What is ethical?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
"plinker"We tend to be less lenient because we favor precision. The gory truth is in nature animals are the most brutal. I have a hard time watching some lion kills when the gazelle is crying and the lion is in no hurry to finish the job. I don't condone hunting pigs with dogs. It seems unmercifully brutal. It is however legal where I live. I don't hunt with a bow because it is not humane to me, but that's all my son in law does. He finds it a challenge and thinks high powered rifles are too easy. He is an excellent archer, but he has no issues with a slower kill and tracking. It's just a deer he says. I don't like gray squirrels. To me they are tree rats, but I do want to be efficient killing one. Blood sport is a difficult subject. 

Click to expand...
I know this is a bit off topic, but I think a lot of it is knowledge vs perception. While it might be perceived that a gunshot death is "quicker" and "less painful", it's not the case in many instances.
I've dealt with many people who have been shot and who have been stabbed. Many times a person who was stabbed in a fight did not even realize it (thought they had just been punched) and went home to find out as they were getting out of their car, bleeding to death or near death. I have never had an individual who suffered a gunshot wound tell me "I didn't know I was shot".
 
Upvote 0
Killing is Killing. Eat what you kill unless it is a non palatable pest species. I don't use dogs, bait, blinds or stands but believe "You hunt your way, I'll hunt mine". No hunter has a right to interfere with another hunter. No non-hunter has a right to interfere with a lawful hunter either. Posting "Look what I can do" videos on YouTube and "Parading" around in public with a kill is what causes the majority of hard feelings and angst of non-hunters for hunters. The hard feelings between hunters for different methods of hunting which a hunter may or may not practice is caused by a propensity of persons to believe that their way is right while all else is wrong rather than looking to a fixed standard (in this example stated in the first sentence of this post) .

Thurmond
 
Upvote 0
I don't think that suffering is necessarily a bad thing. Or, maybe, I don't think that minimizing suffering is necessarily a good thing or, rather, the goodest thing. Anyway, good topic, Michael. Thanks. I think, one of the problems we have is that in our society hunters are a minority. Most people don't hunt. And, those who do hunt do it in so many different ways. So, most people's experience of any particular kind of hunting comes from hunting shows on TV or youtube or by seeing pickup trucks parading around with dead animals on display. What was once esoteric (the experience of the hunt), shared by those who hunted, EXPERIENCED by the hunters is now WATCHED by the uninitiated, those who are ceremonially unclean, who have not been prepared for the sight ritually and so, they judge without real understanding. Those boys in the truck maybe had their mom make them their favorite sandwiches the night before and dad didn't have his evening budweiser or two but went to bed early and they anticipated the hunt for months, scouting the sign, training dogs. Maybe they had been in camp for a week. That's what I mean by "prepared ritually" etc. I enjoy some hunting videos but, some - not so much. I just wind up feeling like that was something that was not meant to be watched from my living room without the whole experience leading up to and after the fact. In a hunting culture where the prefered technique was going after hogs with dogs those kids in the truck would have been accepted and understood by all who saw them. Peace, all.
 
Upvote 0
I agree with some of your responses. "To each his own", some would say. I suppose I was just venting my frustration because all of my hunting is limited to private land with permission from the land owner. And therein lies the double edged sword that accompanies airgun hunting. The more capable, powerful, & popular airgun hunting becomes; the more susceptible it will be to regulations, laws & scrutiny.
 
Upvote 0
I would like to reply to each post directly, but it will take to much time, so I just sum it up a little.

People and their opinions are pretty stupid. Period. Just because you have the right to have an opinion, doesn't make your opinion a "smart" one. Just like one of my favorite comedians Chris Rock says, "poop, you could drive a car with your feet if you want to. That don't make it a good ****ing idea."

Having said that. How can people say, "Nature is not fair! If nature does it, it is OK for us to do it!" Really?! Well, if that is the case, I guess I can bash your head in and take your wife? Right? Nature does it, so why cant I do it? Or how having your wife start chewing on you right after sex? I see the Black Widow do it...

Get it?!

People need to stop looking at Nature so they can justify their own actions. There is a difference in "natures" you know?! That is why they call it "Human Nature"!

Let animals handle their nature and we handle ours. 

Kmd

 
Upvote 0
The more capable, powerful, & popular airgun hunting becomes; the more susceptible it will be to regulations, laws & scrutiny.

Truer words never spoken. I think most know ethics are rules, guidelines a gauge of what is and is not honorable. Many of our game laws are based on ethics. Dogs, bait .radios etc the list goes on and on. And because of this the laws
vary wildly from one state to the next. We now live in a society where people based on their feelings can and do set regulations on issues
they have no understanding of. Most of you are also aware that guns, and anything having to do with animals are under attack. The
groups behind this have no ethics and a (end justifies the means attitude). They routinely lie, distort, and do any thing possible in an effort
to sway public opinion. Because they know if they can change the way people feel about something. Then they can count on the will of the majority to prevail. We live in a time of incredible knowledge and appalling stupidity. How a soccer mom in Florida can feel she should have a right to deny an Inuit native the right to harvest seal pups is beyond me. It matters not that with out that right he may well starve and freeze to death. all that does matter is HER feelings.
As air gunners we make a distinction between air and powder and rightfully so. Trust me the public will make no such distinction,
to them they are all guns. And bull pups are assault guns who's only use is killing. Long ago hunters excepted as one of the standards
of ethical behavior not to take any shot unless they could be certain of a quick humane kill. It has stood up well to the test of time and
public opinion. Why the hell the air gun community has chosen to ignore this I am not sure. When you cheer on fellow air gunners and
take extreme long shots all in an effort to post it and get one up on the Jones. That is not ethical or honorable and will hurt even those among us who don't do these things.
. The public aint going to care that its just a starling. All they will see, is a need for something, anything to be done.
States have laws requiring hunters to have enough gun for various game species. Over and over I see an alarming trend where air gunners seem to have no concept of the limitations of a pellet rifle. To the point where some believe they are a capable , and
wholly adequate for taking pigs.
Most I trust have enough experience to see the folly of these view points. But when we say nothing, to those who do not know
it is a ringing endorsement. Silence is perceived as acceptance. When two people are arguing some point I have no knowledge of.One can be the leading authority and the other an idiot. But I cant tell because I have no knowledge or experience. When others who do 
begin to weigh in it becomes clearer what is right and what is wrong even to me the clueless. 
In the eyes of the public and legislators it is clear the air gun community is unwilling to impose any measure of self governing. 
Unless we can change that perception and fast, we and the freedom we now enjoy are doomed. You might consider these things
the next time some one makes extravagant claims about the capability of his gun or self. Your silence, serves only to give merit
to those claims. Given time the end result is the quagmire we all are now in.

 
Upvote 0
"kmd1984"I would like to reply to each post directly, but it will take to much time, so I just sum it up a little.

People and their opinions are pretty stupid. Period. Just because you have the right to have an opinion, doesn't make your opinion a "smart" one. Just like one of my favorite comedians Chris Rock says, "poop, you could drive a car with your feet if you want to. That don't make it a good ****ing idea."

Having said that. How can people say, "Nature is not fair! If nature does it, it is OK for us to do it!" Really?! Well, if that is the case, I guess I can bash your head in and take your wife? Right? Nature does it, so why cant I do it? Or how having your wife start chewing on you right after sex? I see the Black Widow do it...

Get it?!

People need to stop looking at Nature so they can justify their own actions. There is a difference in "natures" you know?! That is why they call it "Human Nature"!

Let animals handle their nature and we handle ours. 

Kmd

Click to expand...

I agree with you concerning your general point that humans are humans and animals are animals, humans are moral creatures, animals are not. HOWEVER, the reason its important to draw out the harshness of nature is that the same people who oppose hunting on moral grounds are usually the first people to call humans an animal. Their position contradicts itself. If humans are animals and the product to nature, then there's no such thing as true morality. Its no more logical to judge a human for murder than judging a lion for killing the cubs of its rival. Its all just the acts of animals doing their things. The same people ignore the killing of a human because humans are animals but deplore the killing of an animal because an animal is somehow "innocent". Its appropriate to point out the hypocrisy of that position. 

Another good reason to point out the harness of nature is that man's participation in the natural predator-prey cycle or man's more general dominance over nature isn't judged the same as man's interactions with man. For example, it would be wrong for a man to cage another human and keep the human as a pet, or to kill another human to eat their flesh, or to enslave a human as a beast of burden, ect. Its generally not wrong for man to do those things to animals. So by default there is a lesser level of morality that applies between man's actions against animals vs man's actions against man. The life of an animal just isn't worth the same as the life of a human. Period. The natural order re-enforces that notion. 
 
Upvote 0
"T3PRanch"Killing is Killing. Eat what you kill unless it is a non palatable pest species. I don't use dogs, bait, blinds or stands but believe "You hunt your way, I'll hunt mine". No hunter has a right to interfere with another hunter. No non-hunter has a right to interfere with a lawful hunter either. Posting "Look what I can do" videos on YouTube and "Parading" around in public with a kill is what causes the majority of hard feelings and angst of non-hunters for hunters. The hard feelings between hunters for different methods of hunting which a hunter may or may not practice is caused by a propensity of persons to believe that their way is right while all else is wrong rather than looking to a fixed standard (in this example stated in the first sentence of this post) .

Thurmond

Very well stated Thurmond. Hogs cause tremendous damage in my area and are considered pests that taste good. I agree that game should be taken as quickly and humanely as possible but these horrible pests should be killed as efficiently as possible. They are very smart pests and difficult to hunt. If dogs make the process more efficient then dogs it is. From my point of view this is pest control no different than blasting starlings. That said, parading around displaying the animals is very poor taste and damaging to hunting rights.
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
It kills me that our society is getting so soft. I grew up trapping. A lot of people thought it was horrible. There are many states that you are not allowed to trap in now because of that. I would rather see my kids running a trap line before and after school much more than playing video games. It wasn't all just trapping. When I went out I watched birds and other animals that you would never observe unless you were out there for a reason. Trapping gave me that reason. I see nothing wrong with dogs tearing apart some ferrel pigs that destroy farmers fields and kill other wildlife. Those dogs can very easily get tore apart from those pigs.
 
