[Pierre]

The argument about pest control doesn't stack, and never has really, let's just cut through the bullpoo.

Fox hunting is a sport, a countryside pastime, believed by the great unwashed to be partaken only by the landed gentry, which is the only reason it was banned. Because Labour reckon it is a sport for snobs, a day out for the rich, so Labour must stop the rich having their fun.

Lots of other sports hurt and/or kill animals. Horse racing, greyhound racing (greyhounds are often killed, abandonded when their racing days are over), fishing, Falconry (yes you're allowed to have a captive hawk kill another bird for sport), Ferreting all these without mentioning cruel snares and traps.


All the above, and the government deem it only neccessary to ban hunting with dogs. Falconry is looked upon as an ancient art, a skill and sport with great heritage to be kept alive.

Fox hunting is equally steeped in tradition but apparantly killing a fox with a dog is so much more worse than killing a bird with a hawk.

There's no consistancy. Me? I'm not bothered either way, but if you're going to ban one method of injuring, hunting and killing animals then surely you ban them all? What makes Fox hunting worse than fishing? At least the fox is killed instantly whereas the fish may dangle on the end of a line until it is exhausted and then it may tossed into a net along with a load of other fish where it will usually die slowly.

Is it because fishing is accessible to the common man, more than say foxhunting?

Ban them all or not at all.