603
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2025
603 points (100.0% liked)
Not The Onion
17295 readers
1927 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I think there's quite a big difference between senselessly running over an animal and shooting one with a gun. I mean hunting for food and animal population control are kinda necessary in a lot of situations, while running over an animal isn't.
Tbf it's also safer to hit the animal in many cases than slam on the brakes and possibly get rear-ended or swerve into possible dangerous hazards like other cars or poles. Many driving schools actually teach that it's often the safest option unless the animal itself is big enough to be a hazard like a deer or moose.
Doing either out of malicious intent is the problem, but then again doing just about anything out of malicious intent is a problem lol. It's more about the intent than the action.
yeah i kinda obviously wasn't talking about hunting, but just shooting a possum or whatever because you think it's fun
Go to Wendy's
Bring back the native big cats
There. Problem solved.
Don't really see the difference between going to Wendy's to eat meat and hunting for meat. Well besides the fact that industrialized farming practices are less ethical.
We no longer have the same ecology that used to be able to support big cats and wolves, at least in North America. Native Americans spent generations changing the environment to make deer over plentiful. Add that to the destruction of nearly all old forest as European settlers moved west, and it makes it infeasible to utilize apex predators to control the population of deer in the vast majority of north America.
You would prefer that animals are raised in horrendous conditions without ever seeing sunlight only to be slaughtered over shooting an animal that has grown up in it's natural habitat?
Like, vegetarians I can get, because they argue that we shouldn't be eating meat at all. Arguing that industrial farming is better for animal welfare than hunting is just absurd though.
There is a correlative link between the willingness to hurt animals and psychopathy. You start out hiring animals and you are more likely to be okay hurting humans.
If people are going to choose to eat meat, then I would prefer that they are protected from the trauma that comes with animal killing.
I think you're conflating hunting with torturing animals for entertainment...
Not sure I see the difference
Yes. Yes they are.
Distancing yourself from the violence doesn't make you less complicit in the violence.
Eating animals inherently requires a willingness to harm animals. You can either ignore it or you can't.
I'm not talking about being complicit. I'm talking about exposure.
Just like you're not exposed to the child slavery that makes your cell phone possible, and that's good for your psyche.
But if you don't like that, be vegetarian.
Most people cope like you are here but it's honestly weird to see someone who is seemingly so self aware but also encourages this ignorance.
Remaining ignorant of these problems doesn't make them go away or make anyone any less complicit in perpetuating them.
It's worth considering that it's possible to eat without harming animals and it's possible to have a cell phone without child slavery.
Not knowing at all is one thing. Choosing to be willfully ignorant is another.
Yeah I agree.
From the totally opposite side of this. I think that people should be required to kill and butcher an animal at least once if they're going to eat meat.
That would quickly end factory farming, which needs to be abolished anyhow. We'd have a lot more vegans.
If that's the side you're coming from then I guess I can understand your argument. I was thinking from an animal welfare perspective, and the argument (which I've seen made before) that hunting is inhumane and that people should get their meat at the store instead.
As a side-note, I would really like a link to something backing up that people who hunt for food are more likely to be psychopaths.
Not hunting, hurting. But hunting is hurting.
Too lazy to write details. Please forgive the reddit link.
https://www.reddit.com/r/askpsychology/comments/1fdvifa/why_do_psychopaths_torture_animals/
Holy false equivalency Batman. There is a vast difference between hunting and torturing animals. It is a case where intent and what that one approaches the task has a substantial bearing on the individual's likelihood of anti-social personality disorder. An ethical hunter shows respect to the animal that they kill by doing their best to minimize suffering (this includes things like choice of weapon as well as ensuring that any game that they shoot it's tracked down so that they didn't suffer needlessly).
Do some people with anti-social personality disorder hunt? Yes. Some of them also eat at Wendy's. You sound like you're trying to invent a way to make yourself "better than" a large swath of people. I'd suggest that you practice some self-reflection.
I say this as someone who does not hunt but previously worked on a small poultry farm where I had to slaughter as well as euthanize animals. I've seen what good and bad quality of life does to animals. Ignoring the plight of factory farmed animals does not make you a better person.