Amazon.com Widgets
  • Thou shalt not kill

    If killing a human for no gain is considered murder, why not the same for animals? Granted there are certain benefits in underdeveloped countries to gain resources and food, but in a 'developed' country like the UK then there is no real need to kill the animals. I know hunters will show all the 'proof' that what they are doing is right, an their arguments sound convincing... Yet they are hollow, empty words for what is basically taking another life for no other reason than to see another being perish...

    When the animal is armed too. Then i will consider it fair game.

    And that bulls*** about it being culture? Slavery used to be part of our culture, so did male supremacy, it is a good thing when cultures change!

  • Killing is murder.

    Hunting is murder. The killing of a living creature is MURDER. Do not disguise it. I hope you know that the breathing being you murdered mercilessly was trying to live life like you are. Killing a living breathing being is not beneficial. Most humans are like spawns of Satan. R.I.P.

  • Yes - hunting is murder

    Every living creature is blessed to be alive - it is a miracle that a rabbit, deer or chipmunk can survive the elements and natural predators ... How dare we rob a bird of its life ... That bird is looking for food to feed its babies. Ducks mate for life - each living creature knows love and feels a whole range of emotion. Look into the eyes of an animal and you will see its soul. It wants to live and be safe.

  • Of course it is!

    What makes humans more important than every other living species? Is it because we are more powerful in the sense that we can and are currently destroying the earth? Yes I understand the point about the food chain and eating to survive (hence why I'm not a vegetarian) but killing an innocent creature just because it has found a place to live that is "too close" to you or are a "nuisance" is just cold hearted murder.

  • L l l

    Ytutyutyuytu tyul l l l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l ll l l l l l l ll l l ll l l l l l ll l l l l l l ll l l l l l ll

  • L l l

    Ytutyutyuytu tyul l l l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l ll l l l l l l ll l l ll l l l l l ll l l l l l l ll l l l l l ll

  • L l l

    Ytutyutyuytu tyul l l l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l ll l l l l l l ll l l ll l l l l l ll l l l l l l ll l l l l l ll

  • L l l

    Ytutyutyuytu tyul l l l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l ll l l l l l l ll l l ll l l l l l ll l l l l l l ll l l l l l ll

  • L l l

    Ytutyutyuytu tyul l l l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l ll l l l l l l ll l l ll l l l l l ll l l l l l l ll l l l l l ll

  • L l l

    Ytutyutyuytu tyul l l l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l ll l l l l l l ll l l ll l l l l l ll l l l l l l ll l l l l l ll

  • Hunting as muder, really??

    To call hunting murder in my opinion is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Everywhere I've looked murder is defined as one human killing another human with malice and forethought. I asked about 50 or more people at random at about 7 different stores. They all agree with that definition.

  • There is no manner of acquiring food that results in less death and suffering than does hunting and fishing.

    I will propose an example to illustrate my point: On a recent backpacking trip I caught and consumed several trout. In doing so I did no damage to the trout population (these will easily be replaced by the next generation of fish) and caused no harm to the habitat required for their continued existence. Some might suggest that this meal caused unnecessary animal death and suffering that might have been avoided by the alternative of, for example, a meal of rice and beans. This claim, however, ignores the wildlife destroyed in producing these crops. Agriculture does not simply develop on barren soils--it exists only where entire plant and animal communities are destroyed in order to introduce those species preferred by man. Consider the millions of acres of forest, grassland and woodland converted to barren mono-cultures serving no species besides man; consider the billions of pounds of chemicals dumped into our air, water and soil, and the trillions of gallons of fresh water diverted from sensitive aquatic systems--all for agricultural purpose. Agriculture has become the foremost cause of extinction world-wide, as well as the single greatest source of greenhouse gases destined to alter Earth's climate for millennia. There is simply no crop that can be grown without depriving wild animals of the land and resources they require for survival. My meal of fish may cost the lives of two animals, but a meal of rice and beans demands the lives of many more. In fact it requires the elimination of every individual, of every major species on the landscape, as well as every future generation ever to be expected of them.

    Of course, the analysis applies equally well to hunting. He who kills a deer acquires hundreds of meals at the cost of a single animal life. There is simply no manner of agriculture capable of accomplishing this. Remember, I am not speaking only of those animals killed while cultivating and harvesting established fields (as already suggested, such fields have already become ecological wastelands); I am speaking of the myriad wild creatures that perish as a direct result of habitat loss upon the establishment of the field itself. Not only does hunting result in fewer lives lost, but it also leaves habitat intact and so ensures the continued existence of plant and animal communities that would be lost if we elected instead to feed ourselves by agricultural means.

    Ultimately, the question of ethical hunting is not an argument of sentience, or plants v. Animals. It is a question of science and the realization that there is no free lunch. We cannot (even by plant agriculture) eliminate animal death and suffering in feeding ourselves, but we can minimize it. Wild fish and game, taken in a sustainable manner, provide the best means to achieve this for at least some part of the human population.

  • Hunting is NOT murder

    Hunting is a way of life. Wouldn't you rather have something you know lived a health life in stead of something processed. Hunters have their rights and have the legal limits to what they kill. Most people hunt for food so what your saying is I have murder an animal so i have to be punished for try to get food?

  • Hunting is necessary

    Hunting is not murder, its hardly any different than killing livestock for food. Its the food chain. And if we didn't kill certain animals then they would over run us with their sheer numbers. I went hunting today and killed a deer. Ill go hunting tomorrow and kill something else.

  • It should not.

    Hunting should not be considered murder. Human are technically animals too, and hunting and killing other animals is a natural thing. Murder can only be when one human kills another. People who think that killing an animal is murder is just too sesitive and need to get off of their high horse.

  • Hunting isn't murder.

    I think it is a bit dramatic to equate hunting with murder. I think that hunting can be a way to gather resources, control certain animal populations, and a healthy outlet. I don't think that even the most liberal use of the word murder can be applied in this case.

  • no it shouldn't

    I do not think that hunting should be considered murder. Hunting is something that is part of people's culture. Hunting has been used for thousands of years for sustenance. Humans have always had to hunt for food. I do not think that it should be considered murder now. Some people still like to hunt for food and I think that is just fine.

  • Animals are not people!

    Hunting should not be considered murder because animals are not people. Hunting helps feed families. Even those who hunt purely for sport and feel the need to mount a deer head on the wall , use the meat for food. Unless you are a vegetarian, it is hypocritical to be against hunting.

  • Hunting should not be considered murder

    Hunting should not be considered murder. This is because of the fact that taking an animals life is not murder. Murder is the intended death of another human. Humans are omnivores and we eat animals. If we were to change the literal definition of murder to include killing animals, we would all be murderers.

  • Hunting should not be considered murder.

    Hunting should not be considered murder unless you are hunting humans. Under normal circumstance, when you are hunting animals, it is perfectly acceptable to kill. It is natural for humans to kill and consume animals. In nature, a lot of animals kill others for their survival. Hunting is natural in the world.


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