With hunting with dogs to be illegal from tomorrow (17/02/05) and various hunts throughout the country being in defiant mood, what do you think will happen?

As you can see from this http://www.thisissheffield.net/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=58&ArticleID=947238 locally hunting will still go on.

What is it wth these people that because they don't personally agree with the law then they are going to take no notice of it. Doesn't it make the government look foolish that they are not going to be able to enforce this one. No way in the world will the police have sufficient manpower to keep on top of this one. Even if they do attend and make arrests what next? Will they imprison illegal hunters? If so they are going to build a whole lot more prisons.

On the other hand this is a government that is good at passing laws but then not enforcing them ie mobile phones and driving and dangerous dogs act.

They should lock them up along with the rest of the criminals- you do the crime-you do the time- simple as that!!!! barbaric practice.

I recon they will only need to arrest and imprison a couple before the rest of them realise the government realy mean it and pack it in.

Difficult one.

Hunting, in my opinion, should be banned. No question. It IS cruel. Make NO mistake. La-De-Da people who engage in this kind of so-called 'sport' are nothing but cowards and savages with little else to amuse them.

Maybe the general public should take it into their own hands and picket these hunts.

Originally posted by Sam Miguel


Maybe the general public should take it into their own hands and picket these hunts.
no because 2 wrongs don't make a right- stopping them taking there horses out would be illegal in itself wouldn't it???

The Police need to make sure that they don't kill any foxes when they are out!!

No way in the world will the police have sufficient manpower to keep on top of this one. Even if they do attend and make arrests what next?

By that measure the same could be said of burglaries & the like - why bother having laws against it? The police can't stop it from happening.

Originally posted by nick2
I recon they will only need to arrest and imprison a couple before the rest of them realise the government realy mean it and pack it in.

I disagree there nick, the first time any of the huntsmen are jailed the Government will have allowed them to become martyrs who will then become heroes to the pro hunting fraternity, and not even Blair & Co are stupid enough to do that.

Martin Luther King Jnr maintained that a man who breaks a law and goes to jail in order to make a point of the fact that he finds it to be intolerable is in fact showing the highest regard for the law...but this is in no way comparable to the issues he was raising.

Wilde was closer to the truth with these loathsome characters.

Originally posted by scottf
no because 2 wrongs don't make a right- stopping them taking there horses out would be illegal in itself wouldn't it???

The Police need to make sure that they don't kill any foxes when they are out!!

As i understand it they can kill a fox so long as there are no more than 2 dogs present and they carry a gun. Presumably so that the gun is used to despatch the fox and then the dogs go in to do their deed.

Stopping them yes. That would be illegal. But just the sight of a baying , snarling crowd might just make them a little bit nerous about things.

Take some of the enjoyment away, eh?

Originally posted by Mo
On the other hand this is a government that is good at passing laws but then not enforcing them ie mobile phones and driving and dangerous dogs act.
Wasn't the dangerous dogs act a Tory law from John Major's time?

I personally have no view at all on hunting, and this is the first time I have seen a thread come up on the Forum since I joned, and I am quite surprised at that, when I see it constantly mentioned in the news week after week.
This must be a reflection on the general polulation, that it rarely comes up on the forum, and leads me to wonder why the politicians are wasting so much valuable time over it.

Originally posted by scottf
They should lock them up along with the rest of the criminals- you do the crime-you do the time- simple as that!!!! barbaric practice.

Here Here!

Janey.

I personally think Blair & Co should be pilloried for the amount of parlimentary time this took up. There are far more important issues than hunting with dogs.

As for Sam Miguel who thinks that only the affluent/posh engage in hunting then think again. More hunting was done by the working class than anyone else simply because it was a way to put a meal on the table.

Originally posted by muddycoffee
Wasn't the dangerous dogs act a Tory law from John Major's time?

I personally have no view at all on hunting, and this is the first time I have seen a thread come up on the Forum since I joned, and I am quite surprised at that, when I see it constantly mentioned in the news week after week.
This must be a reflection on the general polulation, that it rarely comes up on the forum, and leads me to wonder why the politicians are wasting so much valuable time over it.

Can't remember exactly when DDA was passed but either way it is not enforced and so makes a mockery of the whole caboudle as I see it.

The hunting debate has been argued on the forum before, which is why I didn't want the thread to be a pro v anti hunting discussion. The law has been passed and an appeal and judicial review has failed to overturn it.

