Rich Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Foxes need to be culled for farmers but chasing them with dogs and tearing them to shreds is not the humain way to do it in our day and age. surely there is a more efficient way of killing them without making a sick game out of it. they claim its to help farmers but it is mostly for their amusement and enjoyment as a sport. I dont understand how somebody can get a kick out off killing animals,hey but thats just me . just my opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopite Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 i support the ban. again like many, i understand that fox numbers etc need to be controlled but again ripping them apart using dogs is not exactly humane. i personally don't understand how it's a sport to be honest, "the thrill of the chase" doesnt carry any weight either - go on a trackday or something if you want to chase things. as someone else in this thread said, what's the differance between dog fighting and hunting with dogs? there's lots of traditions which have been outdated, this is just another one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Relating to the comments on McDonalds and other similar corps this is worth a read if you haven't aleady done so: http://www.newlabournewlies.org.uk/images/books/schlosser_fastfoodnation.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbeh Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Honstly.. http://www.newcelica.org/forums/images/smilies/gives.gif I dont feel my personal freedoms are under threat at all. Since when has animal cruelty been a personal freedom? Good riddance to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbeh Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 it will be fishing and shooting next No it wont. Thats just total scaremongering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supragal Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 2) You WILL NOT ban McDonalds until I have used up my two books of vouchers. You got them to then huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 I am totally in favour of the ban BUT... they are already supposed to shoot the fox before the hounds get to it but don't - often don't have a gun anywhere near by yet not a single prosecution has been brought for this lapse... My best friend who like me is a veggie is in favour of the hunts on the basis that a dog normally (so she says) kills instantly with a bite to the throat whereas an untrained farmer may wound an animal with a gun and leave it suffering for hours before it dies... which is worse. The other issue is that most foxes are now urban due to easy pickings from our waste so there is really very little problem in the country with these so called pests... Like all things the government have gone for the easy sell - yes there's a lot of protesters but most people think it's cruel and most people don't hunt and most people tend to think of it as an upper class "sport" (even though most hunters are NOT upper class toffs) - surely if they wanted to do a proper piece of legislation for teh welfare of animals they would go the whole way - do what Norway does and ban all forms of hunting uless you pass a hunting test - to hunt in Norway you must use a gun. To be allowed to do so you must pass a test that ensures you can in an instant identify the target (ensuring it's not a pregnant female etc) , hit and kill the target with one shot instantly (involves hitting hundreds of clays at all angles with a rifle NOT a shotgun) etc etc - the average time to pass the test is 8 years and the average Norwegian hunter could give Marine snipers a few lessons... The penalties for hunting illegaly are harsh and include imprisonment for land owners who allow or fail to prevent illegal hunting on their land. Harsh but everyone seems happy to adhere to it and there are almost no cases of illegal hunting. Yet we will never see that in the UK because it's too much like hard work for the governement to introduce. They can ban fox hunting to pick up a few votes and know that it will never really cause problems because there is almost no way to enforce such a law and no man power to do it. On the flip side people like the RSPCA still receive no government funding so Joe public can still beat and torture and neglect domestic pets at a rate a 1000 times more frequent than foxes with only the most pathetic laws to prevent it (£200 fine and ban from keeping animals for life - oh the severity of it! If they are even caught) The ban is a good thing but will make no difference really but the sad loss here is not to personal liberty (frankly most people have far too much of that anyway IMHO) but to the future well being of animals - having done this the government can now say they've done their bit and leave it at that - leaving animals to suffer at our hands for ever more. Oh, and whilst I'm ranting - gun law - WTF! As an avid shooter for many years who was very Pi**ed off to loose my pistols I am at least, several years on, pleased to see the great reduction in gun crime since legal, licensed weapons were banned. It's gratifying to see that criminals no longer have access to these weapons (as they were all stolen from legal owners weren't they?) and the police and public are safer for it... All in all a greta piece of legislation with far reaching effects on personal safety DAMN, there's no MAJOR SARCASM smiley!! Another example of taking an easy and totally ineffectual route to gloss over a larger problem that they have no idea and no will to tackle effectively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitesupraboy2 Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 i think it