1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Why no one takes PETA seriously.

Discussion in 'Lounge' started by Pagan, Sep 3, 2009.

Tags:
  1. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Ah yes.

    It is in fact very controlled. Controlled to ensure hunting dollars are brought into an area. Hunting conservation, conserves the ability to hunt, period.

    The claim is that without hunting, the deer will take over, so bam, the solution to the problem, is hunting. Yet, it doesn't actually solve the problem. It puts a band aid on it, while maintaining revenue streams. Point is, if hunters cared about the actual populations, as they claim, then they'd work for a solution that finally solved the problem, not a "solution" that continues hunting.

    So, if you (the "yous" going forward aren't you specifically L2G) can claim hunting is for conservation and keeping the populations low, yet it does neither, considering encroachment continues and the numbers go back up, you now have to finally admit that you actually derive enjoyment from killing. If you do, that's fine, I just think its time to end this silly conservation excuse, because it simply isn't true, and the numbers back me up.
     
  2. like2god

    like2god Typical white person Luxury Box

    19,529
    9,219
    113
    Nov 22, 2007
    CNY
    You go from one conspiracy theory to another :pity:

    If I remember correctly, the last time we had this conversation you used a 20 year old article to "prove" your accusations and as it turned out, the article actually refuted your claims a little further down from the sentence that you cherrypicked. Yet everything is about money and bloodlust in your mind, you view everything in extremes and it's rather pointless to discuss anything with you as a result. You obviously have your mind made up that hunting is all about killing and profit, nothing that anyone can say or show you is going to change that. That's perfectly alright, but be honest and upfront when it comes to your intentions. You go to great lengths to distance yourself from groups like PETA, yet your view is just as extreme as theirs when it comes to this topic.

    This is my last post in the thread, I have no intention of getting involved in yet another circular conversation.
     
    BigDogsHunt and calphin like this.
  3. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    That's horsecrap.

    I don't agree with hunting, that hardly makes me a PETA person.

    I've repeatedly said I hate the way they do things and that it actually hurts the argument. Your accusations are uncalled for. What you're saying about me is no different than me saying your a Klan member because neither of you like Obama. (Which I'm not doing)

    Now on to what you were saying about me argument. Can any of you show me a stitch of evidence to refute what I'm saying? Of course not. Yeah I pulled an old article, that showed serious money being brought into an area from hunting. Do you think that amount went down? Of course not. Have the populations gone down to the point where hunting isn't needed? Of course not. You've never shown any evidence to refute that.
     
  4. anlgp

    anlgp ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A

    pofo in 5..4..3..2..1..
     
  5. Frumundah Finnatic

    Frumundah Finnatic U Mad Miami?

    39,245
    10,681
    0
    Dec 2, 2007
    Miami FL
    I thought of something, in nature the sick, stupid(this especially applies to humans as well), old and injured are picked off by natural selection, the strong and healthy survive to pass on their genes.

    The ideal kill would be a deer who is strong and healthy right? so by killing the "fittest" and letting the weak pass on their genes arent hunters effectively hurting the population?



    I never said it was a good suggestion.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  6. calphin

    calphin deadly at 250 yards!!

    How do you know we kill the strongest, fittest or the most healthy? or as fd would say, the alpha buck??? There is no way of knowing. If the truth were known, the strongest, biggest, baddest bucks are nocturnal, and hunting is not allowed at night. I have made my final say on this subject, as we have beat this drum to death. I have my opinion, and others have theirs. Nobody is going to change mine, and I am not going to change theirs, so put the subject to rest.
     
  7. Crappy Tipper

    Crappy Tipper AKA Hero13

    5,865
    2,682
    0
    Aug 23, 2008
    It doesn't work that way. If there are 10 bucks in any given region (just a round number) and a hunter is lucky enough to shoot the top breeding male (which is certainly not the most frequent result as a lot more 2x's and 3x's get taken and I guarantee they are not the ranking male in any region) there would be the #2 & #3 buck to fight it out for the doe. The doe would not go from potentially mating with the #1 to an easy lay for the #10. The oldest and weakest will still be just that and they will lose out to another younger stronger buck.

    I'm not a hunter either, I never have hunted in my life, but I do know enough about it and understand it enough to know that survival of the fittest still very much applies.
     
