I'm sure there are many different opinions on this subject, but you're obviously reading it because you care. That's totally a good thing! You should care; and if you don't, then I'm sure there are other things your passion is busy defending. This is also totally a good thing! (We don't all possess the energy to fight for every single opinion to the fullest extent... even if we try.)

Anyways... Hunting. Killing animals, yes. Good or bad? Right or wrong? That's what we ask ourselves. However, it's not the answers that is the problem. It's the questions. There are good things about hunting, and bad things; and we all have good intentions, I'm sure. But we should be questioning the reasons we hunt, instead. Here are my thoughts:

Hunting for sport. I don't agree with this one at all. You want a trophy on your wall? Buy a painting. An innocent animal doesn't need to lose it's life for your ego to be happy.

Hunting for food. I am not a vegetarian. I like eating meat and (sometimes) it's good for your diet. This is a personal choice for me. I also do my best to make sure I only eat free range animal products. To me, this reason for hunting is a logical one. The animals live happily, and then are put to good use afterwards. The part that I am not OK with is when we do not utilize the whole animal after taking it's life. When I die, I want every part of me to be used for science, medical purposes, etc. The animal's death should be worth it. (As creepy as that sounds...) The meat can be eaten, the skin can be made into clothing, blankets, rugs, etc.

I move onto decorative hunting next to clear up my last sentence. I do not believe animals should be hunted specifically for their skins or pelts. However, if the animal is hunted for food (a basic human need) then the whole animal can then be utilized for other reasons (not basic human needs).

"But some animals are overpopulated." Humans are overpopulated. Should we go around killing people to even the numbers? No, I didn't think so. Humans also don't have more of a right to be alive than animals do. We cannot play god in these situations and make, literally, life or death decisions for other creatures.

"We only hunt the animals that are close to death, anyway". This does not make you a hero. If the animal is suffering, sure. Maybe, if you can't save it, it should be put out of it's misery. But just because the animals is old doesn't mean you get to choose when it's life ends. We don't go around shooting old men because 'hey, you're not gonna be alive much longer so let me help with that.' Seem's a little more messed up now, right?

Hunting to make places "safer". Another situation where you think you're fricken superman... I'm sorry to tell you this but animals exist; everywhere. Humans can live anywhere but animals can't. Animals require certain temperatures or climates to survive. If you don't feel safe because of the animals around you, then move somewhere else. The bear in your backyard most likely lived there first. Call someone to transport it or move it. But killing the animal is completely unnecessary unless it is attacking you. Again, human comparison: If there was a dangerous person in the neighborhood, you are not going to run outside and just shoot them. You would call the police and they would only fire if that person attacked them.

Like I said, tons of people will agree or disagree with what I'm saying here. But others don't even think about the animals' lives. Hopefully people will read this and be more aware of what they eat, what they hunt, and the animals that walk the Earth just like we do.