There are many hunters in the United States. The average hunter is a 42 year old, white male. As time goes by, there are fewer places for sportsman to go hunting. A new US Fish and Wildlife survey shows that the number of hunters has declined by 7 percent, to 13 million, in the past 5 years. Is this an effect from the question is hunting morally acceptable. Hunting in my opinion is acceptable for different reasons.
             There are three different groups of attitudes toward hunting; those who believe that all hunting is morally wrong, those who think it's wrong if it's enjoyable, but permissible for food, and those who approve of virtually all kinds of legal hunting. The first group is of course are the anti-hunters. The second group is those who think it is acceptable if doing it for the food. The third is those who approve of all kinds of legal hunting. For the anti-hunters, the big thing is that they think it violates animal rights. It doesn't matter as long it is for the food and not just the sport of killing the animals.
             The population has to be controlled to some extent, or overcrowding will result in disease and starvation. The landscape has a limited carrying capacity, and populations through hunting is much more merciful than a long death attributable to starvation or disease. Sport hunters take care of the problem and still use the animal as food. Also hunting has been around for a while. How did you think the people in the old days got their meat products? They had to hunt for them. It doesn't make a difference if you eat beef from the store or you go hunting for a certain animal.
             The basis of the hunting experience for the internally motivated responsible hunter is the realization that he has met the challenges of the wilderness experience; hunting, killing and providing food for him and others. He may also honor his animal by investing in the costs for a taxidermist to provide a
             ...