Morally, hunting deer for sport is no different than hunting people. [More]I dunno, pally--why don't you try hunting people to stop it and let's see?
Humans need population control more than deer
Josh Briggs must be racist and xenophobic then, because a 1.8 total fertility rate for non-Hispanic white women means such couples aren't even replacing themselves--and that doesn't even specify the race of women's partners. Maybe, since he sees no difference between hunting people and hunting deer, he can effect a little population control among the groups he thinks "need" it?
These Ingrid Newkirk types (but he swears he's not!) have a hell of a lot of gall talking morality.
I counted five dead deer on the interstate over the weekend. I can only hope they were hit by something really big and no people were hurt. Ever felt a deer's muscles? Like steel cables.
ReplyDeleteThey were forced to cross highways and forage in subdivisions because of drought and a large population. I've seen a herd of ten trot up a residential street.
Man is their natural predator now. The alternative is overpopulation, disease and starvation.
Venison -- when you take into account time, equipment, licenses and all -- is about the most expensive meat there is today.
Without hunters, the government hires snipers to thin the herd. Deer are killed either way. Mr Briggs cannot be what he says he is.
Mr. Briggs needs to put down the crack pipe and seek professional medical help.
ReplyDeleteHe doesn't even address the fact that everything we consume for nourishment was once alive, plant life included. So the 'sport' of killing a deer is somehow morally unjustified in this modern age, as opposed to what? Slaughterhouses killing all manner of animal for human consumption? I'll take a bow or rifle killed whitetail over the hormoned up GMO shit that comes from the grocery store.
ReplyDelete