Disagreeing with other hunters

D

Duffy

Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Location
Rocky Mountain House, Alberta
On another thread a fellow is saying in effect (my words not his, I hope he doesn't think I am putting words in his mouth...but he probably will...) Oh forget the other thread and the other fellow.


First off I don't think any of us should "attack" anyone else on this board. I believe it is in the rules that we don't. I don't think we should "attack" any other hunters for the way they hunt (equipment, techniques etc.). I am a firm believer in the concept that you can disagree with what someone does without being disrespectful of the person.

Sometimes I might say" If they want to hunt that way fine but I would not feel right doing that so I will not." Simple enough, I am not attacking anyone or "giving the antis, ammunition" I am just stating I personally would not do something. I have to be a little careful explaining why. Because if I say "its not fair or its not really hunting etc." Now I am throwing down the gantlet and asking for "counter opinions". If I say "in my view it is not sporting" I would hope I may get a response of "Oh well in my view it is sporting because..."

Sometimes there are things that I would not do and am a little more "passionate" about it in that I don't think others should be doing it. Speaking up on these issues is deffinately going to stimulate discussion. (which does not mean I am trolling for an argument) I still do not see how this is giving the antis ammunition.

I believe a civil discussion among hunters about hunting equipment and technique is worthwhile and healthy.


If we stick to explaining the views we hold and maybe trying just a little to convince others that maybe they should have a look at a different viewpoint things shouldn't go "off the rails".


The problem arises when people firmly believe that "THEY ARE RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG" and then go forth with a stubborn, arrogant attitude that things go wrong. (you would think they would understand that they are not going to convince anybody to agree with them by flinging mud or even dirty water)


Bottom line: Do you think it is ok to disagree with other hunters and have civil discussions about our differences? Or do you think we should stand united even if we don't like being associated with activity we don't agree with? (which means we will all be "painted with the same brush" as it were)
 
Civil discussion should always be healthy and encouraged. However there are always some in a crowd spoiling or trolling for an argument. Then it all goes wrong...

:popCorn: Should be interesting...
 
This will be biblical!!!!

One thing you have to remember when it comes to hunting/ethics...................................

You have the Vatican and then you have CGN hunters. ;)

This will not end well at all.
 
Nicely put Duffy,

Many on CGN are quick to pounce on anyone with a differing view! Open discussion is why I am a memberof this site. I hope that issues such as this can be discussed with out the "anyone not for is against us" attitude. Antis are gonna say whatever the heck they want anyway. When was the last time they said something that seemed well researched or was supported by any factual information.
 
ljones said:
Civil discussion should always be healthy and encouraged. However there are always some in a crowd spoiling or trolling for an argument. Then it all goes wrong...

:popCorn: Should be interesting...
Click to expand...

I should have added a comment about the behaviour that I find a bit silly, which is waiting (I sometimes think hoping) for things to go wrong and getting out the popcorn.

But some people do like to do that:redface:
 
I find it funny sometimes that the folks who complain about hunters bashing hunters actually are the ones who do the bashing when someone disagrees with them...but they do it in a passive aggressive condescending tone that must make them feel better than the "common man"....and in the process they use big words like "hypocrisy"

Do as I say not as I do

Irony is the purest form of comedy

LC
 
Last edited:
While awfully convenient, the Interwebz are lacking in some ways when it comes to having a spirited discussion or debate.

There's no facial expression, tone of voice, etc, and its too easy to be misinterpreted or fall in expressing yourself.

We all need more patience (myself included) in giving a person who might appear to be on the opposing side of a debate a chance (or two) to state what they really mean to say.
 
The problem with controversial "discussion" is that there are generally very few posters on either side of the debate... none of these are inclined to change their minds, regardless of any expressed opinions or submissions of "evidence..." The silent on lookers however, are sifting through the presented data and drawing their own conclusions... often determined more by the conduct and demeanor of the presenter rather than the argument presented...

And then there are some sitting in the bleachers, eating popcorn and laughing at the antics of folks "removing any doubt..."...
 
Good topic.

I have been here for quite awhile. I however do not generate too many replies...I like to "listen"....but have offered opinions here and there.

Having said that, the "old dogs" seem to rule around here...which is fine. Seniority has its virtue I guess. But there is a lot of unnecessary bullying. As for me. I'll take it...got thick skin.

Perhaps the "old boys" club should maybe listen to "newbies" and maybe make them feel "Welcome".

So I think that most of times, most should have respectful and intelligent conversations on whatever topics are posted here.

My $0.02 for now
 
I figure that if another hunter is doing something that I don't like, but is legal, it's not my place to criticize them. I can say "It's not right for me", but that's as far as it should go. Shooting upland birds on the ground with a shotgun (not for me), shooting big game at long range (I'd do it but at this point I can't do it well enough to satisfy myself), shooting an albino moose (if you have a moose tag, a moose is a moose), those are just examples of things that are legal and we shouldn't condemn someone else for doing.
 
Duffy said:
On another thread a fellow is saying in effect (my words not his, I hope he doesn't think I am putting words in his mouth...but he probably will...) Oh forget the other thread and the other fellow.


First off I don't think any of us should "attack" anyone else on this board. I believe it is in the rules that we don't. I don't think we should "attack" any other hunters for the way they hunt (equipment, techniques etc.). I am a firm believer in the concept that you can disagree with what someone does without being disrespectful of the person.

Sometimes I might say" If they want to hunt that way fine but I would not feel right doing that so I will not." Simple enough, I am not attacking anyone or "giving the antis, ammunition" I am just stating I personally would not do something. I have to be a little careful explaining why. Because if I say "its not fair or its not really hunting etc." Now I am throwing down the gantlet and asking for "counter opinions". If I say "in my view it is not sporting" I would hope I may get a response of "Oh well in my view it is sporting because..."

Sometimes there are things that I would not do and am a little more "passionate" about it in that I don't think others should be doing it. Speaking up on these issues is deffinately going to stimulate discussion. (which does not mean I am trolling for an argument) I still do not see how this is giving the antis ammunition.

I believe a civil discussion among hunters about hunting equipment and technique is worthwhile and healthy.


If we stick to explaining the views we hold and maybe trying just a little to convince others that maybe they should have a look at a different viewpoint things shouldn't go "off the rails".


The problem arises when people firmly believe that "THEY ARE RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG" and then go forth with a stubborn, arrogant attitude that things go wrong. (you would think they would understand that they are not going to convince anybody to agree with them by flinging mud or even dirty water)


Bottom line: Do you think it is ok to disagree with other hunters and have civil discussions about our differences? Or do you think we should stand united even if we don't like being associated with activity we don't agree with? (which means we will all be "painted with the same brush" as it were)
Click to expand...
This thread isn't going to end well, I can feel it.:popCorn:
 
It is easy to ask for world piece but this is an anonymous web site were it is easy to be the school yard bully when nobody knows who you are. If you have a different view point from this sites norm good luck.
 
Duffy said:
...

1) First off I don't think any of us should "attack" anyone else on this board. I believe it is in the rules that we don't. I don't think we should "attack" any other hunters for the way they hunt (equipment, techniques etc.). I am a firm believer in the concept that you can disagree with what someone does without being disrespectful of the person.
...
...

2) If we stick to explaining the views we hold and maybe trying just a little to convince others that maybe they should have a look at a different viewpoint things shouldn't go "off the rails".


3) The problem arises when people firmly believe that "THEY ARE RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG" and then go forth with a stubborn, arrogant attitude that things go wrong. (you would think they would understand that they are not going to convince anybody to agree with them by flinging mud or even dirty water)


4) Bottom line: Do you think it is ok to disagree with other hunters and have civil discussions about our differences? Or do you think we should stand united even if we don't like being associated with activity we don't agree with? (which means we will all be "painted with the same brush" as it were)
Click to expand...

1) Yes, being civil with each other should be common sense, not everyone seems to understand that fact.

