ORIGINAL: leben_sie_gut
Well, it seems you answered my question....
But, regardless, our opinions have been stated, and while it seems to me that yours just makes you seem ill informed and mildy ridiculous, it is indeed your opinion. So, more power to you.
I've stated mine as well, simply based on the fact that I personally believe it is unethical to put a game animal at a higher risk of a non-lethal shot simply because an individual thinks that he or she can hit it a half mile away. Just because you theoretically can, doesn't mean you should....
While I disagree, at least this argument makes sense. This is probably what you meant to say the first time, but instead you (likely mistakenly) argued that ANY activity that COULD result in a wounded animal is UNETHICAL. Surely you are sharp enough to see the error in that logic. Thanks for clearing up your previous post....the argument quoted here makes much more sense, and is likely what you meant to say all along.
Your first argument would even indicate that driving your car is unethical because it COULD result in a wounded deer.