This source might be useful to my research because it talks about animal rights and how hunting affects it.It gives examples of what hunting does to animals in a negative way. For example, hunting limits populations of animals. It gives up to date information on animal rights and hunting. The source also stresses that animals have rights similar to humans. I can use this source as evidence for the other side of my argument. I can also use this information to rebuttal the non-hunting side of the argument.
This source will be useful in my research because it discusses animal rights and how hunting violates these rights. It states that hunting causes suffering and pain. It states that hunting takes away morals from people because animals have equal rights to humans. I can use this information to rebuttal the animal-rights activists claims, by finding evidence that ethical shots on animals cause no suffering to animals, and it is a humane death.
Crispell, Dianne. “Targeting hunters”. American Demographics 16 (1994): 34. Academic Search Premier.
I found this source on the Academic Search Premier of the Mesa Community College Library Database. This is a respectable source because it is on the college database. The source is about presenting and comparing statistics of hunters and anglers in America, social status of hunters and anglers, market forecast, and conservation awareness. In addition, the source confronts the Bambi stereotype, disproving any questions or concerns about hunting. For example, it explains that not all hunters kill. In Pennsylvania issued 1.1 million deer tags in 1992, and only 388,000 were harvested. This source is going to be useful for my research because it contains statistical evidence, which I can use to back up my arguments.
No comments:
Post a Comment