How about a Hunting Thread

[hondo2]

This turned out to be a good thread after all. BTW I smoke cigarettes,maybe I'll start a thread,sometimes the smoke looks cool.

me too. if you can blow smoke rings try a colored gel and get some shoys like the beautiful incense shots displayed recently on this forum. i figured this thread would bring out the anti hunting nuts. so far only a very few are dumb as a post.

 

[hondo2]

i dont have a problem with people who choose to hunt with a camera
i do have a problem with people who hunt animals to kill them

you want to hunt animals with weapons, hunt each other
see how it feels when the opponents have equal risk

side bet
there are less hunters the next time

--
Riley

i read sometime back posts from some of your nemesises on this forum that you were a soldier at one time, [sergeant major ring a bell]. IF this is true hwo do you rationalize that occupation with a dsilike for hunting and your comment about "less hunters next time?"

 

[olyflyer]

and anywhere else where they've banned guns - and in fact, taken them away from responsible citizens. Gosh, now only the bad guys have 'em. You gotta love the UK (where it's at today).

I have no idea how it is in the UK, but as far as I know, it is like here in Sweden and most of (if not all) Europe. Guns are allowed if you can show you have a need for it for your own safety, sports shooting or if you are a hunter. However, not every jerk is allowed to walk into a corner gun shop and buy one (or several) handguns, which I am very glad for. Yes, it is true that SOME of the bad guys have guns, but far from all, which actually makes the streets and the homes safer than many other places on earth. Just look at how many are accidentally shot in the USA or other places with more liberal weapon policies. How many are shot by accident in Sweden or UK? Very few I think...

Also, how many bad guys (I mean really bad ones) get shot compared to the number of petty criminals and innocent people, including children, in the USA every year? I think the number of the later group is considerably higher than the first group, the REAL bad boys. No matter how much you defend your rights, I think the number of accidental deaths caused by the weapon liberals is very high.

Ben, I don't think there are that many in Europe who envy you for the liberal weapon laws you have, actually it is the opposite, many of us feel sorry you have to walk around in your own home with fear and that you feel you need all that to protect yourself and your family.

Anyway, this thread was not about weapon restrictions at all, also not about UK, USA, Australia, South Africa or Sweden, only about hunting in general. No difference where you are, hunting is hunting, and while you can't hunt buffalos in Sweden or lions in the USA, the only differences are the game, the means of hunting is the same.

I don't hunt - sorry, I could never kill a creature of any sort - unless I had to do so for food - but that's my personal choice. I don't criticize hunters who do so for the meat and in those areas where certain game is in an overabundance and must be scaled back. Yes, I do have issues with those who go out and hunt "trophy game," meaning only to hang a head on their wall.

Right. That's definitely the way I see it as well.

 

[John_A_G]

i read sometime back posts from some of your nemesises on this forum that you were a soldier at one time, [sergeant major ring a bell]. IF this is true hwo do you rationalize that occupation with a dsilike for hunting and your comment about "less hunters next time?"

I'm failing to see where "hunter" and "soldier" are at all similar. Soldiers are not killing for sport as a general rule. Of course there are criminals that are soldiers that kill unnecessarily - but I really don't think you can say 90%+ of hunters are killing to defend themselves.

Note: I'm not as averse to hunting as others are here. In many cases it serves a very necessary purpose of population control. And there are a number of people I know who hunt only what they will eat.

I just think your argument here is rather weak - that somehow a soldier who kills because of necessity can't be against a person who kills for simple sport. The two aren't the same at all.

 

[kieth kiesel]

you want to hunt animals with weapons, hunt each other
see how it feels when the opponents have equal risk

side bet
there are less hunters the next time

This is the part that made him shine, what the hell kind of a statement is this, "hunt each other" and "less hunters next time". Sounds like some really radical talk to me.

 

[jim stirling]

you want to hunt animals with weapons, hunt each other
see how it feels when the opponents have equal risk

side bet
there are less hunters the next time

This is the part that made him shine, what the hell kind of a statement is this, "hunt each other" and "less hunters next time". Sounds like some really radical talk to me.

I cannot speak for Rriley, but as I posted I have no problem with hunting for food, it is issues such as using parts of dead animals for trophies such as in this post, what is that about?

