Soo Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 For hunters, freedom and us... I'm sure that lots of you will support the ban on hunting with dogs that came in today (I can't as I've had years of fun as a teenager chasing rabbits & hares with lurchers and hawks) but no matter what your opinion, I think it's a bad day for minorities. It's easy for political parties to gain some votes from the majority by banning something that a minority do (ie pistols from the target shooters - including our Olympic pistol shooting team). What do we and hunters have in common ? How easy it would be for our government to get a few more votes by banning bikes and cars that can go twice the legal speed limit. How could you (we) possibly justify needing a car that will do 180 mph-ish ! The great British public (bless em) that are full of jelously, would be only to quick to support a ban on these dangerous cars that only rich people can afford !!! Just a thought.... PS.. as for Snoopers / Road angels etc, only law breakers need them !! Rant over..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soo Posted February 18, 2005 Author Share Posted February 18, 2005 Ps Better Add That The Above Is From Gerry Using Soo's Computer At Work ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Hornet Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Good point. I love my Soop and my bike and both will hit 170+ Politicians are all bent if you ask me, they just want big fat salaries for doing little work. Don't get me wrong I would love to be Priminister, the endless things I would change Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mawby Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 How easy it would be for our government to get a few more votes by banning bikes and cars that can go twice the legal speed limit. How could you (we) possibly justify needing a car that will do 180 mph-ish ! The great British public (bless em) that are full of jelously, would be only to quick to support a ban on these dangerous cars that only rich people can afford !!!But then of course if the police force turned round and said they wouldn't enforce the law because they had more important things to do like catch murderers then what difference would it make? I recall one of the pro-hunting people on the news last night saying that just because the majority want the ban doesn't mean he'll stop now it's illegal. The police have basically said that's perfectly acceptable. I'd like to protest about speed limits on motorways, so therefore I'm not going to stop speeding just because the law says so and I'd also like the police to turn a blind eye as they have more important things to do like catch murderers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Comparing a cruel sport with motorcycles and fast cars is not a valid arguement in my book. Apparently the hunts will continue despite the change in the law because the police don't have the manpower to stop them. How do you feel about that Gerry? Is it OK to break the law because the police probably can't/won't punish you? (I can see parallels with speeding here) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 There is a huge difference between owning a vehicle 'capable' of something and going out and mutilating animals for fun - I'm one of the majority that support the ban I'm afraid. It puts me in an awkward position because my father is a gamekeeper and has regular shoots during the season and enjoys stalking / hunting etc as a hobby, I'm also a meat eater so potentially a hypocrite.... it's certainly a tricky and emotional subject for all. To put this into context I'm also against fishing, pet shops and animal cruelty in general - I'm a bit soft really but I love a good steak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mawby Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 And of course, the majority voted that murderering someone is illegal. Maybe the murderers in the country should claim that humans have been killing other humans long before politics came along and therefore it's a tradition that shouldn't be banned? Hell we could even call it a sport as I'm sure there's people out there who enjoy it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supragal Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 I'm a bit soft really but I love a good steak ROTFPMSL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Hornet Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Nicely put there Michael & Lee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamer Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 I guess the hunt people won't have that warm fuzzy feeling you get inside when you chase a "big bad fox" across miles of countryside with a pack of dogs and a bunch of stuck up tw*ts on horseback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 I'm also a meat eater so potentially a hypocrite I don't have a problem with killing animals for food as long as it's done as efficiently as is reasonably possible and without unnecessary suffering by the animal. I can't agree with letting a fox be chased to exhaustion and then ripped apart by dogs though. How can that be right? Seems like a twisted idea of fun to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terribleturner Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Personnally i don't care if they keep it or ban it. It doesn't affect me what so ever. But foxes and rabbits are a pest and need to be delt with. It does seem silly for a load of people to dress up in bright red jackets and blowing horns chasing dogs that are chasing the unwanted aniamals, but it's what they do and have done for god knows how many years. What i don't understand is people think that this is wrong, but don't mind farmers using traps that can cause these animals pain for hours and hours before dying, even bitting off their own legs to try to escape. Isn't that what the horror film "Saw" is about?? Personnally i cant stand animals gettting hurt and myself am a great animal lover. But what do people suggest that farmers do?? Why not make it a hand to hand combat sport? Maybe get rid of the horses and dogs and your only allowed to pursuit on foot with your hands as the weapons? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveRex Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Hunting hasn't really been banned You can still excercise your hounds using a trailed fox trail, with 2 or more dogs its perfectly legal, if you have horses following who cares You can do eveything you could before apart from let the dogs catch a actual fox and kill it you can still do the whole thing and shoot the fox at the end and its still legal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian C Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Ooh, it's the old "majority" argument. You'll find that the "majority" of people couldn't give a toss one way or the other, so those pro-hunting are in a minority and those anti-hunting are in a minority. Who cares if a mangy pest of a fox gets murdered? Maybe they should switch to less "cute" animals. Where does it stop? If they are allowed to murder foxes, why not allow them to hunt cats and dogs? Both valid (but emotional) arguments. I hate things being banned though. Things being banned says to me "You can't control yourself, you can't moderate yourself, we have to do it for you, you can't think or act responsibly in society". Really, this ban on hunting has said to everyone, even the anti-hunters, "We don't trust you to control yourself if you see a fox. We assume by default that you, Mcanny/Mawby/Jake/Ian/whoever, will instantly try and murder it with dogs. Therefore we have made it an offence punishable by law in order to try and deter you, Mcanny/Mawby/Jake/Ian/whoever, from behaving like the savage we assume you are." -Ian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muffleman Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 I personally have absolutely no problem with these chaps dressing up in funny outfits, getting a pack of dogs together, tootling their little trumpets and dashing off round the countryside admiring the scenery and exercising their horses. And if it keeps these huge poo producing animals off the roads I pay for then terrific. But I do have a problem with the hunting and mutilating of animals, hardly a 'sport' now is it ! And as for culling the animals that present a genuine pest problem, there are more humane ways. Besides, this is a bit of a lame argument really - if these hunts were there for the humane killing of vermin, they'd advertise in Yellow Pages and charge farmers £75 per call out and £75 per part hour there-after I've yet to see a reasonable arguement in favour of these hunts. The destruction of pack dogs is not a reason to keep the hunts either, these dogs are bred for the hunt and kept in poor conditions - not banning this simply perpetuates the cycle. I for one am pleased about the ban. Just my 2p Matt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mawby Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Really, this ban on hunting has said to everyone, even the anti-hunters, "We don't trust you to control yourself if you see a fox. We assume by default that you, Mcanny/Mawby/Jake/Ian/whoever, will instantly try and murder it with dogs. Therefore we have made it an offence punishable by law in order to try and deter you, Mcanny/Mawby/Jake/Ian/whoever, from behaving like the savage we assume you are." Just like they assume and make out in these anti-speeding campaigns that you're a murderer if you speed cause at 40mph you've got an 80% chance of killing that child and at 30mph you've got an 80% change the child will live. I see your point. No wait, hang on, not once in all my time of speeding have I killed a child, so that assumption is wrong. You cannot assume speeding will equal someone getting killed. Yet in all the hunts I've seen the fox is always ripped apart. So that assumption is correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 There are humane ways to deal with 'pest' control, it's just expensive and inconvenient - however it's much more efficient in the long run. But who is the pest? We come along and populate places and then expect to be left alone with no interuption from an opportunist fox that's simply trying to survive. Yes I've seen them kill pheasant chicks and just leave them there in what appears to be 'fun' for them but do we kill the fox or make more of an effort to protect the artificially introduced 'sport' birds? There are huge debates about the 'spare' hounds, the jobs lost as a result of the ban etc etc and believe me I've heard them all from my old man - I still have to disagree with the 'sport' of fox hunting though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveRex Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 I've yet to see a reasonable arguement in favour of these hunts. The destruction of pack dogs is not a reason to keep the hunts either, these dogs are bred for the hunt and kept in poor conditions - not banning this simply perpetuates the cycle. Matt er...not in all cases ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveRex Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 So is shooting ok then ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supragal Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Isn't dog hunting different to horse/hound hunting? Or did you mean them as the same Gerry? As far as I'm concerned I can't see the point in fox hunting, it's too dangerous for everyone/animal involved. Not sure foxes would need to be controlled if they weren't specifially bred and released so they could be hunted... I can understand wanting to go hunting from a horse-back perspective BUT only drag-hunting. No real kill, safe pre-mapped trails so no sudden suprises of spikes etc after an enormous hedge and so on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mawby Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 I hate things being banned though. Things being banned says to me "You can't control yourself, you can't moderate yourself, we have to do it for you, you can't think or act responsibly in society".Careful, that sounds a bit hypercritical you being a moderator and all! Didn't you support the banning on porn on the forum? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian C Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 I've yet to see a reasonable arguement in favour of these hunts. The destruction of pack dogs is not a reason to keep the hunts either, these dogs are bred for the hunt and kept in poor conditions - not banning this simply perpetuates the cycle. Now that's irony "In order to save the vermin from a nasty death (because the poison that'll be used in future will be soooo nice to die from), we've got to murder an order of magnitude more dogs." I'm not gonna miss hunting one way or the other btw, don't mistake me as pro-hunting, I'm just pro-freedom and pro-personal-responsibility. -Ian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveRex Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 it will be fishing and shooting next Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian C Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Careful, that sounds a bit hypercritical you being a moderator and all! Didn't you support the banning on porn on the forum? Hah, that's different, honest lol We've banned porn as it's a bloody car site, it's like banning fox hunting from McDonalds - it's the wrong place for it but it doesn't mean you can't ever take part -Ian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewizzy Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Havent got a problem with culling foxes, as they do casue farmers etc problems, surely though, there is more efficient ways of killing one fox than getting 20 odd people, 20 odd horses, 20-30 dogs and a stupid horn thingy, all that effort, energy time and money just to kill one bloody fox!!! 1 shotgun cartridge costs roughly 10pence and the fox wouldnt suffer at all!!! I really dont agree with running a fox down, to total exhaustion, then letting it get ripped apart by a load of mangy dogs!!! Surely Chavs are a bigger drain on resources, so instead of foxes being hunted, can we not get a bunch of burberry wearing chavs, and hunt them with the dogs that are not being used for hunting foxes? Sorry, ramble over, bit drunk already :upside: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.