Woman saves fox from hounds

Trusty said:
That means its fine then?

This is what i find a bit bizarre about people, you hear people with such a massive opinion on this subject yet they still eat chickens that have been squashed 10 at a time into a cage. It's nutty!
Click to expand...
Progress towards better social attitudes is a gradual thing.

You can't justify the worst gross abuse of animals (blood-sports) because a different kind of animal suffering is considered acceptable.

Looking at humans history, in some nations it was first murder that was outlawed, then rape - then peadophilia.

Would it have been illogical for a man to suggest outlawing peadophilia in a society which still allowed murder & rape? - not really, as any move towards a reduction in total suffering is preferable to none.

The same logic applies to animal welfare, as each negative socially acceptable form of animal abuse because unacceptable we move one step closer to living in a society in which the needs of all creatures are considered.

It's pretty short-sighted to attempt to justify blood-spots on the grounds of a different kind of abuse which is considered acceptable.

I honestly believe in 500 years we won't be killing animals for consumption or entertainment & they will look back in history at us as barbarians.
 
Castiel said:
I wouldn't do either, I would take the animal to a vet as in reality neither of those alternatives would be available or practical and what has that got to do with anything?
Click to expand...
I was wondering how you'd avoid the question.
Tombo said:
Implying that all bullets hit the head and are fatal, also a ridiculous comparison because you already have your pet "captured."
Click to expand...
Captured or not, one has a high chance of causing a quick and painless death, the other has a high chance of causing a slower and savage death.
 
Skunkworks said:
I was wondering how you'd avoid the question.

Captured or not, one has a high chance of causing a quick and painless death, the other has a high chance of causing a slower and savage death.
Click to expand...

It was a stupid and unreasonable question....and shows that you haven't read anything about what I have said otherwise you would have known the answer anyway.
 
Castiel said:
Haha, you have no idea what you are even talking about do you?...my tendentious views and the harm they can do, indeed. The irony is astounding. :D

In the scheme of things I think you will find my prejudices somewhat on the liberal side, they do not stretch to nuking people in Yeovil for example. ;)
Click to expand...

I see you have been studying my force, young padawan.

I live in rural Dorset.

If foxes were carrying Ebola and needed to be terminated and fox hunting was an effective way of culling them, so be it.

What I take exception too is the trail of destruction hunt masters and their merry little crew create, entering private land, they have no right to be in, they cause chaos. The majority of them have no regard for the people around them.

Lets not forget the countless injuries that the horses sustain and the dogs, being snared on barbed wire and put down if they don't make the grade.

These toffs simply do not care.
 
holymonk said:
Lets not forget the countless injuries that the horses sustain and the dogs, being snared on barbed wire and put down if they don't make the grade.

These toffs simply do not care.
Click to expand...

100% +1.

Can not stand this, even watching the video made me want to jump through the screen and rip the toff from his horse and put that horn down his throat.
 
Only retards would find enjoyment from having their dogs rip apart a defenceless animal.

Good on that woman, she deserves an award.

Don't want to say what those ******** deserve.
 
Castiel said:
I find it difficult to believe a trained hound pack broke and went after a farm dog or any farm animal for that matter, also why did your Uncle allow the hunt to use his Land in the first place?

Did i say the hunt was on his land? No. See, you need to read first matey. It was in the lane. Not on his land. We were walking the lane when the hunt appeared charging after the fox. One of the hounds went for my uncles dog (Shock horror, a trained dog attacking another dog!):rolleyes:

And did you not say that the fox was already caught, any farmer would know that interfering in a hound pack would result in a far less humane end for the fox, particularly as he didn't do anything to help the fox which you should have been able to do of you were close enough to see the type of injuries you say you did.

Did i say my uncle interfered with the hunt? No. He went to get his dog who was being attacked by one of the hounds. Again, please read properly! My uncle knows better than to approach a wounded animal like a fox!!! Try it someday :rolleyes:

Given where I live and the my home has the title 'farmhouse' in it should give you some idea the answer to that question......nice try though.
You Uncle's actions seem very strange given that he was a) a landowning farmer and b) keeps animals which are the natural prey of foxes and c) would presumably know that the animals welfare would be better served in this case had the hounds (or the hunts marksman) be able to finish their job.

Just because my uncle was a farmer doesnt mean he approved of fox hunting. Yes, he did shoot the odd fox over the years but he never condoned fox hunting. He was dead against it and never allowed the hunt onto his land.

And it still doesn't explain why you did not help the fox subsequently, as concerned about animal welfare that you are.

As mentioned above, any farmer knows not to approach a wounded, wild animal like a fox!!
Click to expand...
 
i live in the countryside, i dont know any fox hunters with dogs but my immediate family do shoot foxes etc particularly as we have poultry (sometimes my uncle will wait in a tree all night for the fox lol)

i have no problem with killing foxes as they are a pain if they do get into a chicken run but i dont really like hunting with dogs, its a bit ott.

but also i think there are a lot of hypocrites who purchase their factory bought chicken which has had a far worse life than a fox then preach that killing a defences animal is repulsive

still, killing foxes locally does help if you keep stock but out in the woods the reducing the vermin argument is invalid.

i dont like it, but as with animal testing, i would be a hypocrite and ignorant to be against it
 
Skunkworks said:
Whenever someone disagrees with you, your stock response is "you clearly don't understand". I call it The Castiel Defense.
Click to expand...

In my experience if someone hasn't acknowledged the validity of Castiel's point, then they simply haven't understood it. (moral objections aside). Points already addressed haven't even been read it seems.

Some of the face saving backtracking so far has been gibberish.
 
Last edited:
No but I've thought about it many times and even asked an Imam that I find animal slaughter cruel for our personal desire. He said that animal's are a blessing from God which personally I found to be a cop out. lol

But I "rarely" eat meat, probably once every 2 weeks. I just find fox hunting cruel and even when reading the farmer's counter arguments I still find it abhorrent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom