Wisconsin Encourages 10-Year-Olds to Hunt, No Safety Training Required
Published June 23, 2009 @ 02:00PM PT
Note: I removed the photo that was included here because of increasing discomfort with how visible the kids' faces were. The photo showed too very young boys posing with a gun about as big as their bodies and a dead bloody-mouthed deer.
The state of Wisconsin is worried that not as many people are hunting these days, but they have a plan: start legally arming grade school kids.
The legislature has passed, and the governor is expected to sign, a bill making it easier for children to hunt, by lowering the legal age from 12 to 10 (that's fourth or fifth grade) and by removing safety-training requirements.
Now the kids--according to the law, and we could have a whole other conversation about how likely it is that all the points of law will be (or currently are) followed by everyone--need merely be accompanied by an adult, with only one weapon between them and with the adult staying within arm's length of the child. And I want to be clear: it is my understanding that there was a safety training requirement when only kids 12 years and older were allowed to wield deadly weapons and kill animals for fun, but now that the kids will be two years younger, two years less mature, and two years less responsible, no more safety requirement--and they're "offer[ing] youngsters reduced license fees in an effort to preserve the state's hunting culture" too. Someone, please, explain the logic to me. Explain to me how arming "youngsters" is a good idea.
Oh wait--here's the logic:
The state and the organizations and businesses that revolve around hunting make money off hunters, who have to pay for licenses, fees, guns, ammo, equipment, etc. And if the number of hunters drops--as has been the case in Wisconsin--the state and the hunting interests don't bring in as much dough. But if all hunting adults have to do is accompany their kids as part of this "mentoring program," rather than go through the hassle of putting their kids through actual safety training, and if they can now take their kids for even cheaper, they're more likely to buy licenses for their children, hand deadly firearms to their children, take them out into the woods, teach them to kill, and (here's the important part) make lifelong, longtime-license-purchasing hunters out of them. Apparently, the earlier you indoctrinate teach someone to kill, the better and the more likely it is to stick. Lawmakers and hunters hope this program will bring more women into the fold too--adults with mentors won't have to go through safety training either. From the Chicago Tribune:
"It's important for us to include young people in the activities that a lot of us hold near and dear," said Rep. Scott Gunderson, R-Waterford, who has pushed for years to lower the hunting age. "This is about our heritage."
The mentorship program is designed to attract not only more young hunters but adults who want to "test drive" the sport, said Randy Stark, chief conservation warden for the Department of Natural Resources. He said he expects to see more women hunt with the program.
I wrote exactly a month ago, in "Women, Girls, and the So-Called Achievement of Killing," about how much these attitudes disturb me. This need hunters feel to bring as many into the killing fold as possible and the way it is celebrated when children and women join in on the killing--these are not things for humanity to be proud of. Hunting is not a "proud tradition" or a practice that teaches anyone, child or adult, to respect "nature." And it's disconcerting that most news outlets can cover a story such as this with barely a moment (if even a moment, in some cases) of questioning and opposition. And of course, there is rarely any mention of "killing" or of the hunted animals themselves--just the "sport" and the "tradition."
Adults are already taking children 10 years old (and younger) on hunting trips, in states across the nation, legally and illegally both (apparently, 30 states have no minimum hunting age). Does Wisconsin or any other state really need a law expressly encouraging more kids to carry guns out into the woods?
We worry about teaching kids violence via movies and comic books and video games. We worry about them finding guns and knives and other weapons. And then we consciously, intentionally put guns and bullets in their hands and tell them killing is fun and offer them incentives to start killing. What a world.
Share this Post
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
EmailRelated Posts
Author
-
Stephanie is an independent animal rights advocate, a vegan, a tree-hugging environmentalist, and a freelance editor and writer. She lives in St. Louis with an aging corgi-lab and an adolescent rescued pit bull.
Wow I do not understand the logic! If you are lowering the hunting age you would think you would adjust the training material so that the younger child could understand and complete the test. Then increase checking for licenses!