  8. calphin

    calphin deadly at 250 yards!!

    we have a WINNER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    hot damn some one gets it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:hi5:
     
    like2god and Crappy Tipper like this.
  9. Frumundah Finnatic

    Frumundah Finnatic U Mad Miami?

    39,245
    10,681
    0
    Dec 2, 2007
    Miami FL
    Well I had thought that you can tell from the size of the buck or if there were other visual clues, (the animal has a noticeable limp, it looks malnourished, it shows signs of age etc.)

    I admittedly dont know alot about the subject, which is why I asked the question in the first place, its nothing personal against you or any other hunter here.

    Many thanks to CT for his answer BTW.

    I guess animals are people too! Or at least when it comes to women who dont put out.
     
    Crappy Tipper and calphin like this.
  10. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Its what is targeted. And yes, it absolutely does work that way.

    The buck with the best rack is generally the yes, alpha buck. Taking out the leader of the herd, is bad for the herd regardless of how many young bucks are there to take over. The alpha got that way because of smarts, strength and genetics.

    Young males will either try to mate or fight the alpha to earn the right to mate. Many young males will just try to mount a doe, and the alpha stops it. Unless of course there's no alpha. Then there is, in fact, a short time of indiscriminate breeding and fights by bucks who probably aren't qualified taking over the herd. Which does lead to increasing population numbers. Now, you have an inexperienced buck leading the herd. That most certainly contributes to deer invading land with people and eating garbage and gardens. Its easy food.

    On top of all that, there's the over hunting of the deer's natural predators.

    Regardless of tradition, human hunters do not follow the natural laws of hunting. They do, in fact, target the biggest, best and strongest, which is absolutely counter to the natural way.

    I understand stopping hunting will cause an even bigger explosion in populations, that will result in more deer dying of starvation and being hit by cars. But I see it as a necessary evil for the populations to naturally decline to actual sustainable numbers for a given area. Now two of the most avid hunters on this site have accused me of being a PETA person, simply because I think hunting has created a cyclical problem, that only perpetuates the "need" for more hunting. Its true and not a secret I'm an advocate of animal welfare, yet I'm willing to let the deer die naturally if horribly, to get to safe numbers. I'm not a fool, I know an instant death by bullet is more "humane" then dying by starvation, but its what needs to happen if the very real problem of deer overpopulation is to finally be ended. That's not very PETA. However, most hunters will tell you they aren't for any other method of population control other than hunting. So who's really being close minded? Get the population numbers down, to reasonable numbers, then start hunting again...as long as you hunt the way predators do...going after the weak, old, young or infirm. <---If that can't be done, then my point is further proven.

    I'd also like to see hunters be honest about what they do, once and for all. Every part of hunting (outdoors, camaraderie, etc.) can be had by doing other things than hunting, save one...the killing of an animal. To continue to do it, and claim there's no satisfaction in that part of it, is beyond reasonable. Now I now there are people out there, who hunt for food because they've not the means to buy their food like most of America, to them I say fine. You got to eat. But to those who simply like venison, then I say tough, its causing a problem.

    Simply put, nature has ways to balance itself when left unmolested by man. When we interfere, we screw it up, populations increase or become extinct, and we alter the behavior of the inhabitants of the natural land.
     
  11. tinytown50

    tinytown50 Active Member

    328
    139
    43
    Dec 7, 2007
    montana
    I was nearly killed this past June swerving to miss a cow elk that walked out in front of me. I was doing the speed limit of 65 mph and rolled my car at least twice (I passed out and can remember the 1st two rolls) and you claim my suffering is a necessary evil for the overall welfare to this species by the elk walking out in front of me? Since when does the well-being and safety of an animal supersedes that of a human?

    As mentioned in the above statement there is a very real need for hunting, if not to control a specific population of animals, it is to ensure the safety of people traveling on our highways. I wished at that moment I wrecked and was nearly killed that more elk were harvested that past season.
     
    calphin and like2god like this.
  12. like2god

    like2god Typical white person Luxury Box

    19,529
    9,219
    113
    Nov 22, 2007
    CNY
    Glad to know that you survived the accident. :hi5:

    How is the recovery going?
     
    calphin and tinytown50 like this.
  13. BigDogsHunt

    BigDogsHunt Enough talk...prove it!

