If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Anchorage Daily News)   We're not saying Republican Senators are obstructionists, but these days they're reluctant to vote on a bill that's favorable to hunters and outdoorsmen   (adn.com) divider line 98
    More: Asinine, Senate, obstructionists, Majority Leader Harry Reid, Denny Rehberg, environmental laws, firing ranges, hunters, Mitch McConnell  
•       •       •

6628 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Sep 2012 at 4:05 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



98 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-23 02:32:23 PM

digistil: So the act of voting itself is now part of the liberal agenda. Got it.

/fark the selfish crybabies


And apparently if you're a politician, engaging in politics is the worst thing imaginable.
 
2012-09-23 03:02:00 PM

People_are_Idiots: Mock26: When a republican reminds you that unemployment under President Obama is currently at 8.1% be sure to remind them that when President Bush left office it was 7.8%. Under President Obama the highest rate was 10.0, which is only an increase of about 30%. Under President Bush the lowest rate was 4.4. Unemployment under President Bush increased by over 75%!

Don't forget to remind them also that while Bush was in office, the Dems controlled both houses (and have been for 2 years). Cause and effect?


Irrelevant. If the President gets all the credit then he gets all the blame, too.
 
2012-09-23 03:02:27 PM
Hunting does not equal killing. The shot and harvest is just a tiny part of it. I recognize that this is impossible for those who haven't experienced it to understand.

One thing I will say, is that no hunter should be ashamed of their joy in success. The practice, the scouting, the pursuit, and the joy of family and friends in your success is rewarding and uplifting. It's a wonderful thing that human beings have done since the beginning of time. Humans have always killed living things to exist, it's part of being a human being.
 
2012-09-23 03:07:34 PM

parkthebus: Hunting does not equal killing. The shot and harvest is just a tiny part of it. I recognize that this is impossible for those who haven't experienced it to understand.

One thing I will say, is that no hunter should be ashamed of their joy in success. The practice, the scouting, the pursuit, and the joy of family and friends in your success is rewarding and uplifting. It's a wonderful thing that human beings have done since the beginning of time. Humans have always killed living things to exist, it's part of being a human being.


My dad tells me stories of how he used to go hunting in the woods behind his farm in upstate New York with an unloaded gun. He'd hunt, find a deer, line it up, pull the trigger, then hear the empty click . He didn't wanna kill it, he wanted the chase. So I totally get what ya saying.
 
2012-09-23 03:57:50 PM
Whatever joy you get out of the hunt, the death of the animal is not worth it. There's a very fine calculus once people decide death for pleasure is OK, and at the extreme is 'psychopath'. If you stay careful and moderate, you may get away with merely being an 'asshole'.
 
2012-09-23 04:06:55 PM

stonicus: parkthebus: Hunting does not equal killing. The shot and harvest is just a tiny part of it. I recognize that this is impossible for those who haven't experienced it to understand.

One thing I will say, is that no hunter should be ashamed of their joy in success. The practice, the scouting, the pursuit, and the joy of family and friends in your success is rewarding and uplifting. It's a wonderful thing that human beings have done since the beginning of time. Humans have always killed living things to exist, it's part of being a human being.

My dad tells me stories of how he used to go hunting in the woods behind his farm in upstate New York with an unloaded gun. He'd hunt, find a deer, line it up, pull the trigger, then hear the empty click . He didn't wanna kill it, he wanted the chase. So I totally get what ya saying.


I did not hunt with an unloaded gun, but many a time while out hunting I just chose not to shoot. Of course, other times I did.
 
2012-09-23 04:39:31 PM
Senators and other wealthy people who want to taste the great outdoors can do so at the vast estates their friends own, or on publicly owned restricted reserves where you and I are not allowed to even go hiking.

Wealthy powerful people are not your friends.
 
2012-09-23 04:43:22 PM
I just do not understand the urge to shoot there, and I do not ever want to.
 
