how is trophy hunting not illegal?

Win in a melee combat versus some huge damn bear and I could stand you showing off trophies from this. But when you shoot harmless animals from within safe range just for the heck of it and then brag about it then you are a goddamn pussy.

^
 
killing = instinct | rape = motivated


not really the same... also, animals don't share "rape" as a profile for sexual intercourse. as humans understand rape to be a connection to power and/or gender dominance.

i can see how rape would coincide ...but not all killers are rapist and not all rapist's are killers.


i was simply suggesting that all humans are killers because of our primal instincts.
 
Don't deny it, we don't need to kill animals to eat. Being a vegetarian works just fine.

So basically we (rich western world people, we're not talking about people who have to eat meat to survive) are killing animals because we like how they taste.

It doesn't stop me eating meat, same as working conditions in the far east don't stop me buying electronics goods! I guess I'm just uncaring like that :devil:


Vegetarians kill plants. Everyone's a murderer.


I eat meat because it tastes good and I get the nutrients I need from it.

There is a reason it tastes good. It tastes good because that is what we evolved to eat
 
killing is a pure instinct that we have strayed from (in a modernity perspective). we are as much prey now as we were predators then and some people identify with that more so than others.

we can fill it with psychology and rhetoric all day ... but survival of the fittest is a large component of natural selection.

if you believe in evolution, you cannot challenge the kill; it's in everyone whether we aspire or not. we have been game killers for thousands of years (and longer).


*personally, i agree that there must be a balance and to overthrow nature simply for the sport can become arrogant but to deny a primal instinct as a remote possibility is just as arrogant.

but as someone said before, it offsets population.
Actually what you're doing is filling a weird argument with "psychology and rethoric", not the other way round.

Killing is none nor has ever been an instinct. Killing *was* simply a mean to achieve a goal: Procreation. Just to kill anything does not help in any way.
Second: Survival of the fittest is no longer applicable on humans really.. or at least not the way it was meant. Survival of the richest, perhaps. A guy can be as smart and strong and fit like noone else, but if he catches some disease or gets injured he will die if there is no medical scheme. On the other hand, the far overweight guy with fifty different lifestyle diseases will survive if he has the $$$.
I am aware that "fittest" doesn't necessarily mean the strongest or smartest, but that doesn't change anything. If you have enough money, everything else basically doesn't even matter.
Still, all of this has nothing to do with trophy killing, imho.

EDIT: I can't believe you said that killing is an instinct again. Don't you see that killing is motivated just as rape is? The people who aren't able to seperate the normal instincts and motivated actions like killing or rape are psychopaths. If you want to step in their line, that's cool with me ;)
 
I recommend people eating meat. It is very difficult and expensive to be a vegetarian. Few individuals are willing to take the time and discipline necessary to eat balanced vegetarian meals.

I have never been introduced to a vegetarian with a strong body. Their protein intact is far to low to build significant strength. I have seen the effect of a vegetarian doing vigorous exercise over a period of several months and he got weaker and weaker due to the low level of protein his diet. It was literally breaking down his own body and killing him.

When I meet somebody that lives off of only vegetables that can deadlift 300 lbs I will convert. Until then pass me the deliciously murdered animal.


dude your first post was dead on. about more people would be veg if hey weren't removed from their food sources. the pretty pictures of farms on sunny hills with cute piglets on the packages are really just hell on earth and torture chambers and showcases the worst of humanity. big difference. if the average person worked in a slaughterhouse for a week and slaughtered their own bacon or hamburger thigns would be different for sure....


as far this this post that i am replying to above... you are DEAD WRONG. DEAD DEAD WRONG...


i have met extremely muscular and healthy vegetarians and some vegans as well. i myself being vegetarian (pescatarian technically sometimes) have turned around my health for the last 6 years and am more active, fit, and full of energy as i have been since i was a little kid playing on monkey swings.

there are much more obese people in middle america who eat burgers and hot dogs all day and processed foods as opposed to vegetarians who are mostly health conscious as well. it kinda goes hand in hand. when you eliminate meats and sometimes animal byproducts from your diet you have to be extra careful of what you eat and you by nature are more conscious anyway which leads to better decisions.

there are plenty of ways to get protein, iron, etc. etc. from other non meat sources. and again, do your research, there are vegetarian body builders, athletes, and fit people. i've personally met some.
 
as i said ... killing is to preserve survival (not procreation) not all animals can feed their offspring but can and will indeed feed themselves in an effort to survive.

also, trophy killing is a large component of sharpening your survival skill... as we see animals (predators) killing smaller animals for the sake of "practice" and not nourishment.

you are right about the modern form of trophy killing (not necessary) but it is relative to evolution, because my original point was that other animal species kill for sport, so why wouldn't we?



ps. our opinions are far from humble.
 
