I am not a hunter, though I am interested in perhaps starting. I own Bows and I also own firearms. I’m exploring my options and looking into what I would use for hunting. My question is: Is rifle hunting more ethical, if it is our goal to limit the amount of suffering as much as possible?
Or am I simply uneducated to how effective a bow can be? All things being equal, wouldn’t a gun be more efficient (and thus cause less suffering?) I can foresee some responses already so id like to touch upon them:
“Look at the wild, and how lions or wolves hunt” – We are not lions, or wolves. We are humans who can plan, and have the technology and know-how to more effectively take down game, and alleviate as much suffering as possible. We have the choice to use modern armament, or a more ancient tech. Animals are only left with what they are born with, and lack higher level thinking. It is a apples to oranges comparison and does not address the question at hand.
“If you want to limit suffering as much as possible why not just farm and quickly slaughter?” – I would argue farming actually increases the level of suffering versus letting a animal mature in its natural state. For wild game it is also not economically feasible. This also does not address the question at hand, and is veering into a different topic.
“Bows can be just as effective if the shot is placed correctly, and from a shorter distance” – What if the rifle shot is placed correctly, and also done from the same distance as you would with a bow? All things being equal, would the rifle not cause less suffering? Or am i just wrong here due to ignorance (as in, it would be equal amount of suffering)?