Sex God
So 250,000 people are going to hunt within the law. That looks to me like the Law is working as intended.
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Morals
last reply
152 replies
5.3k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Sex God
Quote by Trevaunance
So 250,000 people are going to hunt within the law. That looks to me like the Law is working as intended.
Yes I agree, to a point
this may be easyer to read/follow
Drag / Trail hunting
A number of hunts are drag or trail hunting. This normally involves a quad bike with a drag (normally a sock) tied to the back being pulled along the ground. Drag / trails can also be laid by a rider or a person on foot pulling the drag (sock)
The sock ideally needs to be put into liquid (for example, boiled foxes or artificial scent) a number of times during a hunting day to be any use as a drag, this is because the scent will fade after a short while.
Flushing to Gun
Some hunts are using a piece of the legislation that allows no more than two dogs to flush a deer, fox or hare to guns.
The dogs cannot chase or kill the animal. The animal must be shot by a competent marksman.
Using a bird of prey
A number of hunts have adopted the loophole of using a bird of prey.
This means if a hunt were to take a bird of prey out hunting with them, they can use as many dogs as they wish to flush out a deer, fox or hare to the waiting bird of prey.
The bird of prey can legally kill the animal but if the hounds were to do so it could be illegal hunting.
Sex God
Well you're not gonna do it with a kestrel Robbo sure but quite easy really. Attack squadron of Sea Eagles is all you need, more than up to it. What you do is, you send just a couple of 'em in first to perch on its antlers. That'll weigh its head down a bit, what with 'em being the biggest birds of prey in the UK and all, and they can peck at its eyes a bit for an added distraction. Then, while its busy tossing its antlers about trying to get the buggers off and not looking about so much the rest of the flight steam in. Like being hit by a train is a full complement of Sea Eagles at full tilt mate I assure you. Knock the wind right of it. Then, once it's down trying to catch its breath rest of the job's easy innit, all over in seconds. What are you, some kinda townie or summink that you didn't know this? Country ways Robbo, country ways fella.
Quote by Bluefish2009
Out of the predicted 250,000 people that you are saying will be hunting with hounds on Boxing day, how many will be carrying out legal hunts?
I only ask because hunting a scent is allowed is it not?
It is not illegal to hunt an unspecified mammal provided you don't catch it
You may hunt on private land
you may hunt an animal you release yourself
These are forms of legal hunting with hounds
Are you in the belief that 250,000 people will ride horses and hunt with hounds to catch and kill a Fox in direct contravention of the Law? or will they stay within it and legally hunt?
They will hunt within the law
Trail hunting is permitted, where an artificial trail is laid and the hunt follow that, one obvious problem with this is no one knows if the hounds are following the laid artificial scent or have crossed the path of a live fox, until its too late. In these circumstances the hunts man must do his utmost to stop the kill.
On that note, had the persons on the video been doing so when the footage was taken there probably would have been no case to answer.
There are other exemptions from the ban;
Rats and rabbits are exempt from the
Hunting Act. Permission of the landowner
or occupier is required to hunt them
Any number of dogs may be used (with
permission of the landowner or occupier)
to hunt a hare that has been shot.
Flushing of Mammals The Act allows dogs to
be used for stalking and flushing of wild mammals,
subject to a number of restrictions. No more
that 2 dogs may be used to "stalk or flush" a
wild mammal from cover for defined purposes.
? The protection of game birds, wild birds,
fisheries, crops and livestock; obtaining meat;
and field trials.
? To qualify as exempt, the above activities
must always be done with the permission of
the owner or occupier of the land and
“reasonable steps must be taken for the
purpose of ensuring that as soon as possible
after being found, or flushed, the wild
mammal is shot dead by a competent
person.” (Competent person is undefined
in the Act).
? Each dog used in the stalking or flushing out
must be kept under sufficiently close control
to ensure that it does not prevent or
obstruct the shooting of the mammal in
question.
? A single dog may be used below ground to
“stalk or flush” a wild mammal for the sole
purpose of preventing or reducing serious
damage to game birds or wild birds being
kept or preserved for shooting. In this case,
the person using the dog must carry written
permission (or evidence that he himself is
the landowner), which he must produce if
asked by a exemption also
requires that all the following conditions
are met:
? Reasonable steps are taken for the purpose
of ensuring that as soon as possible after
being found the wild mammal is flushed
out from below ground.