I cannot see the law as being enforcable and I wondered what other members thought.

Originally posted by sanman
As for Sam Miguel who thinks that only the affluent/posh engage in hunting then think again. More hunting was done by the working class than anyone else simply because it was a way to put a meal on the table.
I noticed that you used the past tense here...is the reference to the working class hunting historical or are there still large numbers of us supplementing our meat and two veg with the spoils of a good old-fashioned hunt?

Is it a rural thing?

Just interested.

Originally posted by sanman
. More hunting was done by the working class than anyone else simply because it was a way to put a meal on the table.

Didn't realise people ever ate fox.

In any case there is a whole lot of difference between killing for pleasure and killing for survival.

Originally posted by Mo
Can't remember exactly when DDA was passed but either way it is not enforced and so makes a mockery of the whole caboudle as I see it.

The hunting debate has been argued on the forum before, which is why I didn't want the thread to be a pro v anti hunting discussion. The law has been passed and an appeal and judicial review has failed to overturn it.

I cannot see the law as being enforcable and I wondered what other members thought.

It will be very tough for the police if some pro hunters continue hunting regardless. I'm hoping that a few high profile arrests will go someway to indicating to the pro hunters that it will not be tolerated. It may take many months, but I hope that it will eventually die away. There was always going to be trouble when this happened, but at least it's a step in the right direction. I prefer that the government is making an attempt to ban fox hunting and not just bowing down to the pressure form the hunters.

No I don't think its a historical thing. If you look at the amount of people that go out with lurchers and the like hunting rabbits and hares I'm sure you'd find that they outnumber the foxhunters. The main difference is that there is no pomp & circumstance with this sort of hunting with a dog, the closest it gets to that is the Waterloo Cup. As for it being a rural thing it depends on your definition of rural, hunting with dogs in the way described above probably had its strongest following in pit communities or those on the edge of large connurbations.

Originally posted by sanman
No I don't think its a historical thing. If you look at the amount of people that go out with lurchers and the like hunting rabbits and hares I'm sure you'd find that they outnumber the foxhunters. The main difference is that there is no pomp & circumstance with this sort of hunting with a dog, the closest it gets to that is the Waterloo Cup. As for it being a rural thing it depends on your definition of rural, hunting with dogs in the way described above probably had its strongest following in pit communities or those on the edge of large connurbations.


If Blair gets back in again I feel that he will come under the influence of pressure groups to ban all other types of hunting as well.

On Countryfile last Sunday they highlighted Hare Coursing, which is also covered by the ban. Behind the reporter were a gang of nutters who attend these 'events' for the 'sport' and to be honest, if I didn't know better I'd have thought they were Millwall's bovva boys.

At least from Friday, the hunters will be the criminals, and the hunt sabateurs will be the citizens trying to stop the law being broken.:clap:

Originally posted by saxon51
On Countryfile last Sunday they highlighted Hare Coursing, which is also covered by the ban. Behind the reporter were a gang of nutters who attend these 'events' for the 'sport' and to be honest, if I didn't know better I'd have thought they were Millwall's bovva boys.

At least from Friday, the hunters will be the criminals, and the hunt sabateurs will be the citizens trying to stop the law being broken.:clap:
A sport that involves the painful death of a living creature...since when was football not enough for these people!

The ban is a big step in the right direction, even if the hunters decide to break the law. If something is deemed to be wrong or cruel, then refusing to ban it just because it will be difficult to enforce the law would be a cop out.

Didn't realise people ever ate fox.

In any case there is a whole lot of difference between killing for pleasure and killing for survival.


Mo as you started this thread I'd have hoped you realised that it was about a ban on hunting as a whole. It therefore makes little difference if we're talking about a fox or a rabbit.

As for ththere being a difference between killing for pleasure of for survival tell that to the fox/rabbit. Do you actually object to the killing or that people enjoy it?

Originally posted by sanman
No I don't think its a historical thing. If you look at the amount of people that go out with lurchers and the like hunting rabbits and hares I'm sure you'd find that they outnumber the foxhunters. The main difference is that there is no pomp & circumstance with this sort of hunting with a dog, the closest it gets to that is the Waterloo Cup. As for it being a rural thing it depends on your definition of rural, hunting with dogs in the way described above probably had its strongest following in pit communities or those on the edge of large connurbations.

In the past I have been involved with local groups to stop the waterloo cup. Personally i see no difference in any types of sport hunting. Hopefully, the ban will see an end of large events like this.

