Animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment, or abuse in any other way.

Hunters Are Stupid

Written by PETA | February 9, 2007

And in the esteemed words of Forrest Gump . . . that’s all I have to say about that.

Related Posts

Respond

Comments

Post a Comment

If your comment doesn't appear right away, please be patient as it may take some time to publish or may require moderation.

By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our collection, storage, use, and disclosure of your personal info in accordance with our privacy policy as well as to receiving e-mails from us.

  • But wait a minute says:

    Sean – You are ignoring the problem. According to you hunters are trimming the population so that predators don’t have to cross paths with humans in search of food, and to help sustain the population of prey – but the thing is, it’s a human population problem. If people stopped breeding unnescescarily, there would be less urban sprawl, and the animals would have more room to search for food. Think of it like this, one day you are sitting at home, enjoying yourself, when I move into your house. I bring my family, my cousins have a couple of kids, my nieces grow up and have kids as well. We need space, so we move to your living room. My family keeps breeding, we need more room, so we chase you from your bathroom and hallways as well. Eventually, you will have no choice but to cross paths with us, because we will literarily have pushed you out of your own home. Treat things like you want to be treated – that includes animals who are far less violent and overpopulated then we are. For proof of this, look up some famous serial killers and the population. It’s not pretty

  • Take a moment and use commen sense. says:

    Hey AnimalSoldier, look, Sean isn’t saying that it’s “ok” to kill everything in sight. His argument is the better, rather than yours which contains almost facts and is mostly opinions. And by you saying that you would “truly like to HUNT THE HUNTERS and COLLECT their HEADS for my FREEZER” not only makes your claim worse by showing that you posses symptoms of a serial killer whom decapitates their victims and uses their heads as trophies. That being said, I think you should re-think your claims, and go talk to a therapist about your homicidal thoughts and tendencies.

  • ANIMALSOLDIER says:

    hey Sean , so its okay to kill everything in sight with the excuse of an socalled keeping the ballance of nature ? using high powered modern weapons that makes the hunt unfair. all i see are just trigger happy MORONS!!!!! why not just use a bazooka to shot a little cute bunny then!!!! nature is very well capable of restoring its balance on its own. the human race itself are nothing more than a BAD CANCER towards this planet. i hope that all hunters shoot them selfs by accident so they know how it feels on the other side of hunting. i truly would like to HUNT THE HUNTERS and COLLECT their HEADS for my FREEZER.

  • Sean says:

    Billy- I’ve seen multiple vegans use the excuse that nature takes care of its own, but by saying that do you realize how nature takes care of its own? It is important to note that either way, some animals will suffer. Essentially, what happens is populations of both predators and prey increase and decrease in an alternating fashion (when predators are increasing, prey is decreasing, and vice-versa). As predator populations are at their low & prey populations are at their high, predators have more food available. This is what triggers reverse in populations numbers between the two. However, it is not just predation that kills off the prey at this time: starvation due to high prey populations also occurs. These high populations can also cause prey to migrate in search of food, sometimes into places where they put themselves in danger, such as urban areas with lots of traffic. Starvation and getting hit by cars both tend to put animals in a lot of suffering. This same principle applies to when predator numbers are high and prey numbers are low: predators have less prey to eat, and it is inevitable that some will go days without food and starve. Or, they will migrate to new areas to attempt to find new food sources which can put them in danger too. Hunting helps to maintain a balance between the predator to prey ratio. This method greatly reduces starvation and helps lower habitat migration. As I stated before, either alternative includes some animals suffering, so I really don’t understand how letting nature run its course can be considered a better alternative.

  • billy williams says:

    Actually ash,Hunting is not necessary to control population-Nature takes care of its own & hanging its head on a wall isn’t “Restoring its beauty”–It’s meant for people to always remember that they murdered an innocent animal,-The same way a serial killer will keep something belonging to their victim-It’s just really disturbing & psychopathy if you ask me.

  • Ash says:

    Amazing how many of you are saying “Hunters are stupid” and how these “trophies” are disgusting. The ignorance just amuses me. And everyone’s assumption that hunters are stupid is just stereotypical and downright offensive. Calling out things like that doesn’t support your cause at all. In fact, it looks really childish. Though SPORT hunting isn’t exactly something I find to be great (I prefer the whole animal be used if it is to be killed) hunting does indeed help not only the population but also CONSERVATION EFFORTS!!! Some of the money used to buy tags and licenses for animals goes to fund conservation efforts in order to preserve rainforests and your precious tigers and other endangered wildlife. And though taxidermy is a sensitive subject to most of you it seems (from the comments it seems as though most are disgusted with this), I bet none of you even know what kind of work goes in to it and what the taxidermist feels while recreating the animal. It is an art and yes it may kind of look bad to be doing it on animals that were killed, it’s an art of bringing the animal back to life in a sense. Restoring its beauty the best way the artist can. The “trophy” part is its story, may it be gruesome to some of you, that’s what it is.

  • Chukchi says:

    Hello, let me straighten this whole antihunting vs. prohunting mess. My ancestors are from the Chukchi Peninsula in Russia. As I know that many of you antihunting are vegetarians, you don’t realize that some people can’t live off of vegetarians because of their climate/geographical location. For example, my tribe in the Chukchi Peninsula cannot grow vegetables of any sort except for lichen and mosses, so we have to survive on hunting seals, whales, and walruses. You antihunting people think we hunters kill for fun, but we have skeet and target shooting for that. It isn’t much fun to wait for hours at end in either the freezing cold or boiling heat just to shoot an animal. We hunters hunt to survive, and those who don’t have to survive off of hunting don’t need to buy meat because they have it from the animal they killed. But I know that some hunters don’t respect the animals around them, but they will soon learn that they should from the hefty fine of exceeding the bag limit. Our tribe reveres animals, and only takes one whale a year, and uses every part of it to make tents and such. You vegetarians won’t think that you are so superior to us when you learn that almost all plants harvested for food are invasive, chemically enhanced, and full of preservatives. While the animals we hunt can be invasive, don’t have chemicals, and have no preservatives in them. Humans are made to survive off of animals. We were made to be hunters because of evolution.

  • PETA says:

    Mr. Dudeman, hunters often argue that they are “managing” wildlife, saving animals from death by starvation and disease. Natural predators help keep prey species strong by killing only sick and weak individuals. Hunters, on the other hand, kill whichever animals they come across or, in many cases, whichever animals they think would look best mounted above the fireplace—often large, healthy animals who are needed to keep populations strong. Moreover, hunting creates conditions that favor accelerated reproduction: The abrupt population decline that it causes leads to less competition for food among survivors, and ultimately, a higher birth rate, thus leading once more to the very problems that hunters claim to solve.

  • Josh says:

    I can understand not wanting to harm other animals. Even though I hunt myself, I can respect that way of thinking. I believe that it should be understood, however, how we have effected the ecosystems of some game species. Lets take whitetailed deer in the eastern United States for instance. In areas where the ground is at least somewhat fertile and weather permits, corn is grown in much of the east. Now, when the harvester comes around and gets the crop out of the field, it leaves a sizable portion of that corn on the ground. This extra amount of nutrients allows for larger populations of herbivorous animals in an area than what would naturally be the case. In the case of smaller animals like squirrels, mice, birds, etc. there are natural predators that can help keep populations in check, but in the instance of an animal the size of a whitetailed deer, things get a little hairy. Coyotes can prey on old, sick, and young deer, but fully grown and healthy specimens have no natural predators. So it is easy to see how a population could get out of hand. What happens when populations of large animals get too high? Well, the cosquence that directly effects humans is that there are increases in automobile accidents related to deer on the roads. The next consequence is that there becomes a greater risk of disease in the population, which will lead to a greater amount of suffering than any well placed bullet will cause. So, I think keeping an animal population in control is a good idea. Those animals live a free life in the wild and sometimes they are taken from the population and provide sustainence of other organisms.

  • Nick says:

    So lets say 5 of the population are hunters and 5 of the population are anti hunters 90 don’t care. At least hunters are running out there and getting there own hands dirty rather than the other 90 who sit down and wait for Hormel foods to deliver the butchered animal to them. The commercial meat industry is the most hurtful not the hunters! True hunters don’t raise their animals in cruelty and captivity and they don’t pump animals full of steroids only to waste most of the edible meat anyways.

  • Jake says:

    If you think about it hunting saves lives. Its a proven fact that a certain ecosystem can only support so many animals. So if hunters dont kill a few dear every year there would be a massive fall off in the population.Because there wouldnt be enough food to feed all of them. “A healthy forest sometimes needs a controlled fire” some trees can only spread there seeds if set on fire

  • Deven Markley says:

    The Tyler Durden from Fight Club? The clinically insane anarchist who is the imaginary friend of the men who literally beats himself up in a parking lot and starts a club where men get together and fight? That sounds like a reliable source and a good name to post under…

  • Tyler Durden says:

    Overpopulated? Animals have been around for the better part of a billion years. They would overpopulate? We’ve driven thousands of species to extinction in the last century but they’re going to overpopulate. Interesting. I love all of these “hunters with degrees” unable to discern ‘your’ from ‘you’re’. What’s left? Oh yes they do it to eat. A Wendy’s or Arby’s on every corner and they’re hungry? A gun costs more than a cheeseburger.

