to answer those two dumb questions
i don't use or wear anything that was made from animal
Sorry, I didn't mean to be a dick, but there are a lot of people who are hypocritical about it and I just wanted to know where you stand. I'm vegan as well, so I'm not trying to ridicule you.
Then, however, I don't see why in your mind a hunter is an especially bad person compared to a normal animal products consumer - one kills, the other commisions confining and killing (to put it roughly).
Fur isn't much worse than leather, hunting isn't much worse than buying animal products. Those are branches, not the root of the problem. Without diluting the root, the branches will regrow. By diluting the root, the branches will die automatically.
The root is the strict distinction between human and non-human interests, some even (still) going as far as claiming humans are no animals. I know it is deeply influenced by abrahamitic religions and natural to the degree that "unsimilar" or "farther" is naturally regarded as "lesser" (e.g. most people would take five dead random people over one dead friend) and therefore hard to tackle. You learn it incipent from being a baby and are constantly assured by society and interest groups. It's so deeply enrooted in our society that it takes decades to change.
You can see the heaviest hypocrisy in the difference between how pets and farm animals are treated. The interests of some animals (those you know and are "near") are held in high regard while those of the used ones are only a barrier to profit.
So what can one do? Break the walls down. Show that farm and wild animals have just as much consciousness as pets and a lot of similar interests to humans, in kind and strength. Argue that the existence and strength of interests are the only relevant factor in determining if and how one should be regarded. Provide arguments on why regarding their interests means not using them. Disclose the consequences of using them that are sweeped under the carpet. Demonstrate that not using them is not as difficult as generally assumed.
Nothing is achieved by attacking people, progress can only come from tackling the actions. Of course you won't be able to convince anyone, but this problem is void once conciousness in society is established. If you notice that you're o n a dead end, you should stop because otherwise it casts a damning light on your goals.
One of my basic principles is that there are no bad people, just bad actions and I'll fight the actions, not people. Everyone makes mistakes and harms others in one way or another, so there's no reason to sit on a high horse and condemn other people. That, however, doesn't mean that you have to accept everything others do.
"Murder" is a word with a legal meaning - using it here will just make you look unobjective and aggressive. Nobody will listen to you if you take the position of the antagonist and act like you hate the ones you want to have on your side. There are no "better" people.