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=39956352

Or the pseudo military game of toy soldiers played by folk like this,

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=39956352

There is nothing humorous or brave about wandering about the woods killing defenceless animals. And I suspect if there was any real danger involved in the “hunt” there would indeed be a lot less hunters. If I needed to kill to eat I would have no problem doing so, I wouldn’t be hanging bits of dead animals on my wall or consider anything about it humorous.
Jim

 

[J R R S]

Guns in the UK are very hard to come by - if you are a farmer with need you might have a shot gun (under strict licence) - beyond that its bad guys and police special squad only!

no one has a hand gun! and shooting ranges (the very few there are) keep all guns on site... you don't bring your own, unless its a competition rifle - again under strict licence - if you have one your are probably on the olympic shooting team

The thing I feel the USA has right is that should the state get too corupt and powerfull the citicens can react - if the UK gets an extreamist paramilitary goverment then the citesens are fcuked! - but i hope we won't be going there!

Ok bring it back to photography slightly - (but not 4/3).... has anyone seen the youtube highspeed video of a tank shell being fired? - not only is it in focus and you can see eveythign slowed down - the camera tracks the bloody shell, perfictly!!! how the hell do they do that! - must be a steel mirror - I can't imagine any camera can be accelerated that fast without falling to bits!

 

[gatordog93]

I cannot speak for Rriley, but as I posted I have no problem with hunting for food, it is issues such as using parts of dead animals for trophies such as in this post, what is that about?

Jim, you made some assumptions, and unfortunately they were not accurate. I have never hunted, never photographed, never participated in any form of hunting that wasn't for the "food". And my post had NOTHING to do with using "dead animals for trophies". I along with all that I associate with stand against the "trophy" element, so I am glad we agree on all points...no trophy hunting and all for food.

Or the pseudo military game of toy soldiers played by folk like this

Same post...same reference...and again I either haven't explained myself well or you have formed an inaccurate assumption. The clothing and techniques are necessary, and have nothing to do with attempts to "play" pseudo military games.

There is nothing humorous or brave about wandering about the woods killing defenceless animals.

Was never intended to be humorous...with the exception of some joking comments about the what the attire/equipment reminded one of (military).

The assumption that all hunting is done for the "thrill", or for the "trophy" to hang on the wall is simply incorrect. And though most "hunters" can afford to pay for meat at the market (dead defenseless animals), the need for population control and harmonious (not humorous) balance in nature requires killing (or "harvesting"). Such meat ALWAYS, regardless of animal being hunted, is ultimately consumed (by humans).

This might clear the air and any confusion surrounding my stance, statements, or postings. However I fully anticipate additional "assumptions" on the part of some that lump all "hunters" into the "perverted" (as another has claimed) elements of society.

Thanks,
Gary

 

[jim stirling]

I cannot speak for Rriley, but as I posted I have no problem with hunting for food, it is issues such as using parts of dead animals for trophies such as in this post, what is that about?

Jim, you made some assumptions, and unfortunately they were not accurate. I have never hunted, never photographed, never participated in any form of hunting that wasn't for the "food". And my post had NOTHING to do with using "dead animals for trophies". I along with all that I associate with stand against the "trophy" element, so I am glad we agree on all points...no trophy hunting and all for food.

Hi Gary sorry, i posted the same link twice it was this post that I should have linked to regarding trophies

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=39944598

Or the pseudo military game of toy soldiers played by folk like this

Same post...same reference...and again I either haven't explained myself well or you have formed an inaccurate assumption. The clothing and techniques are necessary, and have nothing to do with attempts to "play" pseudo military games.

There is nothing humorous or brave about wandering about the woods killing defenceless animals.

Was never intended to be humorous...with the exception of some joking comments about the what the attire/equipment reminded one of (military).

The assumption that all hunting is done for the "thrill", or for the "trophy" to hang on the wall is simply incorrect. And though most "hunters" can afford to pay for meat at the market (dead defenseless animals), the need for population control and harmonious (not humorous) balance in nature requires killing (or "harvesting"). Such meat ALWAYS, regardless of animal being hunted, is ultimately consumed (by humans).

As I said I have no issue with hunting for food my problems are with those making it into a sick who can kill the most game. And sadly there are no shortages of examples of that type of behaviour. I should not tar all hunters with the same brush but the pro hunters in the thread were very quick to jump in with the old tree hugger comments for anyone disagreeing with their outlook.

This might clear the air and any confusion surrounding my stance, statements, or postings. However I fully anticipate additional "assumptions" on the part of some that lump all "hunters" into the "perverted" (as another has claimed) elements of society.