Originally posted by sanman
I personally think Blair & Co should be pilloried for the amount of parlimentary time this took up. There are far more important issues than hunting with dogs.

As for Sam Miguel who thinks that only the affluent/posh engage in hunting then think again. More hunting was done by the working class than anyone else simply because it was a way to put a meal on the table.

Yes, after I posted, I did realise this. But I was talking about fox-hunting - not hunting in general.

The thing is, surely if it's for food, then it does seem much more justifiable.

I don't agree with hunting but nor do I agree with the ban. It's go nothing to do with animal cruelty and everything to do with the Government Vs the Red Coats.

If Blair and co seriously wanted to target animal cruelty shouldn't they also stop fishing, Halal meat, battery farmed chicken and vivisection?

This anti-hunting ban has been forced through parliment without a thought to the consequences. Jobs will be lost, rural communities will suffer, and the upkeep of the countryside will go down-hill because many hunts do litter picks and maintain the hedgerows. Not to mention the 1000s of hounds and horses that will be destroyed.

As an animal lover and vegetarian I would like to see hunting with dogs banned, but it should be done properly with thought to the fall-out instead of rushed through. And I think there are much crueler practices against animals going on right now (see above) than foxhunting. Why don't we all start picketing them instead?

I do wonder if the ban is purely a PR stunt to please the left leaning voters.

Purely in the interest of keeping the complete picture, let me point out that not all foxhounds are followed on horseback.

There are several footbased packs and are mostly in the Lake District and Wales. Not a red jacketed Charlie in sight.

Any hunters on here have an opinon on drag hunting as an alternative? Or Non hunters or even anti-hunters for that matter.

It strikes me as a good alternative, with a cannier opponent and the opportunity for a new athletic sport in the making.

Not suited to all forms of hunting, but quite a few nevertheless.

Originally posted by JBee
I don't agree with hunting but nor do I agree with the ban. It's go nothing to do with animal cruelty and everything to do with the Government Vs the Red Coats.
laughed when i read that, sorry! red coats...heheh! anyway im for the ban, think its disgusting. i read somewhere that u can book a hunting trip to kill polar bears NICE:loopy:
from a farmers point of view, who keeps chickens, i agree he can shoot on site or put up humane traps of some sort.

As usual and as expected the government has created another fine mess.
If you pass endless laws , banning this , banning that and banning the other , there comes a point where you can't practically control it all and people either just flout the law or it goes underground.
If something that is popular is banned , then the cracks begin to show straightaway--to wit. Prohibition in America.
In the old Communist countries there was a vast network of corruption , bribery , fiddling and black--marketeering as people tried desperately to get round the myriad rules and regulations.
When people reallyget angry and act together , the government soon cave in. e.g. the Petrol Tax protests a few years ago.The Left---whether Totalitarian or Liberal always seem to think they can control people's behaviour by passing laws and banning things.I wonder if they'll ever learn ?
When you consider the things that need doing in this country , it's amazing that anybody 's got time to spend banning even more things.

If the hunters carry on with this barbaric "sport" why not tie a few fox pelts to them and set them running.....then set their own dogs after them - see how they like it !

Now that seems fair enough to me. Well suggested.

These people really do want a horrible lesson teaching them.

They really are the pits.

Originally posted by Sam Miguel

La-De-Da people who engage in this kind of so-called 'sport' are nothing but cowards and savages with little else to amuse them.


Sadistic pleasures aren't class based. :(

Did you see the clips of the Waterloo Cup on TV yesterday ? Nothing La-De-Da about the thousands of people who attend this spectacle of dogs tearing hares to pieces. - many of them took their kids along to watch from a ring-side seat too.

What about all those horrible people who eat beef and chicken and lamb.
Imagine the poor cows queuing up , smelling death in the air, almost like an animal's Auschwitz ! All those chickens , not allowed to live out their natural span ---and the lambs.
Imagine the poor rats dying slowly ,poisoned by us Humans. Yes , we must all meet the same fate !
And---all those people who will now have to shoot foxes ,should be chased through the woods and shot and maybe tortured a little to teach them a lesson.
We must stamp out this cruelty , to animals at any rate.

They won't have to shoot that many foxes, just stop transporting them round the country to supplement the local fox populations as the hunts do now.

Originally posted by Andy78
I do wonder if the ban is purely a PR stunt to please the left leaning voters.

