She was, like, ‘I know what you’re talking about! This is so exciting.’”

eh, this is too easy....

Is there anything more romantic than watching your wife kill an animal with a gun?

2 - Honeymooning in the Dominican, evidently. That struck me as even stranger than a romantic hunting trip.

Maybe Kimbrel has friends in the DR. Does the dollar get you more in the Dominican compared to Mexico or, I dunno, the ABC islands?

Is there anything more romantic than watching your wife kill an animal with a gun?

with a knife

i wonder if she gutted and skinned it too

prolly not - that is icky-poo and would mess up her nails

#2. Well, toward the end of the classic movie Double Indemnity, Barbara Stanwyck shoots Fred MacMurray in the gut, twice, but then stops and tells him that she didn't know how much she really loved him till she couldn't squeeze off that third shot.

The honeymoon "in the Dominican" was probably in Punta Cana, a self-contained tourism zone in the extreme east of the country, facing Puerto Rico. I know a couple who got married there. Although it's always possible that they went to hang out with Cristhian Martinez's family.

What would be the most romantic animal to kill with a knife? I say a salmon.

What would be the most romantic animal to kill with a knife?

Muntjac.

I am having a hard time imagining her shooting a dear.

http://media-cache-lt0.pinterest.com/upload/31666003600645286_Oy8xHpvg_c.jpg

He had better hope that she's not a great marksman when she finds him in flagrante delicto with Another Woman.

What would be the most romantic animal to kill with a knife?

A Kimbrel?

I'm sure the dear had it coming.

I grew up in a place where school was closed for the first day of deer hunting season, and the front page of the newspaper the next day was full of pictures of dead dear and the morons that shot them. The whole thing was disappointing, disturbing, take your pick. Today, it's amazing to me that 1) there are still so many who consider this sport and 2) society at large doesn't shun these idiots more.

I grew up in a place where school was closed for the first day of deer hunting season, and the front page of the newspaper the next day was full of pictures of dead dear and the morons that shot them.

Rural mid-Michigan? I had the same experience growing up.

What would be the most romantic animal to kill with a knife?

A lot of Americans don't know that a Canadian marriage can't be consummated until the bride has bested a grizzly bear with a knife. Though younger generations are now starting shun that as unnecessarily traditional and kill (or are killed by) black bears, or imported Honey Bears from Cambodia (who are well known for their cowardice).

This largely explains why Canada's population is so low despite having so much space for people.

Rural mid-Michigan? I had the same experience growing up.

Yeah, you nailed it. Wow.

Today, it's amazing to me that 1) there are still so many who consider this sport and 2) society at large doesn't shun these idiots more.

I'm with you. Just wait 'til your food falls down.

Exactly. People should buy their meat at the supermarket, where no animals were harmed in making it.

What's strange about a honeymoon in the DR? Seems like a pretty typical place for a honeymoon to me.

Exactly. People should buy their meat at the supermarket, where no animals were harmed in making it.

They aren't closing school and parading pictures because thank god everyone will be able to eat now. They are doing so because people love to kill for sport. This is what people question with the statements above.


What's strange about a honeymoon in the DR? Seems like a pretty typical place for a honeymoon to me.

I also did not understand this.

This thread is all deer, dear, and D.R.

As I understand it Hudson, Medlen, and Minor do most of the actual hunting. Kimbrel just sits around waiting for a phone call, then he rides in, they hand him the gun, and he finishes the job.

They aren't closing school and parading pictures because thank god everyone will be able to eat now. They are doing so because people love to kill for sport. This is what people question with the statements above.

No, the problem people have above is "your past time is weird and confusing to me, but mine is perfectly normal and reasonable." Hunting? Totally, unfathomably weird. Fantasy football? Why that's obviously normal! LARPing? Dork! Historical simulation leagues with dead baseball players? WHAT?!

People hunt because they like to hunt, and the vast majority of hunters take the kill home for food. I'm no great fan of the "farm hunt" thing where you "hunt" an animal that's inside a hunting compound, but the antipathy toward "things I don't like because I didn't get along with the redneck contingent of my childhood high school parking lot" is nothing but infantile resentment.

I agree with 23. There's nothing wrong with hunting as long as it is regulated and I've never used anything more than a pellet gun in my life to shot at cans. I think people tend to look down on hunting because hunters who engage in it are more likely to have views that they disagree with. Same thing with NASCAR.

No, the problem people have above is "your past time is weird and confusing to me, but mine is perfectly normal and reasonable." Hunting? Totally, unfathomably weird. Fantasy football? Why that's obviously normal! LARPing? Dork! Historical simulation leagues with dead baseball players? WHAT?!

People who object to hunting are typically not objecting to it being "weird." If they found it weird, they would just roll their eyes and not participate (see: NASCAR, line dancing, etc). Instead, they are objecting because they find it immoral to hunt and kill animals for sport. Surely you see a difference there, even if you don't agree, right?

Instead, they are objecting because they find it immoral to hunt and kill animals for sport. Surely you see a difference there, even if you don't agree, right?

Are these people vegans? Do they watch boxing or MMA or football? Because if they aren't vegans, they're getting meat from somewhere. And I don't care how humanely you might raise your grass fed organic beef, at the end of the day, someone's stringing him up by his back legs and cutting his throat so his blood drains out. And most hunters don't hunt "for sport." It's a sportsmanlike activity. There's an entertainment factor involved. But most hunters hunt for food and sport, not merely to go shoot a living thing for fun. (The cases of Dick Cheney pheasant "hunting" with Smithers out front flushing the cage raised birds for the great man to slaughter is the exception, not he rule.)

There's nothing more morally repulsive about hunting than there is about watching college or professional football.

People hunt because they like to hunt

Keeping in mind that hunting is killing for sport, that's exactly what I said.


and the vast majority of hunters take the kill home for food.

I'd be curious about this figure natiowide. But it's beside my point.

If you want to equate the confusion about hunting for sport with the confusion about LARPing, go right ahead. I won't argue that the anti-hunting contingent is among the most shrill around; but the comparison of hunting to fantasy football from an opposition standpoint is similarly infantile.


I think people tend to look down on hunting because hunters who engage in it are more likely to have views that they disagree with. Same thing with NASCAR.

I'm sure that there are people who look down on hunters because they have views they disagree with. A very large and not at all insignificant percentage of the people who look down on hunters do so because they find killing for sport anywhere from pretty gross to morally unacceptable.

There's an entertainment factor involved. But most hunters hunt for food and sport, not merely to go shoot a living thing for fun.

I'll back down if I see some data on this; but without it, I'm just not taking your word for an 85%-90% figure of food vs. fun. And "sport" is the same thing as fun.


There's nothing more morally repulsive about hunting than there is about watching college or professional football.

From a philosophically-inclined mind, this is ridiculous. Death is something in the world more notable than watching men wrestle.

Braves’ Kimbrel will keep pushing

I guess he's a pusher.

From a philosophically-inclined mind, this is ridiculous. Death is something in the world more notable than watching men wrestle

Death to an animal, which everyone in this conversation is part and parcel to barring vegetarians and vegans, vs gladiatorial combat and the "theater of pain" of football on _humans?_ There's a pretty long line of moral reasoning that distances "what we do to animals" from "what we do to people," no?

Again, if you're up in arms about hunting because the deer gets killed, you better damn well be eliminating any meat from your diet soon. Because Bessie didn't volunteer that hunk of red muscle meat for your filet, buddy.

Again, if you're up in arms about hunting because the deer gets killed...

I'm not sure if you mean personally or plurally; but I'm not, and you know I'm not.


There's a pretty long line of moral reasoning that distances "what we do to animals" from "what we do to people," no?

If you think so, I'd like to hear why.

Rural mid-Michigan? I had the same experience growing up.
Yeah, you nailed it. Wow.

It was (& I'm sure still is) the same in rural southwest Arkansas, not surprisingly. Except for the lack of a daily paper (I'm assuming there's still a small weekly, though it's a different one from when I was growing up).

With all due respect to Sam, the hunters tended to be slope-browed, slack-jawed rednecks ... even more so than the rest of us, I mean.

If you think so, I'd like to hear why.

Is it okay to raise a child from birth, feed it reasonably well, then slaughter it and eat it?