Btw the term "instinct" isn't used in modern psychology or behavioural biology any more, because there are multiple reasons against it.
And that said, have look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer_instinct_(human_behaviour)


as i said ... killing is to preserve survival (not procreation) not all animals can feed their offspring but can and will indeed feed themselves in an effort to survive.

also, trophy killing is a large component of sharpening your survival skill... as we see animals (predators) killing smaller animals for the sake of "practice" and not nourishment.
Ok, I think now I get what you were saying. (Allthough I still don't agree)
you are right about the modern form of trophy killing (not necessary) but it is relative to evolution, because my original point was that other animal species kill for sport, so why wouldn't we?
Because we know it's stupid? Because it's "inhuman" and amoral? Because it isn't needed.. many reasons against it. I see your point, though
 
Pure conjecture. Your reasoning is flawed... How about you go live naked in the woods to satisfy your primal instincts?:loco:

not conjecture... probably; flawed only to the extent of this thread ...i wouldn't do that because i can't live without my kitchen and the taste of a good stout ;)
 
Second: Survival of the fittest is no longer applicable on humans really.. or at least not the way it was meant. Survival of the richest, perhaps. A guy can be as smart and strong and fit like noone else, but if he catches some disease or gets injured he will die if there is no medical scheme. On the other hand, the far overweight guy with fifty different lifestyle diseases will survive if he has the $$$.
I am aware that "fittest" doesn't necessarily mean the strongest or smartest, but that doesn't change anything. If you have enough money, everything else basically doesn't even matter.
Still, all of this has nothing to do with trophy killing, imho.


You're taking that a bit far lol

The selective pressures are nowhere near the same as the were a few thousand years ago, but they are always there, however hard to spot they may be.
 
Btw the term "instinct" isn't used in modern psychology or behavioural biology any more, because there are multiple reasons against it.
And that said, have look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer_instinct_(human_behaviour)

it doesn't matter whether the word is used... as it is always implied.


Ok, I think now I get what you were saying. (Allthough I still don't agree)

that is entirely acceptable ;)

Because we know it's stupid? Because it's "inhuman" and amoral? Because it isn't needed.. many reasons against it. I see your point, though

nothing a human does is "inhuman".
 
You're taking that a bit far lol

The selective pressures are nowhere near the same as the were a few thousand years ago, but they are always there, however hard to spot they may be.
Yeah, that's why I said not the way it was meant (or used to be). As you said, the selective pressures are there but totally different. And killing isn't one of them. That's basically my point. We actually have an "instinct" - an innate behaviour - hindering us to kill other beings.. those who don't are psychopaths.
 
Not true. Because one side at least defends what's right.

They aren't "equally just as bad", and I, for one, definitely dig the work the Sea Shepherd (might be the whale lovers you mention) do against the Japanese whale killers.

You're looking too far into what I said :D

I'll just sit back with that beer now lol
 
EDIT: I can't believe you said that killing is an instinct again. Don't you see that killing is motivated just as rape is? The people who aren't able to seperate the normal instincts and motivated actions like killing or rape are psychopaths. If you want to step in their line, that's cool with me ;)




instinct is formed by impulse or inherent motives. it is inborn an biologically changes throughout modernity and society.

behavioral awareness is something that we have managed to craft into a psychology (literally).

my initial point is that human beings are animals, and like animals we are capable of similar primal devices, like rage, fear and murder.

seeing how we are still hunting game, fighting wars and killing prisoners, it looks like our inherent link to murder can still be justified all over the world.
 
When I said vegetarian I was including people that do not eat any eggs, fish etc. This is probably not an accurate since I don't know the technical definition of what makes somebody a vegetarian or a vegan.

It is indeed way easier to get protein if you eat eggs and fish especially. Fish are the perfect food in a lot of ways. In my layman terms I consider fish to be meat.

If someone want to replace all beef with fish I think that is a great idea. I personally only buy very lean beef and boneless skinless chicken at the market. You really can't compare meat in fast food to properly prepared lean meat.

I am just speaking from personal experience of people I have worked out with and or served in the military with (were survival of the fit does count). If some one has the willpower to do the research and stick to a proper vegetarian diet more power to them. I just have not meet one in person yet.

That vegan body building guy in the link is indeed in great shape. Too bad body builders are all gay. :loco:
 
Not when you look into our history or when you consider animals (yes, it seems that in many cases sex between animals is not voluntary). But I know what you mean and I guess the truth is somewhere in the middle.

I'm really not sure what you're trying to say here but if I'm understanding correctly, you're wrong. Rape is not crime of lust or sexual desire, but is motivated out of the desire to exercise power over another individual. It's a violent crime, not a sexual one. It's like if you stabbed someone and then happened to jizz randomly.