Guest MattP Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Like I said, thick. Not sure if you are trolling as you seem to be doing a lot of this recently but do you seriously believe the millions of people who engage in this or support it are just "thick" as you put it? It's clearly an absolutely ridiculous thing to suggest given some of the people who do support it are among the brightest brains in the country. Just calling people stupid because they don't share your viewpoint on something isn't really going to help your own cause. Surely you have learnt this by now?
westernpark Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Its not just animal management though. If people just wanted to limit the fox population and keep them away from farms then I'm sure they would look to more humane methods. How killing foxes be viewed as a sport in today's society in disturbing. In some parts of the country since the ban, the fox population has decreased due to the population of foxes being unhealthy. Hunting only gets the weak or stupid foxes. It's part of our heritage and how people can make a fuss one measily fox, when a man paraded the ISIS flag outside Big Ben is beyond me.
Wymsey Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Don't care if someone thinks that I'm sick/disgusting/vile/one of a kind/coward because I'm slightly for the return of fox-hunting (with credible reasons). If someone like Webbo doesn't like this and deletes this post in disgust, then so be it but there's always a 'yes' or 'no' to every debate going: 1.) It had been around for hundreds of years; it's for country-people, who many probably have had issues with their own animal being killed by certain foxes. Hence foxes need to be controlled, as they've been known for many farm business lose revenue on the poultry etc part of their firm's activities. 2.) Fox-hunting = humane (like any other hunting); however, it has to be with the right TYPE of breed - that is hounds. Hounds, if and when trained properly, are experts in this type of activity as they can trap the weaker foxes (i.e. those that do the most destruction) and leave the healthier foxes to face winter conditions and breed. If fox-hunting was to be reinstated, which is VERY unlikely to happen i agree, then hounds are the best again for this hunting type as they do work much faster without the need for trapping or shooting. A good question here: how many of the rejections of fox-hunting was because so many foxes were beheaded etc due to this activity? Answer: not many imo, as hounds aren't as destructive as other dog types that have been involved in fox-hunting too.
Finnegan Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Not sure if you are trolling as you seem to be doing a lot of this recently but do you seriously believe the millions of people who engage in this or support it are just "thick" as you put it? It's clearly an absolutely ridiculous thing to suggest given some of the people who do support it are among the brightest brains in the country. Just calling people stupid because they don't share your viewpoint on something isn't really going to help your own cause. Surely you have learnt this by now? Not all of them are stupid, no. Plenty of them are just simply barbaric. I'm being fairly flippant because we literally did have this debate a couple of weeks ago in general chat, I wrote a number of fairly lengthy posts and can't be arsed to repeat myself. Especially given I was given absolutely no intelligent counter arguments from yourself or anyone else. When put on the spot, very few people can justify their support for a primitive blood sport without admitting they simply enjoy animal cruelty. I eat meat, I'm fairly pro-hunting if you're going to eat and use what you kill yourself. I'm even fairly open to population control if it's a genuine issue. Pro-hunt supporters are used to arguing the toss with soft vegan hippies or militant tree huggers and I'm neither. Fox hunting is none of the above, it's just torturing a creature for kicks. That's what I object to.
Mark_w Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 how people can make a fuss one measily fox, when a man paraded the ISIS flag outside Big Ben is beyond me. That is just the worst argument ever. The fact that there are evil people out there treating humans badly does not excuse evil people treating animals badly. You'd hope that our government is capable of multi-tasking.
SomalianFox15 Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 In some parts of the country since the ban, the fox population has decreased due to the population of foxes being unhealthy. Hunting only gets the weak or stupid foxes. It's part of our heritage and how people can make a fuss one measily fox, when a man paraded the ISIS flag outside Big Ben is beyond me. What's ISIS got to do with it? Of course they're a bigger issue than fox hunting. In my opinion fox hunting and the people who take part in it are stuck in the past and need to realise that fox hunting is no longer acceptable in the present day. If the fox population needs to be controlled then we should look to alternative methods other than hunting them down on horseback and sending dogs after them.
MPH Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 If they're killing Farmer's chickens, sheep etc, I'm all for it - they're a threat for Farmers in terms of them losing money/productivity. However, it's like dealing mice and rats; pain in the backsides to tempt people to kill them, but their levels can't be controlled and just have to live with it. Its a myth that fox hunting is the solution to any fox issue. Before the ban, ten times more foxes were shot than were killed by fox hunting. Give the farmer the right to shoot a fox because its after his lifestock? Absolutely. Even set up a county council team to come deal with them? Definitely Allow a fox to be chased to the point of exhaustion and be ripped to shreds whilst still alive? Barbaric.
The Doctor Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 In some parts of the country since the ban, the fox population has decreased due to the population of foxes being unhealthy. Hunting only gets the weak or stupid foxes. It's part of our heritage and how people can make a fuss one measily fox, when a man paraded the ISIS flag outside Big Ben is beyond me. So was slavery, witch hunting and feudalism; but they've all been left in the past where they belong
westernpark Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 That is just the worst argument ever. The fact that there are evil people out there treating humans badly does not excuse evil people treating animals badly. You'd hope that our government is capable of multi-tasking. The point I'm going for is not the government doing something, but why aren't we seeing the same numbers of the general public protesting against that.
Finnegan Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Here we go, merge with this please? http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/100612-a-little-close-to-home-fox-hunting-petition
Mark_w Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 The point I'm going for is not the government doing something, but why aren't we seeing the same numbers of the general public protesting against that. I think it's pretty obvious to everyone that the public is against ISIS. The reason there isn't the same pressure on the government is that the government is also clearly anti-ISIS. If the Conservatives were going 'Nah nothing wrong with ISIS, they've got some sound policies' I assure you there would be protests (and there are anyway). Whereas most of the British people are against Fox hunting, but the Conservative party is pro-Fox hunting, so we feel we need to protest to stop the repeal of this ban.
westernpark Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 I think it's pretty obvious to everyone that the public is against ISIS. The reason there isn't the same pressure on the government is that the government is also clearly anti-ISIS. If the Conservatives were going 'Nah nothing wrong with ISIS, they've got some sound policies' I assure you there would be protests (and there are anyway). Whereas most of the British people are against Fox hunting, but the Conservative party is pro-Fox hunting, so we feel we need to protest to stop the repeal of this ban. However, really they've not done much to combat ISIS. If the same amount of public pressure was applied, things might be different.
Ollie93 Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 However, really they've not done much to combat ISIS. If the same amount of public pressure was applied, things might be different. What do you suggest? We all get on horse back, ride to Tunisia/Syria with hounds, chase the ISIS members down and let the dogs rip them to shreds? Population control at it's finest there.
Guest MattP Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 I think it's pretty obvious to everyone that the public is against ISIS. The reason there isn't the same pressure on the government is that the government is also clearly anti-ISIS. If the Conservatives were going 'Nah nothing wrong with ISIS, they've got some sound policies' I assure you there would be protests (and there are anyway). Whereas most of the British people are against Fox hunting, but the Conservative party is pro-Fox hunting, so we feel we need to protest to stop the repeal of this ban. You do understand they do have to have this vote though at some point? If was part of their manifesto and political parties should abide by that, they have to be held to account for what they promised when they were voted in whether you disagree with it or not. As I've said though, I still don't see any sort of "yes" coming out of this as it will be a free vote, they'll be upto 100 Tory MP's saying "No" and probably only a handful of Labour MP's saying "Yes". No way will they get it past even with the SNP abstaining.
Finnegan Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 What do you suggest? We all get on horse back, ride to Tunisia/Syria with hounds, chase the ISIS members down and let the dogs rip them to shreds? Population control at it's finest there. Now this I'd be fine with.