Probably and likely a sop to the PLP. Blair hasn't let them make many decisions on a free vote since he became president. I read somewhere recently that the hunting ban got 700 hours of parliamentary time compared with just 7 hours given to discussion of the invasion of Iraq. :P

If mindless cruelty is the criterion why hasn't angling also been banned ? ....wouldn't be anything to do with risking the wrath of faithful labour voters I suppose :suspect:

Originally posted by sheffexpat
What about all those horrible people who eat beef and chicken and lamb.
Imagine the poor cows queuing up , smelling death in the air, almost like an animal's Auschwitz ! All those chickens , not allowed to live out their natural span ---and the lambs.
Imagine the poor rats dying slowly ,poisoned by us Humans. Yes , we must all meet the same fate !
And---all those people who will now have to shoot foxes ,should be chased through the woods and shot and maybe tortured a little to teach them a lesson.
We must stamp out this cruelty , to animals at any rate.

Oh, dear not this one again. I just hope that you make sure that your carrots are not still alive before boiling them.

Originally posted by JBee
the upkeep of the countryside will go down-hill because many hunts do litter picks and maintain the hedgerows.
As someone with a rural background, who used to work for the forestry commission, I can honestly say that I never once saw any "hunts" litter picking or maintaining hedgerows.

I did see hedges and fences that we had to mend, paid for by the FC.

I did see hedges and fences that had to be mended by tenant farmers at their own expense, because someone on the hunt owned the land, and pressured the position.

I did see crops damaged, and again, the tenant had no recompense from the landlord who did it.

I do know farmers, who owned their land who tried to stop the hunts, they used their own "pest control" and didn't want the damage the "hunt" would cause on their own land. Sometimes it worked, sometimes damage was done, rarely was anyone recompensed.

Does everyone in the countryside support "hunts", no.

Are "hunts" necessary to control foxes, no.

Did "King Tony" waste time banning hunting, IMO no, the House of Lords did that, they knew what it would come to when they kept throwing the bill back, and they wasted all that parliamentary time. The government had a mandate to push this through, and did, good on 'em.

It will be fishing next, tony the tourist sees somthing he doesnt like and bans it, I hope the inbreds give him hell......

I for one dont think those who hunt will stop doing what they have done for years,I personally find it to be reprehensible,but then again it does not hold the same facination it does for others.
My brother is a hunter ,he is a terrier man and belongs to the local dog club,which by the way is predominatly made up of the working class.
He tells me where he lives at Beighton they will NEVER stop hunting and they are all prepared to go to prison rather than stop hunting.
Looks like they will need many more prisons to accomodate all these people.

Originally posted by royjames
I for one dont think those who hunt will stop doing what they have done for years,I personally find it to be reprehensible,but then again it does not hold the same facination it does for others.
My brother is a hunter ,he is a terrier man and belongs to the local dog club,which by the way is predominatly made up of the working class.
He tells me where he lives at Beighton they will NEVER stop hunting and they are all prepared to go to prison rather than stop hunting.
Looks like they will need many more prisons to accomodate all these people.

I am not saying I agree with fox hunting but to put a stop to a whole way of life is a little over the top.

There is more at stake here than a few dead foxes after all, there are the horses and the dogs to think about, and if there is no need for them, is it right to have them put down.

I heard somewhere that blair got bit by a hound once and couldnt get over it.

Or maybe its his scottish blood rebelling in him.

Originally posted by sheffexpat

And---all those people who will now have to shoot foxes ,should be chased through the woods and shot and maybe tortured a little to teach them a lesson.


The gamekeepers round here won't be a*rsed to shoot them, wire snares are much cheaper and far less time consuming than lamping, and who wants to spend a freezing night up on the grouse moor when they can be snugly ensconed in the local with a pint or few ?

We're surrounded by woods and fields and rarely see a fox here. Down the road in Worral village I've seen as many as three dodging the traffic - they live out of people's bins these days as very few farmers keep chickens and local farming practice of two silage crops a year have eliminated all the ground nesting birds like Skylark, Lapwing and Curlew.

hunting is a barbaric sport which harks back to the days of landed gentry. Basically rich idiots get to ride around the country looking superior. It is immoral and inefficient in culling foxes.

