Hunting - should the ban remain

I happen to live in hunting country, and used to get hounds through the garden terrorising my cats. Like most of the 3000 pieces of recent legislation, the ban is unfortunately totally unenforcable.
The hunt employees, terrier men on quad bikes, have the job of getting foxes out of the ground and blocking up their holes so that they can be chased, often to death. These men also train young hounds by getting fox cubs. They are also now allowed by law to kill the foxes as they emerge from their holes. So the people on horses are not neccessary for controlling the foxes. They are only there for the enjoyment of destroying areas of countryside, causing problems with livestock and endangering innocent road users. (hounds will follow a fox through a hedge and across any road). Of the 150 or so on horseback, only about 20 would ride across fields. Then you get the multitude of cross country motor cycles and 4 wheel drives.
The countryside alliance are not too good with the arithmetic either, claiming 59% in favour, without mentioning the 89% against.

I thought the law on fox hunting was so loose that fox hunting was not really outlawed? just a tinkering of the way you could hunt...etc


Chris

Originally Posted by Gary Slegg

Can you say why though?

Well for a start they're completely different subjects and both morally miles apart. Both genocide and murder are already illegal, you can't have genocide without murder, also we're talking about methods of killing rather than whether the killing itself is justified.

Originally Posted by nomad

Keep the ban and more needs to be done about other cruel sports too !!

Yes I agree, Big Brother should be banned too!

Originally Posted by Gary Slegg

Now, imagine if, prior to being killed he was chased across open countryside for a mile or two, prior to having his arms and legs pulled in different directions.

If he were a fox, he would be dead by the time he was ripped apart and wouldn't find it unnatural to be chased by a pack of hounds. There's a lot of anthropomorphication going on here. Understandable given that we're alfa owners. I'm certainly guilty of doing it with my alfas.

Foxhunting as pest control is absolute tosh. The number killed this way is very small and always was, relatively. But the basic tenet remains, you shouldn't kill for fun/'sport'/to impress the neighbours or whatever you want to call it. It doesn't really matter how you dress it up, it's killing for no good reason other than you want to.
All the other 'arguments' are peripheral, they are pests, how else are you going to kill them etc, etc.
And yes, all other bloodsports should be banned too, for the same reason.

As for fishing, well...hmm. I don't fish myself, I find it boring. But do they come into the same category as mammals as regards killing? I need to think about that one!

Originally Posted by chrisd_b

I thought the law on fox hunting was so loose that fox hunting was not really outlawed? just a tinkering of the way you could hunt...etc

Indeed, it's so difficult to enforce, they're all carrying on much as before, so I guess everyone's happy!

Double post.

Originally Posted by badgers_nadgers

There's a lot of anthropomorphication going on here.

Of that there's no doubt. It is a very Anglosaxon trait.

For some reason there is a hierarchy of animals based
on cuteness and the way said animals' behaviour is
perceived.


(Note shock and distress when people see orcas gulping
down sealions and sealions attacking penguins on BBC TV !!
)

Trust good old Labour or new to produce a piece of legislation, that actually has no content.

Originally Posted by badgers_nadgers

Well for a start they're completely different subjects and both morally miles apart. Both genocide and murder are already illegal, you can't have genocide without murder, also we're talking about methods of killing rather than whether the killing itself is justified.

An interesting point, but fox hunting is also now illegal...

Of course, if one were to consider 'killing' per se, then there are instances where killing is 'legitimate', e.g.,
1. In self defence
2. In defence of ones country
3. Execution of criminals (in some countries)
4. As an act of euthanasia
etc

The point I'm trying to make is, whether fishing is banned or not does not effect the immorality of fox-hunting.

Originally Posted by badgers_nadgers

If he were a fox, he would be dead by the time he was ripped apart and wouldn't find it unnatural to be chased by a pack of hounds. There's a lot of anthropomorphication going on here. Understandable given that we're alfa owners. I'm certainly guilty of doing it with my alfas.

But that's a similar argument used by some people in the past to defend slavery, or the subjugation of women / the poor etc, i.e., that it's 'natures' order. Lions will eat people, but that doesn't excuse the Romans from charges of cruelty when they threw Christians to them...

Originally Posted by Gary Slegg

The point I'm trying to make is, whether fishing is banned or not does not effect the immorality of fox-hunting.

But it would if fish were perceived as more cute
than foxes.


It is a cultural thing.


e.g. here in France if you talk about having mice (souris)
in your house, it's "Urg. filthy vermin! Kill them!"

But if you talk about having problems with "mulot" (specifically
field mice) it's all "Ahh! petit mulot! So cute!" Still a mouse,
but culturally more acceptable and less verminy.

Originally Posted by Gary Slegg

But that's a similar argument used by some people in the past to defend slavery, or the subjugation of women / the poor etc, i.e., that it's 'natures' order. Lions will eat people, but that doesn't excuse the Romans from charges of cruelty when they threw Christians to them...

Bl00dy Romans.... what have they ever done for us ??

Larks' tongues. Wrens' livers. Chaffinch brains. Jaguars' earlobes. Wolf nipple chips. Get 'em while they're hot. They're lovely.!!

I think any investment advisors who support hunting should be identified so that we can avoid them before they lose their clients money.

Hunting supporters invariably say that 80% of foxes escape. They also argue that hunting is the most effective method of control.

Right then - so we should all entrust our money to business men who think a 20% success rate is "effective" - yeah right.

Paul.

Hmmm...it's obviously an emotive subject and without wishing to stifle healthy debate I can't help thinking that this thread is getting 'personal' rather than discussing the pro's and con's