What is the difference between killing an animal for fun and killing one for food?

[dimreepr]

It depends where you draw the line .

 

 

As zappatos suggested the ethical line will always lie, roughly, in the center of a bell curve, when the question is argued logically.

[HB of CJ]

We are lifetime hunters. Multiple generation. Killing for food is very important. We hunt for the pot. We hunt for food. Everything we have hunted and will hunt will be eaten by us. About the only exception would be wild hog hunting in Texas USA. There the out of control wild packs/herds of wild pigs cause untold farming crop damage.

 

So much so that the State Of Texas USA has a no limit no license kill on sight order out on wild pigs? Sad, but there you have it. Killing wild pigs is not that fun. Dangerous, and not that much fun. Black rifles. Some are machine guns. Nite vision. Thermal vision. Suppressed weapons. Hunters blinds. Anyway possible. Even helicopters.

 

Other than pig killing, (which must be done) hunting for us is a ritual. We usually deer hunt every fall. SW Oregon, USA. About 43N, 123W. Sorta. Successful about 30% of the time. The killed deer get processed by us into family food. Very good to eat. Sometimes we hunt gray tree squirrels. Same thing. Very tasty indeed. All gets eaten.

 

Simply killing for fun is stupid. Inhumane. We have passed up killing shots on game because we did not need the meat. Hunting is something probably not understood by some on this Excellent Science Forum. If one gets hungry enough, then one WILL kill something to eat. This is hardwired into our human brain stem. Respectfully.

[quickquestion]

 

I think your viewpoint is too shallow for someone of your obvious intelligence. Reducing society down to an "either/or" perspective ignores the nuances necessary to make a society of individuals liveable.

 

Killing an animal because you need to to eat is very different from sport. You seriously can't see that, or are you too first-world? Your other examples all seem negative, yet you don't understand killing to eat is a natural system? I guess in your worldview even eating a salad would be murder, right? Nothing goes.

Nature and natural systems aren't inherently good. That's where science comes in. To give us medicine, so we don't have to suffer from "natural systems" like the Black Plague.

Therefore, my thesis is that killing animals has no place in an age of civilization, science, and comfortable living.

And the salad analogy is a ridiculous fallacy people use to attack vegetarians, by saying killing plants is on the same level as killing an animal, which of course, is a quite ridiculous thing to say.

 

Now, to address the OP, what is the difference? There is no difference, to the animals perspective. The animal just had to suffer and die. The animals family lost a relative, from an unknown human for an unknown reason. But to a human's perspective...well the difference is you can go home and feel good about yourself, saying "you did what you had to do and the meat did not die in vain."

Edited April 12, 2017 by quickquestion

[Function]

Nature and natural systems aren't inherently good. That's where science comes in. To give us medicine, so we don't have to suffer from "natural systems" like the Black Plague.

 

You forsake modern medicine only minutes ago

[quickquestion]

 

You forsake modern medicine only minutes ago

I choose my medicines wisely. I don't fully forsake anything until I have given it careful review. I have largely had adverse affects to anti-biotics so that is out the window. But if I am having a dark depths of depression, I will take my anti-depressions as a quick fix. If I broke a bone or something, I will use synthetic anesthesia to ease the pain over herbal remedies any day. I just don't make it the norm, just usually a "last resort, commanders, we have to switch to Plan X" kind of thing. Like if I have a migraine, and the tea doesn't do anything, I may take a advil or something. But there are often unexplored options due to certain social constraints and taboos, for instance, Massage is made socially taboo and difficult to obtain, so I take advil instead, when massage would often be the healthier option.

[Bender]

And the salad analogy is a ridiculous fallacy people use to attack vegetarians, by saying killing plants is on the same level as killing an animal, which of course, is a quite ridiculous thing to say.

It isn't, it illustrates that everyone draws a line. Where do you draw it? Is it ok to kill musquitos or cockroaches? What about a pet cat killing mice?

 

What is ridiculous is suggesting cows or chicken know who their relatives are.

 

Also: taboo on massage? That's the first thing I hear about that.

[Itoero]

There are of course hunters that hunt to preserve nature but most hunters hunt for the fun.
Most hunting is imo an out of control hobby of humans.
In many forests in Belgium there are big areas with no trees and a loot of grass and shrubs and often a high hunting chair/platform.
Deer are often found in such area's...so hunters can easily kill them.
Those area's also allow more deer to live in the forest...so there are enough deer to shoot down.

In British Columbia it's allowed to hunt with a drone.

Edited April 14, 2017 by Itoero

[quickquestion]

It isn't, it illustrates that everyone draws a line. Where do you draw it? Is it ok to kill musquitos or cockroaches? What about a pet cat killing mice?

 

What is ridiculous is suggesting cows or chicken know who their relatives are.

