>>1548859Nice try, this doesn't change the fact that you're arguing against intrinsic freedom in favor of collectivized "morality".
>>1548858People think like this when they live under regulations for a long period of time and aren't affected by further regulations proposed. They are in favor of restricting someone else's freedom, but not their own to further their own worldview. Ironically, they will almost certainly face a situation where the reverse happens to them and they're uppity. The arguments with regard to hunting and firearms use are almost exclusively all pseudomoralist stances. The problem is that it doesn't apply unilaterally. You can't hunt a dog in the US because people own them as pets and believe they should be protected. You have to use a .30 caliber rifle to hunt deer in most states despite them often weighing as much as a teenage human. Meanwhile, the method of take for feral hogs in Texas has been .22 LR, night vision scopes, shotguns, tannerite explosives, and machine guns from helicopters. All of this to quell the damage that they do to crops. All of this without a solitary regulation in place. Morals generally have nothing to do with regulation. Most of the time it's about political control. City dwellers vote to stop people from hunting as easily or as much because it conforms to their narrow view of the world. They aren't alone as country bumpkins do the same on other things like religion. The government is willing to comply with all of these as they turn these regulations into a profit machine.
