Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well being out in the garden usually produces no varnit what so ever. I won a battle, but not thee war ...yet.
88 can weave up a storm. I think he is, or was a legal beagal. I suspect his arm chair is littered with dents from the rattling his ribs have created over time in debates laughing.
88 mentioned being a census taker in the target shooting drivel.
I am glad he does not hunt or own a gun! Would anyone feel safe around a hunter who kept bringing up "accidental discharge"?
I think 88 is a bit more than a census taker or he was. I think he was a lawyer once. he may be retired. I know we went around aw\efull for a ong time. So far as he was concerned I was the most stupid man on earth.
If he shoots any i don't know it. He is in here for his argument and probably that's all. I think of him fondly as a pet.
88 mentioned being a census taker in the target shooting drivel.
I am glad he does not hunt or own a gun! Would anyone feel safe around a hunter who kept bringing up "accidental discharge"?
It was not me who brought up "accidental discharge", I only mentioned it, and in fact ridiculed the idea, in direct response to:
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinynot
Even though this is not a debate forum and is about hobbies I have to disagree with your statement. Handling a gun in an isolated place is absolutely more risky than bird watching, mushroom hunting, etc. because there is the possibility the gun may jam and discharge unexpectedly, etc. and shoot the person who is carrying it. I highly doubt a mushroom or a bird will put a bullet in a person.
Mac muz, in view of the above, you are nowhere near being the front-runner in my "stupidest man on earth" competition.
88, That's good news I guess. I figure yer part devil @ 10%, part devils advocate @ 10%, part dawg @ 10%, part lawyer at 50%, another 50% libral 50% more consevitive, and so you add up to 180% or 180/10ths ......
I did travel right thru 7 out of 5 deserts once!
bet I am runner up now!
It was not me who brought up "accidental discharge", I only mentioned it, and in fact ridiculed the idea, in direct response to:
Mac muz, in view of the above, you are nowhere near being the front-runner in my "stupidest man on earth" competition.
Your response is quite juvenile, as usual. My statement didn't need ridicule, that is just how you crawdad on topics. I'm not in the running of your competition because I am a woman. But you might be in my shim or herm smartest dumbest wigger contest.
Your response is quite juvenile, as usual. My statement didn't need ridicule, that is just how you crawdad on topics. I'm not in the running of your competition because I am a woman. But you might be in my shim or herm smartest dumbest wigger contest.
Be careful. You just revealed more about your own character, than about mine.
Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with people hunting animals for the meat and/or hide. After all, the native Americans did it. It's just the sport/trophy side of hunting that I disagree with.
The sport side of hunting has been with us since the cavemen. This includes the American Indians. Heck, my cat thinks its a sport.
I understand the sentiment of some that shooting an animal for sport is immoral. And I understand that hunters use the "meat" argument in defense of this. Both sides are wrong imho.
First of all, if we can agree that hunting is less cruel than what cows, pigs, and chickens go thru, and we can agree that consuming meat is an individual's choice, then whether one takes pleasure in the hunt or not is nobody's business but the hunters. My personal code of ethics is that I must eat what I shoot, and that while I enjoy the hunt tremendously, the kill is just the inevetable conclusion. The pleasure of the kill is only in so much as it is the succesful conclusion to the hunt. There is always a bit of remorse.
On the other hand my fellow hunters, having been on the defensive for a couple decades now, will use all kinds of rational justifications for why they hunt. Its not about filling the freezer, and its not about animal population control, its about sport. This is nothing to be ashamed of. In fact, if we step back from the sport argument we may lose some ground in our defense, since the other two mentioned benefits can be had without hunting.
I think there is something primal that draws some of us to hunting. Those that don't have this urge will never understand it. It is one of a couple such urges I can think of that are worth preserving.
The sport side of hunting has been with us since the cavemen. This includes the American Indians. Heck, my cat thinks its a sport.
I understand the sentiment of some that shooting an animal for sport is immoral. And I understand that hunters use the "meat" argument in defense of this. Both sides are wrong imho.
First of all, if we can agree that hunting is less cruel than what cows, pigs, and chickens go thru, and we can agree that consuming meat is an individual's choice, then whether one takes pleasure in the hunt or not is nobody's business but the hunters. My personal code of ethics is that I must eat what I shoot, and that while I enjoy the hunt tremendously, the kill is just the inevetable conclusion. The pleasure of the kill is only in so much as it is the succesful conclusion to the hunt. There is always a bit of remorse.
On the other hand my fellow hunters, having been on the defensive for a couple decades now, will use all kinds of rational justifications for why they hunt. Its not about filling the freezer, and its not about animal population control, its about sport. This is nothing to be ashamed of. In fact, if we step back from the sport argument we may lose some ground in our defense, since the other two mentioned benefits can be had without hunting.
I think there is something primal that draws some of us to hunting. Those that don't have this urge will never understand it. It is one of a couple such urges I can think of that are worth preserving.
Exactly. It is about sport and I find hunting to be quite offensive.
Exactly. It is about sport and I find hunting to be quite offensive.
If you have never hunted, then how can you give a TRUE and HONEST answer? I also find your answer quite offensive, becasue you are judging people on what they do and that is something you cannot judge, because you have never hunted.......
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But you might be in my shim or herm smartest dumbest wigger contest.
