I think it’s a good idea to create such division among hunters. I mean, this way the anti-hunting brigade has to look really long and hard to find statements made by hunters calling a certain type of hunting dishonorable and unethical.
I can hear it now, “Even outdoorsmen state that shooting turkeys with a rifle is dishonorable, shooting ducks on the water is unethical, and shooting squirrels with a shotgun is considered to be a less desirable personality trait than promiscuity; therefore, we motion to make all of the aforementioned illegal henceforth.”
Then you soapbox gents wouldn’t have a leg to stand on, you’d be feeding them exactly what they want and your statements could be instrumental in a restriction of hunting RIGHTS.
Remember, just because it isn’t your cup of tea doesn’t mean it’s unethical, immoral, or dishonorable. If someone is acting within the confines of the written law, you should applaud him for being out and contributing dollars to conservation. If you don’t agree with it, keep it to yourself so your words aren’t used against you.
United we stand, divided we fall.
