Quote:
Originally Posted by GlynMeek
-- We had an interesting discussion on one of the Lounge topics about my perception that Palin likes to “kill things for a hobby”, and I was somewhat pilloried for my European view on hunting...  On the premise of "when in Rome...", I would like to see if I can start to understand the American attraction to hunting and would love to hear your input.
1) I am a city boy, born and bred in Sheffield (England’s steel town). ----I do therefore understand that hunting is much more of a ‘country’ pastime than a city boy pastime, so I will concede that limitation on my part.
2) I have no problem with owning guns for protection…I have one!
3) My father was in the meat trade; I love steak, lamb, liver(!), kidneys(!), venison, pork etc. etc. I worked as meat porter on Southampton docks and as a ‘dear skinner’ for a local meat & game place during college vacations, so I am quite comfortable with dead animals and their place in the food chain…I even had a brief (VERY brief…after the first “Kosher kill”) spell working in a slaughter house, so HAVE been involved in “killing what I eat”.
4) I have even been quail and pheasant hunting here in Texas. I have to admit that I enjoyed it (LOL), and remember the guide warning us that we could “shoot at whatever we wanted, just don’t hit the dog or the truck”.
5) I can understand the allure of back-to-nature, wandering the woods with a bow and arrow (all right, perhaps even a hunting rifle) where the animal has some kind of a chance to get away, and if you eat EVERYTHING you kill, I can accept and partly understand that…BUT, there are two aspects of 'hunting' that I do NOT understand and need your help…
6) Trophy hunting…let’s find a rare (usually inedible) animal and go kill it so we can fill its head full of sawdust and then stick it on our wall so we can boast that we killed it?
7) …and the hardest one of all to understand…let’s all dress up to the nines in (often ludicrous) faux camoflage hunting gear (hats and all), erect a ‘hide’ right next to a watering hole, climb into said hide with a few beers and when the animals come for a drink of water let’s kill them “for sport”….THAT ONE is KILLING to me, NOT HUNTING…wtf is the SPORT in THAT?
So, with no need for name calling and PLEASE NO POLITICS (LOL), can you help me understand the last two?
Glyn |
First of all, I believe hunting in america stems from the 1600's-1700's when people left england to come to america to form a better country, which they did, and had to provide food for themselves, i.e. hunting and trapping, farming,etc. So, since the USA is relatively a young country, there is a relatively strong background in hunting I would say to more established countries, where hunting may be viewed differently.
6) Although seeming contradictory, Actually big game hunting for trophies (like in Africa) I believe provides a great deal of money for wildlife preservation, patrolling for poachers, preserving land for wild animals, etc, so actually sacrificing some animals provides much good for the rest of the herd than by not collecting needed money from licenses. I personally eat, or my dad does, the animals I kill, and it is wrong to waste food, but how much food is really wasted in the US compared to all hunted animals whose meat is not consumed?
7) Ambush is the natural way to hunt. Big cats, crocks, birds, spiders, all animals ambush their prey. Actually, the military teaches the grunts, fighter pilots, etc, to hide, ambush your opponent before he sees you, so he doesn't kill you. There was a war called the American revolution where a group of soldiers wore bright red uniforms and stood out in the open. Their opposition dressed in brown and hid behind trees, brush, etc, so they wouldn't be seen first. A remarkable logical deduction. I guess you're one of those red coats. I bet if you try to hunt wearing a red coat out in the middle of a field, it's going to be challanging to see, let alone get a shot at any worthwhile game.