The funny thing is that the NRA should have a problem with this too. The only thing that saves their case about kids and guns is education. I really think the NRA Should shut this down quick to prove how important it is to educate gun safety!
The lowering the age wow hmm. I would like to hear the pros and cons from child psychologists that both hunt and believe in positive reinforcement.
Be Helpful, Not Hurtful
Posted by Charles Hancock on 06/23/2009 @ 06:06PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The only safe gun is NO gun. Have to disagree about "the only thing that saves the NRA's case" has nothing to do with gun education.
It is all about money and politics. There are no "safe" guns. Something always has to die. By accident or choice. There is no other reason to have one. If you feel you have to justify what you do by calling it a tradition, or a defense, or a sport, then how could it be the right thing to do?
Anyone forcing a child to kill something or learn to kill something before they are 18 yrs of age and able to decide for themselves- it is on many levels a form of child abuse. They do it to "fit in" and feel accepted by their parents and their peers. They are not born to want to kill. It is taught. Teach empathy at a young age and let the children grow up and decide for themselves.
Gun safety is an oxymoron.
Posted by Michele McCowan on 06/24/2009 @ 07:14PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
"Look Ma! I kilt me a critter!"
Remind me to stay out of the woods in Wisconsin.
Posted by Kim Johnson on 06/23/2009 @ 06:34PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Oh god. that is so disturbing.
Posted by Michelle Taylor on 06/23/2009 @ 09:16PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Wow... this is horrible on so many levels...
I just posted about a woman and her young hunter son... I thought it was terribly disturbing... Then I see this - with a whole state of kid killers, being given permission to hunt even younger... and without "skills". I'm just amazed at what is done to keep the dominant, predatory culture in power. This is just sick.
Should we think though, that things are improving in the lack of interest in hunting if they are this desperate?
Oh, and I deliberately didn't use any graphic photos because I thought it would be inappropriate... (kids and all) - But Wow! There's a lot of impact in the visuals of grinning monster children and the dead animals they killed. It's awful!
Posted by Bea Elliott on 06/23/2009 @ 11:25PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I haven't seen your post yet, Bea. I'll have to go check it out.
But as high as emotions run on topics such as this, I'm still terribly uncomfortable referring to these kids as "monster children"; I don't think that's really appropriate or accurate. I don't even think of many adult hunters as "monsters." It's about what you're taught, what's ingrained in you from the time you're very wrong. It's not that these kids (or many adult hunters) are sadistic and cruel--there's just a disconnect regarding what it is they're actually doing because of the society they've grown up in and what they've been taught. Perhaps I'm more sensitive to this because I'm from rural area, and I have loved ones who hunt, but much as I hate it, I know they're not evil people.
I was unsure about including the photo as well and may remove it.
Posted by Stephanie Ernst on 06/24/2009 @ 06:41AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Wow--"from the time you're very wrong"? That was supposed to be "very young." Telling slip, huh? :)
Posted by Stephanie Ernst on 06/24/2009 @ 06:43AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Tomorrow's serial killers.
Coutesy of their parents.
Posted by L C on 06/24/2009 @ 01:20AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Sort of in line with my response to Bea's comment, I don't think it's necessarily appropriate or helpful to make negative remarks or exaggerations about the kids themselves. Obviously, lots and lots of kids who hunt don't grow up to be serial killers
Posted by Stephanie Ernst on 06/24/2009 @ 06:52AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
You're exactly right.
Not all of them, just some. Can we afford that?
Science is my basis, not emotion, for my response.
On a personal note: I, too, used to have hunters in my family who taught me better while I was growing up & stopped. It does reinforce violence in children who turn into adults.
I don't argue with scientific experts (& personal experience) who have proved otherwise, but ty 4 your reply.
Your response also sounds contradictory of more like you protecting your beloved family members (understandably) & not the animals rights.
Posted by L C on 06/24/2009 @ 07:35AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I'm already worn down from dealing with comments in multiple places today, so I'm sorry if my patience isn't quite what it usually is, but...
My family members know how I feel about their hunting. I don't defend or condone what they do. And if you'll wander through this blog, you'll find many posts coming down on hunting (and hunters). I am a staunch defender and advocate of animal rights, and your suggestion to the contrary is incredibly offensive.
I mentioned my family members only to point out how demonizing a group as monsters or serial killers is neither helpful nor accurate. I wish more animal advocates had actual relationships with people who have raised and killed animals on farms and who have hunted. It would make us all more aware of how we come across, of what attitudes are and aren't effective, and of how inappropriate, offensive, and counterproductive some of our rhetoric is.
And I disagree that your response is based on science. Yes, we know that serial killers often torture and kille nonhuman animals before humans, but I know of no evidence that any signficant number of (the many, many--unfortunately) run-of-the-mill hunters have gone on to become serial killers (of humans). And those kinds of unsubstantiated, inflammatory remarks don't help our cause. I'm not saying that hunting isn't part of or doesn't lead to violent tendencies in general--that's a whole other discussion--or that hunting in itself isn't absolutely wrong, but the suggestion that any notable number (or percentage) of hunters go on to become serial killers isn't backed up. And if we want to be taken seriously, we can't make claims like that we can't back up.
Posted by Stephanie Ernst on 06/24/2009 @ 08:00AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I'll let the animalrightsdisussion answer your reply:
http://www.animalrightsdiscussion.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=25336
http://www.animalrightsdiscussion.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=4986
Posted by L C on 06/24/2009 @ 08:46AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Whether it's a serial killer, but a slaughterhouse worker or animal abuser, learning violence & heavy weaponry is wrong.
Would you teach that to your own children?
Murder is murder. Plain and simple.
Also, the scientific & AR community would never agree with your statement.
And it HAS been proven. Giving weaponry to children has a higher stastic rate of them using violence or murder as a means to an end in the future.
You are kidding, right? Why not let the animal rights community see the truth & put the actual photo back up. Who are you protecting?
Case closed !!!!
Posted by L C on 06/24/2009 @ 09:01AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I don't even know what you're responding to or arguing with me about anymore, L.C. I never said increased violent tendencies weren't linked--what I've said in the post(s) and comments both should make it clear that I don't disagree! I've only said that implying that a large percentage of hunters become serial killers is extreme and unsubstantiated. You seem to want to argue just for the sake of arguing. I'm done engaging on this.
No, I will not put the photo back up. Those two young kids don't deserve to have their faces shown in such close-up here just because their parents have taught them to kill--they're kids. And technically, I'm not sure that I had the (legal) right to post the photo in the first place.
Posted by Stephanie Ernst on 06/24/2009 @ 09:28AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Oh, here's some more that us ARA people can read about challenging AR philosophy & rights:
http://www.animalrightsdiscussion.com/Forum/search.php?searchid=9908
Posted by L C on 06/24/2009 @ 09:31AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Disgusting and Disturbing on so many levels. And we pride ourselves on being the intellectually dominant species, ha. Deer are one of my favorite animals and it breaks my heart to see or hear of anyone killing them. Even though this is horrible to say I hope more humans get shot (on hunting trips) in Wisconsin...than maybe they'll reconsider the stupidity of their laws.
Posted by Kristen Magno on 06/24/2009 @ 06:18AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Has there been any attempts to stop/repeal this law?
Posted by Glenn Schreider on 06/24/2009 @ 07:43AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Yes Stephanie... you are right - these kids aren't monsters. The photos however, showing them happy about their kill make them look like such. I was shocked. I should have chosen my words better. It is the repressed, patriarchal culture that endorses this abomination that is monstrous.
I'd leave the photos up... There's more impact pointing to the horror than what words can convey: As a "civilized" species - we've got an awful lot of work to do.