2012-09-23 04:52:34 PM

Mock26: People_are_Idiots: Mock26: When a republican reminds you that unemployment under President Obama is currently at 8.1% be sure to remind them that when President Bush left office it was 7.8%. Under President Obama the highest rate was 10.0, which is only an increase of about 30%. Under President Bush the lowest rate was 4.4. Unemployment under President Bush increased by over 75%!

Don't forget to remind them also that while Bush was in office, the Dems controlled both houses (and have been for 2 years). Cause and effect?

Irrelevant. If the President gets all the credit then he gets all the blame, too.


I guess that's the nice thing about me. I blame and praise where it's due.
 
2012-09-23 05:05:41 PM

rosy at random: Whatever joy you get out of the hunt, the death of the animal is not worth it. There's a very fine calculus once people decide death for pleasure is OK, and at the extreme is 'psychopath'. If you stay careful and moderate, you may get away with merely being an 'asshole'.


I respectfully disagree. Hunting for food is in our genes. There is nothing wrong with taking pleasure in it and doing so is completely natural. You don't have to eat animals, but most of the world does and has always done so. Don't hate what you don't understand.
 
2012-09-23 05:55:18 PM

parkthebus: rosy at random: Whatever joy you get out of the hunt, the death of the animal is not worth it. There's a very fine calculus once people decide death for pleasure is OK, and at the extreme is 'psychopath'. If you stay careful and moderate, you may get away with merely being an 'asshole'.

I respectfully disagree. Hunting for food is in our genes. There is nothing wrong with taking pleasure in it and doing so is completely natural. You don't have to eat animals, but most of the world does and has always done so. Don't hate what you don't understand.


I think he was referring to hunting just for the sport of it...
 
2012-09-23 06:24:31 PM
Even still, doesn't hunting become a sport anyway? All the time and money spent for equipment, etc. would be more efficiently used to just buy meat at the store. We do it because we love it, not just to get the meat. It's a challenge that takes skill and wisdom, with a reward of something tasty to eat.
 
2012-09-23 07:05:56 PM
That is absolutely the worst ethical justification I have ever heard. You are one step away from the 'evolutionarily programmed to rape' argument, and you don't want to go there.

Seriously. Don't go there. All I am hearing is that you like to kill things; you don't like to make the suffer, thankfully, but you like to kill things. You like to take away lives and impoverish the world every time you do. Your justifications are just rationalisations for something horrible.
 
2012-09-23 07:07:32 PM
Weird -- I'd tagged this link in the post above, but it hasn't come through. Anyway, this should have been in:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy#Appeal_to_nature
 
2012-09-23 07:32:08 PM

rosy at random: Whatever joy you get out of the hunt, the death of the animal is not worth it. There's a very fine calculus once people decide death for pleasure is OK, and at the extreme is 'psychopath'. If you stay careful and moderate, you may get away with merely being an 'asshole'.


Sure it is worth it. It is food on your table. Sure, we no longer need to hunt for our food, but hunting is still infinitely more humane than the vast majority of "meat factories."
 
2012-09-23 08:18:48 PM

rosy at random: That is absolutely the worst ethical justification I have ever heard. You are one step away from the 'evolutionarily programmed to rape' argument, and you don't want to go there.

Seriously. Don't go there. All I am hearing is that you like to kill things; you don't like to make the suffer, thankfully, but you like to kill things. You like to take away lives and impoverish the world every time you do. Your justifications are just rationalisations for something horrible.


How does it impoverish the world?
 
2012-09-23 09:12:38 PM

rosy at random: That is absolutely the worst ethical justification I have ever heard. You are one step away from the 'evolutionarily programmed to rape' argument, and you don't want to go there.

Seriously. Don't go there. All I am hearing is that you like to kill things; you don't like to make the suffer, thankfully, but you like to kill things. You like to take away lives and impoverish the world every time you do. Your justifications are just rationalisations for something horrible.


I was in my tree stand trying to kill something, and couldn't read the link from my phone. But I did now, and it's all well and good if you live in a world of theory. But we don't. One of the many, many benefits of hunting is that you get up and close to the natural world. You become a part of it.

I know I won't convince you of a thing since you think killing an animal impoverishes the world. I think that's absurd, but go ahead and feel that way.

Bottom line. You, and many who oppose hunting, really have no idea what it is all about. It's not what you see on TV and the movies. It's like I'm a martian trying to describe my world to you. Unless you've been part of hunting culture, and tried to hunt, how could you have any idea of the richness of the entire experience?
 
2012-09-24 03:56:59 AM
I think I liked hunting better the way my dad talked about it. In small town 1940s it had no "culture," it was just a thing you did for fun, fresh air and sometime food. The grands remembered when ammo had been cheaper than meat, so everybody felt lucky they didn't HAVE to shoot to eat.
 
2012-09-24 04:25:09 AM

i upped my meds-up yours: I think I liked hunting better the way my dad talked about it. In small town 1940s it had no "culture," it was just a thing you did for fun, fresh air and sometime food. The grands remembered when ammo had been cheaper than meat, so everybody felt lucky they didn't HAVE to shoot to eat.


And for many of us there is no hunting "culture." It is something that we do with friends, family, or even alone.
 
2012-09-24 05:21:17 AM
Trust me, I get the idea of hunting. I would absolutely do the thing mentioned above, hunting without live ammo. But I would refuse to kill something just for fun. At least, anything with a somewhat developed nervous system. The fact that you cross that line, that you don't see the problem, and you don't see how animal lives enrich the world and are precious in themselves... well, let's just say I don't think you have any idea what my world is like, and I could never describe its richness to you.
 
2012-09-24 07:26:10 AM
Here's an example of the sort of thing I coo over every day.



I love everything about that. That it exists, and it's possible to make its life better, and maybe to pet it. My world is richer by interacting with its world. You prefer to kill things, and make your life better by destroying its world.

This is our fundamental difference.
 
2012-09-24 07:30:33 AM
OH GODDAMNIT. I'm really not very good at doing links lately Here!
 
2012-09-24 10:43:35 AM

rosy at random: But I would refuse to kill something just for fun. At least, anything with a somewhat developed nervous system.


Houseflys have a developed nervous system. So do any other number of insects.

Hunting is not for everyone, but it is no worse than eating anything else made of meat. Those that hunt do it for several reasons. Fresh air, being in the outdoors, being with friends/family, excercize, thrill of the hunt, test of you skills (markmanship included), filling the freezer with food, etc.

All of these activities can be very enjoyable. In fact, if it was not enjoyable, no one would do it.

Also, let's not forget the wildlife management aspect of this as well. Hunters are the biggest givers to wildlidfe conservation programs as the money they spend on tags,licenses, permits, and all sporting good puchases go to help fund these programs. Wildlife management itself is tailored to also keep populations of species healty and in check.

If you cannot look your meal in the eye, you really don't know what it means to eat meat. There is no reason to be ashamed of it. It is part of life.
 
2012-09-24 10:46:56 AM

rosy at random: What a shame that at some point that annoying morality jerk kicks in and says you shouldn't be killing things anymore.


If you want to starve to death, go ahead and quit killing things. The rest of us will continue to not feel guilty about existing as nature/God made us.
 
2012-09-24 10:55:00 AM
The whole focus of my posts being about the pleasure taken in killing things being abhorrent didn't quite get through to you, did it?
 
2012-09-24 11:00:56 AM

rosy at random: The whole focus of my posts being about the pleasure taken in killing things being abhorrent didn't quite get through to you, did it?


And my point is that the pleasure is never mutually exclusive from the act of hunting. If it were, no one would be hunting.
 
2012-09-24 11:04:03 AM
You can take pleasure and pride that you've done something unfortunate but necessary in such a way as to minimise suffering, yes. That, I understand. To go and kill something for no other reason than killing it is enjoyable is repugnant.
 
2012-09-24 11:04:07 AM
For most of us that hunt, we do it for the experience. Part of that is being successfull in the hunt and killing. Why not be happy about having a sucessful hunt? Why is that abhorrent?
 
2012-09-24 11:09:30 AM

rosy at random: You can take pleasure and pride that you've done something unfortunate but necessary in such a way as to minimise suffering, yes.


So we should be sad (done something unfortunate) but happy (You can take pleasure and pride) now? Is that how we need to feel to be morally superior? You seem confused.

Yes, it is unfortuante from the prey's point of view. However, if you want to truly minimize suffering, a bullet to the head is much quicker and humane than dying of starvation or disease. All life ends in death. Methinks it is time you finally realize that fact.
 
2012-09-24 11:19:06 AM

rosy at random: To go and kill something for no other reason than killing it is enjoyable is repugnant.


Who gets to judge if these other reasons are justified? What if the reasons are as follows:

Killing ground squirrels in a hayfield
Killing coyotes to sell the hide for additional income
Kililng wolves to help struggling elk populations
Killling houseflys that land on your target to see if you can actually hit one from 100 yards

Everyone I know does not hunt just to make something that was once alive become dead. They always do it for other reasons.
 
2012-09-24 11:22:44 AM
Shall we just kill everyone now then and save some time? Why don't you start?

I'm not confused here. A doctor or vet can take comfort and pride in the fact that he's helping the sick. If the patient dies, or hast to be euthanised, then that is unfortunate but the knowledge that they are doing their best, and the suffering was minimised, will also be a source of comfort and pride.

You're really not very good at handling complex situations, are you?
 
2012-09-24 11:31:15 AM

HeadLever:
Everyone I know does not hunt just to make something that was once alive become dead. They always do it for other reasons.


Some reasons are better than others. To provide food and other necessities is obviously good, though there is of course the question of what the alternatives are. For baubles and trinkets is... not so good.

There is no conscience police; all we have are ethics to guide our morality. And ours, clearly, are in disagreement.
 
2012-09-24 11:35:50 AM

rosy at random: Shall we just kill everyone now then and save some time?


Not sure what you are getting at here? Not sure where I ever mentioned anything about kiling everyone (or everything). Or is this another suggestion from the 'moral highground'?

You're really not very good at handling complex situations, are you?

Lol, It takes quite the huckster to be able to say that just after spouting off with this little gem, "Shall we just kill everyone now then and save some time? Why don't you start?".
 
2012-09-24 11:47:08 AM
Yes, it is unfortuante from the prey's point of view. However, if you want to truly minimize suffering, a bullet to the head is much quicker and humane than dying of starvation or disease. All life ends in death. Methinks it is time you finally realize that fact.

All life ends in death. This is used as an argument for killing things.

Oh wait... specifically, killing them with a bullet to the head as it's quick and humane. And they're going to die anyway, so why not?

Go. Find a gun. Sneak up to people and shoot them in the back of the head. It'll be quick and humane, and they are only going to die anyway, right?
 
2012-09-24 11:48:06 AM
I really should use preview more often. That quote tag didn't really work there at all.
 
2012-09-24 11:58:41 AM

rosy at random: There is no conscience police;


Then what the hell have you been doing in this thread? You have been trying very hard to be the conscience police. I don't mind that our ethics are in disagreement. I DO have a problem with you telling me that my ethics are repugnant and abhorrent. Also, I'll have a huge problem if you attempt to legislate these uninformed opinions. Especially when you have very little idea of why us that do hunt may be choosing to do so.

Uninformed blanket statements that end up only describing conjured ideals of trigger happy rednecks shooting everything that moves is a very bad way of making points about the morality of the type of hunting that 99% of us hunters engage in. In fact, due to the uninformed anti-hunting folks out there and the pressure they exert, many states are looking to add (or have added) hunting and fishing as an enumerated right into their states' constitutions.
 
2012-09-24 12:05:48 PM
My morality differs from sadistic serial killers too, funnily enough. Who's to say which of us is right? Man, with all this post-modern cultural relativity in the air, it's just impossible to disagree about anything and try to convince someone your opinion's better.

So you go keep on killing animals and people humanely, sorry, just the people, I mean, animals, and I'll just keep on shaking my fist, I mean, head.
 
2012-09-24 12:11:30 PM

rosy at random: This is used as an argument for killing things.


No, it is not the only reason to kill things. Again, those of us that hunt do not just shoot something in order to make something that was once alive become dead. Who is having trouble understand complex agruments again?

The quckly killing argument was only to show how hunting is oftentimes the best way to minimize suffering. If that is one of your major hangups (as you indicated it to be), you should be all for hunting. If I was a self-riteous ideologe I could counter with the question, 'why do you want to let animals suffer?'.

While it is obvious you don't want this to happen, it is the same self-serving type of argument that exemplifies those that refuse to actually recognize where the other side is coming from.
 
2012-09-24 12:19:26 PM

rosy at random: My morality differs from sadistic serial killers too, funnily enough. Who's to say which of us is right? Man, with all this post-modern cultural relativity in the air, it's just impossible to disagree about anything and try to convince someone your opinion's better.

So you go keep on killing animals and people humanely, sorry, just the people, I mean, animals, and I'll just keep on shaking my fist, I mean, head.


Lol, so now we are sadist? Nice. I'll give that one a solid 7 on the derp scale.
 
2012-09-24 12:24:34 PM

rosy at random: Who's to say which of us is right?


Since most of your points deal with uninformed blanket statements that end up only describing conjured ideals of trigger happy rednecks shooting everything, I know which way I lean.
 
2012-09-24 12:34:46 PM
I never said you were a sadist; the point of that little juxtaposition was that even though there is no absolute morality we can use to settle such matters, and thus we can merely disagree without recourse to authority, this in no way means that there is no such thing as better or worse moralities, at least as far as humans can see, and in some cases we must defend and espouse our views.

All of this has been about hunting. And that has always been about the pleasure of the hunt, of the kill. The ulterior justifications bought up (population control, gaining food and materials, etc) are nothing bu distractions - there are people who hunt. Hunters. They like to hunt, they like to kill, and most of them would consider hunting itself to be the main activity here. "What do you do?" "I help maintain the deer population... oh, and I have to shoot wolves to do that." "And you?" "I sell hides. Oh, and yeah, I suppose I have to kill coyotes for them too."

No, this is the sport of hunting we're talking about. "What shall we do today?" "Let's track down something wild and helpless." "OK... but only if we get to kill it." "Of course... do you think I just wanted to see or feed it, or something pussy like that? No man, I want to put a bullet in something's brain today! Yeah!"

So no, at no point will I think that the impulse to kill for its own enjoyment is anything but horrible. And when you do it for other reasons, it is still not OK to take pleasure in the death.
 
2012-09-24 12:51:27 PM

rosy at random: And that has always been about the pleasure of the hunt, of the kill.


Hunt or kill. These are two different things. Or are you confused again?

The ulterior justifications bought up (population control, gaining food and materials, etc) are nothing bu distractions

Really? How would you know? Is this in reaction to your conjured ideals of trigger happy rednecks shooting everything under the sun again? As someone who doesn't know much about hunting, you sure seem to have no shortage of opinions on the subject.

it is still not OK to take pleasure in the death.

I'll agree if you are only talking about the death itself. However, as i have stated for the 3rd time (and it apparetnly has not sank into your thick head yet), everyone I know does not hunt just to make something that was once alive become dead. Not sure why you are having a hard time understanding this point. The only thing that I can think of is that it will force you to admit that your entire argument is built on a strawman.

If you want to go beat up on the strawman that shoots animals (or humans) just to take pleasure in the death, then I guess, go ahead. Just know that you are not talking to 99.9% of the population that will identify themselves as hunters.
 
2012-09-24 02:45:37 PM

rosy at random: To go and kill something for no other reason than killing it is enjoyable is repugnant.


Why do you assume that that is the only reason people enjoy hunting? Hmm?
 
2012-09-24 02:47:15 PM

rosy at random: My morality differs from sadistic serial killers too, funnily enough. Who's to say which of us is right? Man, with all this post-modern cultural relativity in the air, it's just impossible to disagree about anything and try to convince someone your opinion's better.

So you go keep on killing animals and people humanely, sorry, just the people, I mean, animals, and I'll just keep on shaking my fist, I mean, head.