should be banned, no one likes it when people have their heads chopped off and some are scum of the earth, so why is it ok for a fox to have its ripped off,when all it is doing is surviving? Fishing is different, there are laws, put tiddlers back and most hooks nowadays are disolvable over long periods of time and very bendy making them easier to remove, of course sometimes they can get hooked in the eye. but at least when you do kill a fish it is too eat, does anyone eat the foxs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelG Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 ANYONE who condones fox hunting or similar, needs to crawl back under the fu*king rock they came out from. END OF. Its barbaric, outdated, inflicts probably the worst death any living creature can suffer, and is sadistic that people can actually watch it with no remorse. All these cu*ts that ride around "oh lah-de-da!" on their horses and say "oh my income and career are in tatters because of this ban" need a good punch in the face if you ask me. Whats fun about a petrified fox or hare being chased around countryside by a pack of stinking hounds until its exhausted, collapses, and is torn to shreds on the spot, ripped apart with a bunch of toffee nosed twats in the background shouting "jolly good ho ho ho" "good show old chap we got that blighter good and proper !" If you support it.........you're a cu*t in my opinion. and you need a serious kicking. Its been banned, end of. Dry your eyes, get over it, and find something else to do with your gay little red jackets and over-tight trousers. Jake, i am behind you on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Interesting that folks seem to think that it's mainly posh people who go hunting. That's exactly how they want to be seen. The only people I've seen hunting aren't posh at all. Most of them seem like social climbers who aspire to being posh. Seems a bit sad really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelG Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Interesting that folks seem to think that it's mainly posh people who go hunting. That's exactly how they want to be seen. The only people I've seen hunting aren't posh at all. Most of them seem like social climbers who aspire to being posh. Seems a bit sad really. Posh or not matey, they are still scum of the earth. How great would it be to have one of them run naked through a field, chased by a pack of baying dogs, ripped to shreds, and then see if they still think its a "jolly good sport" F**king t*ssers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 My best friend who like me is a veggie is in favour of the hunts on the basis that a dog normally (so she says) kills instantly with a bite to the throat As far as I know a dog will attack the hind legs first, disabling and then it will complete the kill/attack? Anyway, as many have already said I'm against hunting and as we live in a demorcracy and the majority wanted a ban then tough shit to those that didn't I'm sure rapists are in the minority but would argue for it being legalised as it spoils their fun? This law must be enforced otherwise it'll have an affect on any other law people choose to ignore! Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoboblio Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 and as we live in a demorcracy and the majority wanted a ban then tough shit to those that didn't Democracy isn't about majority rules... it's about everyone getting a voice and having their opinion heard, no matter how small a minority they are. The Blair government seems to have forgotten this with their various bans. I do not agree with the unnecessary suffering of animals, but not being a pest control expert I have no idea how effective the hunting of foxes with dogs is. I do know that a fox that is shot with a shotgun will most likely die a few days later of gangrene. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbeh Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Various bans? What would they be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoboblio Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Hanguns / pistols. Hunting with dogs Camera detectors (soon) smoking in public places (soon) Happy hours Running your car on chip fat (TBH this might have always been illegal but I don't know ) Selling in imperial measurements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbeh Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Hahah, none of which I could care about. Imperial mesaurements heheheh omg Im laughing here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoboblio Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Hey, some of us grew up with imperial you know Well half of it anyway, thanks to that I judge people's height in feet and inches, proper hights in meters, short distances in meters (i.e, 100 meters), long distances in miles, and speed in MPH, people's weight in stone and other weights in KG. What's wrong with selling a pound of onions though? Prosecuting people for that is plain daft. Besides whether or not you care about it is irrelevant, personally I couldn't care less if cat ownership was banned, but I would feel for the people who do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbeh Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 I see what you mean. I grew up with it too, but fortunately was intorduced to metric. I have no problems with it. Guns, no desire to see around these parts, had family car jacked, and brother robbed at gun point, you can see where Im coming from maybe. Smoking, you'll be looking back at this in 30 years and realising how sad an activity it is.. unless you get Cancer before then. Camera