Let's Go Mammoth Hunting

[SuburbanFarmer]

What I'm seeing is a hard conflict between the Natural and Society. We have this cognitive dissonance everywhere in modern life, and it's enough to make you crazy, if you let it.

I can't wrap my head around going out in the woods to murder an animal not for food or training and then going back to a shit office cubicle and constant repression of emotion, and pretending that you 'got it all out'. It's never 'out'. It's part of what we are.

So you get DSL in here, ranting about how killing anything relates to abortions, trying to shock us into empathizing with cell clusters, Otern giving a reasoned but wishy-washy point of view which leans toward total anarchy in the woods, Apeman tying it to bugs because 'something died', and Monte against hunting almost entirely. Carlus is difficult to read, but I think he's coming down on "life is shit deal with it".

All have good points, in a way, but it shows clearly how confused we all are, by what we're supposed to be. I just feel the need to point it out.

We have no good answer for this, and it's been ignored by society for too long, imo. The emotional need to be human is being repressed in our society, and it's leading to bizarre domestic mass shootings, rapes, and other crime. People are literally losing their minds over this - some more than others.

[Montegriffo]

Cruelty is not taking every reasonable precaution possible to ensure there's no unnecessary suffering.

But what's a reasonable precaution for me, might not be a reasonable precaution for you, even though we're both reasonable. It's all subjective.

And in the end, most hunting leads to unnecessary suffering, since most people don't need to hunt. Most people don't even need to eat meat. It might be just a moment of unnecessary suffering, with a good shot. Or it could be hours, with a bad shot. But it would still, by some people be regarded as unnecessary suffering.

Stabbing with a spear and leaving to die a painful death over night is definitely cruelty.

I don't know why they left it to die over night. Maybe they were afraid to go after an injured animal in dense forest, and it would therefore not be reasonable to track it at that time? Maybe they didn't want to track it down for a finishing shot, because it would destroy the "spear kill"? If the latter, it would definitely be cynical, and I don't approve of it, but cruel? Naah.

I doubt "fuck bears, let them suffer" was the hunter's motivation for hunting with a spear. That would be cruelty.

Unnecessary suffering is obviously very subjective, that's why we have laws to define what is considered such.
Shooting a dear from too far away to ensure a head shot is unnecessary, firing a machine gun from a helicopter at wild boar like Flip found so amusing is outright cruel and stabbing a bear in the gut without having the courage to follow it and kill it is cowardly.

[Otern]

I'm not against hunting, in fact I think if you want to eat meat you should be encouraged to kill your own animal at least once in your life.
As with abattoirs, I believe that laws ensuring a quick and humane death are a requirement in a civilised society.
If your bow can guarantee to be as accurate and deadly as a rifle then ok but I doubt that is realistically possible in most circumstances.

Bows have obvious disadvantages to rifles. But they also have advantages. Bow hunters shoot from closer range, so they're less likely to shoot the wrong animal. They're also quiet, so there's less unnecessary suffering to all the other animals in the vicinity.

Close range, and with the right type of arrowhead, a bow can probably be just as lethal as some rifle calibers. They won't be as accurate as a rifle, but depending on the shooter, they can be accurate enough to be a reasonable hunting weapon.

[apeman]

Apeman tying it to bugs because 'something died', and Monte against hunting almost entirely.

My theory is that folks are hardwired to get upset about mammals and cute animals. See, e.g., Harambe; Cecil the Lion.

Snakes, bugs, scorpions, chris christie, no one gives a shit if they die/suffer. If that dude speared a snake and it ran off and died of blood loss,

My father in law stopped bow hunting because he shot a deer and it got away, likely suffering to death. And I've seen this man drinking Busch, sitting in a canoe shooting beavers and watching em float down the river (they were flooding his driveway)

[Montegriffo]

What I'm seeing is a hard conflict between the Natural and Society. We have this cognitive dissonance everywhere in modern life, and it's enough to make you crazy, if you let it.

I can't wrap my head around going out in the woods to murder an animal not for food or training and then going back to a shit office cubicle and constant repression of emotion, and pretending that you 'got it all out'. It's never 'out'. It's part of what we are.

