We are both saying the same thing (and I agree about the gladiators, I just couldn't resist) but the weapon for me isn't the issue it is the proximity and the notion that it is somehow sporting to shoot an animal that is so far away from you. I looked around and have found several recent examples of different situations where a man has killed a bear or believe it or not moose with a hunting knife. When I say several to put it into perspective I found 11 bear kills with a hunting knife or where a weapon was used in hand to hand combat (one guy used an arrow and a stone that were on the ground). Of course all of those situations where acts of self defense and not hunting but to me they were at least fair enough matches.
I think it takes a real tool to get some sort of kick out of shooting a gun or an arrow etc at an animal and killing it for sport especially when their is no real intention of eating the thing that you have killed. I guess I just find the idea of hunting without necessity to be a bunch of pseudo fey macho posturing and trophy hunting doubly so. Kill a deer and eat the meat? Whatever. Kill a gazelle because its head will look really *****in over your mantle? Nonsense.
Still F me and my opinion on the matter ultimately. I mean I fish every now and then when I can go to the store and by all the fish I could ever want to eat so I know that I am on some level being hypocritical. I guess the difference is that I don't pay good money to go out and try to kill the rarest fish on the planet so I can get a taxidermy bust of it to hang on my wall. Differing shades of grey I guess.