Re: Feral cats and head shots
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DebosDave</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TOP PREDATOR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
however, in this day and age, picture hilliary or whomever wielding a picture of "fluffy" with a bayonet and an ak47 stuck it. not a good image in the publics eye. and especially on a forum that shooting is king, and on a section that deals with hunting. <span style="font-weight: bold">gives more fuel to the anti-gun / anti-hunter crowd </span> and the idea that people that hunt and have assualt weapons or guns are going to come to your house and kill your pets. this is how they think, and how we make ourselves our own worst enemy. what's next week, beheaded poodles and electricuted parrots?
</div></div>
Do you really think there is someone out there that is thinking, I am kinda on the fence here, I almost don't like guns... oh shit, a pet cat that has been bayonetted, that is it, now I am truely anti-gun, we have got to do something about this. They don't need any more fuel on their fire, the fact that you are wiling to kill a deer and put it on your wall and take manly trophy pictures of it are the same thing to those people. The only difference between what is shown here and other hunting pictures is a line you have drawn in your mind personally. All saying this is what makes the anti-gunners mad, is that it now creates a division between people who believe the same thing, that guns and hunting are a right. If you believe that feral cats should be killed, what is the difference between these pictures and ones showing armadillos, rabbits, gophers, prarie dogs, coyotes? Is anyone eating coyotes out there?
Dave </div></div>
On the Money... all libs think alike, that is they don't think, they feel, and to them killing animals is wrong, DD exatly right.