Democratic congresswoman shot in Arizona.

[mrstickball]

sapphi_snake said:

mrstickball said:

sapphi_snake said:

Kasz216 said:

Plenty of people shoot in their own homes.  Outside that, it's still more useful then Cigarretes, which have literally zero benefits and kill more people per year through personal use.

I don't really disagree with 1 or 2.  Except for the fact that it's very hard to define "sane."  Hence why you usually use criminal record as a barrier. 

As for 3.... hunting is actually one of the most humane way to get your meat.

Have you actually seen where the majority meat comes from?  Check out any book or documentry about factory farming there isn't anything more inhumane then that.

I'm pretty sure a psychiatrist can judge whether a person is capable or not to own a gun, without starting to shoot everybody.

And I doubt many people today hunt for food. The vast majority of hunters hunt "for sport", which is a despicable practice.

Where I live, that is certainly not the case. During hunting season, hundreds of thousands of deer are shot and tagged, and used for food. Many hunters in the state of Ohio donate their hunt to local food pantries and food banks.

They donated 104,000 pounds to the hungry last year in my state:

http://www2.nbc4i.com/news/2010/dec/15/2/ohio-deer-hunters-donate-venison-food-banks-ar-327767/

While that is true, today we no longer need to hunt poor animals for food. There are already several animals killed and their meat is sold at supermarkets. There's really no point in all this extra killing.

Yeah there is.

Because free-range animals that are shot are fed 100% natural ingredients, and are given a more humane death than most farm raised animals. I would rather eat a free-range animal that was given a natural habitat, instead of living in a pen and fed various feeds to fatten itself up.

Furthermore, they are not 'poor' animals. In the State of Ohio, deer populations are culled through legal hunting at pre-determined times each year. If it were not for these hunts, the deer would become overpopulated, which would require massive government intervention to ensure the populations were culled. If they were not culled, the deer would face starvation, disease and other such maladies. Farmers would also face damages from such animals, that feed on their grains which further tax the population.

Therefore, legal hunting is a win-win propostion: The government doesn't have to spend money on actively culling the popluations, hunters get millions of pounds of 'free' food, and the deer population continues to live in its natural habitat, away from being herded and castrated by the wildlife agencies.