MarkO

Let's be honest - if bloody Superman saw a bunch of plonkers on horseback racing towards him wearing silly red coats and blowing a horn, surrounded by a pack of dogs, even he'd probably leggit.

Diablo

The wee ******* near me don't run from the dog....

Unless she chases them....

Foxes will have had natural predators - wild bears, wild dogs, whatever.

MarkO

Let's be honest, the big cats in Africa have no natural predators, but they still understand fear and self-preservation. For example, a bull elephant can chase off a tiger or lion if necessary, but that doesn't make it a predator.

MrDeference is just making stupid statements to stir things up. Which I can't slate him for, to be honest.

Diablo

The entire office is now looking at me suspiciously wondering why I have just erupted with laughter

Cheers Mark0, there goes any pretence of working....

For a while I thought Mr D may be one of the counterstrike clan's alter egos, but I doubt it, he appears much to intelligent to be one of them...not that it would be hard, and not that such comment would be particularly complimentary..



[Edited by diablo - 9/18/2002 12:29:41 PM]

MrDeference

Diablo.
Do you see it? Look harder. The same question. One talking about food, the other talking about fox hunting. One context you called "food", the other "cruelty". That shows bias. Why didn't you call it "pest control".
Then you go on to say there is no justification for eating food but that is irrelevant. I say it is totally relevant. If we can't justify killing animals for food what hope do we have for justifying hunting.
You have just stated that a discussion of hunting or eating meet has no justification.
The pro hunts men have no chance with logic like that. Sir, I salute you.

MarkO

Having said that, just because you can justify killing for food, it doesn't follow that you can justify this particular method of hunting vermin.

MrDeference

MarkO,
You are as mad as a box of frogs. A bull elephant will kill a baby lion if it gets a chance. Why? It's offspring are vulnerable to a pack of lions. A lion is a predator of elephants. A lion is frightened of an elephant becuase they kill baby lions. An elephant is scared of a lion because they kill baby elephants.

Accuse me of making stupid statements

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Mr Deference: sorry, I got you mixed up with Skipjack from earlier posts. I do, however, fail to see why that mekes me ignorant?
And anyway, my post did not have your name on it, so what made you think it was aimed at you? As the bard said:"Methinks she doth protest too much".
I must just add that I was enjoying the rational way you were trying to argue your case, but it rather went out of the window when you refused to argue a point because of "lack of context".
Are you female, BTW, 'cos you argue like one?
And now I accept that I'm being "ignorant", ie: "behaving in an uncouth manner".
So just how "couth" is it to want to rip foxes apart in the name of fun?(Forget the vermin control thing, it's b*ll*x, and you know it is!):

MarkO

Erm, that doesn't make it a predator. Check your dictionary definitions - a predator is an animal which lives by killing other animals. Self-defence doesn't count as predatory behaviour.

Diablo

We can justify killing animals for food on the grounds that food is necessary for survival. We cannot justify killing animals for food with undue cruelty. I have been unclear, for which I apologise.

I have no wish to justify hunting, so I don't care that you have no hope. There is no bias, I was responding to your point.

Have I Please explain your thinking behind that one. the context in which my statement was made was that there was no justification for cruelty in the killing of animals for food.

Must remember not to assume everyone can follow a discussion thread without absolute detail...




[Edited by diablo - 9/18/2002 12:45:39 PM]

MarkO

I think Mr Deference is getting confused anyway. Many of the participants of this thread are not condemning hunting per se, but are condemning the manner in which the foxes are hunted.

I eat meat, and therefore condone the killing of other animals by association. However, I will - whereever possible - modify my behaviour to reduce the suffering of animals which I kill or which might be killed as a result of my own actions or choices.

A good example of which might return us to the roadkill issue - if I hit a rabbit in my car, I will usually return where possible and finish it off to avoid causing undue suffering.

MrDeference

Full circle:
I say a fox hunt is no more cruel than shooting it. You disagree. Stalemate. Posturing and veiled insults apart, we are no further than we were after my second post in response to Pete.

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

MarkO:
And give it a good kicking for damaging your front spoiler?................................:

[Edited by alcazar - 9/18/2002 12:54:24 PM]

skipjack

the thing at stake between the two warring minorities is hunting as a concept - and whether or not in a modern society it retains any validity, use or benefit.

industrial farming has replaced the practical need for hunting as a means of providing food. in our part of the world anyway.

effectively, the only role hunting has is as a means of pest control and general animal husbandry that maintains the balance of species through a mix of nurture and appropriate culling.

don't forget that the fox is a damaging pest to livestock. it's not a palatable meat, so we don't eat it. but it needs to be controlled in areas where it is a menace to people's livelihoods.

that point accepted, the only thing left to argue over is methodology, bearing in mind that killing the animal is the ultimate goal.