Posted by Bea Elliott on 06/24/2009 @ 08:21AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
It is sad that most of the commentors have demonized hunting and hunters. I am an active hunter, environmentalist, animal rights activist, recycling, liberal organic gardner.I really hope that all of the other commenters are good gardners otherwise you will be a real tax on society when wal-mart fails. It is wonderful that your hearts hurt when you see an animal abused or mistreated or wiped off of the face of the earth. That is a part of what makes you human.
Sterphanie I am not disconnected from the kill when I take an animal. I would venture to say that not many hunters are. It affects me psycologically, emotionally, and physically. It has the same effects on most other hunters. I do not take the killl lightly. I am highly skilled with weapons. This is to minimize the suffering of the animals.
Kristen, You should be ashamed by what you said. It is easy to demonize people when they are one-dimensional, unfeeling, indoctrinated, less than intelligent, killers.
To all. It scares me that there is no discernable difference between a hunter that kills to provide food for his family and a poacher slaughtering an elephant to steal the ivory off of his face leaving the body to rot. It does not help your cause to alienate the hunter. Most of us are more interested in preserving the animal populations than destroying them. Kills are selective not indiscriminate. Without hunters, animals die from starvation caused by overpopulation. Most of the hunters that I know are highly concerned with the health of the animals they hunt. Most are active participants in the preservation of the species and habitat that they seek. I would venture to say that their "brute" actions have a more positive and direct impact on the environment than most liberal feelings ever have.
Please take the risk of connecting with a good hunter today. It is not to late for "the left" to realize that they need the support of the actual stewards of the land in order to accomplish their goals of protecting species and environment. We are not less than human with distorted psychology any more than you are.
Posted by Jared Wood on 06/24/2009 @ 09:09AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Sorry, Jared, but... No. Just no.
You are not an animal rights activist. If you kill animals, knowingly and willingly, when you do not have to, you are not remotely an animal rights activist. I've asked people not to demonize hunters themselves as irredeemable monsters (that is, as people who don't have other good qualities and who may be able to change), but I've no problem stating that hunting is unnecessary and morally reprehensibe. If killing affects you "psycologically, emotionally, and physically," don't do it.
And frankly, I don't care about hunters' efforts to "preserve" species when they're preserving them so that they can kill them. And you're wrong about the overpopulation and starvation. In many cases, numbers are intentionally kept high by state wildlife agencies, and natural predators are killed off, so that hunters can hunt.
What you fail to realize, Jared, is that animal rights adocates aren't just concerned with "protecting species"--we're also concerened with protecting individual animals, the ones you kill by choice, not because you have to.
Posted by Stephanie Ernst on 06/24/2009 @ 09:21AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Jared,
Your whole argument is extremely flawed.
You're not an ARA, no more than I'm President Obama.
Give us a break.
Please refer to the animalrightsdiscussion links above.
I just love how hunters just like to take a life or lives to "control the population" & whitewash for their own tradition and/or bloodlust or whatever nonsense reasons you hunters give all the time to justify taking a life or lives.
And how would hunters know who is sick & who isn't?
Do you hunters have x-ray vision that we don't?
Do you know that you kill mothers & leave the babies to starve to death?
Or when you don't get them with one hit & they run off only 2 die a horrible, agonizing death?
Oh yes, that sounds just like an ARA and a environmentalist with sound judgement and good merit.
Posted by L C on 06/24/2009 @ 09:48AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I think that the most disturbing thing is the parent of these childrn who actually allow their kids to do this and partner with the state government for that.
nice creatures they are raising huh?
Posted by Pamela Pendergraft on 06/24/2009 @ 09:15AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
My opinion - Hunting for the sake of survival is one thing, hunting for the sake of sport is criminal. If you hunt, and eat EVERYTHING you kill and respect the laws and the wilderness areas in general. Hunt on. If you go out to shoot because it makes you feel strong (or anthing else) and leave a wake of death and destruction wherever you tread, including a small mountain of beer cans, then strap on a set on antlers and let the real sport begin.