2) Too many people think they know it all, their view should be imposed on all...but sadly for them, they are not kings.

3) Keyboard bullies and should be taken with a grain of salt...although it does seem like a waste of salt.

4) It is most certainly Ok to disagree with others, we all have our own set of morals, it doesn't mean we are better or that we are wrong, we just do not agree. Speak you peace and don't worry about the naysayers.

:cheers:
 
I don't really like the word "debate". In a couple definitions I looked up "argument" came up too many times.

I recall taking debating in school and the premise of taking a side even if you do not agree with it and presenting a convincing position on it just seems not right to me. Standing your ground and looking for "chinks" in your "opponents" armour that you can "exploit" is not what I feel is part of an honest, open civil discussion.

It isn't always about convincing the others to agree with you it is about presenting your view as clearly as you can and trying to understand their viewpoint and maybe learn something different from it.

It all sounds maybe a little "wishy washy" and I do have some opinions that I am more passionate and sure about. But that doesn't excuse one from banging their heads against a wall trying to "convince" someone else.
 
AbLonewolf said:
Good topic.

I have been here for quite awhile. I however do not generate too many replies...I like to "listen"....but have offered opinions here and there.

Having said that, the "old dogs" seem to rule around here...which is fine. Seniority has its virtue I guess. But there is a lot of unnecessary bullying. As for me. I'll take it...got thick skin.

Perhaps the "old boys" club should maybe listen to "newbies" and maybe make them feel "Welcome".

So I think that most of times, most should have respectful and intelligent conversations on whatever topics are posted here.

My $0.02 for now
Click to expand...

Is that $0.02 American or Canadian... wonder what the exchange rate is on that...:p;)
 
Duffy said:
I should have added a comment about the behaviour that I find a bit silly, which is waiting (I sometimes think hoping) for things to go wrong and getting out the popcorn.

But some people do like to do that:redface:
Click to expand...

I look at it this way. When these debates happen it is like two Boxers going at it. Each exchanges blows. Sometimes one or the other clearly owns the other. Sometimes each is entrenched in their own opinion equally and the bout lasts longer. Rarely have I seen one change sides. Both get battered and bruised from the verbal jabs and some sweet verbal sparring comes from it. Sometimes the "Fans" (Me included) shout our two bits from the sideline, but ultimately all that has been accomplished is both opponents become exhausted, get beat up and ultimately "Entertain" the 'Fans" (readers). Silly? Probably... I don't like to take myself too seriously. Hey it is what it is. Am I hoping? Well sometimes ya can see the "Writing on the Wall" so to speak and know where it is gonna go. Sometimes we even get our moneys worth and are thoroughly entertained. So yes I will grab me :popCorn: grab a :cheers: and kick back. Let the games begin :dancingbanana: ;)

51987areyounotentertained.jpg
 
Last edited:
BigUglyMan said:
I figure that if another hunter is doing something that I don't like, but is legal, it's not my place to criticize them. I can say "It's not right for me", but that's as far as it should go. Shooting upland birds on the ground with a shotgun (not for me), shooting big game at long range (I'd do it but at this point I can't do it well enough to satisfy myself), shooting an albino moose (if you have a moose tag, a moose is a moose), those are just examples of things that are legal and we shouldn't condemn someone else for doing.
Click to expand...

Now if I ground sloosh an albino moose at long range with a scattergun....does that create any eyelid twitch? How about just a bit o'fire in your belly?
:)

Seriously though, there is some stuff that IS legal but that being what it is doesn't make it smart or ethical.
For example, the not so mythical creature that buys a...let's see...Huskemaw scope and plants it in the old '06, grabs a box or two of blue box and uses enough to sight in minute of milk carton then starts twirling and whirling, banging away at 4 legged critters. Its legal, but are you going to shrug and walk away without saying anything?
I love our sport and heritage, enough that I'm happy to stick my chin out and call such a one a fool.
I'd do the same to a guy that bought a chop saw and just up and started trying to build houses for folks. Neither would be pretty....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom