The idea that hunting makes any significant difference to the fox population has already been proven to be incorrect. A lack of hunts did not alter the fox numbers.
Comparisons with fox hunting in the US is misleading. The Burns Inquiry concludes that hunting in the US is of a different tradition;
The same inquiry found evidence of hunts deliberately encouraging settlement of artificial earths, almost as in a breeding program. This is hardly a case of if. As these hunts also practice “digging-out”, the idea that the hunts go for a merry gallop through the countrytside and just hope they happen across a fox is plainly wrong. These foxes are as good as captive. The report says;
The Burns Inquiry states:
The arguments from the Pro-Fox Hunters are typically slippery. Half the time they are protecting a rural social tradition. Then the rest of the time it’s suddenly about controlling a pest. Half the time Anti-Fox Hunters are just spiteful, urban, class warriors against their upper class country neighbours. Then the rest of the time they are a sport followed by all classes and a vital part of rural employment. And spare me their concern about what’s going to happen to the poor doggies. These are working pack dogs that are impassionately put down once they get too old to keep up.
It’s quite clear they’ll employ any argument except the truth. They hunt because they enjoy it, and often their enjoyment has nothing to do with the final kill. No matter, it’s a stupid, cruel, messy, time-consuming and labour-intensive way to control foxes. But they do it because they find it enjoyable. This is the only reason. I wonder why they’re so reluctant to state this and instead hide behind a smokescreen of clearly illogical and false arguments? Could it be because they know “It’s Fun” hasn’t been nearly enough a defense for animal cruelty for centuries?
How much clearer can I be? We do it because it’s fun. Really it is great fun.
It just so happens that there are some beneficial side effects such as hedgerow upkeep, fox control, rural employment, but that’s what they are - side effects.
I am not going to worry too much about hedges if I can’t jump over them. I’m not going to jump over them to chase a peasant with a bag full of aniseed balls - that’s not enough fun. I’m only going to do it after a live quarry.
The people who want to stop me enjoying myself - and hurting no one else (and I’m sorry but you do not have the right not to have your over-sentimental feelings about fluffy foxy-woxy hurt) are cloaking their real motives - class warfare and general lefty chippiness - in balderdash about cruelty.
Like I have said, I would respect these people if they picketed halal butchers and abbatoirs (which really are cruel), but we all know that people with an anti-hunting mindset would no more do something like that than they would get their birds to shave their legs.
Why no complaints about fishing either? - because it doesn’t have any class connotations that’s why.
Gosh FG, I think people have been quite up-front about fox hunting is a recreation, something people like to do, something fun. I see no hidden agenda here.
I still suspect the antis are engaging in class warfare and blue-stocking puritanicalism. I see no admission of that from the antis.
Moderator’s Note: It’s one thing to rebut your opponents’ arguments in Great Debates, but just telling them to shut up, go away, or “fuck off” really isn’t debating anything.
IMHO it goes back to our past. And is somewhat linked to something that is common for people with AD/HD called hyperfocusing. Such intense activities can cause even the most non-ADD person to enter this state of mind. While hyperfocusing, the world of the hunter shrink to just you and the fox, while that ‘smaller’ world is full of intensity and life. It is very pleaserable.
Here’s a link to “The biggest independent support hunting website in the UK”. It’s crammed with all the above mentioned flawed arguments and justifications (population control! class war! not cruel! tradition!), not once in the entire site does it mention anything along the lines of “we wish to continue hunting cause it’s fun.” They have a children’s section where the straightforward question “Why Do People Hunt” is posed. Amazingly the word ‘fun’ never appears, nope, nor “recreation”. I wonder why? :dubious:
I refer both above gentlemen to the 3rd and 4th sentences of my second last paragraph in my last post. How can it be a matter of class warfare when hunting is such solid rural working class support and such a vital source of rural employment? Or is it this argument from the pro-fox hunters nonsense? They can’t both be right.
Actually, they can. Urban working-class people may be against fox hunting because they perceive it to be a sport of the upper class. They may be unaware of, or not care about, the benefits to the rural lower classes that occur from it.
Firstly that is the first time I have ever seen that website. So I’d be wary of it’s claims to popularity.
Also you may have noticed that we have been trying to persuade people with closed minds that they should leave us alone. That requires us to use all the tools at our disposal - including spin. So we will mention the beneficial aspects of hunting.
It is also our belief (well it’s mine) that the reason that this stupid law has been passed is precisely to deprive us of this pleasure. It’s a pure and simple mixture of old fashioned class warfare and lefty chippiness. If they knew we enjoyed it they would be even more determined to stop us.
In any case as the mass hunts, and no arrests, yesterday prove, this unjust and nasty law may as well never have been passed as it won’t be observed or enforced.
One more UK view here. My feeling with regards fox hunting is that it could and should be lumped in with cock fighting and bear baiting. Not by any means as cruel, but cruelty (and killing) for pleasure’s sake nonetheless. In this it differs from abbatoirs and sports that kill for food. It is an important distinction.
