brybusa

Im with Matt, and ill tell you why, its part of our heritage and the rural country life that is England

I just see it as part of an errosion of our identity and the govts mad political correctness.

Mad clerics can shout outside Mosques and deliver hatred against the west, and us?, we ban fox hunting instead of tackling something a bit more serious..

Where does it end? There's no real need to drive fast,performance cars, they only cost more to produce/use more raw materials to make and use more fuel compared to a nice 1 litre hatch...

unclebuck

I would refer you to Tony's speech on Global Warming yesterday. "There are tough decisions to be made about how we travel. This government has already shown that it is not afraid to take tough decisions when necessary" - 3rd Term = 3rd Reich.

Anyway, back on topic.....

daisy

I've lived in the country all my life, and still can't see where the sport is in killing animals. I want to see hunting banned as well. Thousands of people lose jobs in other industries every year. I can't see why people employed in the hunting industry are any different.

SiPie

I'm not a fox

So I don't care

unclebuck

That's easy. It's their recreation for the axe today, your's tomorrow. Nothing is sacred to to Politically Correct control freaks.

UB

unclebuck

I know. But, they are inextricably linked IMO. But, I agree. Let's stick to hunting.

UB

OllyK

Be interesting to see which way the Labour MP for Charnwood votes (he is usually a Tony Lap Dog) the problem he has is that Charnwood covers Quorn which is the heart of hunt country. We get the bloody Royals up here on boxing day rampaging though the villages blocking the roads and causing all sorts of chaos.

I am all for banning it, but for the chaos and destruction it all causes. It's not just the 30 odd horses churning up the verges and crapping everywhere it's the dozens of 4x4's chasing after the hunt, who just stop in the middle of the road (yep even on the A60 which is a clearway) and get out and wander off in to the field to watch, no consideration for anybody else. The rest just blast up on to the grass verges churning it up covering the roads with mud and making them lethal for weeks after.

OllyK

Export the horses to France or sell them to Bostik, the dogs can be exported to China for chow mein!!

Diablo

And so was sending kids down the mines, burning witches at the stake, badger bating and countless other completely unfathomable activities.

Just because its always been the way, doesn't make it right.

popeye

Good riddance to it as far as I'm concerned. It's nothing to do with "Political Correctness" or any other bad excuse that the pro-hunting lobby try to throw at anyone who finds the idea of killing animals for fun distasteful. Pit-bull fighting was banned on the grounds of cruelty to animals, as was bear-baiting, ****-fighting etc. Kids tying bangers to cats on rough estates are done by the police. Fox hunting is no different, just the same animal cruelty masquerading as "tradition". I'm not a big animal-rights do-gooder and I'd probably be able to accept it if there was a compelling reason other than killing an animal for the f**king hell of it, but the onus is on the pro-lobby to come up with some plausible reasons for doing it, but they've utterly failed to do so.

"It's not cruel" - Of course it is. If you're going to claim that chasing an animal to exhaustion then having a pack of dogs rip it to pieces isn't cruel then you might as well disband the RSPCA, and save thousands of pounds in legal fees prosecuting anyone up before the courts on a charge of animal cruelty, as there's obviously no such thing.

"Jobs will be lost" - tough ****. People lose their jobs all the time. They don't start bleating and claiming they'll go to prison and that their whole life is over. They deal with it and move on.

"Pest control" - I believe the stats showed that during foot and mouth when there were no hunts, the fox population remained constant.

"It's occupying too much of Parliament's time and there's more important things" - Too bloody right there is, but the same people using this argument are the same ones trying every delaying tactic to fustrate the will of a democratically elected government. If we lived in a proper democracy, this would have been made law ages ago and we'd have moved on to other more important issues. This is an important issue for now as a promise made by our leaders, and one which can influence our voting descision, has still not been
implemented. It's *very* important as far as I'm concerned as it highlights a problem with our supposed "democracy".

"You townies don't understand the country" - Just f**k off. You have the same morals as anyone with an urban postcode.



Nope, public floggings, hangings and denying women the vote we're all traditions, and we most certainly wont mourn the passing of this one.

As much as I don't like 'em, they've been here for 7 years.

Looks like it.

