Sweet jesus

You can be fairly confident that skeet shooting looses its flare after a while. Why shoot skeet when you can actually kill something? Meat in the fridge, stories to tell, pictures to show. Its just better. Most people don't shoot for sport. They shoot to practice to kill something.

Originally Posted by: grizzlymintYou can be fairly confident that skeet shooting looses its flare after a while. Why shoot skeet when you can actually kill something? Meat in the fridge, stories to tell, pictures to show. Its just better. Most people don't shoot for sport. They shoot to practice to kill something.

To me, that's stupid. If you need meat, why not just buy it with the money you would have spent on entrance fees to killing what are essentially caged animals? Or just like, go to a slaughterhouse and ask to whoop ass? It's the same thing.

Not trying to sound like a PETA dink or anything. I've gone hunting too, and I don't necessarily oppose it. But the caged-in thing escapes me. What's the point?

Originally Posted by: leafThat photo is fake! hogs cant get that bug.

One place you can go to check out the authenticity of something posted on the web is Snopes.com. They don't have everything, but this article is there.
http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/hogzilla.asp

Beats the hell outa me man. I think its just a loop hole people who have a lot of money use to shoot things whenver they so please. I know the place where I've worked has a lot of exotic species also, so they like to shoot them also.

I'm 100% for hunting. Its necessary due to the fact that we (humans) have messed up the ecosystem badly. So stuff has to be regulated so resources don't get depleted and everything else gets messed up.

Not to mention, meat is delcious.

Originally Posted by: grizzlymintI'm 100% for hunting. Its necessary due to the fact that we (humans) have messed up the ecosystem badly. So stuff has to be regulated so resources don't get depleted and everything else gets messed up.

In that case, people-hunting would make just as much sense. :)

Originally Posted by: earthman buckIn that case, people-hunting would make just as much sense. :)

I believe thats a different discussion entirely which would include theology disputes, bickering, and an industrial size box of corn dogs.

And whether or not you hold humans on the same level as animals...

If hunting weren't allowed, some other form of wildlife management (read, the killing of animals so they don't get over populated) would have to take place. Anybody who is against hunting, or thinks it's stupid, has never lived in the South for very long, or had a deer run into your vehicle :rolleyes:

Also, when you live in the South, you are raised around guns, and therefor have more respect for them, and generally more mature in that area. I was given my first gun (20ga. shotgun) when I was 10. Not every kid at that age is mature enough to handle a gun on their own, though.

Originally Posted by: PRSplayaIf hunting weren't allowed, some other form of wildlife management (read, the killing of animals so they don't get over populated) would have to take place.

Dude! Hunting is TOTALLY immoral because it's FUN!

Rather than let hunters pay the government for licenses to hunt (which then in turn pays for the fishing and wildlife departments which manage and supervise hunting and fishing), the government should instead pay untold millions of dollars for all the extra game wardens it will take to both regulate animal populations AND the increased poaching!!!


And on that note, folks, I'm gonna go for a ride on my motorcycle before I drown in my own sarcasm.

[QUOTE=Raskolnikov]Dude! Hunting is TOTALLY immoral because it's FUN! QUOTE]

Or vice verca?

Originally Posted by: PRSplayaIf hunting weren't allowed, some other form of wildlife management (read, the killing of animals so they don't get over populated) would have to take place. Anybody who is against hunting, or thinks it's stupid, has never lived in the South for very long, or had a deer run into your vehicle :rolleyes:

Also, when you live in the South, you are raised around guns, and therefor have more respect for them, and generally more mature in that area. I was given my first gun (20ga. shotgun) when I was 10. Not every kid at that age is mature enough to handle a gun on their own, though.

Kinda the same thing up here in rural Manitoba. I don't oppose hunting, I just don't understand the fenced-in hunting.

And the fact still remains that a .50 calibre gun is, you know, pretty ridiculous for a kid. At least a 20 gauge is manageable.

Yeah, fenced in hunting is quite lame, and shouldn't be called hunting, because it's far from being that.

Ehhh, the kid is not shooting people with that gun. If his parents are smart and believe he's responsible enough to handle that thing well (and thats how it seems, judging by the looks of that picture) then I don't have a problem with it.

I have been shooting guns with my father and by myself since I was six. He always instilled good safe shooting practices in me and I was well instilled with gun safety by the time I was eleven, and I'm sure if his father was a big hunter he would have taught his child the same (And like I said, judging by the looks of that picture I wouldn't doubt the kid's ability for a second).

ANd remember, we can't let the few kids who DO shoot people with guns spoil it for the millions that do not.

The only problems I have with this are:

1) The kid killed a RARE animal. Most likely the ONLY one in the entire world that big, and now we can't even see it anymore. If it was any other normal boar, fine, but this is something that we will probably never get to see because of him.

2) The fact that it was in a "preserve" or whatever its called. That takes all the sport out of hunting itself. Might as well shoot fish in a barrel.

I don't care that he's 11 and wielding a .50 cal, or that hes killing animals. I'm not a tree hugger by any means, but I just think an animal like this would be better of alive than dead. It's a shame that we will never get to see it.

My thoughts go as followed:

1) Theres no difference between letting a kid shoot a .50 cal revolver or a 20 gauge. They're equally deadly to humans. One will just make a bigger hole. We're throwing around the term "gave" like his parents actually gave him a revolver to play with.

2) Even if the animal was "rare" it was in a preserve. Its not like its a naturally occuring hog. I'm sure there were food plots and whatever else on that preserve to make the pig get to the size it did. Its like raising a fish in a tank. The more you feed it, the more its gonna grow. No competition.

3) I could care less about anything being shot, regardless of size. If its within the regulations, then its your right. At that size anyways, its probably gonna die soon. Midas well get it while its fresh.

But I'm just a dirty redneck. What do I know.

Originally Posted by: grizzlymint2) Even if the animal was "rare" it was in a preserve. Its not like its a naturally occuring hog. I'm sure there were food plots and whatever else on that preserve to make the pig get to the size it did. Its like raising a fish in a tank. The more you feed it, the more its gonna grow. No competition.

Kind of interesting, then, that it hadn't been brought to the media's attention until it had been killed. You'd think the concept of a huge pig roaming around, "terrorizing" a preserve would make pretty good news.

Something keeps telling me that this is fake still. I don't see how a pig could get that big, no matter how much he eats. Even if they COULD get that big, lik eearthman buck said, its kind of hard to imagine something like that being undiscovered until it was killed. Kind of hard to miss a pig that big.

Forget all the other debate. Who lets a kid hunt in a polo shirt?

Two words, Photo Shop! :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by: LeedoggForget all the other debate. Who lets a kid hunt in a polo shirt?

Who lets a kid get that fat?

I'm going to lean towards what Damaged said... if you look at this site http://www.monsterpig.com/ the size of the hog seems pretty inconsistent and the by seems rather small compared to his surroundings in the one on the first page of this thread. One of the pictures on the site everyone is clearly standing quite a ways behind the hog, perhaps trying to play that old camera trick to make it seem very large comparatively, however it is clear they are back a ways. In the one where it's hanging in again seems to change size in porportion to the boy and people in general and the hog and what appears to be a backhoe holding seem very flat as if they where cut out (either of the same picture and resized or out of another picture entirely). Anyway, thats my photo analysis, I'm studying digital design in college so Im around this stuff a lot (not that anyone cares but it may give me a slight bit of credibility?).

But really who cares if its real or not, i don't I'd rather it be real cause that be pretty cool that a hog could get that big.

As for the morality of killing it. Animals that get that large are generally very old and very unhealthy and likely in constant pain anyways, similar to the way giant people tend to be naturally unhealthy and have lots of problems in general. However I have a problem with turning it into sausage, why not taxidermy the whole thing, I guess that might be expensive but still Im sure a museum would take it and pay for it. Thats another reason why I would doubt the story, Im sure the kid shot a fairly large boar and they just told a fish story.

Anyway, the argument that hunting keeps animal populations in check does not apply in this instance since it was on a hunting preserve and no eco system was going to unbalanced by an over population within the fences.

Plus I have a huge problem with any argument that assumes law=morality. It is a far to simple way to think about anything.

As far as hunting, I don't really care, people can hunt and it does serve to keep animal populations at a balance, however it should be pointed out that this is only a problem in the first place because humans have overpopulated and over developed areas and that is why there is no room for other animals.

The only time I have a problem with hunting is when it is killing animals for a single product like tusks of fur especially when that animal is endangered, but I don't think anyone argues with that. As long as your not wiping out tons of wild animals or being wasteful then it seems within your right to hunt.

As for the kid with the big gun... eh. As long as he is instilled with the proper safety training and respect for its lethality then it seems alright. I tend to prefer that parents instill their children with respect for life and nature, however I also think this could be done while still teaching a child to hunt, however when you're hunting with a .50 caliber pistol it raises the question of why you need it. A rifle would probably do a better job and be safer, seems like an extravagance that points to a lack of respect for actual hunting and seems to say," I just like shooting **** with big guns" and the "****" here is living things, I could totally understand shooting old cars or toilets (or any other inanimate thing) with big guns... thats just good clean fun. :)