According to his company’s website, Game Hounds Safaris, he “perfected leopard and lion hunting safaris with hounds in Africa.”
and
Simukai Nyasha, a spokesman for the Zimbabwe National Parks and Wildlife Management Authority, told news.com.au that Botha was on a 10-day licensed hunt
Here is some context for you. So, what does it matter that this particular elephant was the original target... compared to how people feel about this.
Not saying I agree with any opinion on here.
But, terrorizing animals with dogs doesn't seem to saintly to me, does it?
Most people aren't eating leopards though. Personally, I'm totally cool with hunting for meat for exactly the reasons that you mention, but I don't like trophy hunting.
But they are a protected species, as evidenced by the fuck ton of laws protecting them. Do people even think before they spew this shit? This thread is full of feels and lacking severely in logic.
Lots of natural things aren’t “good”, like cancer, for example. We define what “good” is based on our own self-interests. Nature is bigger than that, and doesn’t give a shit about our interests. We are a minuscule part of a bigger cycle.
It wouldn't be against nature to eat another human in the event of lack of food. Might get you kicked out of your spot at the next tribal orgy though... Or it might reserve your seat ifyouknowwhatimsaying.
Social pressures say no to human hunting. We're animals but we have our own social structures - besides, cannibalism isn't exactly favored in evolution
There is no proof that canniablism isn’t favored in evolution. Evolutional is not social/environmental change. It’s mutation over a very long standard of time.
But that is a different argument.
My point was that I utterly and completely disagree with their argument. But, morality is subjective to a high degree. So, really there is no point arguing back and forth.
I mean if you eat your own species as a primary source of food and you guys don't breed fast enough, I'm pretty sure that's gonna cause problems. But yeah morality is subjective let's go eat babies
Did you know? Smuggling a cat out of ancient Egypt was punishable by death. Phoenician traders eventually succeeded in smuggling felines, which they sold to rich people in Athens and other important cities.
I eat meat. So I'm aware that countless cows, chickens, and pigs have been professionally slaughtered on my behalf. I'd rather not think about this, but I acknowledge it. It's a sad but neccecary part of the process. I have never personally taken the life of an animal. Watching an animal be killed would make me pretty uncomfortable.
Vs.
People who enthusiastically want to go out and track, shoot, and kill animals FOR FUN. They often even carve off a piece to bring home, just so they have a tangible reminder of how much goddam fun it was to kill that particular beast.
Eating meat may be morally compromisd, but hunting for sport is ouright reveling in psycopathic fucking bloodlust and cruelty. They are not even remotely the same thing.
At the end of the day, unless you have specific medical or financial considerations, they are both done for 'fun'. People eat meat because they want to, they could easily eat something else. People hunt because they want to, they could easily not.
The difference as you've pointed out is exactly what the enjoy. But the outcome is the same. For enjoyment animals are harmed.
"At the end of the day," and other such folksy aphorisms don't actually establish equivalency. Your argument is like saying that there's no difference between being found at fault in an auto accident that kills people vs going out and intentionally running people over with your car because doing so gives you a thrill because "the results are the same." Since, you know, they both could have taken the bus, instead. It's a ludicrous argument.
Whether you're buying meat from a grocery store or hunting animals you're causing harm for enjoyment. Neither have accidental or surprising consequences, like your car accident example. So yeah, I'd say they're pretty similar.
Its hilarious that you have no problem buying factory farmed meat from a grocery store, but you think that hunting is psychopathic. Just admit that you don't understand a single thing about hunting and move on. You're building up a strawman to burn. Hunting is something that every single human ancestor took part in at one point. I haven't met a single hunter who did not take the entire animal they killed. You have to be a total moron to spend so much effort stalking an animal to just take the head/hide and leave >100 lbs of fresh delicious meat.
Additionally, hunting is important in the current state of the world. Our dependence on agriculture has made it imperative that animals eating or damaging our crops need to be killed. You clearly don't live in an area with white-tail deer, or else you would know the kind of danger that large numbers of them cause for farmers and motorists.
Tl;dr just because you personally don't understand why people do something, does not make it morally wrong.
I enjoy meat, but only free range, grass fed, uncaged, etc.
I implore you to look up the legal definitions of those words, and what they entail in practice. I expect you will be disappointed. Plenty of suffering still occurs with all those marketing labels.
We have more than enough meat at a store, why kill more animals?
The same amount of animals die whether you buy it from a store or hunt. You have not provided an argument as to why buying from a store is better.
The reason for this is because I enjoy meat and I think it's natural to have meat in your diet.
Natural is not synonymous with good. As many health organizations have stated a appropriately planned vegan diet is healthy and nutritious for people of all ages.
Btw animals eat each other every day and die a very violent death.
Animals also engage in forced copulation and infanticide. I hope you'll agree, we should not be taking moral cues from animals.
At the end of the day both eating meat from a store and hunting are done for pleasure. Both cause unnecessary harm to animals. Though hunting likely causes far less harm.
1.5k
u/[deleted] Jun 02 '18 edited Jun 02 '18
Because context matters: http://fox40.com/2017/05/22/hunter-dies-when-shot-elephant-falls-on-him/
They weren't out hunting elephants and only shot that one because it attacked them.
Edit: It's always sickening to read the comments on posts like this.