Fox hunting

quote:

---

The antis are motivated by class - but claim it is a cruelty issue

The pros are driven by a basic rights issue or Freedom of the Individual/basic human rights
but claim it is a country side management issue.

---

Derek speaking for myself, I am anti- and would reject any suggestion of being swayed by class issues(whatever they are.....?)

Without re-iterating (please read my postings above)......it is the gratuitousness of it that I find, frankly, barbaric.

Laurie S

"it is the gratuitousness of it that I find, frankly, barbaric."

OK I can accept that as your point of view - but the hunt supporters do not see it that way - so why should your point of view overrule their point of view. They see it as a normal way of life.

There are many things in the UK I find unacceptable that I would prefer to be banned but I have to go along because the people causing the discomfort to me consider that it is
their right to cause me aggro.


Re the class issue - many of the posts in this thread are very class oriented eg "get the toffs" etc. You may not see it as class but many do.

Derek

<< >>

Not so sure it's a class thing. Regular people like me get invited onto hunts - despute the fact that I've refused for the best part of 20 years. Yeah there's often a toff nucleus (or wannabe aristos) but the other 90% are ordinary people - who should have more sense IMO.

I'm glad it's going. It won't instantly make the world a better place but every little helps.

Cheers

Harry

Interesting piece on BBC R4 News this morning. It's been estimated that the cost of policing the fox-hunting ban after 2006 will be approximately £30 million per annum, thats apparently £2000 for every fox that's going to be saved. Except of course they're then going to be gassed trapped or shot instead.

Coincidentally, £30M is just less than half the annual projected cost of fully restoring pension rights to the 20,000 or so people that have lost them through company insolvency and government ineptitude and have, as a result, been sentenced to live a miserable and destitute old age.

Now, I have no strong feelings about fox hunting one way or the other, but I do know where I'd rather have my tax £££ spent!

David

quote:

---

so why should your point of view overrule their point of view. They see it as a normal way of life.

---

this is an essential point

The whole of society must be structured in such a way as to balance personal freedoms against the freedoms of others. These usually conflict.

Restraint on individual behaviour, to benefit society as a whole, is an essential ingredient of civilised society


That is why we have laws, that, in theory enjoy broad support, because they are made by our democratically(?) elected parliament.

This is, surely, stating the obvious

In this case the House of Commons has indicated its will quite clearly. That means that folk should abide by a ban.

To echo your point, taking, for example the nuisance of car exhaust. Many factories would be shut down if their effluent gas composition came anywhere near what is routinely pumped out of the typical car exhaust pipe

(that is MY particular hobby horse)

Laurie S

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurie Saunders:

To echo your point, taking, for example the nuisance of car exhaust. Many factories would be shut down if their effluent gas composition came anywhere near what is routinely pumped out of the typical car exhaust pipe

(that is MY particular hobby horse)

Laurie S

---

Drifting off here a bit laurie but you raise an interesting point. As a lay person it's my understanding that industrial pollution doesn't get hammered in the same way as car pollution. I might be badly misinformed here, but I've heard of sduties (probably anecdotal) which suggest that running a car in good tune over its operational life causes less pollution than that generated in manufacturing it in the first place. So the political dogma that we should be driving 'better' cars and scrapping our big old polluting heaps ingores the cost to the environment of actually making them. This is one reason why we (that is to say my wife and I) keep our cars in tip top nick and run them until they fall apart. Are we doing wrong?

And what about all the dirty 50/60s technology that we sell to less developed nations? We're all going to end up choking on that even if it's thousands of miles away.

You may be a lot more up on this - what's your take on it?

Cheers

Harry

IIR vehicle pollution accounts for about 12-15% of the overall - much less than domestic central heating, (BTW why the hell isn’t there any tax on aviation fuel) oh and BTW it would take about 30 modern cars pollution just to equal one from the 70's. Per passenger km trains and buses can be more polluting than cars. Etc etc
Martin

quote:

---

You may be a lot more up on this - what's your take on it?

---

I don`t have the data at my fingertips, though in principle, accept the point you make about the energy/pollution costs in recycling


However, a high proportion of the vehicles on the road are NOT well tuned, also I might suggest that if properly managed, industrial pollution could be minimal, whilst it is much harder to control the "mobile" polltion of many motor vehicles


I raised this issue as an illustration of the princple that though I might personally might have "exreme" views on the use of motor vehicles, I accept that I live in a democracy and must refrain from "direct action" over issues such as carexhaust, that I feel strongly about

Laurie S

quote:

---

If the hunting community were that upset about the redundancies that keep insisting will happen they would find alternative employment for those they are about to lay off

---

Er, because the income from the hunt pays for these people, plus a large amount of land management in hunt areas.

quote:

---

That is why we have laws, that, in theory enjoy broad support, because they are made by our democratically(?) elected parliament.

---

What those 30 odd MP's that could be bothered taking part in the debate, that's democrocy for you.

quote:

---

If it's cruel then it shouldn't be legal. Fox hunting is clearly cruel.

---

There are lots of things that are cruel that are legal, many previously discussed on this thread.

quote:

---

There are lots of things that are cruel that are legal, many previously discussed on this thread.

---

That doesn't make it OK to do them though, does it.

I could piss against the wall on the way home from the pub.....but that is illegal.
I could tell my mother-in-law that she is a fat useless old bag of lard....but that is illegal.
I could lock the cat in the shed for three days....but that is illegal.
Chasing a fox across the counrtyside to be ripped apart by a pack of dogs just for kicks was OK up until last week was it? Thank god the law caught up on that one....eventually. Do you really need the law to dictate to you what is and what isn't acceptable moral behaviour?
Jesus....

I reckon if I were a farmer my yard dogs would be quite entitled to kill and rip a fox to pieces if they actually happened to catch it, that being fair play so - to -speak, as well as their earning their keep, innit.


Graham George Of Equinox

It's gonna take a lot of serious training to get back properly into the old pub power lunches again though, bloody youngsters of today eh ! Wot a lot ov Snooty little Foxes:
Fuck, the cat just kicked me !