  • Deven Markley says:

    To DennisP. There are majour differences between humans and nearly all other animals especially those hunted for sport. I will only bring up 2 for you though. They are HIGHER LEVEL THINKING i.e. problem solving and OPPOSABLE THUMBS. Squirrels or deer or name the hunted animal could never come up with tools let alone any sort of actual technology and thinking that shows a lack of education on the topic.

  • Will says:

    I would like to add one more thing. Even if we could demonstrate that hunting has a positive result in this or that category that does not make it ethical. Some on this thread have argued that hunting is desirable insofar as it achieves animal population control and contributes to state economies. Well hunting human beings would also contribute to the control of population rates that are dangerously high in certain areas of the world and thus not sustainable and one could argue that slavery has economic benefits a familiar argument leading up to the Civil War. However we have decided that murder and slavery are “off limits” where humans are concerned even if these practices would have utilitarian benefits in some cases. All we are suggesting is that the same kind of logic should be applied to other sentient animals. We can easily obtain healthy if not healthier foods from other sources so survival is not a critical issue. Further I’m sure we could all conceive of a variety of ways of enhancing state economies and managing wildlife that don’t require animals to endure pain andor be killed. When you put everything up on a “beam balance” so to speak I just don’t see the justifications for hunting. And again based on personal experience I just wish hunters would come clean and admit that they enjoy killing rather than hide behind flimsy justifications that just don’t hold water. When it comes down to it you either think animals have rights or you don’t. Some of us cringe at the thought of animals enduring pain and being killed while others couldn’t care less. That’s the divide. Over time I hope we come to extend more rights to animals just as we’ve come to extend rights to beings who at one point did not enjoy the rights they are allowed by law to enjoy today. Many of us simply love all animals the way hunters love their hunting dogs and would not want to see anything happen to them. I am pessimistic but I have not lost all hope that animals will one day be “free.”

  • Will says:

    Lots of ad hominem here on both sides. Personally I understand the antihunting side more than the prohunting side. First my personal belief is that one should not kill and produce suffering for sport or sustenance unless alternatives are nonexistent and hunting would be required for immediate survival. But we do have plenty of affordable alternatives which is why I am a vegetarian. Second I haven’t seen any evidence that hunting is absolutely required to maintain the health of ecosystems. I haven’t seen evidence that it is the only conceivable management strategy. In fact if we really wanted to I’m sure we could find viable alternatives. These may in fact exist though I am not an expert. Anyone want to contribute an expert opinion? I find it pretty unconvincing though when people say they’re doing animals a favor by hunting. If they could speak I’m sure the huntED would disagree vehemently. I grew up in a hunting subculture and I do think that people are generally indoctrinated into that subculture from a very young age. Some of us who are thoughtful do question what we were taught when we were raised. Personally I’ve decided that hunting is ethically wrong in almost all circumstances and as difficult as the task may be I believe it is at least our responsibility to work to try to pass laws that will ban all forms of recreational hunting. If hunters really believe in the majesty and beauty of nature and animals it seems quite odd to me to express that supposed deep appreciation through killing. There seems to be quite a bit of cognitive gymnastics at work there. I think we should devote the resources that we devote to hunting to the development and implementation of less violent conservation plans. This would require hunters to eventually give up this “hobby.” I suspect that most of them would NOT be willing to do this. But if conservation is really what they’re most concerned about as some on this page have said then they should be willing to give up killing in the face of more effective conservation practices. That’s where the debate would get interesting and what hunters really think would be revealed. From those I know which is a little sample of course most simply seem to love the thrill of the hunt and it really has very little to do with good environmentalism for them. And even if that were the motivation I’m sure one could quite easily make the case that better ways exist of managing wildlife. I do feel bad for all the wildlife that will be baited tracked stalked and killed this year. And I do have to agree with those who fail to see the sport and the honor in this. In a sport the other “team” should have a chance at an EQUAL victory. This is not the case with hunting. If it were at least reasonably probable that an animal might end up winning by enjoying the meal of a hunter then we could have a different sort of debate.

  • Thaddeus Buttmunch MD says:

    They hunt for the love of killing not “meat”! Hunting and fishing gear are sooo expensive it’s thousands of dollars to get one deer! The Moose and Elk hunts and safari guides can be ten grand easy! The only counter argument is that animal horticulture is VERRYyy inhumane the way they raise chickens pigs etc. That has to be changed too. cloned “legless” meat in labs is the future!

  • cheefitty says:

    “Like you can’t go to the grocery store to pick up some steaks? No you have to have an animal die for your meat.” Umm…not sure if serious As far as i know steak in a grocery sore doesn’t grow on trees.

  • Jake says:

    If any of you members of PETA have anything bad to say about hunters please contact me and i will clear your mind of all this unfair criticism. all game animals need to be managed and the truth is that natural predators to most game animals no longer exist and humans are the only answer to this serious problem.

  • LIFE TIME HUNTER says:

    So you all have bad opinions on hunters. Some hunters hunt to feed their family some hunt for the sport and still donate the meat. I hunt everychance i get when i harvest a deer or any animal i use the meat to feed my family. If i dont use the meat i donate it to the share of the harvest wich feeds poor people who cant afford to buy food. Im not tryin to change your opinion but lay off the bad comments on hunters. When hunters are safe and ethical they are doing nothing wrong. Have you ever eaten a steak or burger or any sort of meat or fish. Well that food was from an animal whether it was hunted or slaughtered for the meat. IF us hunters didnt use the opportunities given to us to hunt deer you could potentially be involved in or even killed in a car wreck because of the population.so we are actually doing you a favor. God bless you all and go hunt its rather fun i live and die for it.

  • Brian says:

    Hunters are complete effin morons. Especially stupid are those unfortunate proles who choose to display their “trophies” at their homes or place of work. Oh yes you are so badass because you managed to shoot an animal with gun. Wow. Effin morons.

  • haw haw says:

    yeah there nothing wrong with hunting for food if u really need it but its unfair cruel and stupid when its for fun.is kill a living thing right. animals can feel. also its because of hunters that animals might overpopulate because they killed off all the predators and humans are actually the species that is really overpopulating. should we go kill people?

  • Audrey says:

    It’s not illegal to kill humans ie. the death penalty…

  • MoWoNo says:

    Hi dear PETA supporters. I’m from portugal and i have the information that in my region hunters are responsable to support wild animal life in various ways and their habitat. Also they teaches children about animals. From i see from this site i can’t support your commitent some things seems childish lacks reality or information. I hope that your organization gets some better objectives than simply bashing stereotypes based on lacky information. Thank you

  • Level Headed says:

    You hunters go out and shoot poor sweet animals that never did anything to you for what? Food? Like you can’t go to the grocery store to pick up some steaks? No you have to have an animal die for your meat. And don’t sit and tell me that it’s been done for thousands and thousands of years. Because it has been wrong for thousands of years I would know I’ve been alive for 21 of those thousands. And don’t say that you’re really helping the animals by killing them some sick form of poulation control. Us humans never had “population control” and look how we are doing. I mean we have iPhones for god’s sake. Imagine what the animals could have if we’d only let them.

  • DennisP says:

    Het Mr. “animal overpopulation” it’s PEOPLE who are overpopulated not the few remaining animals who are trying to survive in the midst of us and our mess you’re doing them a big favor by killing them huh? Gimme a break. They were fine for millions of years before us. Do us all a favor and control your own damn herd.

  • DennisP says:

    Even if hunters are “hunting for food” they’re not hunting is expensive they do it for “sport” even if they eat it they are all evil murdering aholes who enjoy murdering animals.

  • Rachel says:

    I really don’t get why PETA is bashing hunters. Hunting for sport i can understand but why bash people who hunt for sport and use all of it what is so bad about it? Isn’t it a sht load better than anyone purchasing meat from a farm free range can’t even compare to wild living free. I am vegan but I just get pissed when people bash hunters who hunt for food!

  • Frank says:

    I don’t like to hunt and I’ve turned a vegeterian. I could see if someone hunts to eat for survival. But the so called trophy hunters are the ones that I have issues with. They’re pretty closed minded and stupid and arrogant people!! These are the people that have no value for life!! take their gunsbow and arrows away and they immediately turn into paranoid low life wimps!

  • Nik S says:

    With out hunters in fact with out humans animals will over poppulate. Since the day man was made animals have been killed by man. Yes it was for survival and today is some cases it still is. Hunting is as natural as breathing. And 99 of all hunters try as hard as they possibaly can to “harvest” the animal as pain free as possible.

  • Shirley says:

    Ok so my family is a bunch of hunters. We hunt mainly hunt deer and the reason for that is it saves us money and helps us make it through the winter we are poor so we don’t get much money. neither of my parents can work and i have to think about school. there is nothing wrong with hunting unless your doing it for fun.

  • Jonah says:

    Hey guys I’m a Blackfoot Native American and Hunting and fishing is a key element of Blackfoot culture and heritage. This video is offensive because it berates my people and others who hunt for food as ignorant.

  • erica says:

    the only intelligence i have seen here is from the people who are trying to educate people on the FACTS of hunting. telling someone they are stupid and evil for actually making a difference is just ignorant.

Connect With PETA

Subscribe