Death knell for hunting ban as police abandon monitoring operations

[james.miller]

because the position is not based on evidence of harm.

what difference does that make? i take issue with the pleasure of hunting - it wouldnt matter if they were wiping pests out, or whether they took pleasure in the kill or not - i still do not agree with the joy of the hunt, and the ettique that goes with it.

Your reasoning is more irrational than my beliefs.

 

[deuse]

I do like reading these threads, i take points from both sides of the argument, however i have never finished reading one yet where i've said to myself 'thats it, thats the argument that is correct and beyond all doubt'.
Why is that ?

Later today i'm going to sit on my garage roof with my pellet gun, which overlooks some land aside a farm yard, and shoot some rats.
This year i've only killed about five since easter.
I don't put poison down because that would remove the enjoyment i get from shooting them.

If i had fifty pairs of pidgeons s****ing on my house roof i'd kill most of them too, and enjoy it. I only have a couple of pairs so i leave them be.

Am i wrong and how does the above differ from fox hunting?

Ok lets just say we live next door to each other and you have a dog
and I have a cat. My cat sits in my garden having a nice nap
when your dog jumps the fence and trys to get my cat.

At night time I see your dog in my garden SO I SHOOT IT DEAD
you would not say a thing and your kids would not be upset?

just a scenario you understand

 

[Dolph]

what difference does that make? i take issue with the pleasure of hunting - it wouldnt matter if they were wiping pests out, or whether they took pleasure in the kill or not - i still do not agree with the joy of the hunt, and the ettique that goes with it.

Your reasoning is more irrational than my beliefs.

all the difference in the world when you support laws based on youe opinion...

 

[negger]

Ok lets just say we live next door to each other and you have a dog
and I have a cat. My cat sits in my garden having a nice nap
when your dog jumps the fence and trys to get my cat.

At night time I see your dog in my garden SO I SHOOT IT DEAD
you would not say a thing and your kids would not be upset?

just a scenario you understand

You say 'tries to get my cat' in which case why would you kill my dog?

If your scenario went along the lines of 'my dog jumped over the fence and killed your cat' then later you killed my dog as it was in your garden again then it's my responsibility to keep my dog under control.
You would be wrong in both scenarios in the eyes of the law but i would understand your attitude towards my dog.

I don't think we'd be niping round to each others to borrow sugar anymore do you?

Anyway i think you have answerd my question with this scenario thing with regards to your personal point of view which appears that no matter the reason no animal should be killed.

My personal view is their are times when i will kill another animal when i feel i have good reason.

 

[deuse]

You say 'tries to get my cat' in which case why would you kill my dog?

If your scenario went along the lines of 'my dog jumped over the fence and killed your cat' then later you killed my dog as it was in your garden again then it's my responsibility to keep my dog under control.
You would be wrong in both scenarios in the eyes of the law but i would understand your attitude towards my dog.

I don't think we'd be niping round to each others to borrow sugar anymore do you?

Anyway i think you have answerd my question with this scenario thing with regards to your personal point of view which appears that no matter the reason no animal should be killed.

My personal view is their are times when i will kill another animal when i feel i have good reason.

So as long its not your pet its not ok
I would have good reason to shoot the dog if it came on my land
and yes it is legal classed as a threat to my family.

Not that I would ever kill a dog its a scenario and we will agree to disagree

 

[Rainmaker]

So as long its not your pet its not ok
I would have good reason to shoot the dog if it came on my land
and yes it is legal classed as a threat to my family.

Source? Unless you have sheep instead of cats, I think you'll find that you're very much mistaken. How does a dog killing or attempting to kill a cat (in your hypothetical scenario) constitute a threat to your family?

I find it bewildering that finally, after nine or so pages (not the man-sized ones ) that the antis start crawling out of the woodwork admitting that actually, it's pretty much the fact that someone enjoys hunting that winds them up. It was the same on my ratting thread; if they have to die, so be it (but we don't like it)... however to enjoy the activity is a mortal sin.

What rot! To push through legislation (with about a million quid as lubrication for the wheels of 'justice') based around emotive, subjective puritanism ("OMG they enjoyz it!!11eleven") which ultimately has no reflection on real-life animal welfare is just stupid.

One of our resident antis keeps taking pains to point out the 100,000 or so foxes killed annually on our roads. Ignoring for a moment the ludicrous statement referring to cars thus killing 'what few we have left' (paraphrased), your (antis') tenuous emotive argument would be best aimed at motorists.

Motorists kill more foxes than do mounted hunts (I won't count the real pest controllers, lurcher and terrier men ). Motorists kill other motorists. Motorists kill pedestrians, and - shock horror - motorists kill human children. Want to know what's worse? Not only is death by motor vehicle generally slow, and excrutiatingly painful, but these murderers actually ENJOY driving! OMG won't somebody please think of the children?

Sod the hunting ban. Ban driving, you'll save more lives - animal and human. How's that for emotive decision making? Let's make a LAW so we can all whine about people wanting to break it.

 

[deuse]

Sod the hunting ban. Ban driving, you'll save more lives - animal and human. How's that for emotive decision making? Let's make a LAW so we can all whine about people wanting to break it.

Well at least the fox chose to cross the road.

 

[Rainmaker]

Well at least the fox chose to cross the road.

LOL!

Seriously though, you didn't answer my question. And if we banned cars and motorists, not only would we save all those lives but we wouldn't have built the stupid road through Reynard's territory to begin with. He didn't CHOOSE to cross it, he HAD to. But hey, even antis want to get around this island of ours, and walking is way less convenient than driving door to door... Even if poor innocent animals do get torn to shreds as a consequence.

 

[negger]

So as long its not your pet its not ok
I would have good reason to shoot the dog if it came on my land
and yes it is legal classed as a threat to my family.

Not that I would ever kill a dog its a scenario and we will agree to disagree

Sorry but i really don't understand the first line of your reply. (and i don't mean to be pedantic over the double negative as my grammer's rubbish as well )

If my dog was a threat to your familly I would shoot it. (though if my dog had previously been aggressive towards people i hope i would have trained this behaviour out)

And with regard to this scenario where have we disagreed ?

Moving on from hypthetical scenarios - whats your attitude towards tv programmes like River Cottage and Ray Mears - do you understand the messages programmes like these are trying to get across ?

In my opinion we have been desensitised and removed from the facts of life by such methods as intensive farming and mass retail, it's hidden away from us, you never see the animal carcass hanging up in Tesco's or Asda.
Never try to hide from the truth. I have been truthfull and admitted i enjoy hunting but it has to fit my 'moral compass' (my views and beliefs).

 

[D D Danneh]

I don't like the idea of killing animals, especially not for fun, but I understand it's necessary for the ecosystem, so it's none of my business what they do to cull foxes.

Just my 2p.

 

[negger]

Further reply to Deuse...

Just a thought about where you said 'we will agree to disagree' -I do hope you don't mean if the scenario was reversed and it was your dog which was a threat to my familly that you wouldn't shoot the dog.

When you take on the responsibility of owning a pet you must always remember that the pet has no 'moral compass' or beliefs, it's an animal that has been trained to live with us and things can and do go wrong.

 

[vincent1989]

Alternatively it is because the papers know that most of the public is anti fox hunting and so don't bother to publish stories that would alienate their readership.

it would be printed somewhere and then it would end here (because a large quantity of this forum seem to derive some weird pleasure from killing things)

 

[arknor]

are the foxes being killed in a more humane way? no. the animal welfare research commissioned by the goverment showed no difference between hunting and shooting.

erm one way is a long drawn out chase that lasts until the fox cant try to escape with its life anymore and it collapses and gets ripped to shreds.

the other is a rather quick bullet and it wont last more than a few minutes even if something goes wrong.

how is there no difference?

your telling me a bunch of guys chasing you on motorbikes with blood thirsty dogs is no different to getting shot in the head?

then again maybe animals dont have feelings , they dont get scared etc

 

[Glaucus]

The law is based on emotions nothing more and as such should be revoked immediately. The report commissioned found no evidence to support the hunting ban.

Still, it should be legal in around 12months.

 

[Glaucus]

erm one way is a long drawn out chase that lasts until the fox cant try to escape with its life anymore and it collapses and gets ripped to shreds.

the other is a rather quick bullet and it wont last more than a few minutes even if something goes wrong.

:

Because shooting a fast moving target with a low powered gun, means a head shot and instant death.

Because a shot taht misses the head, is film like and they die regardless in minutes.

Because the dogs rip the fox to bits.

any more non truths you want to post?

 

[TommyTenToes]

That has to be the argument I hear the most which is completely untrue. "It's so cruel the way the dogs tear the fox to pieces while it's still alive!" They are dogs, they are predators, they know how to hunt and they know to go for the throat as soon as they catch their prey.

 

[^TANK^]

Because shooting a fast moving target with a low powered gun, means a head shot and instant death.

Because a shot taht misses the head, is film like and they die regardless in minutes.

Because the dogs rip the fox to bits.

any more non truths you want to post?

Thats why you wait until the target has stopped moving before you shoot, hence why a marksman/fully licensed pest controller should do it and not some blood thirsty ****ing idiot with a 410 shotgun. Have a look around the net at some fox hunts they are not quick kills!

 

[Glaucus]

Thats why you wait until the target has stopped moving before you shoot, hence why a marksman/fully licensed pest controller should do it and not some blood thirsty ****ing idiot with a 410 shotgun. Have a look around the net at some fox hunts they are not quick kills!

As you say SOME. the majority are, once the dogs catch them.
The report found no reason to ban fox hunting on humanity grounds as such the law should be unlawful.

 

[deuse]

As you say SOME. the majority are, once the dogs catch them.
The report found no reason to ban fox hunting on humanity grounds as such the law should be unlawful.

You LOVE government reports dont you.UK and USA

 

[RDM]

it would be printed somewhere and then it would end here (because a large quantity of this forum seem to derive some weird pleasure from killing things)

It isn't that I derive pleasure from killing things I just don't derive pleasure from stopping people doing something for no real benefit. Though I do like a decent steak so I have to say that I do take enjoyment from the side effects of somebody killing an animal...

You LOVE government reports dont you.UK and USA

I would love them more if the government actually paid attention to the reports they spend taxpayers money on. But this government has a record of ignoring the advice of the experts it has employed.