If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
How ironic. And nope, i just noticed the picture for the millionth time this month.
All studies are politically biased. But they give you a better idea of reality than your own experiences (which are also biased).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3929441.stm
http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/general/default.aspx?oid=12486
The BBC source seems reasonably fair and informed.
However I do not agree that studies give a better idea of reality than my own experiences. My experiences may not be the whole reality- but what if the reality of the studies is a small minority of the reality?
I still think that hunting is misunderstood- and while you may have perhaps persuaded me to think that the fox population is not regulated by the hunt- that is only one argument against fox-hunting.
If not, why do all studies not agree?