? Reasonable steps are taken for the purpose
of ensuring that as soon as possible after
being flushed out from below ground the
wild mammal is shot dead by a competent
person.
? In particular, the dog is brought under
sufficiently close control to ensure that it
does not prevent or obstruct the mammal
being shot.
Bollix!
I own 3 Beagles and a Fox plus a Puggle!, whilst it's in their nature to " sniff" and rule out Foxes/Rabbits , etc. all 5 live in harmony!
I own purely for the pleasure of having 5 loyal animals that show afffection and I to return that loyalty too each of them!
Paddy
Sex God
Quote by Bluefish2009
Trail hunting is permitted, where an artificial trail is laid and the hunt follow that, one obvious problem with this is no one knows if the hounds are following the laid artificial scent or have crossed the path of a live fox, until its too late. In these circumstances the hunts man must do his utmost to stop the kill.
On that note, had the persons on the video been doing so when the footage was taken there probably would have been no case to answer.
Probably is a loose word, but we all know there is a lot of ambiguity in the law. I havent viewed the footage, but your saying the huntsman didn't do his job?
And your still defending them?
There are other exemptions from the ban;
Quote by Bluefish2009
Rats and rabbits etc are
not actually what we are talking about and therefore irrelevant
and to save me quoting you several times neither are birds, hares, flushing, game birds, wild birds.
Finally many of your references refer to 'being shot by a competent person'. Do many huntsmen shout 'Tally ho' with a shot gun under their arm? I ask because the traditional image is that hounds do the killing not a shotgun.
Hunting within the law? So these people go out with their hounds and chase what scent exactly again? Then oh dear the hounds pick up a fox scent. The hounds follow the scent and then the fox. Oh dear too late as the hounds have now found the fox, and are ripping it to pieces whilst still alive.
Sorry Mr policeman and Mr Judge. We were trying to hunt within the law but could not get to that poor fox on time. What a load of fucking crap. You know it blue and so does everyone else. Trying to be smart arses seems to be working very well for the rich huntsmen to getting around the law, and the law seems to be allowing this law breaking to continue with impunity.
For the law to work these hunts themselves need to be banned. The use of hounds should be banned also. The reason this law is not working as was intended by the likes of the RSPCA, is that it is being openly broken and then pathetic excuses made to evade prosecution.
I hope they fall off their horses, and what happens when you fall onto your neck sometimes?
Sorry Mr policeman and Mr Judge. We were trying to hunt within the law but could not get to that poor fox on time. What a load of fucking crap. You know it blue and so does everyone else. Trying to be smart arses seems to be working very well for the rich huntsmen to getting around the law, and the law seems to be allowing this law breaking to continue with impunity.
For the law to work these hunts themselves need to be banned. The use of hounds should be banned also. The reason this law is not working as was intended by the likes of the RSPCA, is that it is being openly broken and then pathetic excuses made to evade prosecution.
I hope they fall off their horses, and what happens when you fall onto your neck sometimes?
Sex God
Quote by Paddy
Out of the predicted 250,000 people that you are saying will be hunting with hounds on Boxing day, how many will be carrying out legal hunts?
I only ask because hunting a scent is allowed is it not?
It is not illegal to hunt an unspecified mammal provided you don't catch it
You may hunt on private land
you may hunt an animal you release yourself
These are forms of legal hunting with hounds
Are you in the belief that 250,000 people will ride horses and hunt with hounds to catch and kill a Fox in direct contravention of the Law? or will they stay within it and legally hunt?
They will hunt within the law
Trail hunting is permitted, where an artificial trail is laid and the hunt follow that, one obvious problem with this is no one knows if the hounds are following the laid artificial scent or have crossed the path of a live fox, until its too late. In these circumstances the hunts man must do his utmost to stop the kill.
On that note, had the persons on the video been doing so when the footage was taken there probably would have been no case to answer.
There are other exemptions from the ban;
...................................................
? In particular, the dog is brought under
sufficiently close control to ensure that it
does not prevent or obstruct the mammal
being shot.
Bollix!
I own 3 Beagles and a Fox plus a Puggle!, whilst it's in their nature to " sniff" and rule out Foxes/Rabbits , etc. all 5 live in harmony!
I own purely for the pleasure of having 5 loyal animals that show afffection and I to return that loyalty too each of them!
Paddy
Bollix to what? its a list of exemptions from the hunting act
(many of which I have cut to save space)
Sex God
Quote by Trevaunance
Trail hunting is permitted, where an artificial trail is laid and the hunt follow that, one obvious problem with this is no one knows if the hounds are following the laid artificial scent or have crossed the path of a live fox, until its too late. In these circumstances the hunts man must do his utmost to stop the kill.
On that note, had the persons on the video been doing so when the footage was taken there probably would have been no case to answer.
Probably is a loose word, but we all know there is a lot of ambiguity in the law. I havent viewed the footage, but your saying the huntsman didn't do his job?
And your still defending them?
There are other exemptions from the ban;
Quote by Bluefish2009
Rats and rabbits etc are
not actually what we are talking about and therefore irrelevant
and to save me quoting you several times neither are birds, hares, flushing, game birds, wild birds.
Finally many of your references refer to 'being shot by a competent person'. Do many huntsmen shout 'Tally ho' with a shot gun under their arm? I ask because the traditional image is that hounds do the killing not a shotgun.
Not watched the video my self, only know what other have said, sounds to me they have were encouraging the hounds rather than trying to call them off. Probably is a loose word.
To my knowledge, no where have I defended them or there actions
You asked was there exemption, I supplied them
Foxes can be flushed to waiting guns by no more than two hounds
Stag hunting has always ended by the stag being shot, never by a kill by the hounds
It would be illegal to permit the hounds to kill, must be done with a gun, not normally the huntsman
Sex God
Quote by starlightcouple
Hunting within the law? So these people go out with their hounds and chase what scent exactly again? Then oh dear the hounds pick up a fox scent. The hounds follow the scent and then the fox. Oh dear too late as the hounds have now found the fox, and are ripping it to pieces whilst still alive.
Sorry Mr policeman and Mr Judge. We were trying to hunt within the law but could not get to that poor fox on time. What a load of fucking crap. You know it blue and so does everyone else. Trying to be smart arses seems to be working very well for the rich huntsmen to getting around the law, and the law seems to be allowing this law breaking to continue with impunity.
For the law to work these hunts themselves need to be banned. The use of hounds should be banned also. The reason this law is not working as was intended by the likes of the RSPCA, is that it is being openly broken and then pathetic excuses made to evade prosecution.
I hope they fall off their horses, and what happens when you fall onto your neck sometimes?
As far as I am aware most hunts will be acting within the law :thumbup:
If the law is not working as intended that will surely be down to those who wrote the law, the law makers will be the ones at fault
Actually to a point I agree Star, I would say this however, one of two things should happen, either an outright ban or no ban at all, one or the other.
You use some very emotive words star, like, "ripping it to pieces whilst still alive", every thing that is killed, is killed while it is alive. Hunting foxes with hounds is almost certainly the least cruel way of killing a fox, the fact is you just do not see the other method employed. For instance, shooting a fox with birdshot at the wrong distance is perfectly legal, but far more cruel than hunting with hounds. Hunting with hounds is selective and non wounding, ie the fox either lives or dies, never ever wounded
Dr Fox's study involved 199 shooters in England, Scotland and Wales shooting at 1,970 paper foxes. While the best guns wounded one fox for every 10 killed, others --- even when adhering to government guidelines --- wounded 13 for every 10 killed. Worse still, guns who did not follow guidelines (which are not mandatory) wounded up to 10 times more foxes.
From here,
Foxes: Morgan (2000), in his submission to the Inquiry, from records over the last few years, estimated that, for a Welsh gun pack using hounds to drive foxes towards waiting shotguns, around 15-20% of foxes were wounded and not killed outright. (personal communication), using data from a variety of sources, has estimated of the 135,000 foxes shot annually in the UK as many as 40% are wounded. What percentage of foxes that are shot, escape wounded and are not dispatched, is uncertain. In the case of a gun pack the majority will be caught since hounds are available to follow up and kill wounded foxes. But in the case of lamping, which happens at night and does not involve hounds, none will be followed up.
Blue I personally would say ban it all, lock stock and every stinking huntsman.
It is barbaric that people still get a kick out of doing this.
The law is being openly broken Blue every weekend as well you know. I was not aware that hunting had not been banned totally, but these people are being allowed to push the boundaries of the law, and if the RSPCA are not prepared to stop them, who the fuck will? Certainly not the police it seems, or the public prosecutors or indeed the Government.
So who exactly are these people responsible too? One hunt fined at a huge cost of and yet many other hunts go unstopped or unchecked. It is about time that the police stepped in and arrested anyone hunting via a pack of rabid dogs, and even more rabid toffy nose hunters on horses. Where the fuck are the police? Maybe the next hunt I should take a black friend of mine along and get him to phone the police to say one of these huntsmen had racially abused him. Fuck all weekend leave would be cancelled and police cars would turn up in their tens. :twisted: Now that would be a fact, as political correctness runs the police nowadays.
It is barbaric that people still get a kick out of doing this.
The law is being openly broken Blue every weekend as well you know. I was not aware that hunting had not been banned totally, but these people are being allowed to push the boundaries of the law, and if the RSPCA are not prepared to stop them, who the fuck will? Certainly not the police it seems, or the public prosecutors or indeed the Government.
So who exactly are these people responsible too? One hunt fined at a huge cost of and yet many other hunts go unstopped or unchecked. It is about time that the police stepped in and arrested anyone hunting via a pack of rabid dogs, and even more rabid toffy nose hunters on horses. Where the fuck are the police? Maybe the next hunt I should take a black friend of mine along and get him to phone the police to say one of these huntsmen had racially abused him. Fuck all weekend leave would be cancelled and police cars would turn up in their tens. :twisted: Now that would be a fact, as political correctness runs the police nowadays.
And a utterly defenseless fox.
Now imagine a pack of rabid dogs onto one defenseless fox. How sportsman like and utterly fecking fair eh?
How can we as a civilised society allow this barbaric act to continue virtually unchecked? I am seriously because of this thread about to contact the league of cruel sports to offer a small donation to their cause, as I already subscribe via a direct debit of £5 every month to the RSPCA.
Sex God
Quote by starlightcouple
Blue I personally would say ban it all, lock stock and every stinking huntsman.
It is barbaric that people still get a kick out of doing this.
The law is being openly broken Blue every weekend as well you know. I was not aware that hunting had not been banned totally, but these people are being allowed to push the boundaries of the law, and if the RSPCA are not prepared to stop them, who the fuck will? Certainly not the police it seems, or the public prosecutors or indeed the Government.
So who exactly are these people responsible too? One hunt fined at a huge cost of and yet many other hunts go unstopped or unchecked. It is about time that the police stepped in and arrested anyone hunting via a pack of rabid dogs, and even more rabid toffy nose hunters on horses. Where the fuck are the police? Maybe the next hunt I should take a black friend of mine along and get him to phone the police to say one of these huntsmen had racially abused him. Fuck all weekend leave would be cancelled and police cars would turn up in their tens. :twisted: Now that would be a fact, as political correctness runs the police nowadays.
What is barbaric, in my humble view, is to ban the most humane method of control. To call hunting barbaric, is to totally misunderstand wildlife. Wild animals do not live in a civilised society, and the fact you put them there in your mind do them no favours whatsoever. It demonstrates a profound ignorance of the true role of hunting in wild life management and animal welfare.
Leaving the stinking huntsmen, and the rabid dogs
to one side to for the moment, what we should be thinking of is the welfare of the fox, and not any pre-conceved prejudices people may have about the huntaman. The foxes welfare would be best served with the continuation of hunting with hounds, the only selective, non wounding method of control available Sex God
Quote by starlightcouple
A rabid dog looks no different to another dog going for the kill.
And a utterly defenseless fox.
Now imagine a pack of rabid dogs onto one defenseless fox. How sportsman like and utterly fecking fair eh?
How can we as a civilised society allow this barbaric act to continue virtually unchecked? I am seriously because of this thread about to contact the league of cruel sports to offer a small donation to their cause, as I already subscribe via a direct debit of £5 every month to the RSPCA.
Of coarse you must support the cause you feel is correct, no matter how miss-guided you may be in the choice
Perhaps you would prefer these legal methods of control??
Mod edit: The following links contain material which users may find distressing.
Snaring, indiscriminate, may catch fox, badger, cat, or any other animal passing by. A very slow miserable death I would imagine, some chewing there own legs of to ex-scape, and all perfectly legal. You may fool your self into thinking the haunting act is about cruelty but if it was this and many other activity's would have been looked at.
Blue showing those ' other ' pictures is of course deeply upsetting to an animal lover like myself. The common denominator in all of this? Mankind, and what a horrid species we are most of the time.
Mankind will surely destroy itself at some point in the future, as sure as this planet is being destroyed. I genuinely would rather buy another dog than to have another friend. The worst animal on this planet is the most intelligent and yet they are the worst species here on planet Earth by a million miles.
Mankind will surely destroy itself at some point in the future, as sure as this planet is being destroyed. I genuinely would rather buy another dog than to have another friend. The worst animal on this planet is the most intelligent and yet they are the worst species here on planet Earth by a million miles.
Sex God
Quote by flower411
I think that the point here blue is that people are upset that pest control has evolved into a pursuit that others enjoy. They are unable to grasp that the hunt itself is the enjoyable part and not the kill.
They would prefer any amount of pain and suffering for the animals just as long as nobody is enjoying themselves.
I see what your saying flower, seems some how short sighted to me. Hunting is a combination of recreation, wildlife management and pest control and should be judged solely on what is best for the welfare of the quarry species not by misguided social or moral prejudices. The recreational element of hunting is irrelevant to the central issue of animal welfare, except in so much as it happens to be what pays for this particular method of humane control. The followers, who would rarely have been at the kill, are there to follow the hunt and a wild goose chase across open country, they pay for the privilege and there for pay the huntsman to preform his pest control duty's. For the huntsman it is just a job, like any pest control job.
Is there more morality in shooting, wounding a fox, snaring a fox and letting it die a slow death, I believe the difference to be that the people who scream and shout about hunting never see the other methods, and therefore do not have to care about it. What the eye don't see the heart cant grieve about
Sex God
Quote by starlightcouple
Blue showing those ' other ' pictures is of course deeply upsetting to an animal lover like myself. The common denominator in all of this? Mankind, and what a horrid species we are most of the time.
Mankind will surely destroy itself at some point in the future, as sure as this planet is being destroyed. I genuinely would rather buy another dog than to have another friend. The worst animal on this planet is the most intelligent and yet they are the worst species here on planet Earth by a million miles.
firstly my intention was not to upset, but to enlighten. sorry if that was the result.
I will not dissagree with any of what you right above star, the thing I was try to say is that the hunting act was notheing to do with animal welfare, it does nothing for foxes welfare at all, only leave those with the job of pest control less options for a humane way of control.
An iteresting snippet bellow;
Hunting with hounds was much reduced during World War 2, with the result that
shooting increased and with it an inevitable increase in wounding. In the late 1940s, the
abolition of hunting was on the newly-elected Labour government’s agenda, but there was
considerable concern over the numbers of wounded foxes. The government set up the
Committee on Cruelty to Wild Animals (known as the Scott Henderson Committee) and its
conclusions to retain hunting with dogs were accepted by the RSPCA because of the
suffering caused by alternative methods of control. The welfare benefits of hunting are
as true today as when the RSPCA endorsed them in their submission to the Scott Henderson Inquiry in 1951. Nothing has changed since except the politics of the RSPCA.
Sex God
Quote by Bluefish2009
Not watched the video my self, only know what other have said, sounds to me they have were encouraging the hounds rather than trying to call them off.
Blue I find in incredible that you have not seen this video. Do you often post links to videos you haven't seen or was this a special one off case?
Quote by Bluefish2009
To my knowledge, no where have I defended them or there actions
It is my understanding that in every debate there is a for and against. In this debate you are most definitely for fox hunting with dogs, and most definitely against the rule of law.
Quote by Bluefish2009
You asked was there exemption, I supplied them
Quote by Trevaunance
I only ask because hunting a scent is allowed is it not?
It is not illegal to hunt an unspecified mammal provided you don't catch it
You may hunt on private land
you may hunt an animal you release yourself
These are forms of legal hunting with hounds
One rhetorical question. I did not ask for exemptions, please don't put words in my mouth. I did however provide examples of legal ways of hunting that the criminals should have stuck too in the first place.
Quote by Bluefish2009
Foxes can be flushed to waiting guns by no more than two hounds
As I said before flushing is irrelevant to this debate, but seeing as you keep mentioning it: The Hunting Act 2004, C37, Section 2, Schedule 1, Para 1, sub para 5 does state 'the stalking or flushing out does not involve the use of more than two dogs.' However that is only one of the five conditions for mammal hunting. It is not as clear cut as just that one line suggests.