Huntsman branded the law illegal I notice

you don't have any power anymore:nono:

What it boils down to is that for various reasons , all over the world , millions of animals are killed in different ways to satisfy one human need or another [food , pest control....etc...] every day.
Some people have found a way to kill a few of these animals and have doubled it up as a Sport. This is what seems to get up the Anti-Hunting noses---the fact that people get pleasure from killing the fox.They're too short-sighted to see that when they go "yum-yum" over their fish or meat , that they're getting pleasure from a creature's premature death.
I have absolutely no interest in hunting or fishing or any sport but it seems to be stupid to ban one section of society for killing animals.
Personally , I'm sure it's a class thing and the English disease of hating anyone who gets pleasure from something they don't get pleasure from.

Originally posted by JBee
I don't agree with hunting but nor do I agree with the ban. It's go nothing to do with animal cruelty and everything to do with the Government Vs the Red Coats.

If Blair and co seriously wanted to target animal cruelty shouldn't they also stop fishing, Halal meat, battery farmed chicken and vivisection?

This anti-hunting ban has been forced through parliment without a thought to the consequences. Jobs will be lost, rural communities will suffer, and the upkeep of the countryside will go down-hill because many hunts do litter picks and maintain the hedgerows. Not to mention the 1000s of hounds and horses that will be destroyed.

As an animal lover and vegetarian I would like to see hunting with dogs banned, but it should be done properly with thought to the fall-out instead of rushed through. And I think there are much crueler practices against animals going on right now (see above) than foxhunting. Why don't we all start picketing them instead?

I don't know how you would propose to ban hunting other than the way the government have done it... it has not been rushed through. The countryside alliance have had years of warning... after all, Blair promised to ban it years ago.

Regarding other kinds of cruelty, I applaud your plans to start picketing some other places as well... let me know and I may join you!:thumbsup:

Incidentally, this government has already taken some other action on animal cruelty. For example the banning of testing cosmetics on animals which I believe they banned almost as soon as they came to power.

Originally posted by sheffexpat
What it boils down to is that for various reasons , all over the world , millions of animals are killed in different ways to satisfy one human need or another [food , pest control....etc...] every day.
Some people have found a way to kill a few of these animals and have doubled it up as a Sport. This is what seems to get up the Anti-Hunting noses---the fact that people get pleasure from killing the fox.They're too short-sighted to see that when they go "yum-yum" over their fish or meat , that they're getting pleasure from a creature's premature death.
I have absolutely no interest in hunting or fishing or any sport but it seems to be stupid to ban one section of society for killing animals.
Personally , I'm sure it's a class thing and the English disease of hating anyone who gets pleasure from something they don't get pleasure from.

I agree. I hate animal cruelty of any kind.

Simple question... how many people who have condemned foxhunting on this tread would consider eating non-free range eggs? Battery hens have a miserable life, in a space smaller than the average shoebox, with acid burns on their feet because they've been forced to stand in their own excrement and half their feathers pecked away through boredom. They don't even have enough space to flap their wings.

So in my opinion, if you stick your toast soldier into a battery-farmed boiled egg in the morning when free-range eggs are cheap and readily availalbe, then you're just as bad as the bloke who runs around on a Saturday afternoon chasing a fox.

Originally posted by JBee
I agree. I hate animal cruelty of any kind.

Simple question... how many people who have condemned foxhunting on this tread would consider eating non-free range eggs? Battery hens have a miserable life, in a space smaller than the average shoebox, with acid burns on their feet because they've been forced to stand in their own excrement and half their feathers pecked away through boredom. They don't even have enough space to flap their wings.

So in my opinion, if you stick your toast soldier into a battery-farmed boiled egg in the morning when free-range eggs are cheap and readily availalbe, then you're just as bad as the bloke who runs around on a Saturday afternoon chasing a fox.

I agree with your stance and I only ever buy free range eggs BUT if I'm going to eat out the chances are that any eggs I consume say in quiche, will most certainly be of battery origin.

The same goes for organic produce. I always buy organic veg but if I'm to eat out I won't get organic.

But we do what we can and every little helps.

If anyone is at all interested in seeing exactly what the hunts get up to, or maybe for information on local groups, have a look at www.huntsabs.org.uk

:thumbsup:

Originally posted by foo_fighter
Does everyone in the countryside support "hunts", no.

Are "hunts" necessary to control foxes, no.

I'm not against hunting in principle, because I eat and enjoy meat, and to take any other position would make me a hypocrite.

