Mind you, some of our European partners have some pretty strange hunting/shooting/trapping practices. Perhaps, like everything else, they too will be foisted on us in - then we'll really have something to get excited about!

 

Is this a democratically elected govt? Have they voted for it on numerous occasions? Is the pro-hunt lobby's refusal to accept it the sole reason why this issue is still being debated? Did the govt promise a free vote on it even before they were elected?

Is this *really* all the pro-hunt lobby has left to offer? Isn't it time to accept the will of parliament and move on to other issues?

 

What I notice is a failure and indeed denial by huntspeople and supporters to acknowledge that many people don't want them or their anti-social behaviour and attitude problem anywhere near them or more importantly on their land
If they didn't behave in the high handed manner they are famed for I for one would have no problem with them hunting whatever they choose.
The usual answer to this is that they are not anti-social and behave with the highest level of regard for people and their privacy. Not only has this type of bad behaviour been exposed in the media I've seen it myself at first hand and it stinks.

 

Oh the drama!

 

Foxes control rabbits and they are a top level predator

Hmmm - Last time I was in the Countryside I don't remember there being a lack of Rabbits.

At least One of your statements would appear to be complete bollox .

Foxes are lazy *******s and will take what they can - much like every other animal on Earth - Including Humans.

 

Blimey, even the Beeb doesn't run repeats within 2 hours

 

You will note I said play a major role not that the presence of foxes will guarantee no rabbits (it's called the balance of nature). It might also be worth remembering that since humans have intervened to lower the number of foxes that seeing an increase in the number of rabbits is hardly surprising.

Foxes are lazy. Where did you get that rubbish from. Can you please point me to any scientific study or research that shows foxes are any othe animalss for that matter are lazy.

 

Repeated because I hoped a huntsperson/supporter would have replied to such an accusation. The fact they haven't suggests it's true.

 

www.Igotmoreimportantthingtodowithmytime.com/foxlazyfcukers.htm

 

I wouldn't hold your breath. Ask any of the pro-hunt shower to back up their claims with some stats regarding the fox-population and hunting's effectiveness, and you'll find you have a long wait.

 

I stand corrected you are a truely skilled debater. Surely a career in politics can only be around the corner.

 

I accept that *certain* hunters/supporters have a bad attitude, but isn't that the same with any group of people - even Scoob drivers!! I don't quite follow the argument that the actions of some, in itself, justifies a ban.

There have been stories of hunts following their quarry onto land on which they are not welcome - and they have been, deservedly, condemned for such actions. But I think you'll find that the vast majority stick to the land on which they have permission to hunt.

 

I'm not Pro Hunt at all - It's just people arguing points with nonsense will lose the argument.

There is no place for Fox Hunting in a Modern Society so I'll be glad to see it go. Arguing the reason for banning is because we are risking an epidemic of Rabbits in place of dead foxes is, in my opinion, ridiculous .

 

Do the democratic majority of the UK agree that banning fox hunting should be given priority over all the other domestic problems we suffer?

Have the government even asked us what issues we think should be given priority?

This is an example of how democracy fails. The majority of the people who voted for Labour MP's didn't do so because they wanted fox hunting banning, they voted for Labour because they thought they would get more free handouts from the richer tax payers.

 

And I thought I was cynical

 

Politics is for Poofs - Leadership is the game. The one thing that George W Bush has got right - Ignore the bleating millions and just do what you want to !

 

He was making the point that foxes are part of the food chain whereas idiots killing foxes for fun are not.
Don't worry about the argument - it's been comprehensively won already.

 

Foxes Part of the Food Chain - You should avoid MacDonalds - it's not good for you

 

Those are a lot of assumptions you are making. Firstly that I am arguing the case for banning foxhunting which I am not.

I simply replied to an earlier mail which stated that foxes are vermin which I pointed out they were not.

As for suggesting I was arguing the reason for banning was to prevent a rabiit epedemic that is ridiculous because I never said that. I merely pointed out that is there a relationship between the number of foxes in the wild and the number of rabbits. Given that foxhunting is responsible for only a very small percentage of ll foxes killed each year then it banning will have little or no affect on this issue. Incedentally there have in the past been issues with the number of rabbits hence the introduction of myximitosis.

You need to stop making so many assumptions and actually read wht is beeing said

 

We can argue about stats until we are blue in the face. There are ecological benefits to fox hunting which I have highlighted before. Whether you believe me or not, the simple fact of the matter is that if people want to spend their weekend hunting foxes and it isn't harming the ecology or the natural balance of indigenous species then why stop them?

The perception of barbarity is just that, a subjective perception. Your perception is different from mine, only I have had the benefit of seeing it first hand, so who's perception is better qualified?

What this boils down to is that ignorant people, twisted people who gain pleasure in denying people who they percieve as "privileged" have been procedurally given a hold over something they should not morally be entitled to, and as a consequence we will end up with people suffering, and in my opinion, British ecology suffering too.

 

You're assuming I was talking about you

 

I always love reading these debates because so many people have mis-informed opinions based on just what they have heard or read in the media. Out of all the posts on here, very few seem to be based on actual observations, all the rest from assumptions presented as facts.

I have moved from Jersey (where there are no foxes and therefore no hunting apart from drag hunting) to Devon where there are numerous hunts. We were immediately asked if we would allow the hunt over our land (we have 14 acres of woodland).

I had no strong view on hunting as I could agree/disagree with both sides. On the one side I thought it was barbaric and a social gathering of the great and the good but the other side I thought there were more important things to worry about and I didn't like the anti-liberterianism (sp?) of the anti-hunting brgade.

I watched the hunts with a totally open mind, something that not many people on here seem prepared to do. This is what I actually observed:

None of the people were "upper class twits", they were all very down to earth farmers.

None of them appeared to have a blood lust of wanting to rip an animal to pieces.

They respected other peoples property and asked permission before using any land.

Every "kill" that I witnessed (including two on my own land) the fox was killed humanely with a gun shot to the head after the hounds had run it to ground and it was caught in a net.

Obviously, I don't know how other hunts operate and can only base my views on what I have actually seen.

How much of the debate is based on third hand views and not on actual facts?

 

I am neither for or against hunting, although the times that I have had to 'Police' hunts, has not endeared me to some of the toffeenosed tw@ts that do it.

One thing that has always puzzled me is this. Whenever I am in the countryside, I very rarely see a fox. When I used to work nights in Swindon, you couldn't travel more than a few hundered yards without seeing one. The place (like many other towns and cities) is overrun with the mangy things. They make a real mess and spread all sorts of dieses to your domestic pets. Why then, do you not see the horsey set galloping down the street in pursuit of them? Perhaps its not so much fun, because most of the urban foxes are too dopey to run away!

On the other hand, I do not like the way that this government is doing its best to ruin the countryside. We all like to go and visit it, but how do you think that it is kept looking so nice? If we didn't have farmers managing the countryside, then eventually it will just become an overgrown wilderness. If as a small token to keep it looking nice, we allow them to hunt a few animals(which they hardly ever catch), then I think thats a small price to pay.

 

Given that you included my earlier posting in your post regarding rabbit numbers I think that was a fair assumption

 

True though isn't it! The majority of people vote with their wallets. Anyone who will stick their hand up and say they voted for their MP because they think fox hunting is barbaric is most probably a liar, and those who really did bring in such a useless government purely to get fox hunting banned at the expense of our country at the hands of labour are misguided hypocrites.

There, I've said it!

 

Priority?? Where have you got this info that it's considered a priority?
It's crops up in parliament a few times a year.

The majority of the govt, and the people, want it banned and out of the way. *You* and your ilk are holding it up.

Are they under obligation to do so? What do they say to the people, "thanks for electing us, but we're so indescisive, can you tell us how to prioritise things?". Be sensible.

And now your true colours *really* come out. "Fight the Prejudice!" you all cry. "We're not all toffs!", and now here you are - "All Labour voters are spongers."

The undeniable fact is that the current govt, voted in fairly and squarely which said it would deal with fox-hunting, has overwhelmingly voted to ban it. The fact that is still not law, should be a concern to everyone. Clearly a cross-section of society with a minority interest holds far to much influcence. Too right this is an example of democracy failing.

 

Because a lot of people don't understand why one section of society is allowed to torture and kill animals for "sport", but kids on a council estate tying fireworks to cats, blokes organising pit-bull fights etc is consisdered disgraceful. It's the *same* thing.

Are you honestly saying that if I saw some people chasing and killing a fox, I would suddenly realise the error of my ways?

No, what it boils down to is your complete failure to accept that people who want this stopped are not members of the "fluffy bunny brigade", "townies" or any of the other derogatory terms you label people, nor are they interested in "class war". They are just ordinary people who want to see people who get pleasure in animal cruely to be dealt with equally and not be given the opportunity to hide behind some stupid arguments, all of which have been comprehensively rubbished.

 

The fact that the government would dedicate so much as a minute to bringing up this bill in the first place is an insult to all the people who are suffering as a result of other problems more worthy of their time.

The hold up is merely the result of a group of people telling the government this, and can be ended by the government dropping it and concentrating on the issues people WANT them to concentrate on.

Their MP's were not voted for on the basis of fox hunting, people voted for them with their wallets. The fact that the people they also voted for harboured a prejudice against and an ignorance of rural affairs was a side effect.

Labour voters did so because they believed they would be better off. The fact that if this were so it would be at the expense of other tax payers may or may not have entered their minds at the time. The words "toff" and "sponger" come from YOU and are transparently for effect.

The fox hunting agenda is, and always has been, a sinister side effect of voting for a Labour government. People are going to suffer as a result of this action and its a disgrace.

 

Exactly, gov't should spend 5 minutes on it and say banned or not banned, then move onto real life issues.

 

As a ban is a sure fire thing once the parliament act is enforced most of the debate is now pointless so let's move on to what's important, punishing the law breakers.

When it's banned does anyone know what penalties will be used against the criminals?
I wonder if a spell inside and a loss of significant assets will reduce the bellicosity of those who vow to continue whatever the law of the land says.
It will be great to see, I suspect most of them are full of hot air.