Posted by Glenn Schreider on 06/24/2009 @ 09:22AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Don't EVEN get me started about hunting!
Here's a fun story though. I was working in the public library on weekends a couple of years ago. The "Hunter Safety" meeting was going on in our conference room downstairs. The speaker and leader of the group was showing how to load his weapon "safely" with the gun pointed away from his face and...guess what?
You know what's coming! The gun accidentally went off and blew a hole through the ceiling (which was the floor that we we were working on!) Fortunately, no one was hurt. The headline on the front page of the paper the next day was titled "Oops!" Very ironic that the instructor had the accident. My problem with it started with loaded guns in a public building without our knowledge. The bullet hole is still there. They were not cited or fined. They never did pay for the damage it did to the library. Never even apologized. They laughed it off for months. These are the people that hunt "safely".
There are no hunting accidents. It's called Karma.
It is not about tradition, feeding families or population control. Period. That's a cop-out. Visit Montana or Wyoming. Then tell me that hunting is not just a "sport". Give me a break. People hunt because they CAN. It is about the money and power. Money for the state and the power of making a kill. The children out here learn at a very young age. They DO become serial killers of other species. They DO end up killing people's pets and each other. If you are taught it is okay to kill, then that is what you do. It all begins with the parents and the laws. You have to nip it in the bud. EDUCATION IS KEY. Real freedom is about having your own thoughts and being able to think for yourself. My father has guns and he taught me to shoot at a very young age. I chose not to. I didn't care whether he was my father or not, I made the choice to say no. Decades later, he still has guns, but feeds the wildlife near his home and does not hunt. Living with this lifestyle and tradition all around me...you will NEVER convince me that there is anything positive about hunting. And yes, when a hunter accidentally dies out there. I am not the least bit sad.
Posted by Michele McCowan on 06/24/2009 @ 11:10AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
It is disturbing that many of you believe that you are the arbitor of who is ARA and who isn't. Stephanie takes offense at being outed as not being ARA by one member then a few lines down outs me as not ARA.
I do believe that the blame for the removal of top predators has more to do with farmers and soccer moms than it does hunters. Most hunters that I know want the top predators back in nature and mourn the loss of them. It is the suburbanite that doesn't want a bear in their back yard. I would love to see it in mine. It is the farmer that doesn't want a bear to kill their calvesor trample their crops, so that they can kill the calves and sell them to non vegetarians out there.
I and many others also believe that the top predators in nature are actually man not bears,wolves, gators etc. If this is a discussion group then I believe that there is room for my "arguement" if that is what it should be called.
If I am going to eat meat(which I am), I am also going to kill that meat and I am not going to apologize for doing it. I am not a vegetarian. I do eat what I kill. Many are right that their are sport hunters out there and I also find that to be reprehensible. I do not kill caged/fenced animals and I do not bait them with attractants. In my opinion that is not hunting. And again I must state that all hunters are not the same. We are not monolithic.
To L C eho posted
"And how would hunters know who is sick & who isn't? Do you hunters have x-ray vision that we don't?Do you know that you kill mothers & leave the babies to starve to death?Or when you don't get them with one hit & they run off only 2 die a horrible, agonizing death?Oh yes, that sounds just like an ARA and a environmentalist with sound judgement and good merit."
Response: Yes LC many of us are able to tell which animals are sick/ill. When you spend the amount of time in nature that I do you actually get to know the specific animals that inhabit the area. It doesn't require x-ray vision. It does require a little thought. I can also look at my child and tell if they are sick. I'd imagine that even you posses this level of skill. Each animal has its own personality. Some deer are bossy,some are gentle. Some are itching for a fight. Some nurture their young. You get to know how each individual is acting and how they interact with their community. Nature is so amazing. Id' bet you'd really like to be out doing that. You are welcome to draw a line at which you withdraw your participation from the hunt. It is awesome to witness two bucks locking horns. They fight a few feet from you. Their are does in the balance. I don't believe that every person should hunt or participate in the killing of animals. That would be foolish of me. It would be an extreme if I felt that way. But it would be great if more people had seen that in real life.
