[quote]orion wrote:
…[/quote]
No kidding.
[quote]Will207 wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Will207 wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Will207 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Will207 wrote:
I can do 200 meters on a man sized target, center mass, no problem with iron sights with a carbine. This isn’t difficult.
Shooting a wolf, or any predatory animal from over 100 with high quality optics and a decent rifle isn’t difficult on the grounds that shooting a piece of paper from the same distance with the same equipment is relatively easy.
[/quote]
I’d bet a fair sum you’d miss nine out of ten shots at a wolf with your iron sighted carbine from 200 meters. A fair substantial sum.
Your haughty attitude betrays your credibility on this topic.
Since you’ve boldly claimed, “Shooting a wolf, or any predatory animal from over 100 with high quality optics and a decent rifle isn’t difficult on the grounds that shooting a piece of paper from the same distance with the same equipment is relatively easy,” why don’t you grace us with photos of your wolf kills and the mounts. Put up or shut up.[/quote]
I’ve had to qualify at 200 with iron sights from both the prone and kneeling position at a man-sized target. If you rotate the target 90 degrees, it’s pretty similar to the size of a broadside, full grown wolf. 1 out of 10 is not a pass, and I have never failed to qualify.
I’ve already taken the position of being opposed to so called trophy hunting, so it follows that I would not have photos or a mount.
Can you explain why shooting a stationary, live target is any different than shooting a stationary, non-living target as it applies to marksmanship?
[/quote]
Adrenaline. Unless you are a psychopath, the human psyche does not easily allow a man to just kill a fellow being with no uptick.[/quote]
Are you suggesting that deep down you know it’s wrong and that’s why you get the feeling that you do? Or is it that it’s exciting and you become overwhelmed (ie thrill killing)?
[/quote]
Well, that is quite the false dichotomy. No, I do not believe killing animals is wrong (how am I supposed to live without meat and how are the animals not going to starve if they are not culled), and I don’t believe hunting is about thrill killing.
There is a seriousness about taking an animals life (to hit/not miss/to not wound it without killing it), to respect the animal no matter how fun it is to hunt.
[/quote]
That is exactly how I feel. Although I see hunting more of a means to an end.
For me, the issue with killing the wolves is that the meat is not harvested. I understand why, but then why kill it? If there are reasons other than entertainment to kill it, I can agree with that. [/quote]
Why would they not harvest the meat?
I dont know whats going on…
[quote]orion wrote:
I dont know whats going on…[/quote]
With her tits? Yeah, that’s gross.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]on edge wrote:
I didn’t find that to be very sporting but I’d still bang.[/quote]
What do you consider sporting?[/quote]
I don’t really know where I’d draw the line. Ruffian jumping out of a tree onto a wild boars back and cutting it’s throat with a knife is pretty badass so I’d call that sporting. Shooting a wolf baited with a dead animal with a high powered rifle from the window of a comfy little cabin is not sporting. It’s a sport less confiscation of a majestic animals life. I don’t know where I’d draw the line in between.
[quote]csulli wrote:
Also I like redheads.[/quote]
But why isnt that wolf stealing her virginity, ruining her credit, and then eating her? Wolves are evil right?
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Reminds me of this recent article. What did the guy think was gonna happen?
Just read this. I like when the cop says, they think they got the croc responsibile…
What that SHOULD have said, was that Mr. Cole was responsible for the outcome. The croc just did what they do best, pick out the easiest food source, and go for it. Grab it, drag it to the bottom, and let it drown, then proceed to eat it. I like how an animal gets punished for someone else being on the short end of the gene pool.
Darwin award right there.[/quote]
Ya, it pisses me off every time an animal is put down for doing exactly what it’s designed to do. [/quote]
Because a hunter does exactly what it’s designed to do?[/quote]
I don’t understand the question?
Some guy in the article tried to swim across a Croc infested river, when he was eaten, the Croc was killed. That is stupid, imo.
[quote]Will207 wrote:
Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t the USMC qualify at 500 yards with iron sights on a 40"Hx20" wide target?[/quote]
Not sure on the target size, but the furthest we qual is 500 yards with iron sights (in the prone).
[quote]pushharder wrote:
So many non-hunters convening to decide what’s sporting or not. Interesting.
Maybe:
[i]T-Nation should convene a group of folks who don’t step foot into a gym for an upcoming article to help us decide proper squatting depth.
A group of plumbers should convene to help decide how to battle the resurgence of the Ebola virus in Africa.
A convent should decide how NASA should transition from the space shuttle and space station to exploring Mars.
A group of journalists should help determine the proper grade and the pumping station distances for the Keystone Pipeline.[/i][/quote]
You missed one Push; a group of criminals to write laws.
“Feelings…nothing more than feelings”
[quote]pushharder wrote:
So many non-hunters convening to decide what’s sporting or not. Interesting.
Maybe:
[i]T-Nation should convene a group of folks who don’t step foot into a gym for an upcoming article to help us decide proper squatting depth.
A group of plumbers should convene to help decide how to battle the resurgence of the Ebola virus in Africa.
A convent should decide how NASA should transition from the space shuttle and space station to exploring Mars.
A group of journalists should help determine the proper grade and the pumping station distances for the Keystone Pipeline.[/i][/quote]
Shooting a baited wolf isn’t as complicated as the issues you’ve identified. It doesn’t take an expert to realize it’s grimy. Should we bring in a botanist to tell us grass is green?
If an animal is baited into a location where the killer, er i mean “hunter”, has a clear shot, that’s not hunting; that’s trapping and killing.
obviously it’s saving the life of someones daughter anytime a horrible predatory animal is killed, so it’s all good either way.
So any hunter who positions himself anywhere near a food source is not a hunter but a “killer”. Rock on fools, rock on!
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
So any hunter who positions himself anywhere near a food source is not a hunter but a “killer”. Rock on fools, rock on![/quote]
He’s always a killer, and there is nothing wrong with that. Is it ethical to bait a deer and kill it for food? Yes. Is it fair chase? No.
Baiting is illegal in some places.
Edited