While I have no problem accepting responsible hunting or hunters there are far too many examples of hunting being a blood game, and unfortunately it is often the worst excesses of any contentious activity that reflect badly on the larger group.
Jim

 

[gatordog93]

I thank you for the response. I realize, understand, and completely respect the opinions and rights of both "sides". I also do not frown upon or think any less of those that do not feel comfortable with hunting/killing......and when I talk about "hunting" I don't mean for the single purpose of seeking out a "trophy".

I also think one of the earlier post, a rather concise post/reply, most accurately explains this controversial topic.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=39943477

I feel Collin has done a good job of explaining his position on this topic (you've probably already seen/read his comments).

My interpretation of Kim R's post is not in alignment with your interpretation though. My gut feeling about Kim R's post might be wrong, but I feel she also represents the ethical, experienced, and respectful "hunter".

No hard feelings or disrespect intended...simply not my style or personality. Thanks again for the respectful exchanges.

Gary

 

[jim stirling]

Hi Gary,

It is always difficult to find a middle ground in a subject with such polarised views and a lot of folk especially city dwellers are far removed from the reality of where meat comes from. I grew up and live in the countryside of Scotland and shooting, fishing and trapping are common activities. It is really the grotesque activities such as canned hunting that seriously impact on how hunting is viewed by many. Or activities of groups like Safari Club International who have made hunting into a sick scorecard game ticking of killing animals like trainspotters.
Jim

 

[hondo2]

i read sometime back posts from some of your nemesises on this forum that you were a soldier at one time, [sergeant major ring a bell]. IF this is true hwo do you rationalize that occupation with a dsilike for hunting and your comment about "less hunters next time?"

I'm failing to see where "hunter" and "soldier" are at all similar. Soldiers are not killing for sport as a general rule. Of course there are criminals that are soldiers that kill unnecessarily - but I really don't think you can say 90%+ of hunters are killing to defend themselves.

Note: I'm not as averse to hunting as others are here. In many cases it serves a very necessary purpose of population control. And there are a number of people I know who hunt only what they will eat.

I just think your argument here is rather weak - that somehow a soldier who kills because of necessity can't be against a person who kills for simple sport. The two aren't the same at all.

You are probably right. Though if a guy is drafted he has no choice. If he joins he still knows he may have to kill. I see a difference. I used to hunt and was in the army. We did eat what we killed while hunting with one exception on my part [see belwo]. Lucky for me I didn't have to hunt people.

As to hunting for sport we used to have so called wolf hunts when I was growing up. They were actually coyote drives and were for sport though the grownups at that time didn't think of it that way. Coyotes were considered a danger to small livestock and there was a bounty paid for their ears back then too. Mainly this was an oppurtunity for farm folks to get together for a big feed and social. It was a large social event. Probably the same social event as jack rabbit roundups before my time.

Coon hunting is still sport hunting in many areas of the US. Some folks eat them but not many.

The high school guys in FFA also came around every fall to shoot pigeons out of barns for every farmer for miles around. It wasn't considered sport but a service.

In the eighties I read a story about how much money a good shooter could make per night in areas of Australia shooting pest roos. How many mice, rats, possums, roaches and flies are killed by poison? Not demeaning you but how many of these bleeding hearts use a pest serice or buy ant, roach, or fly poison for their homes? I last saw a jackrabbit in my area at age 12 thanks to ddt. Deer are a different story and thankfully we have had a deer season for many years.

I see most of the anti hunting posts as plain hypocrisy.

 

[Raven15]

Getting away from why saying "passing away" is a dishonest glorification of dying, but "harvesting" is just a stupid euphemism...

a few snaps from a wildly unsuccessful bow hunt. Many rocks were hit by arrows in the making of these photos.

 

[gatordog93]

I enjoyed your little series! I particularly enjoyed the motion/panning/blur effects of the first image.

May I ask where this hunt occurred? The terrain is beautiful.

 

[Kim R]

a few snaps from a wildly unsuccessful bow hunt. Many rocks were hit by arrows in the making of these photos.

but none were hurt? ;-)

KimR

 

[Batteries rus]

Hi Ben,

I envy you being able to buy / keep all those nice toys that make big boom and spit fire and hot projectiles with precision (coupled with the smell of burnt gunpowder, cleaning solvents and fine gun oil ) at a shooting range.