There is, I think, a moral imperative to make peace with being omnivorous (obviously vegetarians and vegans can excuse themselves from it, though one can apply arguments to the ethics of killing plants/funguses for food.) I don't hunt, but I do fish and then kill and eat said fish. And yes, I enjoy fishing. Not for the sake of killing fish, but let's say for the sport of it (I'm not sure it's quite right, but it's close enough). If you eat animals, but can't make peace with killing them, then that's immoral. Not celebrating your position in the circle of life.

With all due respect to Sam, the hunters tended to be slope-browed, slack-jawed rednecks

A fact that has nothing whatsoever to do with the moral issues of hunting as an activity. Your discomfort culturally with people you feel intellectually and socially superior to is another question altogether.

Is it okay to raise a child from birth, feed it reasonably well, then slaughter it and eat it?

And your response when a vegan says "No, and this is okay for no living creature"?

A lot of Americans don't know that a Canadian marriage can't be consummated until the bride has bested a grizzly bear with a knife. Though younger generations are now starting shun that as unnecessarily traditional and kill (or are killed by) black bears, or imported Honey Bears from Cambodia (who are well known for their cowardice).

I heard that if the bear wins, the groom is obligated to marry the bear. Can anyone confirm this?

And your response when a vegan says "No, and this is okay for no living creature"?

I've exempted vegans from the calculus already. Are you a vegan?

I heard that if the bear wins, the groom is obligated to marry the bear. Can anyone confirm this?

Most Canadian grooms can't tell the difference either way.

There's an entertainment factor involved. But most hunters hunt for food and sport, not merely to go shoot a living thing for fun.

I'll back down if I see some data on this; but without it, I'm just not taking your word for an 85%-90% figure of food vs. fun. And "sport" is the same thing as fun.

I doubt any such data exists, but speaking as a guy who enjoys guns and shooting, I know plenty of people who hunt and I don't know a single one who doesn't eat what they kill. Not one. Presumably it's more fun for them than buying their meat from the grocery, but why is that a bad thing?

I've exempted vegans from the calculus already. Are you a vegan?

Nope. Doesn't mean my asking how you put them into the calculus is invalid. They are indeed here. I am still curious

My thing with the acceptance of the argument against hunting is that I see a moral and philosophiccal difference between the fun and sport of killing vs. the killing for food. As I said above, I'm not willing to take it on faith over numbers that the majority of hunters are doing so for food. (Let alone the figure of who is doing so PRIMARILY for food vs. simply eating what they had fun killing.)

I come from farmers, I understand and accept the use of animals to survive. The posts that started this were about the sport and glee involved in hunting. I don't think an utter distaste for that is close to an invalid position.

Your discomfort culturally with people you feel intellectually and socially superior to is another question altogether.

Are we to assume that back in the swamps where you grew up, the cream of society was to be found in the deer stands & duck blinds on a regular basis?

Presumably it's more fun for them than buying their meat from the grocery

That, and the flavor is different, since it's a different animal.

My granddad used to hunt rabbits for food, back during the Depression. He'd set some snares, spend a couple hours gathering berries and mushrooms and stuff like that, and whatever he found/caught and took home was what they had for dinner.

Eating wild mushrooms seems like a pretty big leap of faith to me, but I guess if you're hungry enough, you do what you have to do.

The federal government has been using various measures (including sharpshooters) to thin out the deer population in Washington D.C.'s Rock Creek Park for almost a year now, because there are just too damn many of them running around.

Hunting seasons don't exist solely for the purpose of people's personal entertainment. Good luck trying to explain that to some of the classic ignoramuses around here who think they know everything though.

Hunting seasons don't exist solely for the purpose of people's personal entertainment. Good luck trying to explain that to some of the classic ignoramuses around here who think they know everything though.

Annoyingly, I left out above the thinning of the herd due to our inevitable takeover of the planet from the things I could accept. Does this mean I continue to know everything, or not? Considering that isn't what anyone was talking about anyhow, as usual the bee in Joey's bonnet has nothing to sting.

Nope. Doesn't mean my asking how you put them into the calculus is invalid. They are indeed here. I am still curious.

