Woman saves fox from hounds

[Castiel]

Methinks the moderating is rather lenient in this thread ...

You are not kidding....the insults I am getting are just a step too far, particularly as they ignore anything I have actually said and they are coming from someone whose supports religious viewpoints whose ethics are arguably in the toilet.

I have had enough of being vilified by people who have no right or reason to do so and therefore I'm through, I have better ways to spend my time.

 

[RDM]

It's not a great argument that boils down to.

Well, people already do X, I may as well do Y.

I just personally find it somewhat hypocritical, that is all. Plenty of people seem to be willing to overlook their faults when pointing out the faults of others.

It's still no defence for fox hunting, just arguments against eating meat (which I agree causes massive amounts of animal suffering) - but I don't expect social attitudes to change on eating meat instantly.

But if the person making the argument against fox hunting will not accept those same arguments when used against eating meat then surely his argument is flawed?

Moral changes in attitudes happen very slowly & over numerous generations - it's pretty predictable to expect fur/blood-sports to be the first things which the population deem unacceptable - once these are "settled" in the moral standard of the population other forms of abuse will be focused on.

It's unrealistic to have an "all or nothing" attitude to this kind of thing when historically change has always been slow & gradual, as isn't an overall slight reduction in suffering better than none?.

Except of course it hasn't led to a slight reduction in suffering. It has led to an increase in suffering.

Also with the attitude presented regarding "people eat meat which is bad, so hunting should be ok" - how will anything ever change?, if a currently acceptable negative behaviour is used to excuse other forms of negative behaviour society will never progress.

I am not entirely sure I want it to change. I really do like the taste of meat and doubt artificial meat will be viable in my life time. You would also need to convince me that fox hunting is negative behaviour, a case you haven't really made successfully yet. I am sure that subjectively you think it is, but that is a world away from objectively proving it is.

 

[Xordium]

Maybe I didn't make myself clear enough. My point was that there has been quite a few personal attacks and quite a few swear words completely unstarred in this thread. And yet they remain. Now whether that is because you guys are too busy to notice everything (fair enough) or they haven't got flagged to you (fair enough) then I really can't say can I.

The problem though is that people see some people get away with breaking the rules freely and then they see others punished for seemingly lesser things. I freely admit I often push a little too far but maybe I get away with it because I phrase things a certain way ... I don't know. Often I'll re-edit something if I think it comes across as too harsh when I translate things in my mind into English they don't necessarily come out too good and upon rereading I can see that. But I wouldn't expect to get a free card because English is not my first language. And if I cross the line then sobeit to any consequences.

Anyway I am not challenging your moderating ability, not my intention, I am merely pointing out the facts. And I am sure you realise not everyone will be as gracious as me and be there thinking 'all posters are equal but some are more equal than others'. Anyway that's off topic for this thread but I think it warranted stating.

 

[Gilly]

I've only seen one RTM from this thread and it didn't warrant any action.

I admit to not having read the whole thing though, haven't had time yet.

 

[Xordium]

I've only seen one RTM from this thread and it didn't warrant any action.

I admit to not having read the whole thing though, haven't had time yet.

I wouldn't bother tbh you summed it up in your first post on the last page a load of hippies and blodthirsty types spouting vitriolic from entrenched positions because they have nothing better to do.

 

[Craterloads]

I wouldn't bother tbh you summed it up in your first post on the last page a load of hippies and blodthirsty types spouting vitriolic from entrenched positions because they have nothing better to do.

I disagree, you don't have to be a hippy to not want animals to be shredded alive by a pack of dogs, just so some *** holes on horses can laugh at the death of an animal and feel all powerful.

I would go as far to say 95% of the people in this thread against the brutality towards animals are far from hippies.

 

[elmuzzy66.]

Is animal welfare really at the heart of the argument or is this one of those class issues?

 

[Craterloads]

You are not kidding....the insults I am getting are just a step too far, particularly as they ignore anything I have actually said and they are coming from someone whose supports religious viewpoints whose ethics are arguably in the toilet.

I have had enough of being vilified by people who have no right or reason to do so and therefore I'm through, I have better ways to spend my time.

You call these insults, people vilifying you?... It's your actions that are vilifying you, not anyone else’s words.

Maybe my ethics in other areas are not as up to scratch according to you, but I’m dam sure my ethics are above yours in this particular thread/topic, since I’m not the one who gets a rise from killing for "fun".

And for someone who’s complaining of being insulted, you sure do a good job of insulting others too.

 

[Efour]

hey i got an infraction for HOT LINKING Basil Brush the Mods are doing their best as usual going for the things that matter

 

[Porceliamone]

In fairness, whilst I disagree with a lot of the pro-hunt stances in this thread, I have actually read this whole thread; and I don't think at any time I've had the impression that Castiel has stated (or for that matter hinted) that he has 'enjoyed' the act of having to shoot a fox, or directly condoned those that stated that they have enjoyed witnessing or partaking in an act that causes suffering to an animal for sport. Most of the debate seemed to center on the choice/option of local communities to decide on legislation over national legislation and the chance of those communities having a greater say on what happens within them, taking into account the broader picture.

 

[Xordium]

I disagree, you don't have to be a hippy to not want animals to be shredded alive by a pack of dogs, just so some *** holes on horses can laugh at the death of an animal and feel all powerful.

I would go as far to say 95% of the people in this thread against the brutality towards animals are far from hippies.

Yes, well I was hardly being literal and I doubt Gilly was either. I don't think we thought people are sitting at their desks brushing shoulder length hair out of their eyes whilst listening to Electric Ladyland.