Being a machinist I appreciate finely machined / finished and lubricated metal parts perfectly mated to lovely finished wood (or composites) all working / sliding together in harmony, while chambering rounds, igniting the primer which in turn ignites the propellant / gunpowder, sending projectile on it's merry way down the barrel towards that DREADED PAPER TARGET, making loud boom, THEN finally ejecting the spent brass............for a complete cycle................... semi autos of course.

All that nice shiny (centerfire) brass can then be custom reloaded (experimented with) for higher velocities IF the target shooter so desires.

Then there is the (at home) full stripping, cleaning, reoiling and assembling of all those fine mechanisms.

Ben, here in Canada your drum magazine alone would earn you at least 100 years in prison with no chance of parole may I add.

BTW, I am NOT a hunter but I always loved target shooting and the self discipline required to do it accurately.
--
Bill

 

[Kim R]

My interpretation of Kim R's post is not in alignment with your interpretation though. My gut feeling about Kim R's post might be wrong, but I feel she also represents the ethical, experienced, and respectful "hunter".

Your interpretation is near right on other then I am a 'he' rather the a 'she"... but that is of no matter to this discussion (as I do not hunt to prove my manhood).

I in no way indicated that I am a trophy hunter and in fact I believe in all posts I made I mentioned harvesting the meat, etc. Antlers and such are a byproducts of the harvest which we do not waste, even the hide goes to the Elks Club for charity and to make into gloves, etc.

Nor did I indicate that I hunted because I had an some dark desire to "kill' someone else just fabricated that. In fact the killing for me is the least desirable but and necessary part of the harvest and of proper and good game management.

Jim and other anti-hunting posters have in their own mind, consciously or sub-consciously a desire to paint all hunters as something we may not all be. Their assumptions are certainly far from correct.

I suspect that those folk have never participated in a walk into the bush into piles of deer carcase for the purpose of putting those not dead yet to weak to move or to survive down & not for any harvest but to end their slow suffering. Those were sad times for me but real times and times I will forever remember.

I will always appreciate the opportunity to hunt responsibly and harvest healthy animals in order for others of the herd to remain healthy and survive rather then "killing" the devastated weak animal with no fat nor flesh left on their bones and leaving them to decay where they lay.

It is a fact that I probably have a greater love and respect for those animal then any of the 'Nay Sayers' and by far a better understanding of those animals and their needs to survive.

I appreciate your open-mindedness and intelligence.
Thank you.
--

KimR

 

[Kim R]

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
A college professor, an avowed Atheist, was teaching his class.

He shocked several of his students when he flatly stated he was going to prove there was no God.

Addressing the ceiling he shouted: "God, if you are real, then I want you to knock me off this platform. I'll give you 15 minutes!"

The lecture room fell silent. You could have heard a pin fall.

Ten minutes went by. Again he taunted God, saying, "Here I am, God. I'm still waiting."

His count-down got down to the last couple of minutes when a Marine - just released from active duty and newly registered in the class - walked up to the professor, hit him full force in the face, and sent him tumbling from his lofty platform.

The professor was out cold! At first, the students were shocked and babbled in confusion. The young Marine took a seat in the front row and sat silent.

The class fell silent...waiting.

Eventually, the professor came to, shaken he looked at the young Marine in the front row. When the professor regained his senses and could speak he asked: "What's the matter with you? Why did you do that?"

"God was busy. He sent the Marines."
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

I thank you for the time you spent in assuring that we here in the US have the right to keep and bear arms.
I salute you

KimR

 

[jim stirling]

Jim and other anti-hunting posters have in their own mind, consciously or sub-consciously a desire to paint all hunters as something we may not all be. Their assumptions are certainly far from correct.

Hi Kim,

I am not anti-hunting as I made clear in previous posts; I am anti the gratuitous killing of animals for trophies. Hunting for animals you intend to eat is an entirely different matter and I apologise if I misinterpreted your post as being a trophy hunt as that is what the photo with the woman rather looked like to me.
Jim

 

[olyflyer]

What Jim and I and some others clearly stated was our disgust of the pleasure hunting, cutting off heads and posing with the slaughtered HEALTY animals is what I call pleasure hunting. Just look at the faces of those happy "ladies" you posted... There is no sorrow in their eyes, nothing but joy, like a 6 year old posing with his new toy. Shooting injured, or weak and old animals is not pleasure hunting, though not many hunters are interested in that part.

I guess you don't want to understand what we were saying, so you call us "Nay Sayers" which we are not.

It is clear that those who don't see the clear statements who do not have an open mind, not us.