Hunting debate.....nb

Re: I don\'t think this is \"non-boaty\" re Mirelle

I whole heartedly agree with you, it scares me to think that 'our government' can vote on a topic and no matter what the outcome of the vote - pass said ledgislation (spelling sorry). It doesn't bother me either way with fox hunting, although I don't quite understand how people get such pleasure from chasing a creature through the countryside. IMHO this g'ment ( maybe all g'ments) have lost the plot with seemingly minor issues taking priority over bigger issues - Health Service, policing, pensions etc. Mind perhaps the whole world has lost the plot !!

ps, has anyone seen the age of inocence, it was lost some time ago !

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
"No Hobbits around anymore"

No, but there are plenty of Orcs and I'm pretty sure that I've seen the occasional Cave Troll. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>Think I'll draw some little rabbits on my head, from a distance they might be mistaken for hairs.
 
Your opinion and I respect it, but the issue here is that the opinion of at the very least, a large minority, is being ridden over roughshod in the name of parliamentary democracy, which makes a mockery of the whole system.

<hr width=100% size=1>Khyber
 
How true indeed

Years ago I thought I spotted Gollum.... 'till somebody informed me it was just another one of the in-laws.....

<hr width=100% size=1>Never attempt to teach a pig to sing.
It is a waste of time and it annoys the pig.
 
"Years ago I thought I spotted Gollum.... 'till somebody informed me it was just another one of the in-laws....."

It's frightening what you can end up with when you start messing about with rings!

<hr width=100% size=1>Think I'll draw some little rabbits on my head, from a distance they might be mistaken for hairs.
 
Good to know that there are still fans of R S Surtees who haven't "come a-cropper at a wiscious bullfinch in the shires"! In all seriousness (well, not too tongue-in-cheek), there were some interesting role-models in Surtees' novels for some yotties. For example, the ability to leave the handling and maintenance of your horse (boat) to others; the talent of eating and drinking in someone else's dining room (saloon), at their cost, even if you don't really know them; and, not least, the ability to exaggerate the size of fences (waves) encountered in a day's sport!

Help me, I'm going all misty-eyed...

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
"Tear them apart with dogs or shoot them in the back, see how they can justify it then!!! "

I'm no doctor, but I'd say that would be difficult....

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Hunting debate

There are enough problems that need sorting out like
Decent care homes for elderly people where they can live with dignity
Pension legislation to prevent "the city" from creaming off profits out of companies and allowing a few directors to cream off vast amounts of money
Dealing with polution and in particular vehicle emmisions, improvement of air quality
A decent transport policy designed to get freight onto rail and onto waterways, with a massive capital expenditure program to enhance both networks
Increased places for training new doctors, nurses and medics in general so that we do not continue to deprive poorer contries of the staff that they have trained.
We wish other countries to "live and let live" and tolerate fellow mankind, we should do the same on our own doorstep.
I do not hunt or follow hunts but believe people should be allowed to carry on what has been done for hundreds of years.
If everyone was a bit more tolerant the world would be a better, and happier, place. IMHO. Paul

<hr width=100% size=1>" there is nothing-absolutely nothing-half so much worth doing as simply messing about in boats".
 
Re: Hunting debate

quote: "I do not hunt or follow hunts but believe people should be allowed to carry on what has been done for hundreds of years".

That could be funny if it wasn't so damn serious. So, it's ok to burn witches, extinc the whales, kill all the indians (ah sorry, that hasn't been done for 100s of years... hmmm origional inhibitants?), piss on the poor, go to war and polute the earth. All has been done for hundreds of years, so why not continue.....?

<hr width=100% size=1>Never attempt to teach a pig to sing.
It is a waste of time and it annoys the pig.
 
Re: Hunting debate

Sir,

This whole topic tends to get entirely out of hand.

Hunting with hounds is one of many field sports, all of which are very well but not perfectly self-regulated and combine a social sport with essential management of the countryside. Hunting and other field sports have nothing in common with witch burning, commercial whale hunting, bear, badger or similar baiting, cock and dog fighting or beating up pensioners outside of the Post Office. When people overstep the mark - and they occaisionaly do - it is most regretable and in most cases the perpetrators are dealt with severely by their peers - and no, they are not shot or chased or burned!

This thread is not primarily about individuals' views on hunting but the rights of British subjects to engage in general persuits without undue let or hindrance, from whatever source, so long as those persuits do not adversly affect the lives and wellbeing of their neighbours.

Hunting with hounds does not fall into this catagory and is being used as political whipping post in the internal party politics of H.M. Government so as to take attention away from many other and far more important issues which do have a direct effect on the lives and welbeing of British subjects and peoples far and wide.

Je couche ma valise . . .


<hr width=100% size=1>Khyber
 
Re: Hunting debate

Well said...

We could also bring back slavery and as for equal rights for women...we survived for centuries without it so why bother with it now.

IMHO ANYONE who hunts for the "fun" or for the "sport" or supports the people who do is not all there in the head and needs to be castrated so their genes cannot further pollute this planet.

I find it really difficult to understand how "people" can get pleasure out of the physical suffering of an animal just for the fun of it. And Pleeeeeease don't anyone give me any crap about pest control.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://static.photobox.co.uk/public/images/45/99/10714599.s.jpg?ch=97&rr=16:00:39>Nirvana</A>
 
Re: Hunting debate

"IMHO ANYONE who hunts for the "fun" or for the "sport" or supports the people who do is not all there in the head and needs to be castrated so their genes cannot further pollute this planet."


