Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Ethical or not? 1376 yard elk by a 12 year old

kingston,



First, help me understand where obeying the laws of the land are circularargumenting?

Now, I will help you so you don't have to speculate about where my post name came from. I used to make "Bullet Rings" for awhile. I used to have a website called bulletrigns.com. I charged $175 for them and sold them until my hands hurt. When my hands began to cramp from holding them while polishing them I said, "Thank you, Lord" and quit making them. Often people would send me a fired case they used in a memorable hunt. I would make a ring for them using their case head and a stone they chose. These particular rings were worn a lot back in those days.

One time I was walking into an elevator and a guy was walking out. In passing he said,
"Nice rings."
"How did you even notice them?" I was more than a little curious.
"I work for the FBI. I'm paid to pay attention to details," he said.

That is pure stupidity and does not belong in this conversation. A sniper's job is to disable the enemy-irrelevant as to whether he is dead or not. Actually, a wounded combatant is better, because some dumbass needs to drag him off.

Shooting animals is intended to kill them, NOT HAVE THEM JUST DISABLED to die later!!

There are good points made in this thread and ethics is in the eye of the beholder. I think, however, that it is pure crap that Davidson's are using a kid to push their shooting systems and the BS Berger target bullets.

I know that they have lost at least one lease due to the amount of shot-and-lost animals that the landowner found. THERE is an ethics discussion! The other long-range clown show had a cameraman quit due his disgust at lack of follow-up on assumed MISSED long shots.

Shooting long targets is great fun, but leave it at that. The furry ones deserve better.

I concur and nearly posted similarly on your line of thinking.

A. A muslim extremist is LOWER than any animal.. they want/intend to kill/wound/cripple all/any who aren't muslim.
Animals have NO such ideology.

B. I understand the Government's position in war/battle, however a wounded extremist MIGHT recover.

A DEAD muslim extremist is FAR better. We can't reason with them and they will NOT be converted so....


Jerry

Oh, you're going to Hell for that one...

Besides, at one point it was legal to throw Christians to the lions, so that must have been ethical.

I saw 33 pages and figured the lil stubby Alaskan was showing off his nub

I guess not.......yet

Ted -

WHY throw out the bait ?


Jerry

I'd put my child on that elk, no question. Based on the light, the shot was in the morning. The hike was probably 2 hours to get to the animal. We'd have gotten into position to catch them on the way back down the ridge and set up 300 yds from where we expect them that evening, trying to account accurately for the wind and in a location where we could change position. And we might have bagged a couple depending on location and tags. I've had many great times doing just that. 1400 yds? Yawn.

As to long range shooting, it wasn't that long ago that equipment really limited us to much shorter ranges. Especially in the field with little assurance of accurate ranging. What hasn't changed are environmental variables such as wind shift and animal position shift. Down-range bullet performance is also a limiting factor, especially at such a range. There seem to be a lot of smart people who refuse to acknowledge these boundaries.

Not all of them are that smart.

The great irony of most of the Men who post about what may or may not be ethical as far as elk hunting is many of them have had there cock in another woman while they were married to the one they vowed to be honest and faithful to.

The phuucking hypocrisy one sees on these forums and in every day life is non less than amazing.







Shod

I wouldn't know about that, I have a hard enough time keeping myself on track without worrying about others. So I try to tend to my own business, not other people's.

But who are these people? Maybe you can provide us with a list so we can exclude them from the discussion?

And I hear you on the hypocrisy of it all. By the way, which is worse in your world, committing a sin, or sitting in judgment of others who do?

Boundaries are something you can point to or define. So, tell me, with respect to long-range hunting, where is the boundary between what is right/wrong?

And is it your personal boundary, or should it apply to all hunters?

smokepole,



Excellent question to start the day.

Which version of the Bible would that be? Would it include the books that were arbitrarily omitted? Are you talking about the versions of the books that are included as written in their original languages or the versions that suffered greatly in their multiple translations?

The more I read about the history of the Bible and of ancient times the more convinced I become that the Bible as we know it today, and in particular the New Testament and the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, is more a work of man than God. Although I was brought up in a Christian environment and am convinced the human spirit (and the spirit of all living creatures) survives the body, I consider myself more of a Deist than a Christian. The Bible is a self-contradictory collection of books selected by men that excludes many books that I consider more accurate and therefore more important.

Fire-breathing Christians, who can't even agree amongst themselves, would have you believe that unless you subscribe to their particular beliefs you are doomed to eternal Hell. If true, that means most of mankind, past, present and future, would be so condemned. I don't think a loving God would do that, but then I don't think most Christians have any idea what actually constitutes sin. I and many millions of others don't need the Bible to tell us what is ethical and what is not.

Coyote_Hunter,



I think you are asking Which Bible contains the Word of God. The eleven Bibles I've used contain

"For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do." Hebrews 4:12-13.

Therefore I think if you are seriously seeking the Lord all that's necessary is for you to read One and you will be reading God's Word.



None were "arbitrarily omitted." If you study Bible history you will discover the canonized books of the New Testament were being circulated as copies of the original written by the apostles who were instructed by Jesus.



If you study the history of the Bible objectively you will learn the entire Old Testament was translated into Latin 285 years before the birth of Jesus. If you objectively study Bible history you will find out about the Dead Sea Scrolls. What we use today matches what we find in the original Hebrew language. As far as the New Testament goes anyone who is educated about It knows there is a thousand times more evidence for Its accuracy because It has a thousand times more manuscripts or parts of manuscripts than ANY thing else from antiquity. Some of them go back to within thirty years of the actual events They depict.




These sentences show the bias you used in your study.



First tell me what's wrong with contradictions. Second list your favorite half dozen, please.



Fire-breathing Christians agreeing or not agreeing do not change Jesus' Words:

"'Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.'" Matthew 7:13-14



2 Thessalonians 1:5-10
"This is a plain indication of God’s righteous judgment so that you will be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which indeed you are suffering. For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, when He comes to be glorified in His saints on that day, and to be marveled at among all who have believed."

Revelation 20:5-15
"Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them. And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire."



James 4:17
"Therefore, to one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, to him it is sin."

Romans 14:23 b
"...whatever is not from faith is sin."

1 John 3:4
"Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness."



Outside of an Absolute Authority how do you and these millions determine "what is ethical and what is not"? There are communities who believe killing and eating other people is good. Some communities are convinced killing Christians and others who don't agree with them is good. Why are your arbitrary ethics any better than theirs?

"'The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it?'" Jeremiah 17:9

You go Circularargumentman!

Your like a living breathing encyclopedia of logical fallacies.

You do make it look painless though.

My point made perfectly and right on cue...

kingston,



Most arguments are circular. If you push them back to their foundation you will discover they are irrational. When one uses God as The Foundation you can't go beyond the God of the Bible: Infinite Intelligent Energy. Even God uses circular reasoning in places. He appeals to Himself at the Absolute Final Authority.

People on the other hand appeal to other finite flawed people or their own flawed information base.

No, not yet. Circularargumentman is still busy dotting his i's and crossing his t's. That'll likely be followed by the ceremonial padding of the walls and ceiling. Then we'll be ready for full on retard.