>dunno there Ben ..
I've always looked at animals as objects (some people too, if I'm being honest, but getting too specific about that could upset the ladies, lol ... never quite understood that ... I spent much of my youth wanting to be objectified by hot babes, but alas, had to finally give up on that wish). Of course horses aren't inanimate objects, but the very use of the phrase implies the existence of animate objects. Horses are animate by definition, unless they're dead, but even then they could be a vehicle for disease.
All right! Not only a fellow Mississippian, but a Philosopher as well! What a treat!
Yes I agree and concede, even though the definition of the term 'things' is clearly stated and defined; In this case a 'dead horse' could very well be a 'vehicle' for spreading disease. lol
What happened with you that contributed to the disappointment of your lack of hot babes growing up? With your sense of humor,
(an important attribute that most girls appreciate, or so I would have thought, which you clearly possess), you should have been swamped with 'hot babes' growing up. lol
> Legally speaking, horses are treated as property, and therefore as objects and/or things. Also, when it comes to traffic laws; horses are treated as vehicles just as much as any vehicle they might be pulling, they're just not motor vehicles ... and there's another one of those phrases, this time implying the existence of non-motor vehicles.
Yes Horses are considered as property for sure. However I don't know so much about their being considered as 'things', I suppose in the sense you are speaking they could be considered as 'things a person owns' in a blanked sense of tone.
I would more so lean to the idea of horses being "
Property that a person owns: to be more precise.
However in this case I went strictly by the rules of Mr Bush, in answer to his definition of 'things'. lol.
And yes,
wagons, carts, and buggies that a horse or mule may pull, may very well be perceived and defined 'as vehicles', but not the horse by which power they are drawn (the horse or mule). Such beast laboring is considered 'horse power'. One hose drawing such a 'vehicle; equals one horse power. Two horses pulling such a vehicle equals two HP etc. lol.
>I don't think fishing on horseback would be a good idea (in or out of the water, but especially not in, and most especially not in deep water). I doubt they would appreciate getting accidentally hooked either, and I bet it would take a bit of training to get one to tolerate a big flopping fish getting hauled up on it's back (maybe bream fishing with a cane pole, but that's the slimy oatmeal or kale of fishing ... pretty much not worth doing unless that's all you got . Hunting deer and especially quail on horseback is pretty hard to beat though.
Nor do I consider fishing on horseback, to be the most convent way to fish, especially if a lot of area is to be covered. On the other hand, Quail in wagons? Most defiantly! Deer on HB" Yes, my preference for that quest as well! We might add squirrel hunting with dogs via horseback to be considered to boot...
Sadly, quail are gone in my area, thus a way of life with them....
>Just picking atcha, because I'm bored and rambling after a long day ... and being a vehicle for irritation is kinda fun sometimes...
I relate, appreciate, and welcome such objective points of view, no matter the 'vehicle' you may use and choose to pick at me with! lol
Topic: Let?s Go Hunting Or Fishing! Your Pick! (Read 4799 times)