Bring Back Fox Hunting

[Digital Fanatic]

Originally Posted by martyh

i repeat why is that ridiculous?

It's ridiculous because the story keeps changing...

Something doesn't add up here. First the news said that the babies were in critical condition but now it appears they had scratches to their faces and arms. Hardly life threatening. Secondly, how does a timid fox go in to an open door, up two flights of stairs, into a bedroom, jump into TWO cots (yes the babies were in seperate cots) and attack them without anyone hearing. Surely they had a baby monitor 2 floors below> And another thing....the news said that one of the children is now well enough and talking.....helloooooo they are 9 months old!!!! I SMELL A RAT NOT A FOX!!!!!

Originally Posted by Digital Fanatic

It's ridiculous because the story keeps changing...

Something doesn't add up here. First the news said that the babies were in critical condition but now it appears they had scratches to their faces and arms. Hardly life threatening. Secondly, how does a timid fox go in to an open door, up two flights of stairs, into a bedroom, jump into TWO cots (yes the babies were in seperate cots) and attack them without anyone hearing. Surely they had a baby monitor 2 floors below> And another thing....the news said that one of the children is now well enough and talking.....helloooooo they are 9 months old!!!! I SMELL A RAT NOT A FOX!!!!!

from your link,have you actually read it?

Mrs Koupparis said: “Isabella is doing well but she is still on a ventilator and in intensive care and is very heavily sedated.
“It is so hard to see. The doctor has said she is making small progress but at least she hasn’t got all the wires on her any more. It is horrific to see her like that. It is our job to look after our children and the whole thing has left us feeling a bit out of control.�
Isabella was transferred to west London’s Great Ormond Street Hospital, which specialises in the treatment of children, after her condition deteriorated.
Lola was bitten on the face and arm while Isabella suffered serious wounds to her arm. Both babies underwent surgery to treat the “life-changing� injuries. Fashion designer Mrs Koupparis, 41, praised the medical staff and those at the Royal London Hospital where Lola is being treated and is responding well.

seems fairly serious to me
town foxes are anything but timid there are numerous reports of foxes walking into houses
she possibly did have a baby monitor if you actually read the story from when the attack first happened you will note that she heard the babies crying and then went upstairs to investigate

I realy don't know why you insist on doubting the story and despite the evidence denying it ever happened as reported you are starting to sound a bit ,well, silly to be honest

[Digital Fanatic]

Originally Posted by martyh

from your link,have you actually read it?




seems fairly serious to me
town foxes are anything but timid there are numerous reports of foxes walking into houses
she possibly did have a baby monitor if you actually read the story from when the attack first happened you will note that she heard the babies crying and then went upstairs to investigate

I realy don't know why you insist on doubting the story and despite the evidence denying it ever happened as reported you are starting to sound a bit ,well, silly to be honest

We'll see... once the truth comes out

Originally Posted by Digital Fanatic

We'll see... once the truth comes out

ok then lets leave there for now and see what happens

[Digital Fanatic]

Originally Posted by martyh

ok then lets leave there for now and see what happens

ok, sounds fair

[idi banashapan]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Please yourself..I'll just view you as another sad conspiracy theorist...

lord forbid someone thought different to you about something.

anyway, from the pictures of the alleged attacker (the fox), I'm surprised that, for such a savage attack, the white mouth and chest of the fox isn't covered in blood. it's quite clear to see that the photographed animal does not have blood over it. the report also says

It is not certain whether the officer's photograph is of the fox thought to have mauled the twins.

this leaves room for the position that not only was this not the fox, but indeed that it might not have been a fox at all that committed the offence. some people seem very quick to jump on the band wagon and place blame where no conclusive evidence has been submitted, only a statement and assumptions. you wouldn't kill a man based on one persons comment that the man had done wrong without proof.

why is it ok to do the same to an animal - more than that, and entire species? we're talking about people trying to initiate a cull of urban foxes here (plus the ones in the country as the thread title suggests). imagine if someone were to try and kill, say, all Jewish people because they felt wrongly done by a few....

it's madness - this whole thing has gotten well out of hand and it appears a LOT of people are falling into the angry mob trap here (thanks for that Fleet Street). I don;t deny the children are in a bad way from what I've heard, and yes, that is a terrible thing, but there is nothing in this entire story thus far that proves without reasonable doubt that a fox mauled these children. and now, the fox, that apparently just stood in the room staring at the mother when she entered, has suddenly turned into a kidnapping, child-eating animal!! WTF??? get a grip people - step back and take a good look at what's happening here...

I think, before we start killing innocent animals, we wait for the hard evidence - more than just a womans story, which is what it is at this stage. a court would not throw someone in prison on the same basis. and for those of you who now turn and say 'But these things are vicious blood-thirsty animals' well take a good look at what the human race is becoming. you need look no further than this event and in some cases, perhaps this very thread. vicious blood-thirsty animals indeed.

