I f***ing say. And people with some decent morals would and do, also. 
You think that statement is somehow disagreeable? Riiiiiiight.
That video was pretty harsh. They didn’t even manage to get it in one shot at the very least. They shot it repeatedly. -_-
I say you’re a f***ing moron. And people with some decent morals would and do, also. You think that statement is somehow disagreeable? Riiiiiiight.
You’re right. They should have shot it once and let it run away wounded, right?
When hunting it’s important to make your shot count so you don’t wound an animal and have it escape. That’s why a hunter will usually aim for the area where the heart, lungs, and liver are located. This ensures that even if the bullet is off by a few inches either way it’ll hit a vital organ and the animal will quickly die. Often the animal may even run for a few minutes before dying, but they will die if the shot was placed right. In this bears case the hunters were able to shoot him again before he ran off and might have actually saved the bear a few minutes of pain.
A true hunter is not cruel. I don’t like seeing animals in pain unnecessarily so you make every effort to have a clean kill and make sure you don’t have a wounded animal escape. If you thing hunting is cruel go work in a slaughter house or something. There are way better places to focus your righteous animal-saving energies.
Awesome way to spin it. I obviously meant to make the shot count at least. Finish it quickly in one shot. Or if you only wound it the first time, finish it off with a second final shot. 5-6 shots is a very painful end.
You also just totally started throwing words into my mouth. Good times.
A slaughterhouse has terrible living conditions for animals, but at least it is for food. They could use better methods in many cases, but it’s still food. It’s not just ending the life of something for the hell of it. Or to hang their severed head on the wall. It’s just silly.
(Lastly, “righteous animal-saving energy” seems to have this ignorant arrogance undertone to it. Which this is not. I just don’t think it’s cool to go killing animals for fun.)
lmao. You appear to have a clear distaste with empathy. You border on ignorance in both your initial reply and the follow up reply. Initially “challenging” a simple statement; obviously posted on the basis of moral value, by quoting my comment, instead of ellaborating on your question’s basis and then proceeding to call me a moron for proclaiming my standpoint? I bet you support the Seal Hunt eh? If you at least can’t agree trophy hunting is cruel and needless, could you at least jump in front of a bus? 
I agree with the statement about the slaughterhouses, it’s not nice(and needs to be changed for the better for the animal, pre slaughter, in my opinion) but at least it is for food and on the whole, not wasted.
On the topic of the bear hunting: It doesn’t belong anywhere in my opinion. Especially not on the Charlottes.
Just because you don’t think it’s right, doesn’t mean everyone has to feel the same way. Man has been hunting for food AND sport for thousands of years. I’m sure no native tribe has ever hunted for sport, maybe to test their skill…right?
Its that attitude that man is on the edge of its own extinction, we are the only animal Species that kills for pleasure we are the only animal Species that kills for recourses on this planet. we kill each other for a pair of sneakers, for the color of skin, religion, or jealousy.
Just because we have been doing it forever does not make it right, its time to grow from the Neanderthal of kill or be killed attitude and take a more positive role or we will not grow as a Species, we are doomed as a species.
some say we have are not intelligent yet, sure we can manipulate science and sent man to the moon, but really if we were intelligent species we would be living and caring species and not a waring species on its own path of destruction.
You guys could be arguing any other issue where the law intersects morality.
They are the same arguments – how much should one group of people be able to impose (or ignore) the moral views of another? Should the law reflect the morality of the majority, or should the government respect diverse views?
The fact is that the hunt is perfectly legal. The hunters did nothing illegal. They are bad hunters (or it’s a really bad guide), but that doesn’t make it illegal. On the other hand, the local population doesn’t want this kind of activity to happen at all.
To me, it’s no different than any other issue of religion or morality – try like heck to get the government to change the law. But realize that not everybody shares your moral or religious views.
If I was a citizen of Haida Gwaii and I wanted this hunt stopped, I’d make certain that the island voted for the party/politician that shared those views.
I’m not sure if you’re being serious or not.
God gave us the intelligence and physical attributes to use tools and weapons. He placed animals on this earth for humans to use and trophy hunting isn’t necessarily contrary to his ultimate game plan. It keeps us from hunting each other, right? Basically it’s just natural to trophy hunt.
you have a direct line to gods ear do you… 
well I’m a Buddhist so your god is wrong…
All paths lead to the same God.
so says u, but through buddha’s teaching
Five basic precepts:
1. Abstain from killing living beings (from destroying/taking life)—or practice love.
2. Abstain from taking the not-given (from stealing)—or practice generosity, practice giving.
3. Abstain from sexual misconduct—or practice contentment.
4. Abstain from false speech (from lying)—or practice truthfulness.
5. Abstain from taking intoxicating drinks—or practice awareness and mental clarity.
so not all paths lead to the same god… 
Okay…I was with you until you hit #5. I’m glad I’m a Zen Buddhist:-)
“Abstain from killing living beings”
You mean like your trophy wolf?
[attachments over a year old automatically deleted]
Considering he wasn’t the one who killed it. Maybe you should read his other posts before you say something.
So it’s ok to have a trophy, just not ok to hunt for one?
He didn’t destroy or take any life. He didn’t kill the wolf. Thats the point.
AND that wolf is used for cultural things is it not? It’s not just something that sits on a wall, it shows more about First Nations culture. Correct me if I’m wrong Astro.
I think you guys just proved my point, and you even used religion to do it, thanks.
You’re arguing that one religion or moral system is correct and another religion or moral system is wrong. If you want to have a religious discussion, great, but you won’t solve anything.