Bring Back Fox Hunting

Originally Posted by Chris

An activity in which dogs are trained (brutalised) to act contrary to their nature, in unnatural surroundings? I can see what you're trying to do, but you're trying to categorise everything under the heading "sports where animals get hurt" when I would argue "sports where animals do what they do" would be nearer the mark so far as fox hunting is concerned. And dog fighting doesn't fit that category.

I asking more because of the class aspect. There have been suggestions that Fox Hunting was banned partly to spite the people who take part as they are often rural and would be considered members of the upper class. Dog fighting would be an example of a 'sport' that is banned for reasons of animal welfare that would traditionally be seen as a 'working class' pursuit. The comparison isn't exact but I can't help but think that if Fox Hunting was conducted by a bunch of teenagers with a pitbull chasing Foxes though an urban estate it would have been banned sooner than it was. So I don't buy the notion that this was because of the class of the people who did it.

Animals fight, that's natural, but they have a flight response as well as a fight response in any given situation and that it both beaten out of them and also physically barred from them in a fighting pit. Likewise for cock fighting, especially when the birds are tooled up with blades on their feet.

It may not be as cruel but it's still making a sport of animal suffering. It's still somewhat contrived rather than simply being nature in action. Foxhounds tend to be trained for the hunt for example and there would be additional techniques used by the hunters to find and draw out foxes that would not be available to the foxes. So Foxhunting as a sport isn't natural either.

Except, and IMO it's a pretty big exception, the fox can get away. A fighting dog, or a cock, cannot.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Damien

I asking more because of the class aspect. There have been suggestions that Fox Hunting was banned partly to spite the people who take part as they are often rural and would be considered members of the upper class.

Not suggestions, that's exactly what happened, arch buffoon Tony Banks was actually jumping up and down in the commons the night it got banned shouting "that showed the toffs", classy.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Chris

An activity in which dogs are trained (brutalised) to act contrary to their nature, in unnatural surroundings? I can see what you're trying to do, but you're trying to categorise everything under the heading "sports where animals get hurt" when I would argue "sports where animals do what they do" would be nearer the mark so far as fox hunting is concerned. And dog fighting doesn't fit that category.

Animals fight, that's natural, but they have a flight response as well as a fight response in any given situation and that it both beaten out of them and also physically barred from them in a fighting pit. Likewise for cock fighting, especially when the birds are tooled up with blades on their feet.

I might just as well ask if you would seek to ban angling.

Yes i would and is why i do not go fishing.

Fair comment. if you were younger and fitter, would you go angler sabbing? Is there such an activity?

Well at least we don't have the problems our ancestors did seeing as we managed to exterminate all the wolves and bears that once existed.They weren't concerned about preserving animals that were a danger to their communities and their livelihoods.

I'm wondering why foxes weren't exterminated too.Maybe it's something to do with the species ability to adapt to it's environment especially the human settlements.Other species don't seem to have the same adaptability.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Not suggestions, that's exactly what happened, arch buffoon Tony Banks was actually jumping up and down in the commons the night it got banned shouting "that showed the toffs", classy.

Yes but one idiot isn't representative of everybody else.

Originally Posted by Damien

Yes but one idiot isn't representative of everybody else.

I'm sorry Damien but a good many of those that supported the ban weren't thinking of the foxes welfare but of sticking it to the toffs.

I do however support the idea that in the 21st century we can really come up with a far more humane and effective way of controlling foxes.We have no compunction in calling in pest control when we have mice or rats or whatever so why is it different for a fox.Possibly their appearance is what makes some not able to view them as vermin.They look too much like a dog I suppose.

Originally Posted by Maggy J

I'm sorry Damien but a good many of those that supported the ban weren't thinking of the foxes welfare but of sticking it to the toffs.

Some probably yes but not all. Certainly many New Labourites as they were wouldn't have had quite the same animosity to the 'toffs' as Old Labour anyway. Besides it's not help to presume more sinister motivations to your opponents unless it's clear that's what it was. I mean on any issue you can find someone who comes at it from a dark place but we shouldn't make them the focus of the debates.

Originally Posted by Damien

Some probably yes but not all. Certainly many New Labourites as they were wouldn't have had quite the same animosity to the 'toffs' as Old Labour anyway. Besides it's not help to presume more sinister motivations to your opponents unless it's clear that's what it was. I mean on any issue you can find someone who comes at it from a dark place but we shouldn't make them the focus of the debates.

I'm fairly positive there were plenty of old labour masquerading as new labour in the last Government.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by martyh

I'm not going into the ins and outs of setting a snare(it's many years since i did that, and not very successfully then)

Yes, I would avoid the subject too...............if you're obviously wrong.

Originally Posted by Pierre

Yes, I would avoid the subject too...............if you're obviously wrong.

No because it's pointless and off topic and quite frankly i don't give a toss .Fox hunting in the barbaric traditional way is banned ,every argument that pro hunters put forward has been trashed and proven wrong .There is no coherent argument to bring it back and it will never happen

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by martyh

No because it's pointless and off topic and quite frankly i don't give a toss .Fox hunting in the barbaric. ***emotive bollocks alert*** traditional way is banned ,every argument that pro hunters put forward has been trashed and proven wrong .There is no coherent argument to bring it back and it will never happen

I'm not pro- hunting. It's irrelevant to me as it not a past time I am involved in.

However, I'm just pointing out what is more "barbaric" being killed instantaneously by a pack of dogs. Or being trapped for up to to 72 hrs and then shot in the head.

Also if I wanted to be emotive.................

[PISCES]

Originally Posted by Chris

The problem is, the simple, straightforward version of the hunt remains illegal, due to an illiberal piece of legislation that took up mountains more parliamentary time than it was worth, and animal "rights" activists are using that legislation as an excuse to engage in surveillance in an attempt to criminalise ordinary people for pursuing a pastime they previously did legally, as did generations of their ancestors. That, incidentally, includes the RSPCA, which is increasingly throwing hundreds of thousands of pounds raised by ordinary, well-meaning animal lovers in politically-motivated prosecutions, many of which have been so incompetently brought that they are failing in any case.

The fox hunting ban is very difficult to prosecute under, has not reduced fox killings and has not reduced hunt participation. It is bad law. Bad law has no place on the statute book.

Is that what you really think it is all about?(pursuing a pastime) and once again like many more like you, money comes into it!!

---------- Post added at 23:59 ---------- Previous post was at 23:39 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

I'm not pro- hunting. It's irrelevant to me as it not a past time I am involved in.

However, I'm just pointing out what is more "barbaric" being killed instantaneously by a pack of dogs. Or being trapped for up to to 72 hrs and then shot in the head.

Also if I wanted to be emotive.................

Pierre from dare me finks

---------- Post added 14-07-2013 at 00:06 ---------- Previous post was 13-07-2013 at 23:59 ----------

Surely you can't class fox hunters as 'ordinary people'!

---------- Post added at 00:37 ---------- Previous post was at 00:06 ----------

Fox Hunters defined in an ordinary world!

Originally Posted by Pierre

I'm not pro- hunting. It's irrelevant to me as it not a past time I am involved in.

However, I'm just pointing out what is more "barbaric" being killed instantaneously by a pack of dogs. Or being trapped for up to to 72 hrs and then shot in the head.

Also if I wanted to be emotive.................

How the hell is being chased to exhaustion and then torn apart instantaneous??,and as for my use of "emotive bollocks" then yes rubbing the blood of the dead fox across someones face is barbaric and shows fox hunting for what it is ,pure entertainment.I agree that snaring isn't ideal but if it is done well then there is less suffering .