For the ones that have more feelings towards animals than people. I must commend you on your feelings concerninng animals but, It is frightening to know that you can seperate yourselfs from an human enough that you do not hurt for the loss of life. Maybe you didn't think about what you said. Because if you had really felt that way...wow thats scary.
Posted by Jared Wood on 06/24/2009 @ 06:32PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Jared, I'm not going to respond to your comment point by point because, frankly, I'm tired--tired today in general and tired of dealing with these sorts of comments over the months. I'll limit myself to this:
I have no problem stating that you are absolutely not an animal rights advocate because, quite simply, you're not. Look up animal rights. Read, for example, the primer and other background posts in the "About" tab of this blog. The primary stance in animal rights is that animals have the right to live free of exploitation and that we humans don't have the right to exploit and kill animals unnecessarily for selfish desires. As someone who chooses not only to unnecessarily eat animals, but to unnecessarily kill them yourself, you automatically take yourself out of the realm of animal rights. Perhaps you support animal welfare, but you don't support animal rights.
Posted by Stephanie Ernst on 06/24/2009 @ 07:03PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
It may sound scary to you...but...
One of the kindest people that I met since moving to Montana is a 65 year old woman (vegetarian) who was an elementary teacher and children's librarian. Church goer, doesn't drink, touch drugs, or ever say anything bad about anyone- once made a comment while reading an obituary about a local soldier killed overseas (and I am quoting her) "I hate to say it, but I thank God every time I see that another soldier was killed in battle, and then read that he was a hunter and sportsman. It makes me kind of happy. Think of all of the people that won't die in the other country and all of the animals that will now live because he is gone."
I will never forget that. She only said it to me because she knew that I am opposed to hunting and war. It is not because we care any less about people. It is because we do care. Any "legal" murder is still a murder. If a hunter dies. Lives are saved. It's not scary. It's very real that many people think that way just won't say it. That is freedom of thought and speech, but you can't actually say it out loud. It is politically incorrect. But...no one can stop you from thinking it!
Her thoughts harmed no one. I can't say the same about someone who hunts animals or kills in war. The end result is not the same as a "thought". You cannot compare the two.
I did think about what I said. I will not ever be sad for the loss of a hunter in order to save the lives that he/she would have taken-legally or not. Humans are not (in my opinion) MORE important than animals. If there was not anything such as a feeling of superiority, then there would not be so much death- in any form or species.
Animals kill to survive. Humans don't. We have other choices. We are no more important...we just think that we are.
Here is a statistic for you about why we will never ALL agree. Four percent of all people do not have a conscience. That is one out of every 25 that secretly is sociopathic and can do anything at all and make decisions without ever feeling guilty.
That is the statistic from a few years ago. It is closer to 5% now. It always makes me wonder why people ask the killer "why?" when someone or something is killed. People WITH a conscience find it difficult to understand what it is like to NOT have one at all. Once you understand that, it is easier to never ask "why"? someone kills or teaches to kill. It is because they had the ability, the opportunity, and it just didn't bother them. Now...that is scary!
When you know better...you do better.
Posted by Michele McCowan on 06/24/2009 @ 08:00PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Jared... about knowing the animals... whether they are sick or bossy... shy... etc. It all reminds me of a woman who also "knows, feels and cares" for the animals so much. Perhaps you've heard of Ms. Grandin - darling of the animal user industries? With folks like the two of you it's such a relief to know that all the animals will be murdered with the utmost of thought fullness to their well being... NOT.
Posted by Bea Elliott on 06/24/2009 @ 07:18PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Call it what you will. You can define me out of whatever you want. I am advocating for what I belief to be animal rights. You are advocating for your definition of it. I'll keep up my education campaign you are welcome to keep up yours.
Posted by Jared Wood on 06/24/2009 @ 07:30PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
At the very least in definition - Animal Rights is the right of animals to not be "property". Everything is predicated on this. If anyone thinks they have the right to take another's life - they are violating all rights. No other "right" can exist without the right to one's own life. You cannot "hunt" - and kill and still "respect" an animal's rights. (period).
Posted by Bea Elliott on 06/24/2009 @ 08:06PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
That is your right, Jared. Education is key. Just make sure that you teach empathy for ALL sentient beings, not just the human species. (I am a former teacher)
We humans seem to destroy that which we do not understand. All species of animals love, hurt, fear, and bleed. Just be happy that you were not chosen to be one of the less "superior" of the animals.
Take a walk in "their" shoes (feet, hooves, paws). We, as humans will never understand the fear and suffering that they have to endure just to survive. Give them a break.
Justifying your actions and making excuses moves us further and further into the past. Time to make a change. I respect your opinion, but hope you think about it. Take a walk on the wildside. Feel their fear. It might help.
Posted by Michele McCowan on 06/24/2009 @ 08:20PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I think that we can agree to disagree, Jared. I think that your opinions are valid. The bottom line is that instead of gun rights and hunting rights and animal rights, if we had one law...one amendment to the Constitution it should be:
Harm no living thing intentionally. Wouldn't it be a nicer place to live? No fear by or for any species or race. Hmmmmm....
Posted by Michele McCowan on 06/24/2009 @ 08:28PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
well since i live in wisconsin im going to be a little scared when hunting season starts. The last thing i need is a 10 yr old shooting me in the ass thinking im a deer.
Posted by amanda goodwin on 06/24/2009 @ 08:47PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
California is about to conduct a state-wide draw for 25 youth-hunters ages 12-17 to each kill one deer in Placer County with bow-and-arrow. The excuse, as usual for other deer-slaughtering states, is deer "over-population".
http://www.facebook.com/posted.php?id=1680260475&share_id=109113203523&post_id=109113203523&comments=&share_footer109113203523=#/note.php?note_id=112942214883&id=554570644&ref=mf
Deer overpopulation is a myth:
http://beaelliott.blogspot.com/2009/06/hunting.html
The only reason there are "too many" is because we are breeding them!!! They are "secondary livestock" presented as "wild life"... for the purpose of recreation for hunters and animal killers. That's it. They are slaves, no different than cows, pigs and chickens... Secondary Livestock - that's what they are listed as according to the USDA...
Posted by Bea Elliott on 06/24/2009 @ 09:49PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
And the Californians later ask thmselves why everything seems to be comming appart in California.. Devine Justice?
Posted by Pamela Pendergraft on 06/24/2009 @ 10:09PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Yo all that believe that murdering a living being is a sport:
Whether you like it or not Animals are creations of God.
We as human beings have NO right to murder them just for the sake of sport.
How can some people in their right mind call the killing of innocent animals a SPORT? You are all sick things.
And I rather call you SICK than calling you despicable perverted "things" whose evil goes beyond comprehension.
God did not make the animals to serve us as shooting targets. He created most of them to sustain us.
What a shame that there are living things like you who lack of any compassion and find pleasure on extinguishing a life.
Because whether you like it or not they are living beings unlike you ... You are living "things"
I hope that when your time comes to face God He will be able to help you fogive yourself for your despicable sins.
And yes there is a God and this God I am talking about is not the war monguerer, hateful, xenophobic, incapable of forgiveness god that most of you believe in.
May the light of God bathe your souls and make you see the barbaric, perverted and senseless crimes you all are committing.
Posted by Pamela Pendergraft on 06/24/2009 @ 10:07PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Closed
Posted by Stephanie Ernst on 06/25/2009 @ 05:09AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.