Having said that, I think there are areas of animal welfare that are more deserving of parliamentary time than the fox hunting bill. I once had the misfortune to be taken around a poultry shed. I was appaled at the conditions chickens were housed in. Legislation in this area could improve the lives and not just the deaths of many animals.
Much of the material on it is from the Countryside Alliance. It is also top ranked at google for “fox hunting uk”. It’s not a minor site. But no matter, if you have any quotes from leading supporters of fox hunting that plainly say “we want to hunt and kill foxes because it’s fun” we’d be happy to hear them.
Except these supposed beneficial aspects are factually dubious. Yet still they persist with them. We can only conclude that these arguments are the best you’ve got, even better than the real facts, because you know the real facts are unpalatable and undefensible.
Well prove it then, instead of all this other nonsense. Otherwise all you have is simple paranoia and conspiracy theory crankiness. What you are saying that all the studies, and all the reports, and all the politicians and all the anti-fox hunters have all had a hidden agenda? That every single one is so totally blind to the type of people who support and employed by hunts that they still imagine they’re all toffs who want taken down a peg? With so many involved I’d say this conspiracy should be extremely easy to expose.
But everyone knows you enjoy it, otherwise it would be a totally insane practice . What infuriates people is all the stupid arguments put forth when we already know what the truth is.
Nope. They’re beyond dispute. Hunts do undertake the upkeep of walls and hedgerows - not out of altruism but because we like jumping over them. Hunts do employ people - that’s beyond arguement. Hunts do take fallen livestock for free. That’s a fact. Hunts do kill foxes. That’s a fact too. All facts. Facts. Facts. Facts. Not asserions or thoeries. Facts.
.
It’s not a hidden agenda. It’s an open agenda. I’ve even heard the phrase “revenge for the miners”. Just look at the people involved - they are all of a type (bomb-banning bra-burners mainly).
.
I’ll bet you any money I’m right on this. The police really don’t want to arrest huntsmen.
Will the Police really waste time and money arresting fox hunters? If they do, then I have a serious protest against the whole thing, considering their apparent inability to do anything about true, violent crime in my neighborhood, especially the wonderful youths from the housing estate that make walking to / from my house such a joy after pub closing time.
The hunters can come get the foxes in my neighborhood any time. They piss on my front door, dig through my rubbish, make my entire neighborhood stink when it’s wet, and chase my cats (if my cats weren’t young and fast, they would be lunch by now - I don’t let them outside anymore. Foxes have chased them INTO MY HOUSE!). And the Council can do nothing about it because of the idiot animal rights protestors forcing bullshit laws like this to soothe their consciences. Like these mangy, diseased, and starving animals have a fantastic and fun-filled life living in my garden and running around my streets.
Basically, it’s a political bum fight hidden behind an altruistic agenda that doesn’t help the ‘victims’ of this ‘cruel bloodsport’ yet ignores the true cruelty of allowing animals to attempt to live wild in an urban environement. It’s not about kindness to animals, or it would provide something to actually take care of foxes. It’s a moronic political exercise that will do absolutely no good to anyone and only serve to further alienate the populace from a do-nothing nanny state.
To which the reply to is… “So?” Are these defences for hunting? It keeps the hedges neat? It employs people? Well, this is too bad, but I can can think of lots of things that employed people that we do without now because they were obsolete or immoral. Perhaps the money that went towards employing people to fox hunt will be spent in a more useful venture employing others? Isn’t this good, sound Tory economics?
.
I actually only quote the above because it says more about your (and the pro-hunter’s generally) mindset than those who oppose hunting. They’re wrong, and just spiteful because… well, just look at them… they’re that * type* aren’t they?
Sorry to burst your paranoia bubble, but the “people involved” are politicians and the general public.
If you’re so convinced of the cosy relationship between huntsmen and the police then maybe you have another clue as to why everyone else hates and persecutes you so much. You think you’re above the law.
The Police always found time and money to arrest hunt saboteurs. If anything this law should save them time and money. Should the hunts ignore the law I expect them to be treated in the same manner.
What does fox hunting in a rural area have to do with fox being pests in your urban area? They are two different problems, one is not a solution to the other.
Why does this matter? In either case, it was a waste of police money and resources in a fruitless and meaningless waste of time rather than spending that time and money on policing real crime. It’s stupid; the fact that the hunt protesters are just as stupid as the hunters who disobey the law doesn’t make it any better.
My point being, they (the animal rights people protesting the rural hunts) are wasting money ‘saving’ a massively overpopulated species to protect it from cruelty, but ignoring real cruelty that could be easily and quickly addressed by relocating the urban foxes. It’s a question of priorities - if their true reasons for the ban were animal protection, then they would implement real change that would help real animals rather than window dressing for political gain that just happens to target the rivals of certain politicians.
I dunno, I guess I see being torn apart by dogs as more cruel/painful/whatever than being shot to death, assuming the hunter is shooting to kill and isn’t just kneecapping them. Not jumping in on either side of the debate, just saying I don’t follow why you feel it is evident that the gun vs. dogs automatically makes it a class thing.
