:
: In the case of the white hunter who spends big bucks for lodging, guiding, and outfitting it seems to be more a greed that reveals a need to bring back a trophy which will somehow designate the killer as someone to be revered. : : I mean some rich dude out of Alabama who goes to northern B.C. for trophy hunting isn't considered respectable by most folks in Canada but back home where most of the wilderness has been destroyed and turned into shopping malls and subdivisions he's a "hunter". Pretty lame huh?
: Yup it is pretty lame. This is coming from a hunter who lives in San Francisco where the wilderness has been destroyed and turned into shoping malls. To me a guy who payes foy everything and only goes for a
: trophy isn't a hunter. A real hunter drives to his own place and goes out to hunt with his friends, not with people he just met. Plus a good hunter doesn't kill for a head he kills for the meat.
If you want meat, Hunter & Proud, you can go to the store. You kill animals for reasons going beyond feeding yourself, and it's that aspect that anti-hunters like myself find puzzling, and even disturbing. If you told me you lived in the deep bush and had to hunt to feed yourself, I'd have never uttered a word in opposition. The fact that you live in a city, with plentiful food, means that killing animals satisfies some deep urge within you. Since not all people have that urge or, if they do, do not act on it, you ought to contemplate while you feel you must -- or, as you put it, why you're a hunting "fanatic."
You're far better than the sport hunters, slob hunters, and others that both you and Qx rightly deride, but still, why kill when you don't have to?
