Pros And Cons Of Hunting

There has always been an ongoing debate between hunters and non-hunters on whether or not shooting animals is considered inhumane. I, for one, believe it to be fine and see nothing wrong with pursuing a wild animal, unless the hunt is done with malicious intentions, such as killing the animal for sport and not eating it. As long as there is a hunt with purpose, such as consumption, then there should not be a problem with the non-hunters. Hunting is done to cull overpopulation and to feed families, such as my own. People who oppose it see it as morally wrong to kill animals. Glenn Kirk stated “Hunting causes immense suffering to individual wild animals…” and is “cruel because unlike natural predation hunters kill for pleasure” (scientificamerican.com). However, this is not true. I do not know of one family who kills “just for fun.” Before I ever even went on my first hunt, my dad informed me that I must eat the deer I killed, or I am not allowed to go. Also, after we harvest an animal, we give thanks to God for providing us with food. Hunters do not kill animals just to watch them die, contrary to what opposers of hunting believe. In recent studies, fewer people hunt today than in the past (scientificamerican.com). Only a total of

In the article, a lot of people were against the idea of hunting calling it cruel and barbaric. I would have to contradict this article because in my experience, the deer go down quick and easy most of the time. Throughout the ages of time, people have killed animals to survive. Food is a necessity for human survival and many people may argue that man can survive with just vegetables in their diet, but vegetables do not give all the nutrition that a person needs to survive. Hunting is only wrong when a person kills just to kill; however, if a person kills with the intention to eat what they killed, hunting is not