I know we're all different thinkers, but I'm just curious if there is a consensus view among atheists regarding firearms?

Views: 584

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

In my area it is actually more humane to shoot Deer. Otherwise they just starve to death. Plus, eating what you kill is hardly the same thing as killing for shits and giggles.
Thanks Susan. Don't waste any time reading about hunting policies and their terrible results for the hunted. Gov. hunting rules are designed to maintain large herds for hunters pleasure, and to wipe out other predators who are seen as competition. Just keep parroting that old saw. Those who kill are more humane than those who don't. Hunters hate to kill animals, they just do their charitable duty for wild creatures, who are burdened by being alive.`
Thanks for completely missing the fact that hunters EAT what the kill.
We have that problem in Wisconsin too. Not to mention they destroy farmers crops.
There's a simple solution to deer and car accidents: build fences and wildlife bridges. It'd save money in the long run unless you're planning on completely eliminating the wildlife in the area, which I don't need to say is a bad idea if you care about maintaining a human-supporting environment.
Build fences along entire stretches of highway?
Sure - how much would it cost versus the cost of car repairs, hospital visits, deaths, etc. over a 5-year period?
Probably a lot more.

We have enough trouble fencing off Mexico.
And again - how much do we spend on deer-related accidents every year? What about every five years?

You don't have to fence every single highway in the entire country, just the ones that are high speed, regularly driven on and cross deer migration areas.
My Louisiana cousins don't actually hunt - they harvest. The deer are so numerous they could easily out strip the carrying capacity of their environment if regular culling did not occur. What some people don't realise is that if there is an area that will support 800 deer over a growing season and there are a 1000 deer it doesn't mean 20% of the herds will starve - it means the herds will run out of food in 80% of the time and almost all will starve. Deer don't do well as planners.
In the "natural" environment, complete with predators, things are not all sweetness and light. The same thing occurs as wolves and bears are also shitty planners. Predator/Prey cycles don't nicely overlap and mass die offs occur periodically because the carrying capacity was inadequate. So, from the deer's POV it doesn't mean much - except perhaps the difference between a quick death and a long lingering one through starvation.
This really doesn't have much to do with the 2nd Amendment.
I hate it too Susan, but you are right. I have seen so many starving and diseased deer in the Mountains here in TN, plus they do wander out onto the highway and get plowed. I hate to see anything die, and I am a total animal lover. But I think you are absolutely right. It can be more humane to shoot rather than watch them starve. I still wanna cry when I see one strapped to the hood of a truck though....
The problem IS THE NRA. The industry lobbyist have pushed the laws to the point that it is almost impossible for local law inforcement to get gun sales records electronically combined with background check records for every purchase. That would let them look for dealers that are selling large numbers of weapons to a few individuals on a regular basis. This would allow them to track the black market dealers that sell them on the streets of Detroit and Juarez.


© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service