 

[Soundood]

comes into thread to comment, then leaves epic quote thread

laters

 

[Craterloads]

Yes, well I was hardly being literal and I doubt Gilly was either. I don't think we thought people are sitting at their desks brushing shoulder length hair out of their eyes whilst listening to Electric Ladyland.

Lol, i guess so

 

[Gilly]

I absolutely was not being literal

Nor does my belief that anyone hunting with dogs is an idiot and deserving of pain themselves affect my moderating at all.

Half way through, still haven't found anything worthy of being moderated.

 

[Craterloads]

Nor does my belief that anyone hunting with dogs is an idiot and deserving of pain themselves affect my moderating at all.

I like this mod

 

[Kenai]

You have not read what i posted earlier



If the hunt is not providing a service to the landowner then the landowner is not going to give permission to cross on his/her land. Its not just one location you hunt at, as i have stated its a vast swath of the countryside which you would have no chance of riding across if not for having the invitation extended to others to view the huntsman at his work.

So essentially your justification for hunting in such a manner is now boiling down to being allowed to ride a horse in a place you might not otherwise be able to.

I can't say i'm wholly convinced by such an argument, if i'm entirely honest with you.

 

[Castiel]

You call these insults, people vilifying you?... It's your actions that are vilifying you, not anyone else’s words.

Maybe my ethics in other areas are not as up to scratch according to you, but I’m dam sure my ethics are above yours in this particular thread/topic, since I’m not the one who gets a rise from killing for "fun".

And for someone who’s complaining of being insulted, you sure do a good job of insulting others too.

The point Craterloads is that if you actually read what I have written carefully in no way have I ever said I have hunted for fun, nor is it my hobby, nor have I participated in a hunt where hound packs are used to tear a fox apart...in fact quite the contrary...I participated in a few hunts because the Hunt Master asked me to because of my skill with a rifle and the reason being is that they now shoot the fox and not allow the hounds (all two of them) to kill the quarry animal (the exception to this was one in Scotland a long time ago that I was required to participate in and that did not involve the pack getting the Fox either) there marksman was pretty rubbish to be fair so I agreed, frankly I am not really into killing anything unless there is a specific reason to do so. I refer you to my original post in this thread where I said quite clearly that Pack Hunting is not really my thing. In fact hunting isn't something I do as a matter of course either, generally only the very occasional pheasant shoot I get invited to.....you are entirely entitled to your opinion on hunting and that you choose not to do it or disagree with it for personal moral reasons, what you are not entitled to do is compare me to a serial killer and twisted and sick and all the other rhetoric about dying creatures souls and so on because that is simply unfounded nonsense. Like I said I could disseminate your beliefs in a similar manner, but they would hardly be fair or justified, in the same way that the accusations you are flinging about at me are unjustified.

just for reference my original post on the matter:

Most of the hunts I ever went on the poxy fox got away anyway. And before anyone starts throwing accusations about, the hunts I participated in where perfectly legal and either involved only one or two dogs to flush out the fox to be shot, or used a pack in Scotland for the same outcome, although I never really liked the pack hunting, for me it was really about hunting with a rifle.

I understand some people disagree with all forms of hunting and they are entitled to their opinion.

As for the rest I was showing that much of the arguments for and against the relative animals welfare and so on are either subjective or lacking in conclusive evidence and my belief that local communities should decide such matters in their own communities, whether that is for or against hunting in any form is immaterial to me as I do not have strong feelings either way.

I am sorry if you find my opinion on Wildlife Management in general is distasteful to you, but I do not condone or oppose hunting with dogs, I leave that to others to decide and I really do feel that you have been grossly unfair in you judgement of me personally.

 

[wilber]

That'd be why they was uproar from the fox hunting community when it was suggested that the 'entertainment' aspect of it could be fulfilled via drag hunting instead then?

Apparently though, it's just not the same for some reason?

So essentially your justification for hunting in such a manner is now boiling down to being allowed to ride a horse in a place you might not otherwise be able to.

I can't say i'm wholly convinced by such an argument, if i'm entirely honest with you.

No i suggest you read the entire thread from start to finish. You asked a question i answered that particular question. Stop taking one point made and making into the entire argument.

 

[Castiel]

In fairness, whilst I disagree with a lot of the pro-hunt stances in this thread, I have actually read this whole thread; and I don't think at any time I've had the impression that Castiel has stated (or for that matter hinted) that he has 'enjoyed' the act of having to shoot a fox, or directly condoned those that stated that they have enjoyed witnessing or partaking in an act that causes suffering to an animal for sport. Most of the debate seemed to center on the choice/option of local communities to decide on legislation over national legislation and the chance of those communities having a greater say on what happens within them, taking into account the broader picture.

Thankyou, this is pretty much my position. I have never gained any enjoyment out of shooting anything living, sometimes it has been a necessary thing to do and the alternatives were either worse or the act was unavoidable or occasionally for food...

 

[BF-Bert]

Comparing hunting with dogs to other recognised vermin control measures it is actually one of the more humane ways of killing. Its over in seconds, unlike poisoning and snaring and whilst shooting is the quickest way of dispatching an animal it doesn't lend it self to all terrains (the initial video is a good example of where shooting is not a good option).

I think a lot of the anti dog hunting is brought about by the cute image people have of foxes, anyone who has had do deal with foxes will tell you otherwise tho. Rats, pidgeons etc are routinely dealt with by poisoning, usually a toxin that thins the blood with the end effect being the animal literally drowns in its own blood.

So lets ban poisons as well and see what effect that has on the vermin population in cities in particular. Not wanting to fuel the country v townies debate but it is one thing to live in the country and another to make your livelyhood from the land.

For the record I do hunt but with a rifle and hunting with dogs has no appeal for me.