Are you a vegetarian or vegan?
 
2012-09-24 02:53:14 PM

rosy at random: I never said you were a sadist; the point of that little juxtaposition was that even though there is no absolute morality we can use to settle such matters, and thus we can merely disagree without recourse to authority, this in no way means that there is no such thing as better or worse moralities, at least as far as humans can see, and in some cases we must defend and espouse our views.

All of this has been about hunting. And that has always been about the pleasure of the hunt, of the kill. The ulterior justifications bought up (population control, gaining food and materials, etc) are nothing bu distractions - there are people who hunt. Hunters. They like to hunt, they like to kill, and most of them would consider hunting itself to be the main activity here. "What do you do?" "I help maintain the deer population... oh, and I have to shoot wolves to do that." "And you?" "I sell hides. Oh, and yeah, I suppose I have to kill coyotes for them too."

No, this is the sport of hunting we're talking about. "What shall we do today?" "Let's track down something wild and helpless." "OK... but only if we get to kill it." "Of course... do you think I just wanted to see or feed it, or something pussy like that? No man, I want to put a bullet in something's brain today! Yeah!"

So no, at no point will I think that the impulse to kill for its own enjoyment is anything but horrible. And when you do it for other reasons, it is still not OK to take pleasure in the death.


What about someone who does not hunt but goes out, orders a steak, and enjoys it? Is such a person complicit of enjoying killing something? By your reasoning it would seem that the answer is Yes.

And why are you trying to associate hunting of animals with murdering of human beings? That is a flawed analogy. Are there people who enjoy killing animals and hunt just to kill? Sure there are. But not all hunters are that way. And while not really "proof" my personal experience is that very few hunters are that way. But, for some reason you are lumping all hunters under your opinion that we are blood thirsty, psychopathic killers who enjoy nothing but killing. Why is that?
 
2012-09-24 02:54:16 PM

HeadLever: rosy at random: And that has always been about the pleasure of the hunt, of the kill.

Hunt or kill. These are two different things. Or are you confused again?

The ulterior justifications bought up (population control, gaining food and materials, etc) are nothing bu distractions

Really? How would you know? Is this in reaction to your conjured ideals of trigger happy rednecks shooting everything under the sun again? As someone who doesn't know much about hunting, you sure seem to have no shortage of opinions on the subject.

it is still not OK to take pleasure in the death.

I'll agree if you are only talking about the death itself. However, as i have stated for the 3rd time (and it apparetnly has not sank into your thick head yet), everyone I know does not hunt just to make something that was once alive become dead. Not sure why you are having a hard time understanding this point. The only thing that I can think of is that it will force you to admit that your entire argument is built on a strawman.

If you want to go beat up on the strawman that shoots animals (or humans) just to take pleasure in the death, then I guess, go ahead. Just know that you are not talking to 99.9% of the population that will identify themselves as hunters.


Either rosy is a die hard vegetarian or she is a troll. I am betting on she is both.
 
2012-09-24 03:09:47 PM

Mock26: Either rosy is a die hard vegetarian or she is a troll. I am betting on she is both.


I am betting on a city slicker that has never spent any real time in nature and has the notion that all hunters are toothless hillbillies.

Connecting hunters to those that murder people is just another way to attain a self-righteous moral foothold above us unwashed country folk and helps justify the deluded position he/she has chosen to take. Doesn't seem to matter that this coorelation has no real significance in the real world.
 
2012-09-25 03:22:43 PM

HeadLever: Mock26: Either rosy is a die hard vegetarian or she is a troll. I am betting on she is both.

I am betting on a city slicker that has never spent any real time in nature and has the notion that all hunters are toothless hillbillies.

Connecting hunters to those that murder people is just another way to attain a self-righteous moral foothold above us unwashed country folk and helps justify the deluded position he/she has chosen to take. Doesn't seem to matter that this coorelation has no real significance in the real world.


Yarp. She is a self delusional person who thinks that name calling is a mature way of making your point.
 
Displayed 48 of 98 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report