- gun
- trap
- poison
- gas
- hounds

shooting: looks good on paper but has many variables,the principle one of which is marksmanship. farmers aren't usually snipers and the net result of much shooting is still a dead fox - but only after wounding and a slow death through shock and blood loss. time consuming. most humane method of disposal but *only* with a clean, one-shot kill. not always easy with an airgun and draconian gun laws make it difficult to obtain a licence for a decent hunting weapon (and they are expensive).

trap: prone to indescriminacy in what gets caught and places the animal under great physical stress. absolutely requires regular inspection in order to dispose of the animal quickly with a bullet. time consuming. without inspections, the animal starves to death.

poison: indescriminate to other animals and birds of prey, slow death.

gas: ditto poison, slow death.

hounds: relatively inefficient, death is quick *if* animal is caught.

all involve the death of the animal, none are particularly humane but control is necessary. so to be honest, the gun=good, hounds=bad argument strikes me as pretty spurious and a bit of a red herring.

which leaves us at the point where, if hunting with hounds is banned, then so should trapping, poisoning and gassing. and unless you're a qualified marksman that can achieve a one-shot kill on a consistent basis, then so should shooting.

Diablo

But you have failed to justify your view that it is no more cruel.

And, in advance of your next question, it is not for us to justify that shooting it is more cruel. Alternatives had been requested and were provided.

This whole discussion is in the context that fox hunting by dogs should be banned because it is cruel, period. Not whether it is more or less cruel than any other method.

Let me ask you this, which way would you rather die?

Shot in the head, or ripped apart?

D

MarkO

Yeah, but we've had so much fun!

Diablo

With the exception of humane and regularly checked traps, I agree entirely.

But the issue here was that fox hunting with hounds should be banned because it is cruel. If the only currently practiced alternatives are also cruel, then they should be banned as well.

Remember that the law passed in Scotland doesn't just outlaw hunting with dogs.

Diablo

Anyway, I'm going out for lunch

In a Country that has banned fox hunting

Its been fun people.

D

[Edited by diablo - 9/18/2002 1:12:13 PM]

MarkO

Much as I hate to admit it, Skipjack's post comparing and contrasting the methods of control is probably the most balances, unemotive, realistic and factual post in this entire thread. His points about the draconian gun law and low-quality marksmanship are particularly good.

Perhaps the only way forward is to make the fox a protected species for which the government can licence specific culls, which are carried out by highly-skilled and trained marksmen. Kindof similar to the way badgers are controlled.

His post does show, though, that realistically there is no ideal solution for all parties, and hence the argument will continue to be a circular one.

But f*ck it, let's ban it anyway, just to p*ss off the toffs.

Diablo

merkin

Foxhunting types :1, motorists :0 - coming soon in paperback form at all good booksellers near you, just 5.99!

skipjack

markO

i've never been hunting in my life. i just fancied a bit of a wind-up.

MarkO

Is that it then. Have we all finished?

skipjack

i hope so. i'm spent. thank you for your thoughtful comment on the previous page.

MrDeference

Yeah. I think so. For the record: I hate horses, and horsey types. I have never ridden a horse. I haven't been to a hunt, and I don't care to. I want horseriders banned from the road, and they can take their slow arsed horse trailers with them.

No one was putting their side and in the true requirements of a debate, I thought I would. I am just sorry I disappointed a few of you with my subnormal intelligence

Gents. It's been grand.

MrDeference

p.s. MarkO, you sure there are tigers in Africa?

MarkO

Absolutely certain. Obviously they may only be of the fish or vehicular types, or in the wild, but they're definitely there.

But I didn't actually state that there were tigers in Africa, if you read my post. I mentioned 'big cats' in Africa, and then mentioned tigers and elephants. And as you well know, there are both tigers and elephants in India.

MrDeference

Touché

MarkO

So, guess we need to post some rubbish now (well, more than before) to get this thread muppetised at last?

Diablo

Don't go in the huff now Anyway, it was you who started the clever ar$e comments on language use..LOL...

D

(Does this mean I can get back to work now?)