....and that's an idiot statement. Think about it.Originally Posted by bigboab
Use Logic Or STFU!
....and that's an idiot statement. Think about it.
mostly harmless
It's probably one of the starkest cultural differences.
People in the UK don't understand why someone would want to own a gun. People in the US don't understand why someone wouldn't want to own a gun.
You're never going to change our minds, and we're never going to change your minds.
During the recent massacre, it was observed that while the British news services and correspondents were talking about gun control, none of the American ones were.
Guns are in the US culture, and they're there to stay. I just hope things don't ever get like that over here.
Use Logic Or STFU!
I disagree. You guys over there have a narrow view of the US. All you see is the NRA and some hunters on TV and group everyone together and it's quite foolish.
Also I and many Americans understand why someone would not want to own a gun. I hope I never have to use it for protection but rather have it than not have it due to some made up "no gun ideal" or cuz I'm scared.
America is a helluva lot larger than the UK. Everyone here doesn't want to own a gun. I'd bet more of us have no desire to own a gun than all brats.
I don't know what news you watch but all I've seen were talks about gun control (which I'm for).
I support a person's right to own a gun but not everyone, not so easily, and not in all cases. To me there is a difference between gun control and banning guns.
I don't care to change UKan's minds (you are not all for gun contol anyway). However, calling gun ownership mentally suspect goes too far and from a logical standpoint, it's a stupid fucking assertion.
Simplify
Busyman...do you need a hug?
there is no god
If it's hunting purely for "fun'' then you have a point with which I agree, however very little hunting here is purely for that reason. The hunters eat what they kill and the prey has at least a chance of escaping, something not likely in a slaughter house.Hunters? If you are asking me to agree to anyone killing a living creature as a sport or for pleasure you have not a hope in hell.
One could make the argument that with modern intensive farming there is enough meat to go around without having to hunt. One could make a cruelty argument against hunting, but unless you are a vegan I wouldn't give that argument any weight.
In short:
Twits on horses with 100 plus hounds chasing a fox......bad
tracking down, shooting and eating your prey.....ok.
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
Poster
BT Rep: +1
Twits On Horses, Twits With Guns, same thing to me.If it's hunting purely for "fun'' then you have a point with which I agree, however very little hunting here is purely for that reason. The hunters eat what they kill and the prey has at least a chance of escaping, something not likely in a slaughter house.Hunters? If you are asking me to agree to anyone killing a living creature as a sport or for pleasure you have not a hope in hell.
One could make the argument that with modern intensive farming there is enough meat to go around without having to hunt. One could make a cruelty argument against hunting, but unless you are a vegan I wouldn't give that argument any weight.
In short:
Twits on horses with 100 plus hounds chasing a fox......bad
tracking down, shooting and eating your prey.....ok.
The fox had a chance of escaping too, not that I agreed with Fox Hunting.. Can't remember one being shot from about 100 yards or over.
If you are living in the wild and hunting for food that is OK.
Killing for killings sake is wrong.
The best way to keep a secret:- Tell everyone not to tell anyone.
Use Logic Or STFU!
Here we go. You may have seen folks on TV hunting just for fun.Twits On Horses, Twits With Guns, same thing to me.
The fox had a chance of escaping too, not that I agreed with Fox Hunting.. Can't remember one being shot from about 100 yards or over.
If you are living in the wild and hunting for food that is OK.
Killing for killings sake is wrong.
That doesn't make it so for everyone or even most. In fact, everyone I know personally that hunts, eats what they kill. I think it's plain stupid to kill an animal like a deer and not eat it.
One does not have to live in the wild to hunt wild animals for food.You can just fuck right off if you are gonna insult anyone that owns a gun.
It's ok if people wanna protect themselves with something besides harsh language.
there is no god
I'm wondering what you are arguing that I haven't agreed with. I pointed to fox hunting as an example of "killing for killings sake"
Twits On Horses, Twits With Guns, same thing to me.
The fox had a chance of escaping too, not that I agreed with Fox Hunting.. Can't remember one being shot from about 100 yards or over.
If you are living in the wild and hunting for food that is OK.
Killing for killings sake is wrong.
Why does there have to be a distinction of "living in the wild" to make hunting for your meal ok?
I am going to have BBQ, I could go to the store and buy meat that someone else corralled into a pen and killed or I could go out and track the animal down and kill it myself....... Explain the moral difference to me because I don't get it. (I don't go hunting myself but I have killed my own food in the past)
IMO with the exception of the hunter possibly missing and injuring the animal hunting is FAR more humane than intensive farming.
The next time you are in the store looking at your pre packed meat ask yourself this.......did that animal die from natural causes or was rounded up and herded into a cramped trailer and driven to be slaughtered?
BTW. I assume you are going to condemn the fishermen that supplied you with the fish you have with your chips.
Last edited by vidcc; 05-01-2007 at 05:07 PM.
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
Poster
BT Rep: +1
I think angling is next on the list.I'm wondering what you are arguing that I haven't agreed with. I pointed to fox hunting as an example of "killing for killings sake"
Twits On Horses, Twits With Guns, same thing to me.
The fox had a chance of escaping too, not that I agreed with Fox Hunting.. Can't remember one being shot from about 100 yards or over.
If you are living in the wild and hunting for food that is OK.
Killing for killings sake is wrong.
Why does there have to be a distinction of "living in the wild" to make hunting for your meal ok?
IMO with the exception of the hunter possibly missing and injuring the animal hunting is FAR more humane than intensive farming.
The next time you are in the store looking at your pre packed meat ask yourself this.......did that animal die from natural causes or was rounded up and herded into a cramped trailer and driven to be slaughtered?
BTW. I assume you are going to condemn the fishermen that supplied you with the fish you have with your chips.
The best way to keep a secret:- Tell everyone not to tell anyone.
there is no god
I'm not talking about angling, I'm talking about fishing. It's hunting on a large scale.
I think angling is next on the list.
As to all hunters that live in cities, so what if they enjoy it, as long as they are eating their kill. What's to say that the guy in your slaughter house doesn't enjoy his job?
I'll look for a video later showing chickens being rounded up for slaughter.
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
You can just fuck right off if you are gonna insult anyone that owns a gun.
Bookmarks