Fishing is Cold-Hearted!

JT wrote:
And you a filthy crack whore, who is screwed in the ass for all eternity!

Oh no! I can't handle that fate! Lord please help me!

barfing in fear

"Radium" wrote in message
ps.com...
JT wrote:
And you a filthy crack whore, who is screwed in the ass for all eternity!

Oh no! I can't handle that fate! Lord please help me!

barfing in fear


Tell that to cone snails that harpoon their victims with poison harpoons.

"Radium" writes:

Fishing is a very cruel sport that slowly and painfully kills the fish.
The fish dies in the water before it is brought out to air. Thats

So, you've never actually seen a fish caught on a hook, have you?
--
Joseph J. Pfeiffer, Jr., Ph.D. Phone -- (505) 646-1605
Department of Computer Science FAX -- (505) 646-1002
New Mexico State University http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~pfeiffer

On 10 Jan 2007 23:20:03 -0800, "Radium" wrote:

Fishing is a very cruel sport that slowly and painfully kills the fish.
The fish dies in the water before it is brought out to air. Thats
right, it is not an easy bloodless death by suffocation, but rather a
brutal, blood-spurting death caused by shock, profuse bleeding, and
excruciating pain. The sharp objects on the fish-hook kill the fish by
causing severe pain, hemmorhaging, and shock. This is very cruel and
sadistic.

That's actually completely incorrect. Fish have totally different kind
of skin to humans and it is very tough especially around the mouth.
Hooks do not cause fish a lot of pain and rarely cause bleeding. They
certainly don't kill them.

Suffocation is not what kills the fish. Its the sharp stuff on the hook
that slowly, painfully, yet surely kills the poor fish

You are completely deluded and quite obviously know nothing about fish
or fishing.

When I have been fishing in the past it is the striking of the fish on
the head which kills it instantly without any suffering. That's for
the small number of fish I keep to eat. The majority of fish that I
release back seem pretty fine and healthy to me and swim away none the
worse for wear. If hooks were really as deadly as you think then the
fish we release back to the water afterwards would not swim away as
right as rain.

Stop fishing!!!!

No. You stop whinging.

Shooting a deer is not nearly as sadistic as fishing.

I was beginning to think you were a bleeding heart liberal. Now I
think you're just a whinging hypocritical troll.

Shooting a Deer especially if you are quite a distance from it, could
result in you not hitting the dear in the correct place to kill it
instantaneously. It could suddenly move before you pull the trigger or
you may move slightly and miss hitting it elsewhere. Then you have a
situation where you will have a Deer with a bullet in it some place
that might manage to leave the scene to somewhere further away were it
is going to bleed for quite a while before it dies or before anyone
can get there to finish it off. So I would argue that if anything the
Deer hunting is more likely to result in a Deer that suffers before it
dies.

Not that either of these sports are sadistic and in the case of
fishing, not all fishermen keep what they catch, a lot of it
especially in course and game fishing is thrown back.

Before the ban on Fox Hunting here in the UK, what you usually had was
the dogs would catch the weakest, disease ridden or oldest foxes, or
the ones that were problems, and the huntsmen would be right behind
and be able to take care of the fox pretty much straight away.

Since the ban on hunting with Dogs what you now have is a situation
where you have marksmen shooting them from greater distances, and
quite often missing which now results in Foxes that have been shot and
injured that suffer for a long time before they die. And these foxes
shot by marksmen from longer distances are not necessarily the weakest
foxes, old foxes, problem foxes or diseased ones. It is often healthy
ones too.

So now the ban on hunting with dogs has just exacerbated and made
worse a problem that you never had previously. The weekend after the
ban on hunting with dogs came into effect, 10 times as many foxes were
killed that weekend by marksmen. I believe it was something like 130
foxes that were shot the weekend after the ban when ordinarily the
hunts going on around the country would have only culled a seventh or
sixth of that number at best.

Due to the animal rights brigade who know nothing about conservation,
animals or the countryside, you now have a situation were animals are
worse off, and instead of problem disease ridden foxes being culled
you also have healthy ones being killed as well. At least with hunting
with dogs the fox had a sporting chance of getting away, and quite
often the fittest and healthiest foxes would get away, usually only
the diseased ones and problem ones would be caught and killed, and
this served a very useful purpose.

Now you don't have this situation any more because of spiteful class
warfare instigated by left wing scruffy hippy types who know nothing
about the welfare of animals especially from the looks of the way they
keep themselves and their own animals.

The sad thing is that a lot of people in this country as well as
political parties have been suckered in to believing that things like
fox hunting is cruel without ever actually going on a hunt and finding
out for themselves whether it is or not. It is just another law that
has been passed based on public emotion instead of hard facts.

Those who fish are commiting a grave sin and will burn in hell after
their deaths. Karma is a bitch!

Jesus is doing just fine as well as all his disciples and they caught
and ate plenty of fish.

John

Radium wrote:
Fishing is a very cruel sport that slowly and painfully kills the fish.
The fish dies in the water before it is brought out to air. Thats
right, it is not an easy bloodless death by suffocation, but rather a
brutal, blood-spurting death caused by shock, profuse bleeding, and
excruciating pain. The sharp objects on the fish-hook kill the fish by
causing severe pain, hemmorhaging, and shock. This is very cruel and
sadistic.

Suffocation is not what kills the fish. Its the sharp stuff on the hook
that slowly, painfully, yet surely kills the poor fish

Stop fishing!!!!

Shooting a deer is not nearly as sadistic as fishing.

Those who fish are commiting a grave sin and will burn in hell after
their deaths. Karma is a bitch!

I'd suggest you set an example for all of us, by no longer eating fish.
You should also avoid eating animals, for the same reasons. You should
also avoid all kinds of plant life, because, their living things as
well.

Get back to us in a few months, and let us all know how your doing.

John

The research on the survivability of fish that have been caught and released
simply does not support this claim. Most of those fish survive. Many of the
deeply hooked fish even survive because the strong acid in the digestive
system dissolves the hook. Today, all of the fishermen that I know release
most of the fish that they catch. The fish are not harmed. Since most fish
are lip hooked, there is usually no loss of blood. The statements made below
by "Radium" are refuted by the current research and are simply not true!

Have a Great Day!

Fishinprof


"Radium" wrote in message
oups.com...
Fishing is a very cruel sport that slowly and painfully kills the fish.
The fish dies in the water before it is brought out to air. Thats
right, it is not an easy bloodless death by suffocation, but rather a
brutal, blood-spurting death caused by shock, profuse bleeding, and
excruciating pain. The sharp objects on the fish-hook kill the fish by
causing severe pain, hemmorhaging, and shock. This is very cruel and
sadistic.

Suffocation is not what kills the fish. Its the sharp stuff on the hook
that slowly, painfully, yet surely kills the poor fish

Stop fishing!!!!

Shooting a deer is not nearly as sadistic as fishing.

Those who fish are commiting a grave sin and will burn in hell after
their deaths. Karma is a bitch!

On Apr 7, 7:13 pm, "Nick" wrote:
Since most fish
are lip hooked, there is usually no loss of blood.

Okay, but extremely painful tears occur on the fish's lip. The fish
may not die but it sure will suffer extreme agony while victimized by
the sadistic sport of fishing.

In article .com,
Radium writes
On Apr 7, 7:13 pm, "Nick" wrote:
Since most fish
are lip hooked, there is usually no loss of blood.

Okay, but extremely painful tears occur on the fish's lip. The fish
may not die but it sure will suffer extreme agony while victimized by
the sadistic sport of fishing.


It is also a fact that many fish once released ,and swim away, may well
die soon after.
--
Bill Grey

On Apr 10, 2:52 pm, "W. D. Grey" wrote:

It is also a fact that many fish once released ,and swim away, may well
die soon after.

Exactly.

On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:52:12 +0100, "W. D. Grey"
wrote:

In article .com,
Radium writes
On Apr 7, 7:13 pm, "Nick" wrote:
Since most fish
are lip hooked, there is usually no loss of blood.

Okay, but extremely painful tears occur on the fish's lip. The fish
may not die but it sure will suffer extreme agony while victimized by
the sadistic sport of fishing.


It is also a fact that many fish once released ,and swim away, may well
die soon after.


Whose fact is it that"...many fish once released ,and swim away, may
well die soon"? Do have some remotely scientific data to support your
wild-eyed claim or do you have a dedicated group of observers who
report to you on a regular schedule?