However the pro-hunt lobby are very difficult to warm to, with their muddled arguments and loathsome bleating - I mean, around 1% of the fox population is affected by hunting, so to suggest that it's a form of pest control is just silly. It's entertainment, pure and simple.

The pure arrogance exhibited by their "you don't understand the countryside" (puh-lease) members means I'll be glad when a few toffs get locked up, just as they should have been during the "fuel protest".

Originally posted by Greenback
I'm not against hunting in principle, because I eat and enjoy meat, and to take any other position would make me a hypocrite.

However the pro-hunt lobby are very difficult to warm to, with their muddled arguments and loathsome bleating - I mean, around 1% of the fox population is affected by hunting, so to suggest that it's a form of pest control is just silly. It's entertainment, pure and simple.

The pure arrogance exhibited by their "you don't understand the countryside" (puh-lease) members means I'll be glad when a few toffs get locked up, just as they should have been during the "fuel protest".

This is very similar to how I feel about it. I eat meat (although I do try to buy free range), but I'm not that bothered about hunting because although it is cruel, it affects such a small proportion of the animal community - far less than factory farming for example.

It's the way the "country" people have put their argument across that has really annoyed me. They've been saying "you don't understand the countryside" since this whole debate came up and only recently have some begun to a) admit that they like hunting because it is a sport and b) explain, in terms that I understand, what it means to them (i.e. I remember a guy on Countryfile explaining that to him it's like banning football - I'd never thought of it like that).

If they'd just done this in the first place then a proper debate could have been had in the first place and I think there would have been much less grief caused.

Originally posted by pussycat
...(i.e. I remember a guy on Countryfile explaining that to him it's like banning football - I'd never thought of it like that)....


I know, the poor ball gets booted everwhere. :(

What the countryside alliance fail to acknowledge, is that there are a lot of farmers who live in the countryside who are against hunting, and who do not allow hunts on their farms (some even say the hunts do more damage to their farms than foxes do). So it is somewhat of a myth that it is a town versus country issue. I think it is more a kindness versus cruelty issue.

Regarding the comparison between chasing and killing a fox purely for pleasure and kicking a ball of air about for pleasure, I think it is a really stupid comparison. However, when scientists prove that a football feels pain then I will probably agree that football should be banned too.

Originally posted by Andy78
I know, the poor ball gets booted everwhere. :(

Are you being sarcastic, or did I really make that come out wrong...?

:confused:

Originally posted by Siân
By that measure the same could be said of burglaries & the like - why bother having laws against it? The police can't stop it from happening.

Catching burglars comes higher up on my list than apprehending people fox hunting. I'd sooner any police on fox hunting duty were drafted onto catching and preventing burglars and other similar crimes.

sod riding a horse and chasing a poor wild little bushy tailed member of the dog family, i'll stick to hunting fish with my extremely large and expensive rod, its less strenuous and theres never a pub far away.
once had a fox run past me whilst i was hunting for fish then ten mins after a load of howling wolves or whatever they are came past , me flask and sarnis flew all over the place, a very nice gentleman in a red coat appologised profusely and offered me lunch at the local country pub, very english and traditional
a very nice sunday was had by all :P :P

Originally posted by Lickszz
Catching burglars comes higher up on my list than apprehending people fox hunting. I'd sooner any police on fox hunting duty were drafted onto catching and preventing burglars and other similar crimes.
This argument about wasting Police time interests me.

Have any of you actually been near a hunt and seen how many Police officers are present, generally quite a few.

All they have to do now is stop protecting the hunt from the sab's, and enforce the law.

Net increase in wasted Police time, zero.

I'd be interested to know how many of those people above who were saying that the law's the law, anybody hunting should be locked up etc. are the same people who were involved in the poll tax protests, or maybe didn't pay their poll tax. Or how many of them were involved in secondary picketing during the miners' strike? Or was that different because it was a Tory government then?

I have no interest in hunting and have never been on one, but I am from a rural background and I think in rural communities it will make a big difference. I also think that if you're brought up in the country you realise rather more that nature is red in tooth and claw and if you've seen the damage caused by a fox in a henhouse (and that's for pleasure, not for food) then you feel rather less sorry for them when they're hunted. But then I don't really think this is about animal cruelty because otherwise we'd be banning halal slaughter as well.

Unfortunately I do think there's an element of town vs. country here, and I also think there's an element of class warfare and revenge; some people think that Maggie killed off the mines and steelworks in the towns, so now it's Labour's turn to kill off the farmers in the countryside and their way of life. And before you all say that's rubbish, just look back at the previous posts and see how many of them talk about toffs, upper class people and so on.