---------- Post added at 20:14 ---------- Previous post was at 20:08 ----------

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Occam's razor.

doesn't mean it was a fox though, does it?

Originally Posted by idi banashapan

lord forbid someone thought different to you about something.

anyway, from the pictures of the alleged attacker (the fox), I'm surprised that, for such a savage attack, the white mouth and chest of the fox isn't covered in blood. it's quite clear to see that the photographed animal does not have blood over it. the report also says



this leaves room for the position that not only was this not the fox, but indeed that it might not have been a fox at all that committed the offence. some people seem very quick to jump on the band wagon and place blame where no conclusive evidence has been submitted, only a statement and assumptions. you wouldn't kill a man based on one persons comment that the man had done wrong without proof.

why is it ok to do the same to an animal - more than that, and entire species? we're talking about people trying to initiate a cull of urban foxes here. imagine if someone were to try and kill all Jewish people because they felt wrongly done by a few....

it's madness - this whole thing has gotten well out of hand and it appears a LOT of people are falling into the angry mob trap here (thanks for that Fleet Street). I don;t deny the children are in a bad way from what I've heard, and yes, that is a terrible thing, but there is nothing in this entire story thus far that proves without reasonable doubt that a fox mauled these children. and now, the fox, that apparently just stood in the room staring at the mother when she entered, has suddenly turned into a kidnapping animal!! WTF??? get a grip people - step back and take a good look at what's happening here...

I think, before we start killing innocent animals, we wait for the hard evidence - more than just a womans story, which is what it is at this stage. a court would not throw someone in prison on the same basis. and for those of you who now turn and say 'But these things are vicious animals' well take a good look at what the human race is becoming. you need look no further than this event and in some cases, perhaps this very thread. vicious animals indeed.

---------- Post added at 20:14 ---------- Previous post was at 20:08 ----------



doesn't mean it was a fox though, does it?

what's with comparing this incident with the slaughter of jews ..which you were quite clearly eluding to ...we are not dealing with people here it is a animal that is consistently year in year out becoming more of a pest in urbanised areas ,mostly because humans insist on treating them like pets by feeding them and treating deseases in them

so what do you think it was if it wasn't a fox ? i would appreciate an answer not more tree hugger ramblings

[idi banashapan]

hmm.. i fear my point in it's entirety was lost on you. ho hum...

Originally Posted by martyh

what's with comparing this incident with the slaughter of jews ..which you were quite clearly eluding to

1) the comparison was that we would not accept what people are proposing to do the the foxes, were it done on people. what makes it acceptable to be done on an animal - although in this case, a large group of innocent animals? I believe I am right in saying it was a single fox that did this (according to the media reports). Why need we kill all foxes? much the same as a couple of Jews made one man feel bad, so he decided to try and eradicate them all. same difference.

Originally Posted by martyh

...we are not dealing with people here it is a animal that is consistently year in year out becoming more of a pest in urbanised areas ,mostly because humans insist on treating them like pets by feeding them and treating deseases in them

2) then let's educate the people and not punish the product of their own doing. it's not unlike shooting the messenger, and I'm sure we are all familiar with the saying regarding that. also see point 4 below.

Originally Posted by martyh

so what do you think it was if it wasn't a fox ? i would appreciate an answer not more tree hugger ramblings

3) the whole direction my initial thread was going in is that we do not know for sure what did this to the children, so we shouldn't become to hasty in becoming judge and jury. as I said, you would not sentance a man to prison or death based entirely on one persons story and the result of an event without ensuring you found out the circumstances that actioned the result.

4) This point is merely to get you to read the last paragraph of my post you quoted above regarding becoming vicous blood-thristy animals. now take a step back, and think about what you are saying, should you agree that a cull is in order here. if it still isn't clear, then what I'm am trying to draw attention to is the ironic situation whereby people are calling for a huge cull of innocent (and yes, they are innocent as only one fox allegedly did this) animals they themselves consider blood-thirsty killers.

[Jimmy-J]

A summer night, an open door, and a fox attacks sleeping girl

The family had left open their back door to let in a breeze on a summer night. The idea of London families now having to lock up for fear of attack by a wild animal raised concerns last night.

It is the third time since last summer that a fox has attacked a sleeping child at home in the South East. Urban foxes are believed to have become less wary of humans in the search for food.

No idea if this has already been mentioned, the article from 2003.

Originally Posted by idi banashapan

hmm.. i fear my point in it's entirety was lost on you. ho hum...



1) the comparison was that we would not accept what people are proposing to do the the foxes, were it done on people. what makes it acceptable to be done on an animal - although in this case, a large group of innocent animals? I believe I am right in saying it was a single fox that did this. Why need we kill all foxes? much the same as a couple of Jews made one man feel bad, so he decided to try and eradicate them all. same difference.

who said we need kill all foxes ,not me ...and you now accept that it was a fox



2) then let's educate the people and not punish the product of their own doing. it's not unlike shooting the messenger, and I'm sure we are all familiar with the saying regarding that.


yes educate people that foxes are not sweet cuddly little pets they are oportunist scavengers ,so we must stop feeding them and stop treating them for illness



3) the whole direction my initial thread was going in is that we do not know for sure what did this to the children, so we shouldn't become to hasty in becoming judge and jury. as I said, you would sentance a man to prison or death based entirely on one persons story and the result of an event without ensuring you found out the circumstances that actioned the result.

so now you don't think it was a fox
again you are trying to use human justice on a animal


4) This point is merely to get you to read the last paragraph of my post you quoted above regarding becoming vicous blood-thristy animals. now take a step back, and think about what you are saying, should you agree that a cull is in order here.

i personally don't think a cull is in order i do think that they should not be fed or treated for desease when a member of the public finds a injured or deseased fox it should be put down not restored to health .I have no idea what you are trying to say in the rest of the paragraph re.becoming vicious blood thirsty animals
now could you answer my question ...what do think attacked the babies given that the fox was discovered in the bedroom next to the injured babies with no other animals reported in the house

[idi banashapan]

Originally Posted by martyh

i personally don't think a cull is in order i do think that they should not be fed or treated for desease when a member of the public finds a injured or deseased fox it should be put down not restored to health .I have no idea what you are trying to say in the rest of the paragraph re.becoming vicious blood thirsty animals
now could you answer my question ...what do think attacked the babies given that the fox was discovered in the bedroom next to the injured babies with no other animals reported in the house

I'm afraid you have quoted my post from before I editted it, yet you did post a response well after I editted it. please reread my post from the forum, not an email alert. there is a big gap in time there (17 minutes between my edit and you quoting response).

I'm not making any definitive decision on what caused the injuries because thus far, there is no clear cut evidence that goes beyond circumstancial. however, the reports do point to it being a fox attack. however, I know that as a parent, if I found something attacking my child, I'd kill it myself, yet no attempt appears to have been made to even apprehend the fox, which (depending on which paper you get your info from) was just standing there looking at the mother whilst she screamed. does that not strike you as odd? second to that, there is a photo believed to be the fox that attacked - yet there appears to be no blood on it. odd? and why, if it were scared away by screams and then lots of people, noise and flashing lights, would it come back in the midst of it all and peer through the window? perhaps it was attracted by all the commotion? who knows?

at the end of the day, regardless of how I have worded any responses, I still believe that we should step down from being judge and jury in a situation where there is no proof of it being a fox, regardless of the likelihood and circumstances. it's a dangerous place to stand.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

+ they have a picture of the culprit

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...irls-cots.html

They have a picture of a fox, it has not yet been proved it was the same animal that attacked the children.

Originally Posted by Flyboy

They have a picture of a fox, it has not yet been proved it was the same animal that attacked the children.

If only you gave the Police the same benefit of the doubt.....

[idi banashapan]

I once saw a dead bird laying at the back of my house with the pet dog sniffing it as I walked into the garden. At first, it would be very easy to assume that the dog had somehow managed to catch the bird and kill it. Until I went upstairs and into one of the back bedrooms. Upon looking out the window, I saw an unmistakable bird shape impression. turns out the bird had killed itself by flying into the window and fell to the ground, where I found the dog sniffing it.

jumping to a conclusion could have meant me scolding the dog for something she didn't do. Luckily, I learned many years ago not to take action or pass judgement on something if you don't know the full circumstances surrounding the event. It looked like the dog caught and killed the bird, but I didn't see her do it myself.

I believe others would to well to step back when such drastic 'solutions' are being thrown around. yes, what has happened is terrible. I wouldn't wish it on any family. but we still can;t go round advocating a culling.

[TheDaddy]

Brian May's view

May wrote: "Fox attacks babies? Sure! And monkeys will fly... out of my butt.

Well it might save you from talking out of it

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...-fox-rant.html

---------- Post added at 06:25 ---------- Previous post was at 06:17 ----------

Originally Posted by idi banashapan

but we still can;t go round advocating a culling.

Yes we can

London Mayor Boris Johnson said councils should "focus on their duties for pest control".

Mr Johnson said foxes were a pest and a menace and could in rare circumstances pose a threat to humans, telling reporters: "Therefore it's right that boroughs should focus on their duties for pest control because as romantic and cuddly as a fox is, it is also a pest."

Seem to remember Dave Cameron said something similar the other day to IIRC.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/latest/...5875-22319671/