:
|
Hurts, don't it?
I have an open-ended question to rev your motors; When is hunting necessary and when isn't it? When does hunting become a sport and not an asset to survival? All societies are at different rungs of the same ladder, and there are whole nations of peoples who need to hunt to survive, whole nations that are on the fence, whole nations that could survive on the food issued by the government but don't want to, and then there's the US - which always seems to put it's self on the top of the ladder and assumes immunity on all issues that ask it to think on ethics.
|
If it's less expensive for you to hunt, whether that be for clothing or food, then I am one hundred percent behind you. I firmly believe in survival of the fittest. However, if it would be more cost effective for you to go to the supermarket than hunt (hunting is expensive), then it is not necessary.
I can't back legislation that would stop hunters. I'm not out to demonize anyone. I just want people to be honest with themselves. Your typical American hunter is not doing it for the sake of the animal, or out of necessity. They do it because to them it is fun.