Originally posted by metalman
[Unfortunately I do think there's an element of town vs. country here, and I also think there's an element of class warfare and revenge; some people think that Maggie killed off the mines and steelworks in the towns, so now it's Labour's turn to kill off the farmers in the countryside and their way of life. And before you all say that's rubbish, just look back at the previous posts and see how many of them talk about toffs, upper class people and so on. [/B]

Like I said before, it's Blair Vs the Red Coats. I think it's got F-all to do with animal cruelty.

Originally posted by metalman
I'd be interested to know how many of those people above who were saying that the law's the law, anybody hunting should be locked up etc. are the same people who were involved in the poll tax protests, or maybe didn't pay their poll tax. Or how many of them were involved in secondary picketing during the miners' strike? Or was that different because it was a Tory government then?

I have no interest in hunting and have never been on one, but I am from a rural background and I think in rural communities it will make a big difference. I also think that if you're brought up in the country you realise rather more that nature is red in tooth and claw and if you've seen the damage caused by a fox in a henhouse (and that's for pleasure, not for food) then you feel rather less sorry for them when they're hunted. But then I don't really think this is about animal cruelty because otherwise we'd be banning halal slaughter as well.

Unfortunately I do think there's an element of town vs. country here, and I also think there's an element of class warfare and revenge; some people think that Maggie killed off the mines and steelworks in the towns, so now it's Labour's turn to kill off the farmers in the countryside and their way of life. And before you all say that's rubbish, just look back at the previous posts and see how many of them talk about toffs, upper class people and so on.

As someone who has campaigned for a ban for more time than I care to admit I can tell you that this is all about cruelty, nothing else. You ask about Halal butchery, other campaigns are under way to stop this as there are campaigns to stop transporting live animals.

I've used this analogy before but, would you stop someone trying to eradicate poverty in India because there's far worse poverty in Africa?

I suspect that we may be heading for lots of foxxy propaganda in the coming months.

A couple of weeks ago there was quite a spread in the Daily Telegraph about foxes making their way into urban areas and killing any cats they encountered along the way. The article was suggesting that babies and small children may not be safe if the fox wasn't going to be hunted. :D

Originally posted by metalman
I'd be interested to know how many of those people above who were saying that the law's the law, anybody hunting should be locked up etc. are the same people who were involved in the poll tax protests, or maybe didn't pay their poll tax. Or how many of them were involved in secondary picketing during the miners' strike? Or was that different because it was a Tory government then?

...and conversley, how many of those now using the "laws an ass" and "what about the jobs" arguments supported these principles in the times you're talking about.

Sorry, but compare the devastation of the mining comunities to the job losses in hunting, no contest.

Your arguments just don't stand up.

Originally posted by Mo
I suspect that we may be heading for lots of foxxy propaganda in the coming months.

A couple of weeks ago there was quite a spread in the Daily Telegraph about foxes making their way into urban areas and killing any cats they encountered along the way. The article was suggesting that babies and small children may not be safe if the fox wasn't going to be hunted. :D

I would say that the Daily Telegraph was talking a load of 'Bow Locks'.

We have at least three foxes which come into our garden and we feed and actively encourage them. Our cats play with them sometimes, (I have this on film) and even argue with them over the food. The cats usually win. It would be interesting to know from anybody who has first hand experience of foxes killing cats. Even more unlikely is the idea of foxes killing babies. Isn't this the kind of tosh the Spanish media spread around in order to bring the locals down on wolves after hunting them became illegal?

Originally posted by Mo
I suspect that we may be heading for lots of foxxy propaganda in the coming months.


..... and a lot of the propoganda may come from ill-quoted gossip.
The main focus of the article is on the existing urban population and the suggestion that the change from bags to wheelie bins may be reducing the food sources. While it does quote a couple of "cat attack" tales it certainly does not claim any new influxes of foxes.

However, the the article does conclude with:

Stephen Harris, a professor of environmental science at Bristol University, said, however, that increasing fox attacks on domestic cats was an "urban myth".

"I have studied the behaviour of urban foxes for more than 35 years and have yet to see one attack a cat," he said. "Foxes are solitary by nature, so anybody claiming to have seen a pack of foxes attacking their cat is simply talking rubbish."