 

Also: taboo on massage? That's the first thing I hear about that.

I have no qualms or problems with killing. What I have a problem with is torturing animals by locking them in cages and tormenting them with sensory deprivation.

 

Taboo on massage is in America, don't know if you are American or not.

So when I say "the health care system is a joke" let it be known I don't speak for Germany, or foreign nations, I am basically saying that "America's health care is a joke."

In America if you are in pain, and you ask someone for a massage, they will say "No that's awkard, etc." Even your own mother won't give you a massage.

So you go to the doctors or hospital, and they refuse to appoint you a massage therapist.

Instead of massage they give you pills or bogus physical therapy that doesn't do anything.

I have talked with the elites of the elites and they told me what it is...if you have money you get the proper care. If you don't have the money, you might as well be treated like a homeless person, the medical industry will give you the lowest quality treatment possible.

[Phi for All]

I have no qualms or problems with killing. What I have a problem with is torturing animals by locking them in cages and tormenting them with sensory deprivation.

Wow. It's like you're trying to trick me into thinking this strawman you set up is the new right hand goalpost.

 

Taboo on massage is in America, don't know if you are American or not.

So when I say "the health care system is a joke" let it be known I don't speak for Germany, or foreign nations, I am basically saying that "America's health care is a joke."

In America if you are in pain, and you ask someone for a massage, they will say "No that's awkard, etc." Even your own mother won't give you a massage.

So you go to the doctors or hospital, and they refuse to appoint you a massage therapist.

Instead of massage they give you pills or bogus physical therapy that doesn't do anything.

I have talked with the elites of the elites and they told me what it is...if you have money you get the proper care. If you don't have the money, you might as well be treated like a homeless person, the medical industry will give you the lowest quality treatment possible.

I want to talk about this, it's very interesting, but it's off-topic here. Start a new thread, maybe in Psychology, or Other Sciences.

[quickquestion]

Wow. It's like you're trying to trick me into thinking this strawman you set up is the new right hand goalpost.

 

 

I want to talk about this, it's very interesting, but it's off-topic here. Start a new thread, maybe in Psychology, or Other Sciences.

How is it a strawman?

 

His question was "What is difference between killing animal for fun and food?"

Killing for fun usually means hunting, and a quick death.

 

Killing for food usually means locking them in a cage for years, and tormenting them with sensory deprivation.

Edited April 14, 2017 by quickquestion

[dimreepr]

How is it a strawman?

 

His question was "What is difference between killing animal for fun and food?"

Killing for fun usually means hunting, and a quick death.

 

Killing for food usually means locking them in a cage for years, and tormenting them with sensory deprivation.

 

Wow, what a complete load of bollox; killing for fun usually means a dickhead wannabe who wants to control the world, with a very limp dick; killing for food is a person trying to live.

[Bender]

I have no qualms or problems with killing. What I have a problem with is torturing animals by locking them in cages and tormenting them with sensory deprivation.

Are you fine with eating animals if there is no evidence of torture or torment?

 

(I'm indeed not American. Massage is perfectly acceptable here.)

[zapatos]

 

Taboo on massage is in America, don't know if you are American or not.

 

 

Exactly what part of America do you live in? I can get a massage at work or even at the shopping mall. And I live in the very conservative Midwest.

[Phi for All]

Exactly what part of America do you live in? I can get a massage at work or even at the shopping mall. And I live in the very conservative Midwest.

 

I heard that, in Albuquerque, anyone on the street will gladly shave your back for a nickel.

[fred2014]

Killing an animal for fun is fun.

Killing an animal for food gives you the energy to have more fun.

[dimreepr]

Killing an animal for fun is fun.

Killing an animal for food gives you the energy to have more fun.

 

That's nice, lets hope karma has hand to play in your future .

Edited April 15, 2017 by dimreepr

[koti]

That's nice, lets hope karma has hand to play in your future .

+1

[quickquestion]

 

Wow, what a complete load of bollox; killing for fun usually means a dickhead wannabe who wants to control the world, with a very limp dick; killing for food is a person trying to live.

Talking about penis size will usually not help bring credibility to your argument in a scientific discussion.

 

Also, I want to point out something interesting...Most of these arguments are focused on the human's perspective - whether the human is right or wrong. This reflects the inherent self-centeredd nature of the human species.

 

My argument is from the animal's perspective - whether or not killing them is right or wrong for the animal. An animal does not care if you shoot him or for fun or shoot him for food....he despises you regardless.

Thus the method of killing is all that matters. Animals who are farmed for meat are kept as slaved and have a very low quality of life. If you want to keep your delusional fantasy of how trophy hunters are evil, bad people and how people who eat fast food are saints, I don't know what to tell you.

