One I agree, those Scandanavian countries are some of the best to live in. 

However, they aren't exactly in line with how the USA is at all, nevermind politically, I mean diversity.

Those countries, like most countries in the world that aren't the USA, are not diverse at all.  It's just a bunch of like-minded white people.  The more diversity, the more hatred, and the more crime.  In the USA, black people hate white people, hispanic people hate blacks, white people hate hispanics, etc etc etc.  Other countries do not have to deal with this mix of populations.  Sure, it's a small % of the population who does this, but all that gang crime happens mostly between the low lifes in their all black, all hispanic, and all white gangs.  And they fight eachother.  Even prison divides up into ethnicities.  Sometimes things aren't so pretty when you have uneducated (and unable to be educated) people living in poverty, who resort to animal like behavior in "proving" themselves to be the tough guy.  I mean shoot, the number one way for a black man to die in this country is to be shot, and by another black man. 

Also, the USA is WAY bigger than those countries... so once you have so many cities that are so much larger, etc... crime starts to happen.  I think the rest of Europe right now is proving that those Scandanavian systems don't work on a larger scale. 

Also, not sure where that graph is from... but Egypt being one of the more peaceful countries?  What a joke.

I know that a government and millitary force can't control a populace that don't want to be controlled. History teaches us that. You're delusional if you think an armed resistance force in America couldn't win a war of attrition against the US government. 

You're right.  Killing an animal for food is not murder.  Murder is, by definition: a crime of killing somebody: the crime of killing another person deliberately and not in self-defense or with any other extenuating circumstance recognized by law, or Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human being.

Notice how those definitions say human being, and person.  Not animals.  I live in the real world.  In the real world, humans are at the top of the food chain.  If that makes us playing God, then so be it.  Maybe God shouldn't have given us this incredible advantage over other species then?  Go talk to him about that.  Even if you're a vegan, all the products you eat were made possible by killing thousands and millions of smaller creatures, you know the kind that get crushed by the farming equipment as it goes through the fields? 

And while we are on it.  Go sue the lions and cheetas who brutally run down their prey, stab it multiple times, and rip its throat out as it wiggles and dies slowly... you know, much worse than an instant kill shot through the heart.  That's murder by your definition right?  And they don't need to eat just like we don't need to eat right? 

So you would have most of the world go hungry then?  You want most of the billions of people on this planet to die?  Some humanitarian you are.  Join PETA dude.  They seem right up your alley.  The only reason you eat what you do is because of the practices that humans do in regards to farm land and hunting.

Fences?  They already do that.  Doesn't stop much, not to mention, if they can't afford fences to stop illegal immigrants, what makes you think they could do it to guard all the land we use for farming?  But forget about being practical that way.  Small electrical current?  You want to pay for that?  You want to install that?  And small current?  Small like those invisible fences for dogs?  That I've seen dogs run right through when a cat runs across the street?  Or enough to kill the animal dead and stop it's heart.  Otherwise, fences aren't stopping anything, definitely not anything hungry, nevermind the smaller animals who will just dig underneath it.

You justify killing by eating the food you do, you just don't know it.  It's called being at the top of the food chain.  Welcome to humanity.

Ok, so let's raise the wolves back from the undead and let them eat all the deer.  Problem solved.  Or let's somehow inject them with something that makes them more fertile, or breed our own wolves and release them into the wild.  Does that solve your problem?  Because you can't undo what's been done.  So what is your master plan to fix it, since you have a degree in the field?  And why haven't you implemented it yet?

And so you agree that for example, deer, will explode in population until they use up all the natural resources and start dying off... aka, our resources, and other animals' resources, thus we resort to hunting. 

So you're saying that despite all of the feral hogs that humans kill with guns, traps, and poisons, there is still a problem, right?  So would that problem not be EVEN WORSE with NO human intervention at all?  Sounds like it would be.  Wouldn't humans have to be the ones to introduce their natural predator, whatever that may be?  Wouldn't that have consequences? 

I know how the food chain works.  We are at the top. We do what is necessary to keep our way of advanced life sustainable.

Obviously humans didn't dictate 99.9% of wildlife populations.  Humans haven't even been around that long.  Not to mention nature has its own animals become extinct despite our efforts.  Just look at pandas.  Those dumb animals don't even want to procreate anymore, thus they should be extinct.  But humans intervene and show them panda porn (no joke) just to make it work so we can keep looking at fluffy pandas.  Is this wrong?  Should we just let them go extinct?  It's clearly a species that should be dead.  But they look cute, so we do our best human intervention to keep them alive.

But guess what, there are 7 billion people on this planet now.  7 billion humans. Who need food.  And in some places, have overgrown their natural resources and spread more than the earth will naturally let them live.  So what do we do?  We figure out ways to fix that, and one of those ways is hunting to prevent certain animals from decimating the landscape that we use to feed these people.  You want to help fix this?  Go tell them to wear some condoms.

Like I said, I live in the real world, not the ideal world.  I think wolves are awesome, and humans shouldn't kill them.  But they did, and now it's done.  And now we have a deer problem.  So how to fix it?  Hunting is one of the ways we use.

Im no veggie but you kill not just for food but because there are too many? Thats basically hunting seasons purpose or am i putting words in your mouth again? The food is just a bi-product of reducing an "overgrown population" I eat food that is killed humainly and purely bred for food. Those animals are electrified before death so they dont feel a thing. 

Again we are at the top of the food chain but doesnt mean we have the right to kill a species because there are too many. It sounds like birth control, killing off those that cant speak for them selves or defend themselves because theres too many of them. You must admit its a similar polocy.

On the topic of brutal killings by lions etc. Its in their nature and they know no better, you and other hunters though do know better. Im not saying a bullet isnt an instant kill although sometimes it wont be but i am aginst the fact you are killing them because theres "too many" 

Again i would kill myself to eat but not because of a surplus population, THAT IS WHAT PISSES ME OFF NOT THAT THEY ARE KILLED FOR FOOD!!! I do not wish for the world to die of hunger but in america? I know there are slums there but if you can afford a gun and ammo you can surely just buy normal food?

I think that electricity is cheaper than amunition or again am i wrong? Also you kill it for eating food? Im sure if some guy off the street stole your food you wouldnt shoot him so why shoot an animal for doing the exact same thing? I except your arguement that smaller creatures could tunnel under but a little wire mesh going into the ground never hurt anyone?

Top of the food chain means that all animals below you are prey and respect you but doesnt mean you can go around needlessly killing them, with great power comes great responsibility.

In a previous comment you called me "ignorant" That is coming from the guy with the gun. Overhunting leads to extinction and killing because theres an "infestation" causes me to question your basic human emotions. I take it this is a hobby or pass time (please correct me if im wrong)

Last point: At the age of 16 I am a firm believer in humanity. We have our flaws and ive studied many of them but in most cases we make up for that with our feats of science, medicine and sacrifice. I also believe that as intelligent beings we have a commitment to those who do not share our intelligence. I refuse to believe humanity would murder because there are too many of another species (a harmless species in 99% of cases) If humanity really is a race of brutes then i would no longer wish to be associated or one of them.

And you quite clearly know nothing about history

True. I guess i forgot about the fact that weaponry, warfare tactics and gap between government's arsenal and civilian arsenal hasn't changed during history by the slightest. At all ! Also I forgot that USA has an army just as strong and capable as those of Afghanistan, Libya, and Somalia...

Wait a second... Do you really think that the animals that you eat have it any better than the hunted animals who have spent their lives living in the wild? You should really visit some pig and/or chicken farms then, because believe me, if I had to choose between being a deer and live a free life until sudden death by shotgun, or being a pig that has its balls cut off without anasthetic and lives its entire life in a one square meter pen without any room to move before being slaughtered, I'd choose to be a deer anyday.

Besides, what makes deer more worth than pigs or cows? Why is industrialized systematic killing of animals more okay to you than just going out and shooting something for meat like people have done over thousands of years? You should either be against all killing of animals for food, or you are a hypocrite.

Keeping a population in check by hunting isn't going to lead to extinction if the hunting is carried out responsibly. I didn't follow this conversation from the beginning, but noone is for the extinction of any species, right?