Vegans have more of a platform to argue against hunting than omnivores, certainly. The case that "all animals should be treated like humans" is far more structurally sound than "we shouldn't hunt deer, but cows are yummy good." At least they're drawing their moral line in the trace of some realistic, biologically meaningful line in the world. I have a buddy who is a pescatarian. His moral line is drawn at "no mammals." Fish and poultry good. Mammal bad. I guess he could eat reptile and frogs too, if it came to it. Neither accepting or denying his moral claim, at least that line of thought is based on some real factor in the world. "I am a mammal. I do not want to be eaten. I should not eat other mammals."

Vegans draw that line between biological kingdoms. Where most of the US assumes the distinction of consciousness, pain and suffering is drawn between humans and "everything else" (almost certainly wrong, biologically), vegans draw the line between animal and plant. (This assumes, of course, that on some quantum level that we have no access to outside of peyote or LSD, plant life isn't screaming in pain when we pluck their baby pea pods from their loving arms.) Again, without agreeing or disagreeing, it's a rational line to draw. (Of interest, to be functionally sound about these things, a morally incented vegan - someone who is a vegan because it is wrong to consume animals or animal by product - who refuses to so much as eat a chicken egg, should by comparative logic be pro-life in his or her personal beliefs. If a chicken egg can't be sacrificed for breakfast, certainly a human ova must be respected and preserved as well. But that's another tangent altogether.)

So, to sum up, if vegans argue to me "hunting is horrific because killing animals is morally evil" I might disagree, but they have a foundation to stand on, argumentatively. If someone who's just finished noshing down a side of bacon makes the same argument, something is amiss. Which brings us to...

My thing with the acceptance of the argument against hunting is that I see a moral and philosophiccal difference between the fun and sport of killing vs. the killing for food. As I said above, I'm not willing to take it on faith over numbers that the majority of hunters are doing so for food. (Let alone the figure of who is doing so PRIMARILY for food vs. simply eating what they had fun killing.)

I come from farmers, I understand and accept the use of animals to survive. The posts that started this were about the sport and glee involved in hunting. I don't think an utter distaste for that is close to an invalid position.

This is a distinct argument from "it's morally wrong to kill the animal," but still questionable I think. Your case seems to reduce to "it's okay to kill the animal, so long as you feel sorry about it and make a sad face while he bleeds out." That is...tentatively less than compelling. I would posit that it makes little difference to Bambi or Bessie if the guy that kills them is sad or gleeful after the fact of their deaths. What with the being dead and all. "You can kill, just don't enjoy it" is a weak construction.

Even if we were to grant the argument that the thrill of the blood-kill is "invalid," then you're left needing to apply that same moral calculus against other bloodsports, such as football and boxing/MMA.

Are we to assume that back in the swamps where you grew up, the cream of society was to be found in the deer stands & duck blinds on a regular basis?

Many of the hunters I grew up with are people I'd prefer to never interact with again in my life. Many of them were perfectly fine people who happened to like to hunt. Many of the people whom I disagree with politically, religiously and generally speaking on every subject imaginable are hunters. Many of them are not. The one thing doesn't imply the other, and to the original point here, the fact that you're socially uncomfortable with people you think are culturally, economically and intellectually beneath you doesn't mean that hunting is evil or wrong.

This is a distinct argument from "it's morally wrong to kill the animal," but still questionable I think. Your case seems to reduce to "it's okay to kill the animal, so long as you feel sorry about it and make a sad face while he bleeds out." That is...tentatively less than compelling. I would posit that it makes little difference to Bambi or Bessie if the guy that kills them is sad or gleeful after the fact of their deaths. What with the being dead and all. "You can kill, just don't enjoy it" is a weak construction.

It's an odd, puritanical argument that hinges on the actor's enjoyment of the act being the critical element that determines "wrongness".

the fact that you're socially uncomfortable with people you think are culturally, economically and intellectually beneath you doesn't mean that hunting is evil or wrong.

Actually, most of the people to whom I'm referring were (& probably still are) economically above me & my family (well, I don't have any family anymore, but god knows the cats bring in no income); as of middle school, for instance, I'm pretty sure I was the only white kid in my class to qualify for free lunches, for instance.

Another (apparent) stereotype shattered, I suppose.

I'm not morally opposed to hunting as long as the animals are eaten, and I'm not a vegetarian, but I just don't like killing anything. Even bugs. Maybe that makes me a huge hypocrite, but I yam what I yam.

I'm not comfortable with hunting simply because I can't understand why someone would want to kill something. It's not really a political statement.