The article is
here (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;sessionid=BUZU3FKLFBDGNQFIQMGCM5WAVCBQU JVC?xml=/news/2005/02/06/nfox06.xml&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=4782) but I think you might have to register before reading it.

Originally posted by foo_fighter
[B

Sorry, but compare the devastation of the mining comunities to the job losses in hunting, no contest.

Your arguments just don't stand up. [/B]

I wasn't comparing them, and that wasn't my argument.

I support a ban on hunting, but I seem to disstrust & disslike the anti hunt brigade even more. Their favourite phrase is Fascist or class war & they go for the ''Toffs''. I dont know. Lots of the red coats I have seen are working class. The people in the fields, are they called beaters? are most certainly working class. The anti hunt people are a class war thing & are to be disstrusted. Once again. I think fox hunting is vile. I think people who want to go & chase, torture & kill & rip these creatures apart is horrific. These two groups seem to like this their own sport. This nowt s qeer as folk, disscus??????

Originally posted by foo_fighter
This argument about wasting Police time interests me.

Have any of you actually been near a hunt and seen how many Police officers are present, generally quite a few.

All they have to do now is stop protecting the hunt from the sab's, and enforce the law.

Net increase in wasted Police time, zero.

Yes, my good friend the Earl of Yarborough of the Brocklesby Hunt once gave me a guided tour. :D

The hunts really need to sack some spokespeople.

On this morning's BBC was a master of hounds saying that they were going to be off out today and would keep within the law.
They would be following a trail.
That said, we would all think something along the lines of "Good for you!"

Then the fool has to go on to explain that the trail would be of "fox scent" and that would be provided by some foxes that they would shoot and the carcasses would be dragged to make the trail. Within the law? Yes. Acceptable? No.

Originally posted by Tim42
I support a ban on hunting, but I seem to disstrust & disslike the anti hunt brigade even more. Their favourite phrase is Fascist or class war & they go for the ''Toffs''. I dont know. Lots of the red coats I have seen are working class. The people in the fields, are they called beaters? are most certainly working class. The anti hunt people are a class war thing & are to be disstrusted. Once again. I think fox hunting is vile. I think people who want to go & chase, torture & kill & rip these creatures apart is horrific. These two groups seem to like this their own sport. This nowt s qeer as folk, disscus??????

It annoys me when people try to turn it into a class issue. I disagree with the people who's main reason for a ban was that they don't like "toffs"... ie inverted snobbery.

For me and I suspect most of the public who have consistently said it should be banned, the issue is purely about preventing cruelty.

Apparently a hunt attacked some ITN cameramen who were filming a hunt attack on some sabs,read about it here (http://hsa.enviroweb.org/news/180205.html)

Saw one of the 'inbreeds' on the news tonight. He (it) was proudly holding a dead fox by the tail and boasting gleefully about how they had only used two dogs to flush it out before shooting it.

These sickos honestly seem to enjoy it.

Okay, kill 'em if you have to for control purposes, but don't boast about it you sad, arrogant arseholes!!!:rant:

These evil people try to pretend they are a rural version of Rentakil. I don't know if Rentakil deliberately breed pests or bring pests over from other areas to keep them in business like the hunters do with foxes, but I doubt it.

If anyone on this forum is incensed by the bar stools who are still hunting foxes in spite of the ban (who could carry on their sport by drag hunting if they weren't obsessed with blood... as shown by their attack on an ITN reporter) then I would recomend this website.

http://hsa.enviroweb.org/hsa.shtml

I joined today. The countryside alliance have really shot themselves in the foot with their evil gloating over holding a dead fox up by the tail on national news. If they really thought foxes were a pest then they would stop breeding them and bringing them to areas where there aren't enough foxes. They are lying when they say it is all to do with pest control.

Originally posted by Mo
As i understand it they can kill a fox so long as there are no more than 2 dogs present and they carry a gun. Presumably so that the gun is used to despatch the fox and then the dogs go in to do their deed.

The photos in the papers over the weekend of a red coater gloating as he held up a dead fox was the predicted outcome of my previous post.

Nothing has changed. Foxes will still be hunted albeit by only 2 dogs and then killed. The scent then being laid for the tally ho gang to continue their recreation. THIS IS PERFECTLY LEGAL. The law must have been drawn up by a village idiot.

Fox hunting is not illegal in this country, a fact that you will do well to remember when you toddle of to the polling booths at the next election.