That's an opinion, but, like most of the anti-hunt "debate", it's not an argument. Most people who are anti-hunt seem to descend into the indiscriminate spraying-around of adjectives such as "cruel" and "inhumane" without developing a consistent argument as to whether (a) animals should be regarded as being the same as people (b) whether hunting an animal is "cruel" but slaughtering an animal for food is not (c) whether an anti-hunting ban would result in any animal welfare benefits for foxes or (d) whether a predator can reasonably expect immunity from the same stress it applies to other creatures. Maybe we should just bin this thread until it generates more heat than light and people have taken the trouble to read the Burns report on hunting with dogs. I bet most people haven't.



<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Hunting debate

What makes me laugh is the idiots who walk around with posters stating that 59% of the public do not agree with a hunting ban. Well yes that may be true, most don't object to fishing, but if the question is asked specific to hunting foxes with dogs the vast majority find it abhorrent and want it banned..

As for your points...

(a) No, animals should not be regarded the same as people. As an example: animal experiments which enhance the well being of humans. But no animal should be regarded so low that it would be acceptable to subject it to physical torture for "sport" or "fun".

(b) Are you serious???

(c) Well it can't be any worse than being ripped apart by a pack of dogs, watched by a bunch of twats.

(d) A fox hunts for food not for fun. It may kill all the chickens in a coup but with the intention of returning for the rest. Foxes do not have recipe books so don't know how much chicken is needed!!!

Fox hunting with dogs IS going to be banned so there is no real reason for any further debate. Goodbye/forums/images/icons/cool.gif

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://static.photobox.co.uk/public/images/45/99/10714599.s.jpg?ch=97&rr=16:00:39>Nirvana</A>
 
Re: Hunting debate

"(a) No, animals should not be regarded the same as people. As an example: animal experiments which enhance the well being of humans. But no animal should be regarded so low that it would be acceptable to subject it to physical torture for "sport" or "fun"." - they're not subjected to "physical torture" they're hunted in the same way they hunt other creatures and are killed v.quickly - in any event if the end result's the same, what does the motive matter?

"(b) Are you serious???" - yes, interesting to see you ducked this question - if you're a buddhist, fine, you have a consistent philosophy, if you are anti-hunt but are happy to have thousands of cows, sheep and pigs slaughtered for your satisfaction, you are either a hypocrite or one mixed-up puppy, depending on how charitable I'm feeling

("c) Well it can't be any worse than being ripped apart by a pack of dogs, watched by a bunch of twats". - that's not what the Burns report says

"(d) A fox hunts for food not for fun. It may kill all the chickens in a coup but with the intention of returning for the rest". - you'd know that from in-depth conversations with Basil Brush, would you? There's evidence that killer whales "toy" with seals before killing them by flipping them up in the air and tossing them between each other - it's not just humans that kill for fun.

"Fox hunting with dogs IS going to be banned so there is no real reason for any further debate" - don't think you're right even about that - there are many legal and illegal challenges to come - not sure Tony Blair will want to deal with that and Irag disintegrating in the run-up to the election.

Besides, I'm not sure if the law would even be enforceable - they're not going to ban riding on horseback in the proximity of a dog, and if the dog happens to chase a fox, well then I've got to follow him to prevent the fox from coming to any harm, haven't I M'lud? - I'm only sorry I got there a bit late...



<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Hunting debate

(a) in any event if the end result's the same, what does the motive matter?

A lot, otherwise you are saying it is ok for me to walk into your back garden and kill your dog, it is ok, it is only another animal, just like you.

(b)I have never eaten fox, if those on the hunt took it back and ate it things might be seen differently, but you don't, you get high and cover each other in the dead animals blood. It is as abhorrent as bull fighting, bear baiting, cock and dog fighting. Don't try to justify what you do because we are meat eaters, unless you start eating fox.

(c)There is a need to keep fox populations in check, 200 people with horses and dogs tearing through the countryside damaging peoples property in some sick adventure is not one of them. I still have not seen a good argument to keep fox hunting, it makes me laugh when it is stated as a way to control the population. Releasing a fox prior to the hunt strikes of cheating somewhat.

(d)But the fox and killer whale eat the prey. See point a.

Now look, I have stayed out of this, but people who keep harping on about it being a comfortable part of the countryside and anyone who was not born in a ditch cannot possibly have an opinion should butt out are starting to get right up my nose.

What is wrong with drag hunting, be honest and say you enjoy the chase, stop the crap about populations and control. Farmers who have a fox pest have guns, electric fences etc. I can keep my dog in the garden, why can't the farmer keep the fox out of the coup.

A good friend of mine has a farm with free range chickens free to roam everywhere. He loses the odd one to foxes, but as not in a coup he does not lose everything. Maybe some better management is called for.

If you had asked my opinion 12 months ago what I thought about fox hunting I would have honestly said it is not important and fulfils a role in the countryside. After reading and listening to hundreds of pro hunting nobs, I will back any decision to ban it. You have actually been self defeating with the outcome that I don't only hate the sport now, I hate all who participate in it.

Well done.



<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.topcatsail.co.uk>Woof</A>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top