    22,422
    9,819
    0
    Nov 27, 2007
    DC Metro Area
    Interfere??? One should realize that Hunters Hunt...its what they enjoy doing. Therefore, they as a group, have done more for making sure the species they enjoy HUNTING prosper (Deer, Turkey, Water Fowl, Rabbit, etc). They have invested time, money, and resources to preserve and increase what makes the Sport and Enjoyment of putting FOOD on their table, and the table of food banks and shelters, including non-food items like pelts/fur.

    One should also realize, all the ANIMAL "Rights" groups combined have not contributed to the rebuilding of decreased Animal populations at the same time. Natural selection by no means guarantees that a given species or poplulation would continue. However, Hunters INTEREST lie in actually that...making sure species they want to HUNT continue.

    Its not very hard to understand.

    One can be against HUNTING, fine....but too not comprehend how HUNTERS conserve and aide in the management and growth and success of a RESOURCE they need in order to HUNT is perplexing.

    Animals are on this earth to provide what MAN needs. Whether in a Food Store or by cutting-out-the-middleman and doing it yourself by HUNTING, FISHING, TRAPING. Domesticated Animals are the lucky ones (hahaha)...if Cats and Dogs tasted better and werent so darn loveable, we have tags and permits for them too. Too bad the Fish, Deer, Turkey, Fowl, Cow (Milk/Meat), Turkey/Chicken (meat and eggs), and Pig/Hog (Ham/Bacon) serve a greater good than just being cute and cuddly.

    Anyone wants to see them alive, cool, visit a Zoo, Wildlife Perserve, go on Safari, lots of choices.
    Anyone that wants to eat them, one can order off a menu and have a Waiter or Waitress bring them to you and pay the bill and leave after you have enjoyed it that way.
    Or others pick up a tool of the trade (Rifle, Musket & Powder, or Bow & Arrow) that lets you enjoy the HUNT and provide for it themselves through their own skill and talent.
     
  14. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I too am glad you're ok.

    However, we weren't discussing the ways to keep them off the roads. I'm sure there are other ways besides hunting.

    I mean let's be honest here, we have hunting and well, your accident still happened. That should further reinforce the fact, hunting isn't working.
     
  15. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Wow, non of that had anything really to do with what I'm saying. But great rant anyway.
     
  16. tinytown50

    tinytown50 Active Member

    328
    139
    43
    Dec 7, 2007
    montana
    Answer why it is better that my accident happened as a neccessary evil so you can go to sleep at night knowing that things are working them out without man interfering? I have children and it is okay with you that they could have grown up without a father because of a neccessary evil.

    The point I am trying to make that you have seemed to have missed is there is a safety issue to not controlling their numbers. I was also trying to put a human face to this debate.

    Not all quotas are ever filled (number of animals havested), hence more accidents, and to say my accident happened even though their is hunting to justify your arguement is stretching it to be polite. I say haverest more and my accident could have been prevented.

    Now to state there are other means of keeping wildlife off of the roads besides hunting them I will agree with you on that. But is any of them realistic, cost effective, or even achieveable?

    And finally answer the question I brought up to begin with:
    Since when does the well-being and safety of an animal supersedes that of a human?
     
    calphin likes this.
  17. tinytown50

    tinytown50 Active Member

    328
    139
    43
    Dec 7, 2007
    montana
    I recovered fine. I busted out my left ear drum from the side air bag going off. Some cuts and one long bruise that stretched from my left shoulder to my right hip.

    The kicker was I just made my 1st payment on the vehicle. I had it less than a month. It was a 2009 Toyota Yaris and the main reason I swerved and not hit the elk.

    To add insulte to injury, when the state trooper took my report at the ER, he said there was a large herd of elk grazing right beside my vehicle. It did not even phase them.
     
    AbideN703, calphin and like2god like this.
  18. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Again, let me say I'm sorry for your accident.

    However, twisting what I said into me saying it was ok for you to get into an accident is beyond ridiculous. I was talking specifically about the starvation part of the equation.

    I've not missed it. It just wasn't part of what I was discussing that you responded too. I was talking about the deer numbers. Which by the way, you've not refuted a single thing I've said.

    Was the quota filled that year? Do you know? Maybe the elk was running across the street because it was being chased by a hunter and his dogs or heard the gun shot of another one.