If someone shoots a deer in the head and gives it a quick death, they are less evil than some person who eats a hamburger, fast food, because the fast food factory kept the cow in a cage and gave more suffering to the cow than the bullet did.

 

 

Are you fine with eating animals if there is no evidence of torture or torment?

If I'm in a bad mood, and I want to vent my aggressions, and I shoot a deer with an M4, of course I will eat it. But normally I'm a vegetarian...if my life is good why should I make an animal's worse.

 

 

Exactly what part of America do you live in? I can get a massage at work or even at the shopping mall. And I live in the very conservative Midwest.

I live in the Liberal Midwest. I can pay money to get a massage at the shopping mall, but that's just it...it costs money. It's like I have to pay money for friends, love, romance, sex, massages, everything. None of it feels genuine or real, it all feels corporate and hollow.

I'm not a big fan of liberals or Bill Nye bicycle utopia...My idea of a utopia is not having to pay 70 bux for someone to care about me. And that's the vibe I get from Bill Nye's idea of the future is how he wants everyone to run around on bicycles like a liberal utopia, where everyone is turned into hipsters and liberal yuppies......Boooring.

That being said, I'm not a fan of Conservatives either. If the Conservatives and Liberals would just attack each other out the world would probably be a better place.

[dimreepr]

Also, I want to point out something interesting...Most of these arguments are focused on the human's perspective - whether the human is right or wrong. This reflects the inherent self-centeredd nature of the human species.

 

It's not interesting, it's obvious, it's the only perspective we have available.

 

I think this reflects the inherent selfishness of those who choose to kill purely for fun.

Edited April 15, 2017 by dimreepr

[koti]

Wow, what a complete load of bollox; killing for fun usually means a dickhead wannabe who wants to control the world, with a very limp dick; killing for food is a person trying to live.

+1

[dimreepr]

My argument is from the animal's perspective - whether or not killing them is right or wrong for the animal. An animal does not care if you shoot him or for fun or shoot him for food....he despises you regardless.

Thus the method of killing is all that matters. Animals who are farmed for meat are kept as slaved and have a very low quality of life. If you want to keep your delusional fantasy of how trophy hunters are evil, bad people and how people who eat fast food are saints, I don't know what to tell you.

If someone shoots a deer in the head and gives it a quick death, they are less evil than some person who eats a hamburger, fast food, because the fast food factory kept the cow in a cage and gave more suffering to the cow than the bullet did.

 

Your argument is an excuse not a reason.

[quickquestion]

+1

Can't believe you actually plussed one that.

It's an emotional rant and completely logically hysterical. It's the equivalent of saying "Daddy I want a pony."

 

It's not interesting, it's obvious, it's the only perspective we have available.

 

No it is interesting, how you still go on immune to the point i have made.

The animal does not give an S whether or not you killed it for fun or killed it for food. The animal does not say "Oh you killed me for food? Ok, I'm cool with that. But if you killed me for fun, you are an evil person."

That is a human perspective, so a human can feel good about the dirty deed and said "Oh i just hurt an animal for food, I am a good person now, if someone kills it for fun they are more evil than me."

 

I told you the ONLY way to determine ACTUAL good or evil is whether or not the animal is trapped in a cage. Killing an animal for no reason is less evil than raising an animal in a cage and killing it for food.

[dimreepr]

Can't believe you actually plussed one that.

It's an emotional rant and completely logically hysterical. It's the equivalent of saying "Daddy I want a pony."

 

No it is interesting, how you still go on immune to the point i have made.

The animal does not give an S whether or not you killed it for fun or killed it for food. The animal does not say "Oh you killed me for food? Ok, I'm cool with that. But if you killed me for fun, you are an evil person."

That is a human perspective, so a human can feel good about the dirty deed and said "Oh i just hurt an animal for food, I am a good person now, if someone kills it for fun they are more evil than me."

 

I told you the ONLY way to determine ACTUAL good or evil is whether or not the animal is trapped in a cage. Killing an animal for no reason is less evil than raising an animal in a cage and killing it for food.

 

 

When I was a child I took pot shots at the starlings nesting in our eve's with an air-pistol and missed, so I decided to shoot into the hole and out fell a chick, it was a head-shot so it didn't suffer but I did, because I knew my motives were selfish (I was 10); but when it came to daisey, I was sad but I knew I'd given her the best life I could, she didn't suffer and neither did I.

 

That's why your argument is an excuse to indulge yourself, rather than a reason to kill.

Edited April 15, 2017 by dimreepr

[Phi for All]

Animals who are farmed for meat are kept as slaved and have a very low quality of life.