Quote by Bluefish2009
Stag hunting has always ended by the stag being shot, never by a kill by the hounds
What does stag hunting have to do with this? We are talking about fox hunting, as well you know.
Quote by Bluefish2009
It would be illegal to permit the hounds to kill, must be done with a gun, not normally the huntsman
So if it isn't one of the hunters shooting the animal who is it? A passing Japanese tourist perhaps????
Sex God
Lot of questions there Trevaunance, I will try to answer as best I can
1) I posted the thread not about fox hunting, but the morality of what the RSPC had spent there money on, little point in watching the video, the judge did that and made his judgement on them, the link was to a newspaper report that just happened to have an video embedded.
2) To disagree with a law is very different than breaking it
3)Sorry, I must have miss-read this as "Are there other exemption", my apology's;
3) The flushing of foxes to gun packs is being used in areas, how legal that is, is not for me to say but a judge. Terriers may also be used to flush foxes from below ground to be shot but only to protect game birds that are being preserved to be shot.
4) Stag hunting; Although staghunting, as it was practised, was banned by the the Hunting Act 2004, the D.S.S.H, with the support of the farmers and landowners of the moor have continued to meet 3 times a week during the season to manage the deer on their behalf, monitoring the numbers, distribution and health of the herd and operating within the restrictions imposed by the act. The hunt has also continued to provide a very efficient 24hrs casualty service to locate any sick and injured deer.
5) As I said it would not be the Huntsman who shot any animal
1) I posted the thread not about fox hunting, but the morality of what the RSPC had spent there money on, little point in watching the video, the judge did that and made his judgement on them, the link was to a newspaper report that just happened to have an video embedded.
2) To disagree with a law is very different than breaking it
3)Sorry, I must have miss-read this as "Are there other exemption", my apology's;
Quote by Trevaunance
There are other exemptions from the ban;
3) The flushing of foxes to gun packs is being used in areas, how legal that is, is not for me to say but a judge. Terriers may also be used to flush foxes from below ground to be shot but only to protect game birds that are being preserved to be shot.
4) Stag hunting; Although staghunting, as it was practised, was banned by the the Hunting Act 2004, the D.S.S.H, with the support of the farmers and landowners of the moor have continued to meet 3 times a week during the season to manage the deer on their behalf, monitoring the numbers, distribution and health of the herd and operating within the restrictions imposed by the act. The hunt has also continued to provide a very efficient 24hrs casualty service to locate any sick and injured deer.
5) As I said it would not be the Huntsman who shot any animal
People hunt foxes with horses and hounds because it is fun.
All of the rest is just smoke n mirrors.
I chuckle every time I read the ridiculous arguments in favour of fox hunting but I have a terrible habit of challenging misinformation.
What makes me very angry is the way some sections of society feel they can ignore the law. Boxing day, the local hunts will allegedly following a scented trail. They will probably pick up the scent of a fox and kill it as they often do.
Let us hope this case will make them think twice although I doubt it. Perhaps with enough prosecutions folk will start to behave responsibly or it may be necessary to ban scented trails too.
All of the rest is just smoke n mirrors.
I chuckle every time I read the ridiculous arguments in favour of fox hunting but I have a terrible habit of challenging misinformation.
What makes me very angry is the way some sections of society feel they can ignore the law. Boxing day, the local hunts will allegedly following a scented trail. They will probably pick up the scent of a fox and kill it as they often do.
Let us hope this case will make them think twice although I doubt it. Perhaps with enough prosecutions folk will start to behave responsibly or it may be necessary to ban scented trails too.
Sex God
Quote by Ben_Minx
People hunt foxes with horses and hounds because it is fun.
All of the rest is just smoke n mirrors.
I chuckle every time I read the ridiculous arguments in favour of fox hunting but I have a terrible habit of challenging misinformation.
What makes me very angry is the way some sections of society feel they can ignore the law. Boxing day, the local hunts will allegedly following a scented trail. They will probably pick up the scent of a fox and kill it as they often do.
Let us hope this case will make them think twice although I doubt it. Perhaps with enough prosecutions folk will start to behave responsibly or it may be necessary to ban scented trails too.