    From some things I've heard, yes. I'll try to provide some links in awhile.

    To be frank, that was the first time you asked that question. When and where did I ever say animals were more important or superseded humans? I didn't.

    This is exactly the point I brought up earlier. I'm not a PETA member. I eat meat. I'm against hunting, not because I think its cruel, but because I think its caused problems, which no one has refuted yet. Now even though I've stated that more than once, the opposition, still thinks because I'm against hunting its about animals being safe and free. Therein lies the problem, people only hear or believe what they want to regardless of the facts in their face. And they do that with little old me on a message board. Imagine the amount of ignoring that goes on, when its about something they call tradition.
     
  19. Frumundah Finnatic

    Frumundah Finnatic U Mad Miami?

    39,245
    10,681
    0
    Dec 2, 2007
    Miami FL
    how is pulling a trigger a sport? at least with a bow it takes alot of skill.

    :crapstrom:
     
  20. tinytown50

    tinytown50 Active Member

    328
    139
    43
    Dec 7, 2007
    montana
    You said it was a neccessary evil for them being hit by cars, I am not twisting anything I took the quote directly from you. I see that you have to seperate sentences. If they are two seperate ideas entirely start another paragraph. It all boils down to the "neccessary evil" comment in realtion to being hit by cars. If your point was to have them starve to death as a neccessary evil, do not include being hit by cars, clarify it more. By you saying that it is a neccessary evil to be hit by cars for the overall well being to the animals to lessen their numbers, you are putting the animal 1st and not taking into consideration the driver of that particular vehicle.


    I asked that question in my initial post. Again, by you saying that it is a neccessary evil to be hit by cars for the overall well being to the animals to lessen their numbers, you are putting the animal 1st and not taking into consideration the driver of that particular vehicle.



    By asking those questions in the mannerism that you are implying that I do not know what I am speaking of is bothersome.

    The accident happened at 4:00 am in june of this year. So hunters chasing the animal with dogs, which is illegal and really not logical at that time of day and time of year is a stretch. There is no trophy status haveresting a cow elk and plus consuming them during this time of year is not all that healthy. And last but not least, the quota for my area where the accident occurred was not filled. A reason why I brought that up in the first place. They even extended the season around here a couple extra weeks and still did not fill the quota. Less animals, the less likely they are on the road.

    What is there to refute? I was speaking about deer/elk numbers also. There is too many of them. It is a safety issue when you have to many of them in a residential area or near a highway. One is too many for either of those to cases. People do get hurt by all forms of wildlife when they encounter them in either of those two cases.

    Along with the safety issue lets discuss alligators as an example. Once upon a time they where nearly extinct in FL and in 1973 they were added to the Endangered Species Act. Their numbers improved to where there is over 1 million of them in FL now. Since their climb in numbers has their not be a direct realition to rise in attacks also? Wouldn't it be adviseable to control their numbers to decrease the number of attacks? How many people have been killed from alligator attacks? I know one year there was 3, but I need to look it up and get the source. A last resort to controlling their numbers is stop encroaching on their territory. I know that is not realistic and a reason why I moved from FL in the 1st place (got sick of seeing swamps and orange grooves I grew up with being paved over and turned into 7-11's and Walgreens).
     
    BigDogsHunt, like2god and calphin like this.
  21. BigDogsHunt

    BigDogsHunt Enough talk...prove it!

    22,422
    9,819
    0
    Nov 27, 2007
    DC Metro Area
    Sorry, I interpreted your posts to imply that Hunting and Hunters did not serve a purpose in areas concerning Conservation of what they Hunt. I further thought your implication therefore was that Hunting should be discontinued/banded/outlawed.

    If wrong in my interpretation I apologize, but my "great rant" clearly identifies someone who may feel that way to be a fool! Glad its not you, this time:wink2:.

    You would have to ask someone who hunts with Rifle or Black Powder that question, and then ask someone who hunts with a Bow and Arrow if more, less, or same skill set applies when it comes to rackin' and stackin'!
     
    calphin likes this.
  22. AbideN703

    AbideN703 Yes, I'd hit it

    2,532
    925
    0
    Jan 7, 2008
    Springfield, Virginia
    Of course it was some piece of **** teenager just looking for kicks. It's almost a guaranteed certainty
     

Share This Page