly, hunting provides a source of food for many families. People who live in secluded areas, such as deep in the Appalachian Mountains or the backwoods of the Catskills, often have a difficult time getting to supermarkets or are even too poor to afford food. Banning hunting would take away a major food source for these individuals and their families.

  • No, there is no need to ban animal hunting

    Banning animal hunting will not stop the most egregious violators, the poachers who kill endangered species. It will also not keep people from owning rifles as long as the second amendment stays in place. Hunting for food is a long and honored tradition, and the innocent should not be punished with the guilty.

  • It does not make sense to ban animal hunting.

    Animal hunting is more than the gratuitous killing of animals. Many hunters use their game for food, which is the original purpose for hunting. Hunting also helps control populations of animals that could become parasitic to or disrupt ecosystems if their numbers were not controlled. For this reason, banning hunting could potentially have some very adverse effects on the environment.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.