I believe you have been misinformed on all levels here Ben
Sex God
Quote by Ben_Minx
Yet, this is exactly what the hunt were prosecuted for.
For dissagreeing with ben?
Sex God
Quote by Ben_Minx
No, for disagreeing with the law and having the arrogance to presume that nobody will care.
If you know of these law breakers I advise you inform the proper authority's, or is this here say?
As for me,
I disagree with the law, but do not condone the breaking of it :thumbup:
Sex God
Quote by Bluefish2009
1) I posted the thread not about fox hunting, but the morality of what the RSPC had spent there money on, little point in watching the video, the judge did that and made his judgement on them, the link was to a newspaper report that just happened to have an video embedded.
So it was a one off :thumbup:
Quote by Bluefish2009
2) To disagree with a law is very different than breaking it.
Quite right, and those that break the Law should be prosecuted.
Quote by Bluefish2009
3)Sorry, I must have miss-read this as "Are there other exemption", my apology's;
Accepted
Quote by Bluefish2009
3) The flushing of foxes to gun packs is being used in areas, how legal that is, is not for me to say but a judge. Terriers may also be used to flush foxes from below ground to be shot but only to protect game birds that are being preserved to be shot.
Flushing is completely irrelevant to this debate, stop throwing up smoke screens.
Quote by Bluefish2009
4) Stag hunting, blah blah.
Another irrelevant smoke screen.
Quote by Bluefish2009
5) As I said it would not be the Huntsman who shot any animal
Perhaps I'm not using the right terminology; As far as I'm concerned a person hunting an animal is a huntsman. So if it's not one of the people hunting the animal who shoots it who does?
Sex God
Quote by Bluefish2009
Yet, this is exactly what the hunt were prosecuted for.
For dissagreeing with ben?
Quote by Bluefish2009
No, for disagreeing with the law and having the arrogance to presume that nobody will care.
If you know of these law breakers I advise you inform the proper authority's, or is this here say?
As for me,
I disagree with the law, but do not condone the breaking of it :thumbup:
It's not hear say Blue, you were good enough to even post the links for us!
Sex God
Quote by Trevaunance
Yet, this is exactly what the hunt were prosecuted for.
For dissagreeing with ben?
Quote by Bluefish2009
No, for disagreeing with the law and having the arrogance to presume that nobody will care.
If you know of these law breakers I advise you inform the proper authority's, or is this here say?
As for me,
I disagree with the law, but do not condone the breaking of it :thumbup:
It's not hear say Blue, you were good enough to even post the links for us!
Ah, but we can not presume that they are all breaking the law
Sex God
Quote by Ben_Minx
Yet, this is exactly what the hunt were prosecuted for.
Quote by Bluefish2009
Ah, but we can not presume that they are all breaking the law
Why bring other hunts into it? Ben is clearly referring to the one you posted about.
Sex God
Quote by Trevaunance
1) I posted the thread not about fox hunting, but the morality of what the RSPC had spent there money on, little point in watching the video, the judge did that and made his judgement on them, the link was to a newspaper report that just happened to have an video embedded.
So it was a one off :thumbup:
Quote by Bluefish2009
2) To disagree with a law is very different than breaking it.
Quite right, and those that break the Law should be prosecuted.
Quote by Bluefish2009
3)Sorry, I must have miss-read this as "Are there other exemption", my apology's;
Accepted
Quote by Bluefish2009
3) The flushing of foxes to gun packs is being used in areas, how legal that is, is not for me to say but a judge. Terriers may also be used to flush foxes from below ground to be shot but only to protect game birds that are being preserved to be shot.
Flushing is completely irrelevant to this debate, stop throwing up smoke screens.
Quote by Bluefish2009
4) Stag hunting, blah blah.
Another irrelevant smoke screen.
Quote by Bluefish2009
5) As I said it would not be the Huntsman who shot any animal
Perhaps I'm not using the right terminology; As far as I'm concerned a person hunting an animal is a huntsman. So if it's not one of the people hunting the animal who shoots it who does?
You may feel flushing to be irrelevant, but as terriers can legally flush foxes to the gun for the protection of game birds, for me it is not irrelevant.
Hunting dear with hounds falls under the same law so not irrelevant at all, as does hair coursing, and mink hunting, all relevant.
As for the shooting, it vary form hunt to hunt, some may have a marksman within there employment, some may subcontract one
