Quote:
Originally Posted by Monahammer
There are non-firearm methods to kill livestock or animals that are available to veterinarians.
Yes, I believe I admitted that they were weak analogies, as Azure also used to drinking and drugs.
Shooting is fun- this was the position I was hoping would come out. So we're willing to balance personal enjoyment against the potential for mass death?
This serves as a response to btimbit's post as well. It's fine if that's what your position is, just admit that you value personal enjoyment of a novelty more than societal well-being.
I have been on a firearm hunt before. I didn't at any point say it was easy. That was an inference you made based on my comment of returning to more traditional hunting methods. I'm just saying there are other tools to accomplish the exact same end that don't represent a substantial threat to the lives of many people. A knife can also harm people, but the scale of threat a firearm represents compared to a knife is obvious.
Regarding acquisition of chemicals through licensing: there are still some chemicals that you cannot obtain in spite of licensing, that are specially restricted and controlled.
|
The scale of threat of a firearm we are speaking to is likely far less then other means to be frank. A cube van would be much more lethal then many of the firearms we are speaking about in many scenarios. I would bet a longbow with a quiver of arrows is more lethal then some of these firearms. Threat is a matter of human existence.
You are welcome to dispatch the wolf eating your livestock with other means available then a firearm.