I'd like to say I get a kick out of wacko threads like this one, but when I think about it, I get a bit upset.

I worry when a segment of hunters wants to increase laws that are made to restrict how we kill our animals. Since the first time man ever killed an animal to eat, the method he choose was completely irelevant. It's only recently, since anti-hunting propaganda has taken hold, that hunters have started pointing fingers and claiming foul - "that way is too easy, it's not hunting". Pretty soon, there will be other "hunters", who point there finger at your method and claim, "that way is too easy, it's not hunting". Anti-hunters will make sure that this trend continues until there is no more hunting. Heck if you think about it, no hunting is fair to the animal. There is no such thing as "fair chase". It's always unfair and we alway kill animals with methods that give us huge advantages. The only differences are the degrees of unfairness.

I happen to believe that animals are killed behind a fence and those that are killed without a fence nearby are both just dead animals and neither feels they were given "repect". It should always be legal to kill animals in any manner deemed safe and acceptable to the local area. Let each individual decide how difficult they want their kill to be. There is no room for the "holier than thou" hunter if killing animals is to remain legal.