detectors.. well I dont use one. Not got a point on my license, now I would like a Unmarked car detector The only reason chip fat is prohibited is because they cant get TAX from it. Im pretty sure when the oil runs out they'd happily allowm it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoboblio Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 I've got no desire at all to see guns on the streets like the USA, but the handgun ban stopped our medal winning target shooters from practicing at properly licenced locations, and was basically a knee-jerk reaction. Of course Dunblaine was a tragedy that should never be allowed to repeat, but far more thoughtful measures could have been put in place. I can see completely where you're coming from.... isn't it nice to be able to have a decent moral discussion without people resorting to slating each other's mums Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amazing grace Posted February 20, 2005 Share Posted February 20, 2005 Man is an animal too!!! but we have a conciense which is supposed to govern rational decision making. I say should because not all people seem to be able to decide what is right or wrong or maybe they just dont care when they beat the Sh*t out of their wives or children.. This is what the Goverment should be concentrating on the cruelty one man does to another . They outlaw it but that is only effective if there is a way out for these poor victims, where proper suport is given to this minority. But laws and enforcing such does not win Elections does it. Punishing a hated Minority to please a greated majority will on the other hand win votes???? how is this right what happened to a persons freedom to chose. I hate cruelty on any level to animals people or any thing for that matter apart from Rapist Murders and Pedophiles of course i hate them, i would have them all castrated lolol. Gets off her soap box and gets coat!lol regards, Sheena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbeh Posted February 20, 2005 Share Posted February 20, 2005 Its not to win votes, it was a small policy in their manifesto 7-8 years ago, raised by a back bencher. Its got nothing to do with winning votes. Do you think it looks good to have thousands of people protesting in the city and all the trouble no doubt to occur in the city. They could have done it in their first year in Government, but they had more important issues to deal with. Also, I think you'll find that they are trying to prevent cruelty to 'people' in the house, but how does one police that unless you want big brother constantly watching. Besides a Fox has no chance of defending itself, humans do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaver Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 Problem with banning things is that you dont cure the "human" element of the problem. They ban the activity without addressing the behaviour or attitude that lead to the person undertaking the action in the first place. Taking hunting as an example, if people, and i'm afraid this must mean children, were educated properly we would not see this problem. If they were taught more effective and less cruel ways of separating human existance and wildlife the problem would be cured. Not overnight but the long term benefits would be huge. It's like the debate on guns. A gun does not pick itself up and shoot twenty people, the human element did that. Banning the weapon does not stop the human element harming someone. They will either find a knife to perform the same act or illegally obtain a firearm. Same with speeding, wrong approach. The government fines people for breaking the speed limit. What they should be doing is educating drivers to a higher standard so that they know what speeds are appropriate in a given area/circumstance and act accordingly. In this manner I think you will find that automotive accidents are reduced, pedestrian deaths are reduced and traffic flow overall is benefitted due to more thoughtful driving. The lowest common denominator in life is the human factor. Alter it and you alter society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Geo5 Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 Being a horse owner I have never taken part in a hunt -you can still have a good gallop across the fields without chasing anything. My doberman comes too and he just loves the run - he never catches any animals - he's too dopey. I even agree with keeping horses off main roads. I never ride on main roads - there are loads of bridleways, it is dangerous too on the roads and I wouldn't put my horse at risk. Geo5 - SZ import owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supragal Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 Being a horse owner I have never taken part in a hunt -you can still have a good gallop across the fields without chasing anything. My doberman comes too and he just loves the run - he never catches any animals - he's too dopey. I even agree with keeping horses off main roads. I never ride on main roads - there are loads of bridleways, it is dangerous too on the roads and I wouldn't put my horse at risk. Geo5 - SZ import owner. Err. I think I just found my long lost twin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_y3k Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 just out on intrest .. so you non hunters swat flys ? This point was made by a guy here when we were all debating it. I think his point was that the end result is the same .. dead fox / dead fly. Both methods can be seen to be cruel and have alternatives (fly spray), but where as a fox is 'cute' a fly isnt and so does not stir up similar feelings .... 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.