So you get DSL in here, ranting about how killing anything relates to abortions, trying to shock us into empathizing with cell clusters, Otern giving a reasoned but wishy-washy point of view which leans toward total anarchy in the woods, Apeman tying it to bugs because 'something died', and Monte against hunting almost entirely. Carlus is difficult to read, but I think he's coming down on "life is shit deal with it".

All have good points, in a way, but it shows clearly how confused we all are, by what we're supposed to be. I just feel the need to point it out.

We have no good answer for this, and it's been ignored by society for too long, imo. The emotional need to be human is being repressed in our society, and it's leading to bizarre domestic mass shootings, rapes, and other crime. People are literally losing their minds over this - some more than others.

No I fully approve of hunting, I don't approve of it being done purely for sport with the meat wasted and I think it should be done as humanely as possible.
I'm not a squeamish vegetarian, I've gutted, plucked, skinned and even killed animals for other people to eat. I think wild meat is not only healthier but often more humane than farmed meat. I just don't want to see suffering if it can be avoided.

[C-Mag]

What I'm seeing is a hard conflict between the Natural and Society. We have this cognitive dissonance everywhere in modern life, and it's enough to make you crazy, if you let it.

I can't wrap my head around going out in the woods to murder an animal not for food or training and then going back to a shit office cubicle and constant repression of emotion, and pretending that you 'got it all out'. It's never 'out'. It's part of what we are.

So you get DSL in here, ranting about how killing anything relates to abortions, trying to shock us into empathizing with cell clusters, Otern giving a reasoned but wishy-washy point of view which leans toward total anarchy in the woods, Apeman tying it to bugs because 'something died', and Monte against hunting almost entirely. Carlus is difficult to read, but I think he's coming down on "life is shit deal with it".

All have good points, in a way, but it shows clearly how confused we all are, by what we're supposed to be. I just feel the need to point it out.

We have no good answer for this, and it's been ignored by society for too long, imo. The emotional need to be human is being repressed in our society, and it's leading to bizarre domestic mass shootings, rapes, and other crime. People are literally losing their minds over this - some more than others.

+1
Good Post

'Life is Shit' not really what I'm getting at, my points are that man is merely an animal, we've removed ourselves from our natural world, and we view nature through the lense of human societal interaction and it doesn't fit. Man is better when he experiences nature, preferably untamed nature. Man is better when he challenges himself. Nature is a great avenue for that, standing in line for the latest iPhone is not.

I'm OK with tribal and primal man, be it Africans hunting elephants, the Makha whales or Jack Donovan wrestling in the mud with his pals.

[C-Mag]

Apeman tying it to bugs because 'something died', and Monte against hunting almost entirely.

My theory is that folks are hardwired to get upset about mammals and cute animals. See, e.g., Harambe; Cecil the Lion.

I disagree completely. I feel people are programmed to be upset over mammals being killed.

[apeman]

[Montegriffo]

I'm not against hunting, in fact I think if you want to eat meat you should be encouraged to kill your own animal at least once in your life.
As with abattoirs, I believe that laws ensuring a quick and humane death are a requirement in a civilised society.
If your bow can guarantee to be as accurate and deadly as a rifle then ok but I doubt that is realistically possible in most circumstances.

Bows have obvious disadvantages to rifles. But they also have advantages. Bow hunters shoot from closer range, so they're less likely to shoot the wrong animal. They're also quiet, so there's less unnecessary suffering to all the other animals in the vicinity.

Close range, and with the right type of arrowhead, a bow can probably be just as lethal as some rifle calibers. They won't be as accurate as a rifle, but depending on the shooter, they can be accurate enough to be a reasonable hunting weapon.

I'm sorry but if you are far enough away to hit the wrong animal you really shouldn't be taking the shot.
If you are using a bow to make it more enjoyable for yourself that is risking unnecessary suffering for the wrong reason. If you are using a bow because you are hungry and have no access to a rifle or ammo that is a necessary risk.

[C-Mag]

Man is instinctively a hunter. Not as much amongst females, but definitely for males. Plenty of science behind it too.