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
"fuznut"Furthermore! ha. Anyone who promotes the taking of pigs with a pellet gun.( big bore and arrow excluded)
Is in my opinion not only unethical but just plain ignorant.
Click to expand...
Not entirely true. Where an air gun company makes a video of one of their shooters cornering a pig and shooting it with a .177 break barrel in effect saying 'you can do this too!' - HIGHLY unethical. But when an experienced hunter undertakes the time and effort in research and practice to make a clean a kill with a break barrel then it's not unethical. This shot may look easy but this guy put a TON of hours into prep for taking this pig w/a .22 break barrel. Would not take the shot if the weather wasn't right, the angle wasn't right, etc. I think that's a failing point for many shooters. They know the ethical thing to do but don't want to lose the opportunity of a less than perfect shot so they take it anyway. Wrong. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUcyrfIO--4&feature=youtu.be
 
Upvote 0
glengiles I can kill a deer with a 22 far easier, than a pig with a pellet gun.
Shooting deer with a 22 is illegal. Because law makers realize just because you can
is not justification for doing so. If ( the air gun community) can not, or will not sound
off against view points as flawed as yours, then sweeping far more restrictive laws are
soon to follow. And I must admit they are probably needed.
 
Upvote 0
Ethical isn't the means, it's the method.
Killing a pest with a gun is either ethical or not - that's the means.
Caliber and type of gun is the method.
Some have a low skill level, take a lazy approach to shooting and thus require a higher energy method. Some are highly skilled, work hard at their craft and can effectively use a lower energy method. If it's ethical to kill rats with PCP's then it shouldn't matter if the FPE is 6 lbs or 60 lbs. as long as the rat dies ethically which is attributed directly to the shooter. There is a minimum FPE required, via physics, for any pest shot and furthermore that's affected by the maturity of the animal. Laws will always land on the side of 'more is better' because that will make up for less experienced, less patient shooters. If you have the experience to take out a pig with a blow gun I'm not going to say you can't do it. I don't have that experience and would never think of doing that, but that's my skill set compared to your skill set. Thus, laws ultimately aren't made for individuals. I have to wear my seat belt every time I drive because other drivers won't wear their's unless the government makes them do it. I'd do it anyway, so the law doesn't really affect me but government seemingly has to create laws for the bottom end of the curve. 1 in 10,000 shooters can kill a <100 lb pig w/a break barrel .22. Those are not good odds so the government will up those odds to a gun platform that will cover 10,000 out of 10,000 and a pig of 100's of lbs. Gun companies, air and powder, need to promote responsible use of guns. For you a deer w/a .22 is fine, but not legal. You probably have a higher skill set and more patience than the average deer hunter. My viewpoint is hunt within the law and within your abilities. I don't see how that's "flawed".
 
Upvote 0
"fuznut"glengiles I can kill a deer with a 22 far easier, than a pig with a pellet gun.
Shooting deer with a 22 is illegal. Because law makers realize just because you can
is not justification for doing so. If ( the air gun community) can not, or will not sound
off against view points as flawed as yours, then sweeping far more restrictive laws are
soon to follow. And I must admit they are probably needed.
Click to expand...
You've lost me there. Its proven that airguns of proper caliber and fpe are very capable of cleanly taking hogs with brain shots. Rimfires are generally illegal for deer because rimfires are the prefered choice of deer poachers due to their relative quiteness and short of shining deer in the eyes, deer don't often hold their heads still enough for brain shots. As proof, I offer you Florida's laws, which ban rimfires and airguns for deer but allows rimfires and air guns for hogs. Hogs don't bob their heads all around like deer and the policy makers understand that. 

Besides more government regulation is rarely the answer. 
 
Upvote 0
Bullfrog Air guns of proper caliber and fps yes, when you lump in a 22 springer NO.
You can use a pellet gun on pigs because there are no restrictions on them you can shoot them at night from a helicopter
with a machine gun. you can blow them up with dynamite all kinds of things that you can not do to any game animal
like deer.
I work for and with many ranches where for a fee you can hunt free range feral pigs. call and tell them you would
like to book a hunt with a pellet gun. HA In my youth I ran a trap line in Alaska I once killed a grizzly caught in a snare with
a 22 pistol. It was suffering horribly and likely would have continued to at least a week more before I could have returned.
In that instance the ethical thing was done. I often see deer caught in fences, sometimes I can cut the wire and they are no worse for wear.
Often that is not the case, at those times killing it by any means gun knife rock is the ethical, moral, and the humane course of action.
though technically illegal. just because some thing is legal does not mean its ethical. On the flip side often the ethical thing to do is unlawful
I have never had a warden object. I know of none who would endorse killing pigs with a pellet gun even though it would
be perfectly legal. With the exception of big bore or arrow .it which case they would harbor no objections..

 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu