Food for thought

[Horne Shooter]

I was watching some "outdoor TV" this weekend and the host mentioned some of the anti hunting groups and how we must support our cause to fight these people.  I got to thinking that I have never really gone to any of their websites to see exactly what they are trying to accomplish and what their belief systems are.  I went to a few but PETA took the cake.  I won't go into it here but you owe it to yourself to get on their website and read what they espouse.  It will curl your hair.  
The point of my topic is that I think we can become complaisant here talking to our friends, those who believe as we do.  Organizations like PETA are serious about shutting us down, both hunters AND fishermen.  Don't take our rights for granted, we are in a fight.  Take the time to educate non hunters about all we do for the animals and the enviornment they live in.  I bought a new camera today and told the woman selling it to me that I would be taking it on my bear hunt next month.  She frowned and told me not to shoot the pretty bears.  I spent the next several minutes explaining to her why I hunt and how much hunters love the game we persue and being in the woods.  I REALLY think it made a difference and when I left she told me that she had never thought of hunting that way and good luck.  One person at a time is how we must fight the anti-hunting radicals.  The non-hunting public is the battle ground.

[vermonster13]

I agree 100%.

[goodolboy94]

I wish we could change the way antihunters thought but some peoples ignorance level is so high they will never understand why it is imporant not just from a biological view but also an economic view if hunting was banned some how that would put such a dent in the economy. i personaly probably buy enough stuff from a few companies to at least keep there lights on and im one person imagine if the entire hunting community gun guys and compounders included just halted all purchases for hunting equipment. And isnt there more imporant things to worry bout these days then keeping people who hunt

[Horne Shooter]

The thing to remember is that we have right on our side.  The arguement can be won, keep things on a factual basis and get them away from the emotional.  Some will never understand but there are many who just are ignorant and if each of us change a few of these a year it will snowball.

[McDave]

"The non-hunting public is the battle ground."

You're absolutely right about that.  It's just like elections: the people who believe in you will always vote for you; the people who hate you will never vote for you, but the people in the middle are the ones who determine whether you get elected or not.

Even though they are annoying, no time should be spent on the anti-hunters since it just further polarizes them and does no good.

On the other hand, it is useful to spend some time talking with non-hunters, since most people in this country believe in preserving other peoples' individual liberties, so long as they aren't contrary to their own moral values.  Most people eat meat and can be convinced that there is nothing wrong with hunting for your own meat, even if that is something they would have no interest in doing themselves.

Most non-hunters, and some hunters too, for that matter, would find it difficult to see the morality in hunting game you don't intend to eat.  There is all the logic in the world why someone paying a multi-thousand dollar fee to hunt a trophy animal is a good thing for just about everyone, but I don't think it will convince one non-hunter to support us.

As was mentioned, it doesn't hurt to point out the contributions that hunters make to the environment and to the economy with their fees and purchases, although I don't think this is a strong enough point to sway anyone's vote one way or the other.

From my point of view, the strongest argument is that just about everyone has something they like to do that someone else would like to stop them from doing, whether it is riding motorcycles, smoking, whatever.  If we don't protect other people's rights to do things we have no interest in doing ourselves, then we can't expect them to protect our rights either.

[Horne Shooter]

McDave...really great points and right on the money. Thanks

[rbbhunt]

There is an article in the latest American Hunter magazine on talking with anti-hunters.  Everyone should read it.

[Bakes168]

Well said all of you I couldn't have soid it better.
I recently gave a speech in my high school speech class and I directed it toward informing the non-hunters. There was one anti-hunter in the class and afterward I asked her what she thought and she said she didn't hate hunting as much now.    
I wish there was more I could do to promote our sport and our passion, I think about it everyday.    
Happy Hunting
Bakes

[Allan Hundeby]

I went to PETA.org for the first time today:

 http://www.petacatalog.org/prodinfo.asp?number=AT375&variation=&aitem=5&mitem=24

 

PETA's 'No Fishing' and 'No Hunting' signs don't just say, 'No hunting allowed,' they go into depth to explain why by reminding others that animals are thinking, feeling beings who deserve respect and consideration of their interests.

Certainly being "cruel" to animals is not acceptable in our society.  But how would PETA define cruelty?  I didn't get frustrated or angry at this page - just puzzled.  I know these people obviously love animals - and that they truly believe they are doing the "right thing" by not eating animals.  But what I've never understood is...  

Why should humans act any different than any other predator in Nature?

Which worldview or mindset does their thinking come from?  Two dominant beliefs in N. America are evolutionism and creationism.  1. As an evolutionist/humanist, you believe in the survival of the fittest, where it's "Natural" for predators to kill, and erecting barriers to that behaviour does not allow "Nature" to take its course.  2. Or... as a creationist/theist, you're given "dominion" over animals, so there's no explanation there, either.  What other worldview's might support PETA's approach?  Are these people simply squeamish at the thought of anything dying?  (I have close friends who don't like thinking of their "steak" as "Bessie", so should we put these signs up to shame wild predators away from hunting too?    )

I know in a fight you're always supposed to "know your enemy", but I can't "get inside the head" of somebody at PETA.  Can somebody enlighten me?

rbbhunt, could you summarize the article for us, please?

[Brian Krebs]

I think in the case of someone that has declared themselves to be an anti-hunter; and a vegan...we probably have a low percentage chance of ever changing their minds.

 I have a buddy whose daughter is nearly 40; and she is a vegan; and totally against hunting. He has hunted since way before she was born; and has heard all the facts from my friend and myself.

 She cannot though accept killing things. If you ask about the rain forest being cut down to grow soy... or the effects of herbicides and pesticides involved with growing plants- she just shuts up and goes home.

 Her mind is made up; and that is that.

I think in a lot of these situations; the anti-hunter has to either get loud or walk away.. because they just don't want to think about it.

 Brain cells need animal proteins....

[Allan Hundeby]

Thanks, Brian.  I still would like to know how a vegan explains all the killing that goes on in the wild - in "Mother Nature"... and why humans should act different if we're a part of that natural ecosystem.  It's not enough for me to just believe "they just don't want to think about it," because that doesn't explain their motivation.

[Brian Krebs]

Your right to pursue that Allan; gotta find whats broken before you can fix it..

[John3]

These PETA types are over educated, suburban sub-division dwelling free thinkers...LOL

That is an easy lifestyle and thier choices/causes reflect that. What do you think the PETA people would "support" after they had missed 15 to 18 meals? Do you think the bunny would be a feeling, thinking being... Or would it wind up in a pot?

[John3]

I forgot to add that my strategy against anit's is to always be a "role-model" for traditional bowhunting.

I know that my time and calories are wasted getting into hunting discussions with these types; but I do love the look on their faces when I tear apart their logic.
I never get flustered by their bullsh** when in a discussion. Do you know the definition of a close minded animal killer?  Answer: any person who is winning an argument with a tree hugger.  LOL

[Brian Krebs]

It came to mind a statement made on a blog online on the Hailey/Sun Valley newspaper.

 The subject was the proposed wolf hunt; and the writer was an anti-hunter.  Her argument against hunting the wolves was:'we need the wolves - because after we outlaw hunting.. we will need wolves; to kill the animals- that will eat the all the flowers.. when they get hungry'.

 Not kidding you. That is what she said.

 Does that help you to understand the mindset?

[WidowEater]

PETA

What can I say?

Im going to leave it at this:  I have no problem with vegetarians, vegans, no red meat, etc.  But I do have a problem with anti hunting.  (obviously)  Where I hunt is right next to a major MI highway.  The deer are way overpopulated.  My dad and I try to manage our hunting property with as much care as possible given th ecircumstances.  There was a time when you could get unlimited doe tags in my county.  There were also times when between us and some of our relatives we shot over thirty deer off of 12 acres.

But every year the number of deer we saw killed on the highway stayed the same.

PETA is a caricature of itself.  They will saturate the public with videos of inhumane treatment of chickens or what they do to hogs at the slaughterhouse.  True nasty things go on at those places and if a vegetarian chooses that as their reason to stay away from meat that is fine but if they do they better at least consider eating venison or some other wild game because it was never subjected to that treatment.  It ate natural food (some of the crops out there are treated though) and was processed in about the best place possible for meat to be processed.  Either by yourself or from a butcher specializing in wild game that is not nearly subjected to as many of the horrible things as mass producing slaughterhouses.

MMMMMM now theres some food for thought.

[HNTN4ELK]

Anti-hunters as most have noted are not realistic, and for the most closed minded. Not being a psychologist, but understanding psychology, most antis are not bad people, just mis-informed. There have always been the closed minded types, saying they were right, everyone else was wrong, and that the earth was flat, and the sun revolved around the earth.

Facts, biology and real science have no bearing on them, and by anthropomorphising animals they feel a closer mis-guided kinship to them.

By not understanding that all life is intertwined, and interdependent, instead of interfamilial, the basics of life and the process of some consuming the others and those consumptors being in turn consumed and absorbed in the end is lost to them.

I had the pleasure of a debate with a bunny hugger a while back as he expounded, that there was no way man was superior to any other animal. The hubris of the thought, he said he found revolting.

It kind of took the wind out his sails when I asked if his berkinstocks were made by man or the cow whose skin they were composed of? Whether his t-shirt and jeans were made by man or the genetically altered cotton plant from which the fibers grew?

Both the cow and cotton plant were at one time, like us, living organisms.
I could not recall the last time I saw a cat or rabbit make a pair of shoes, or t-shirt from scratch.

The irony only served to enrage him, poor guy, and we did not even get to really discuss hunting before he stalked away.....poor lad.

Sometimes talking to an anti is like wrestling a hog in the mud, after they get really tired they find out the hog likes it.

Gary Carvajal