Do you think Rainford was right about being the hunter and the hunted? The strong hunting down the weak. Yes in a sense he was right. Maybe and no are also goodchoices. People should really think about what they do to other people. When you huntsomeone down for their head as a trophy, that’s uncalled for.Rainford was right in a sense, because weaker people and animals should be thehunted. Like the weak people at heart shouldn’t be the hunter. Strong people at heartshould be the hunters because they know when to do things. They know when to fire theshot. Weak people and strong people should never switch being the hunter and thehunted. The hunter may want human heads as his trophies.Maybe also in a sense, some people should shoot people and maybe theyshouldn’t. It depends on the person, who is the hunter and the person who is the hunted.The hunted may want to be killed and the hunter wants to kill some one. For examplebounty hunters go after other people.No he is not right because people shouldn’t be a hunter’s quarries. People andanimals have differences when they are the quarries are different Humans should haveanimals as their quarry because animals pose more of a game. Like most game have fourlegs and are faster. Also some animals are quicker, harder to shoot, impale or doanything to harm.In my last few words depending on the situation I would say yes in a sense, maybein a sense, and no. The hunted could have family. Also, people hunting down otherpeople is a very bad thing. And never should anyone be released into a forest and behunted down....
