CreateDebate


Debate Info

4
2
yes it gives the animal a shot no, its all WRONG!!!10NE!
Debate Score:6
Arguments:4
Total Votes:8
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 yes it gives the animal a shot (2)
 
 no, its all WRONG!!!10NE! (2)

Debate Creator

loganwhite(51) pic



is bowhunting more fair than using a gun?

is using the ancient method of the bow to hunt and kill animals as sporting as using a gun, with bow hunting, they have a better chance.

yes it gives the animal a shot

Side Score: 4
VS.

no, its all WRONG!!!10NE!

Side Score: 2
2 points

I think bow hunting takes some more skill than using a gun, but I think the animal will die either way.

Side: either way the animal is dead
2 points

With usings bow and arrow you would have to be far more skilled then using s gun and the animal would have more of a chance as people have more of a chance of missing. i also think bows and arrows are really cool

Side: yes it gives the animal a shot
Swryght(161) Disputed
1 point

While you are correct that the hunter might have a greater chance of missing his or her shot with a bow, this doesn't necessarily mean that the situation is more fair than when a firearm is employed.

Either way, the animal has everything to lose, while the hunter has nothing to lose. "Fairness" does not enter into the equation.

Side: no, its all WRONG!!!10NE!
1 point

I think this question of "Fairness" is misguided. Hunting is not a game, it is a struggle of life and death. In such a struggle of life and death, the notion of fairness does not apply.

Let us address two cases:

1) The hunter as sportsman.

In this case, the hunter hunts for pleasure, for sport, and for accomplishment. In this case, the use of a bow may well provide a greater sense of accomplishment than a gun, because it takes more skill to kill an animal with a bow. However, this does not mean that the bow is more fair to the animal. Sport hunting can never be "fair" to the animal, because the hunter has nothing to lose, while the animal has everything to lose. That is not "fair," either with a gun or a bow.

2) The hunter as survivor.

In this case, the hunter stalks his or her prey for the purpose of survival. He or she needs the food or other raw materials from the animal, and must kill in order to survive. Here, the use of a gun would make survival much easier, because of its increased range and firepower. Once again, the question of "fairness" does not apply, because both parties (human and animal) are struggling to survive, and we can never blame either party for doing everything in its power to survive.

Conclusion: It is a confused question to ask whether bow-hunting is more fair than using a gun. Neither is fair, and neither is unfair. The concept of fairness is not relevant.

Side: no, its all WRONG!!!10NE!