Animals farmed for meat like chickens and cows wouldn't be alive at all if we didn't practice the husbandry we do. How long would a cow live in the wild? And really, how cruel would it be to turn a domesticated animal over to predators he's been bred without exposure to? This argument always ignores ongoing efforts to remove cruelty, and also ignores what we would do with all the animals in captivity. It also assumes "low quality of life" on every farm, and a corresponding high quality of life in the wild.

I live in the Liberal Midwest. I can pay money to get a massage at the shopping mall, but that's just it...it costs money. It's like I have to pay money for friends, love, romance, sex, massages, everything. None of it feels genuine or real, it all feels corporate and hollow.

I'm not a big fan of liberals or Bill Nye bicycle utopia...My idea of a utopia is not having to pay 70 bux for someone to care about me. And that's the vibe I get from Bill Nye's idea of the future is how he wants everyone to run around on bicycles like a liberal utopia, where everyone is turned into hipsters and liberal yuppies......Boooring.

That being said, I'm not a fan of Conservatives either. If the Conservatives and Liberals would just attack each other out the world would probably be a better place.

 

This sounds like someone who's been programmed to "know" what a liberal is. You rail against caricatures of what you think things are all about.

 

I saw Bill Nye at an astronautics conference last year. He looks damn good for his age, so bicycling may hold the key.

 

As for your utopia, Bernie Sanders healthcare policies (I don't know why we're talking about this in a thread about hunting) might have led to socialized medicine, which could very well have included massage therapy care like they have in Germany, as part of your national system. Well-being is part of good health (gasp, a liberal stance!), and I for one wouldn't mind paying into a system where you could walk in anytime you needed a massage, a therapy that kept folks like you from getting so tightly wound up and defensive about life.

[quickquestion]

 

 

When I was a child I took pot shots at the starlings nesting in our eve's with an air-pistol and missed, so I decided to shoot into the hole and out fell a chick, it was a head-shot so it didn't suffer but I did, because I knew my motives were selfish (I was 10); but when it came to daisey, I was sad but I knew I'd given her the best life I could, she didn't suffer and neither did I.

 

That's why your argument is an excuse to indulge yourself, rather than a reason to kill.

Dude...you are MISSING the entire point I am making.

You keep making comments about Me and You...This has NOTHING to do with me or you...

 

It's about THE ANIMAL. How does the ANIMAL feel about getting killed...The animal does not give a care if you killed him for fun or food...the animal will despise it regardless...

Your whole argument about the chick thing is ABOUT YOURSELF and how YOU feel about the killings...If you shot the bird for fun or for food the bird will hate you the same either way...

 

 

Animals farmed for meat like chickens and cows wouldn't be alive at all if we didn't practice the husbandry we do. How long would a cow live in the wild? And really, how cruel would it be to turn a domesticated animal over to predators he's been bred without exposure to? This argument always ignores ongoing efforts to remove cruelty, and also ignores what we would do with all the animals in captivity. It also assumes "low quality of life" on every farm, and a corresponding high quality of life in the wild.

 

This sounds like someone who's been programmed to "know" what a liberal is. You rail against caricatures of what you think things are all about.

 

I saw Bill Nye at an astronautics conference last year. He looks damn good for his age, so bicycling may hold the key.

 

As for your utopia, Bernie Sanders healthcare policies (I don't know why we're talking about this in a thread about hunting) might have led to socialized medicine, which could very well have included massage therapy care like they have in Germany, as part of your national system. Well-being is part of good health (gasp, a liberal stance!), and I for one wouldn't mind paying into a system where you could walk in anytime you needed a massage, a therapy that kept folks like you from getting so tightly wound up and defensive about life.

You seemed like the one programmed not me.

You seem to think that keeping someone alive is inherently good for some reason. Why is keeping someone alive inherently good? If I am starving someone in my basement, and they are saying "Kill me, kill me", how does that make it good if I keep them alive.

Just like how does it make it good to keep millions of cows in cages against their will and breed them into miserable low quality lives.

 

Also, the majority of animals in meat are not raised in humane farms, most are factory farms and the amount of pleasant lives are very few.

 

Also, I am not "programmed" to feel a certain way about liberals...I had to live with liberals and live in a town with liberals deal with their crap on a daily basis. I would not want to live in a society ran by liberals, Bernie Sanders or any other politician...I am a free-spirit and modern liberals tend to be authoritarian and totalitarian...Sanders is more democrat than liberal anyway.

 

Now, the actual practical interpretation of liberal is not what modern liberals are...an actual dictionary definition of a liberal is just someone who is open minded, deep thinkers to change traditional values....Modern liberals want to be thought and word police, tend to be closeminded and shallow philosophers with generic status-quo morality and wish to regulate and punish everything. Same with modern fake-anarchists like on Anarchist memes. Modern liberals are basically fake liberals.

Edited April 15, 2017 by quickquestion