View Single Post
Old 21-05-2010, 13:47   #354
Pierre
The Dark Satanic Mills
 
Pierre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: floating in the ether
Posts: 13,096
Pierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny stars
Pierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Bring Back Fox Hunting

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Angry View Post
Unless there is a coordinated national sport of running over cats using cars or motorcycles that I'm not aware of then I'm afraid that's a not very good try at flawed analogy avoidance there Pierre.
I think it's a good analogy.

Show me where there is a "coordinated national sport of hunting cats using dogs".

I go out on my motorcycle with upto 10 others all wearing the same kind of clothing. If we run over a cat should we be lambasted for it??

The hunt is not after cats, they're after foxs, if a cat is killed it is an accident

Quote:
You introduced the idiotic notion of people perhaps calling for a ban on leisure driving in the event that someone ran over a cat whilst out on a leisurely drive. Assuming that the "leisurely drive" is the prime motivation for them being out on / in a motorcyle or car then one might reasonably assume that they did not intentionally go out to run over a cat.

As for fox hunting (the clue is in the name) as you kindly pointed out above it is the intention to chase and kill a fox - there is a very clear difference between the two situations. Trying to justify "hunting" by drawing analogies involving accidents is really clutching at straws.
Why??? both are accidental. The hunt doesn't want to kill a cat, it doesn't go out with the express intention of killing a cat.

You pushed the whole cat angle anyway.

Quote:
With a straw poll of even just the posters partaking in this thread / debate I'm pretty sure one will find that the public will afford the accidental death of an animal as a result of leisure driving a greater degree of sympathy / understanding than a planned organised quasi ritualized hunting and killing of same - especially by those they view (rightly or wrongly) as "toffs" or whatever.
Well that's sort of my point

---------- Post added at 13:45 ---------- Previous post was at 13:43 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy View Post
Where as of course your fox is quite happy to kill a cat...
It is,

I've had a fox "intentionally" attack my cat strangely they never seem to do it by accident.

I've never had my cat attacked by a hunt.

---------- Post added at 13:47 ---------- Previous post was at 13:45 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf View Post
I think that was Mr. A's point in response to your question if people would call for recreational driving to be banned in response to the accidental killing of a cat through recreational driving.
Well it wasn't was it, becuase his response implied that hunts were intentionally going out to kill a cat.

Anyway I think the cat angle is skewing the debate somewhat
__________________
The wheel's still turning but the hamsters dead.
Pierre is online now   Reply With Quote