I am having a hard time understanding why so many people in Britain are so vigerously defending this bloodsport. I think the argument for controlling the population of foxes is bollocks. It’s a lame excuse. The real motivation is bloodlust (still IMO at this point). If they wanted to limit the population of sheep-killing foxes then why the fucking hell do they make a sport of it.
So I am asking, if there are any pro-hunting (preferably brit) dopers, to attempt to justify it to me.
[sub](p.s. I put this here because I am asking for debate. If a mod judges it more as a pit thread I have no objection to it being moved)[/sub]
What’s wrong with making a sport of it? And what’s wrong with a bloodsport? Apparently some people really like it, it’s a lot less harmful to the animals than what takes place as a matter of course in the meat industry of every western country and involved a comparable miniscule number of animals. So why make such a fuss of it? At least the foxes get to live free untill they’re killed.
Anti-hunters are bigoted haters who can’t stand a certain people who are culturally diferent than them. It’s plainly immoral to give in to these profoundly disturbed, hate mongorers.
Bloodsports are wrong for the same reason animal abuse is wrong and illegal in most jurisdictions. While we all love our animals, these laws tend toward self-interest. Generally, treatment of animals this way does not sate violent impulses, it encourages them. Isn’t it one of the major flags for serial killers, etc.?
I don’t mind killing. But drawing it out, making a game out of it is just stupid.
-stonebow, who can’t even fish because he thinks it’s inhumane to hook, freeze, and asphyxiate a living thing…but will shoot a deer, squirrel or anything else, for that matter
A lot of things we do in society is completely unnecessary and we don’t ban it. Although I’d never participate in a fox hunt I don’t see anything immoral about it. It’s a lot of trouble for such a little animal but if that’s what they want, go for it. I guess it’s easy for me to come to this conclusion because I don’t believe animals have any rights. It doesn’t matter if we hunt them for sport or if we hunt them for food, fur, or bone.
If anyone has shown a ridiculous amount of hate it’s the pro-hunters. It’s their behaviour that I am trying to understand. The anti-hunting stance is perfectly easy to understand - I.e. It is cruel and unnecesary.
So it’s not just fox hinting you object to, it’s all kinds of hunting? Deer hunting. Seal hunting. What about trapping? Fishing? Fishing is a blood sport too. They even have competitions, national teams, prices and everything. What about traditional hunting by e.g. Eskimoes? The tradition of fox hunting can be compared to traditional hunters, they have a long history too.
Anyway meat isn’t a neccesity. Any vegatarian will tell you so. And surely not in industrilised way it’s being done today. Neither are dairy products. Scrap the fur industry while we’re at it. And most of all pets too. etc.
Fox hunting is, all things considered, just such a very small problem. I’d bet many times the number of foxes are killed on British highways than on fox hunts. This tells me the real motive for all the energy spend on this small problem, lies for elsewhere. Probable they just can’t stand those guys who hunt foxes.
Fishing can be justified as killing for food (and when it isn’t for food then yes, I am against it in principle).
Traditional hunting by Eskimoes - Killing for food.
The tradition of foxhunting has nothing to do with killing for food.
Meat is a neccesity in that it is hopelessly naive to expect everyone to become vegetarian. No, killing for meat can not feasibly be banned. Killing for fun can easily be banned, so I support the banning.
Foxes being killed on motorways by accident is a difficult thing to avoid. Foxes being killed for fun can be avoided easily by making it a crime and forcing those who willingly participate in it to avoid it for the sake of avoiding breaking the law.
Anyway my motivation for this thread is an inability to understand the vigour and sometimes disgusting behaviour displayed by the active hunt supporters. They act as if they are defending a good cause, but they are defending cruelty for fun. Don’t they know they are nationally reviled??
So far as I know it isn’t illegal to kill a fox in England… even in an inhumane manner. For example, a leg trap is legal, slow-acting poison is legal, and hunting then from foot is also legal. The only thing that makes foxhunting illegal is the perception that only rich people do it (not true, buy the way).
If you are to demand a humane death for all farm vermin, fine. But to single out foxhunting – which by the way, is an industry that gives many people jobs, and contributes to the preservation of open land – as the only “inhumane” method of fox-killing, is absurd.
This is very much a class issue and hardly an animal rights issue at all.
Actually the tradition of foxhunting does go back to “killing for food.” Foxes prey on chickens and other small livestock. That’s why they are considered pests. Since time out of mind farmers have found it necessary to protect their livestock against predators.
So they found a way to do it an also have some fun. Big freakin’ whoop.
Hello Again I’m sorry but you have it completely wrong. It has nothing to do with who is doing it. It has to do with the simple fact that it is being done for nothing more than fun.
As I keep trying to point out - Other forms of killing that goes on is for acceptable reason. Killing for fun is simply not acceptable IMO. Would you defend killing stray cats and dogs for fun?
I see no one cared enough to read my post. Anyone want to discuss my argument (re: the effect of bloodsports on people)?
Fox Hunting is much different than deer hunting, from what I understand. You are setting the fox to run, chasing it with dogs that I assume are not very gentle with it, running it to exhaustion, and then, when you have it cornered, killing it. Is my understanding somehow incorrect?
If this is an accurate portrayal, then yes, I think it takes a certain type of sadist to enjoy it.
You haven’t explained to me why it is permissable to kill a fox in a slow and agonizing manner with strychnine, but a quick death from a broken neck is somehow worse?
Also, I don’t think you really understand the point of foxhunting. The “fun” part isn’t the kill specifically. Most foxhunters don’t care if the quarry is accounted for or not. It’s riding out over open country with two of mankind’s closest animal friends, the dog and the horse. testing the bond that man (or woman) has achieved with these animals. If a local nuisance is destroyed from time to time it doesn’t bother me in the least.
Many cats are hunted for sport, just not domestic ones. As long as they’re not endangered I don’t have a problem with it. As far as picking off domestic dogs and cats for fun, you can’t even make that comparison. Cats & dogs have an in-bred tolerance for humans that foxes don’t have. When someone hunts a domesticated fox, give me a call and I’ll be all up in arms about it.
Stonebow I agree with you. (I cared, but I was on your side so didn’t have anything to say to your previous post)
Several people have mentioned a fuss being made. If the issue at hand was the mere act of foxhunting I probably wouldn’t have cared much to post. The fuss I am making is about the rabid and widespread objection to a law that prohibits a sport of killing. I am not trying to directly argue about foxhunting (but I am being drawn into responding to the arguments being made) I am trying to understand the stubbourn nature of the visible supporters. Their outrage perhaps supports Stonebow’s argument that there is sadism involved.
Hello Again We may be unable to come to an agreement because it seems to boil down to one fundemental difference between us. You don’t have a problem with the death of an animal. I do.
P.S. I didn’t say it was permissable to kill a fox using strychnine, or anything as direct as that. All I have said is that animal death is justifiable if it is neccesary for more than just fun.
Sort of. the hunt rides out with dogs who are trained to idenfiy fox scent (they are called foxhounds). If they locate one they give chase (they don’t release a captive fox! that’s the way it sounds in your post). This usually takes a couple of hours as foxes are very clever. If the fox does not escape them (big IF) the dogs catch it and break its neck, and then, usually rip it up in their excitment (this is the part that gets people in a lather, usually).
The fun part is the running around. The killing part is more of a service to the community. Here in Virginia there are 4 or 5 hunts wirthin a couple hours drive of me. I don’t think any of them has caught a fox is more than a decade and they really don’t care.