Situation Ethics????........2 Part Question .....**UPDATED WITH twils real life situation

[MN/Kyle]

23 pages of debate, who has changed their minds, really curious.

[Charlie P]

but leaving a case of Milwaukee Best for you

Talk about littering.

[brucelanthier]

ORIGINAL: MN/Kyle

23 pages of debate, who has changed their minds, really curious.

I will no longer go 1 mile over the speed limit because if I do then I should be willing to compromise my ethics in other areas too .

[Charlie P]

who has changed their minds, really curious.

It's made me think.

Now I want to invent a hover craft that can pick up a deer.

[bawanajim]

ORIGINAL: Germ

Jim I am going on your land, but leaving a case of Milwaukee Best for you

Yer just being mean.[:'(]

[Germ]

ORIGINAL: bawanajim

Yer just being mean.[:'(]

Hey I thought that was your beer[8D]

I am currently re-thinking my position

[LittleChief]

ORIGINAL: TEmbry
I agree humans are far more important than a deer, but you aren't harming humans in this process and you are in a way harming or doing a disservice to the deer.Honestly, what is it really hurting if you do go get that deer? but i don't like this last statement quoted above...How is the hunter in this situation being any more selfish than the a-hole neighbor? Both are in the wrong, IMO.

TEmbry,
Just to clarify, the lastlittle paragraphI wrotewasn't aimed at hunters who would cross a fence. I ended my thoughts on this specific topic in the paragraph above that.The last statmentwas aimed at what seems to be becoming the main-stream train of thought.... at Americain general. I'm only 44, but I remember a time and a place where you could count on a total stranger to render assistance to someone in need. People waved "hello" to total strangers they met on the highway. I joined the Navy in 1981 when I was 17. Now, I've seen more of the world than I haven't seen, and I've never seen anything to change my feelings thatwe, as Americans, are the luckiest people in the world. We have rights and freedoms that people in so many other countries can't begin to fathom, and so many Americans take them for granted,take advantage of them or just generally spit on them.

In direct response to your question, the "a-hole" neighbor may be just that, but he has the "right" to do as he chooses. He has the "right" to just be an "a-hole" if he wants. Neo-Nazi's demonstrate and spread a message of hate and intolerance, but the Supreme court says it's their "right". Groups burn our flag, but somehow, it's thier "right" I could go on and on, but there's no need.These views, like many others, turn my stomach. There are thousands who wouldn't agree with the land-owner who is enough of a jerk to refuse access in this case, but who are willing to die fighting to protect his right to do so.

What's the hunter in this case hurting? In my opinion, he's only hurting himself. If you can reason that out, good. If you can't, well, that's good too. It's just my opinion. It's not right or wrong.

[huntbigb]

Actually, the second situation is not tresspassing. A hunter has the legal right to recover their game. The landowner has no legal right to prevent them from doing that...call the cops, I will wait. haha.

[Lanse couche couche]

Just out of curisoity, how many folks know of specific cases where someone was arrested and really had the book thrown at them for going ten feet onto someone else's property to retrieve a deer? Not trying to start an argument, I would just like to know how often something like that actually happens.

[buttonbuckmaster]

ORIGINAL: huntbigb

Actually, the second situation is not tresspassing. A hunter has the legal right to recover their game. The landowner has no legal right to prevent them from doing that...call the cops, I will wait. haha.

Depends on the state. The hunter gets a "no" from the landowner here...he either lets it rot or tresspasses.