I wasn’t playing games, but guess I missed the sarcasm or metaphor you were using again-— it truly seemed to me as though you were making a claim about hunting animals when it is done purely for sport, as opposed to hunting for food, to cull the herd, to protect livestock, etc., with hunting for the sake of gaining a trophy being not quite as bad as the rest, and that said claim was of there being a connection between a statiscally significant group of serial killers and the least “healthy” form of hunting-— that while virtually no hunters were serial killers, a statistically significant number of serial killers had hunted purely for sport, so much so that asking about this was part of the standard psychological interview of such people.
At least you come to the point of clearly begging the question — to assert that “hunting” down animals just for for the pleasure of finding and killing them, without even any residual value is “sport.”
Glad you don’t feel the same way about people — or the neighbor’s petunias.