RonnieTodger Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 What if the person shooting the fox enjoys it? Then they're a bit weird
Webbo Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 If someone like Webbo doesn't like this and deletes this post in disgust, then so be it but there's always a 'yes' or 'no' to every debate going: Don't you start. I've never deleted a post just because I disagreed with it. (btw, I agree with you anyway) Here we go, merge with this please? http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/100612-a-little-close-to-home-fox-hunting-petition I don't have the power to merge or I'd have done it this morning.
Guest Bilo Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 They stil won't get the vote through anyway, loads of Tories will be voting against the proposal, surely they realise this? You almost wonder whether Cameron set this vote up to catch the SNP out as liars and prove his point we need a law to create English only votes. I wondered that too. This is what I meant in May by the SNP being out-thought by the Tories - this is exactly the kind of trap a keen-to-make-a-stand SNP were always likely to fall into. The first trap's been laid, the SNP have thrown themselves into it and the SNP's influence could be adversely affected over the next few months.
Guest Bilo Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 All that being said though, I'm delighted that fox hunting is to remain banned. It's a brutal, barbaric past time that belongs in the history books along with bear bating and dog fighting. Had Parliament voted for a relaxation or repeal, there is no way we could ever criticise the Spanish for their love of stabbing cows. The main problem I see at the moment is lack of enforcement with regard to the law, a problem that may get worse with lack of funding to police in rural areas.
Guest MattP Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 I wondered that too. This is what I meant in May by the SNP being out-thought by the Tories - this is exactly the kind of trap a keen-to-make-a-stand SNP were always likely to fall into. The first trap's been laid, the SNP have thrown themselves into it and the SNP's influence could be adversely affected over the next few months. Quite ironic really, Cameron "flushes out" the Scottish fox.
Rincewind Posted 15 July 2015 Posted 15 July 2015 Just saw something funny. I think cameron has lost his marbles. It was from one of the Dailys. Cameron has had a go at Sturgeon (SNP) for voting against Foxhunting and ensuring the ban stays and says SNP should not vote on it as it only affects England. Well the last time I looked Scotland was part of the United Kingdom and they do actually have foxes in Scotland. I also believe there is alo deer hunting there. On the isles croft owners are allowed to shoot foxes that trespass onto their land. So Cameron on this occasion is talking bolloxs IMHO. Sorry to all those that think the sun shines out of his backside but he has done himself no favours by antagnosing many who live north of the border.
Darkon84 Posted 15 July 2015 Posted 15 July 2015 Just saw something funny. I think cameron has lost his marbles. It was from one of the Dailys. Cameron has had a go at Sturgeon (SNP) for voting against Foxhunting and ensuring the ban stays and says SNP should not vote on it as it only affects England. Well the last time I looked Scotland was part of the United Kingdom and they do actually have foxes in Scotland. I also believe there is alo deer hunting there. On the isles croft owners are allowed to shoot foxes that trespass onto their land. So Cameron on this occasion is talking bolloxs IMHO. Sorry to all those that think the sun shines out of his backside but he has done himself no favours by antagnosing many who live north of the border. The Scottish, using their own Parliament in 2002 implemented their own version of a hunting ban, before anywhere else in the United Kingdom. To my knowledge, a handful of their permitted hunts are still allowed to use hounds in order to flush the fox out, to then be shot, rather than the dogs finishing the kill. The recent vote in question was to bring English laws in line with that, rather than to fully allow fox hunting again. So, in fact, this was not a Scottish vote, and considering that time after time, the SNP have said they will NOT get involved in English only matters, they've gone and stuck their noses in where it doesn't belong, and so, showing themselves up. Therefore, Cameron is right to have a pop at Sturgeon and the SNP, and has not, as you say, 'lost his marbles'. It was never going to get passed anyway, even without the SNP getting involved. It's probably worked out well, as the SNP have made themselves look like fools once again.
Buce Posted 15 July 2015 Posted 15 July 2015 'The unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible.' Oscar Wilde.
Darkon84 Posted 15 July 2015 Posted 15 July 2015 'The unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible.' Oscar Wilde. Oh god, I know what you mean.... Vegetarians in pursuit of brussel sprouts and turnips. It's just plain wrong!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.