We have the physical resources to build a bow and arrow just like a gun. What's the difference?
There's a significant difference. But hey, don't let technology get in the way. And considering no animal uses any weapons when it hunts other than its own physical ability, why shift the degree of advantage? That's all I'm asking. Regardless of the excuses that hunters use to justify the use of guns in a hunt, there aren't any. Use a bow and arrow.
That's the problem with hunters. They've convinced themselves that anything they do is in the right and have no solution for anyone who challenges them. I never said that hunting should be banned. I said that it's a necessary evil, but hunters should be relegated to less advantageous means of hunting. This way, if they miss, the animal has a reasonable opportunity to either escape or defend itself. In my opinion, if we have the right to hunt and kill the animal, then it's equally acceptable for the animal to hunt and kill the person.