Brendan Hughes

Excellent - rather than using slavery, which might gobsmack 8% (dunno the stats) of my audience, I'm going to switch to this one, which should hit 50% of the audience straight off

popeye

It's your's mate. (Just don't use my original punctuation error). ;-)

Geezer

Hunting foxes with dogs is no 'crueller' to the animal than many other ways of killing them. Killing anything involves a certain amount of suffering, so what's the difference?

We don't baulk at the methods used to kill rats do we? They are classed as vermin, but rat poison if terrible stuff. It causes the animal to hemorraghe (sp?) to death. Extremely unpleasant.

Traps are notoriously cruel devices, causing the animal much pain before it dies. Shooting ain't much better unless you get a clean heart or head shot, or are sho close to the animal as to virtually blow it apart with a shotgun.

Once the dogs get hold of it, it's as quick and and painless (relatively) as almost all other forms of death.

If you concede that foxes need controlling (and unless you are a farmer, I don't see how you can argue against this) then the method of their destruction is irrelevant. It's just sentimentalism or political correctness.

All IMO, of course

Geezer

unclebuck

Popeye = the charming voice of Politically Correct intolerance. No wonder this country is going to the dogs (no pun intended) with these sorts holding the reigns of power.

UB

Diablo

I doubt very much that unless you have been poisoned, shot or trapped that you are in a position to make considered comment about the comparative pain of each method.

But what would you rather have happen to you, assuming a bad shot as an example.

Be strolling along the road, get shot, and die from blood loss an hour or two later, or have to live with the terror of being chased to exhaustion for a few hours and then literally ripped appart?

And remember, the fox doesn't always die straight away after the dogs get to it. Bits of it, sure, but not whats left attached to its brain and torso.

Think about it.

popeye

To be honest, if I was a farmer, and the stats I mentioned are true that the fox population remained constant during the foot and mouth hunting cessation, then I'd be demanding a meeting with the local hunt to try and get some answers as to why they've been trampling all over my land for the past few years whilst making no difference whatsoever to the amount of foxes about the place. I'd want to know why they're so crap at their job.

Nah. Just basic common decency. Same reasons as "STi wanna Subaru" 's angry post. I don't think it's too much to ask for.

Diablo

Sorry mate, but popeye gets my vote this time.

There's a huge difference between not being able to call a blackboard a blackboard and condoning some barbaric cruelty.

Its not all black and white mate.

popeye

I'l take your failure to argue with any of my points to be a complete acceptance of them. You should start more of these threads where I pick up on all your mistakes, you might learn something.

popeye

I hardly ever post on here - are you sure you're not confusing me with someone else?

Fosters

agree with Popeye 100% too!

well said m8.

Geezer

That is no argument at all! Nobody who has not been killed can comment on death of any sort then?

Also, you are endowing the foxes with human attributes. You don't know that they suffer from fear, they are just reacting to a stimulus, running away from something which endangers them. They have no idea of what awaits them at the end of the chase!

The larger the animal, the more difficult it is to kill it. It takes a failry violent event to kill anything, and the larger they are, the harder it is to do it quickly. Swatting a fly is quick, but an extremely violent end for the fly. If the fly was 6 feet tall, it would take some killing!


The anti hunt people are hippocrites to say the least. They are quite happy for their modern excessive lifestyles to cause untold death and suffering (and indeed the biggest extinction in the earths history) 'behind the scenes' but get upset when a few people are upfront enough to do the killing themselves!

Geezer

Geezer

But you are quite happy to cause the extinction of several species for the pleasure of drving your car, or having a televsion, or flying to your holiday destination, or [repeat ad infnitum] ?

I have no such hangups, by the way, just making a point.

Geezer

Leslie

I feel it is only fair to point out that the demise of the fox to the hounds is probably similar or maybe even quicker then the death of the creatures that the fox eats. The fox will also kill creatures for sport when it does not feel the need to eat.

I personally would not want to go fox hunting, I would get no pleasure out of the kill.

I do however decry the government's use of this bill purely to try for "brownie points" and to satisfy their backbenchers' demands for the sake of peace within their party.

Les

Jye

That was PopeyeP1 m8, and he could hardly string a sentence together nevermind a coherent argument