Who is Going on 'The March'?

Former Member · September 2002

Originally posted by stee1gate
No class divisions have nothing to do with opposing hunting! .

....If anything it is because fox hunting is an upper class sport that its followers think they are above everyone else!'

You've just contradicted yourself na dthats exactly the kind of 'classism' and generalisations I was talking about.

How many of you have actually been hunting? Most of people against it have third hand views from other people who then have it from other people.

In response to Man Of Kent, a foxes scent is found by the hounds and they go off and track it down, for want of a better phrase.
The foxes are nbot always caught as the scent may go cold. Sometimes a lareg amount are caught, sometimes none.
They are organised hunts and organised months or weeks in advance. Land owners permission is always required.

Originally posted by clair:

'Having been on a few hunts myself I can honestly say from exprience that the fox dies very quickly. If you were to try and shoot a fox, the chances are (even the most accurate shooters will admit this) that the fox will be hit in the leg or similar i.e. a non fatal injury which will lead them to crawl off into a ditch and die slowly and painfully.'

This is exactly what a lot of people don't understand. A farmer/land owner will agree for a hunt to take place on his land due to foxes being a nuisance eg harassing and killing livestock. The hunt will come along and try to keep down the fox population.

If the hunt DID NOT do this, then a Farmer may resort to doing it himself. This could include anything from gassing them, snaring them or shooting them. All of these are not a fool proof as the hunting method and are less humane. There is a higher chance of the animal being maimed using these methods.

Don't reply to this if your going to give me the same old bullshit about a fox being ripped to shreds and all of that crap because those situations are a minority and are spread about to'inform' people about what is happening. These stories then snowball and people think that it is true.

Former Member · September 2002

Originally posted by Gandalf
You've just contradicted yourself na dthats exactly the kind of 'classism' and generalisations I was talking about.

For Steelgate there are only two classes...

Personally I don't believe that class does come into my anti-hunting stance. I don't care what you background is.

How many of you have actually been hunting?

I haven't, but then I find it repulsive, so I'm unlikely to.

Have you ever robbed an old lady? No, and not just because it is illegal (afterall no-one is totally law abiding), but also becuase it is a repulsive act...

a foxes scent is found by the hounds and they go off and track it down, for want of a better phrase.
The foxes are nbot always caught as the scent may go cold. Sometimes a lareg amount are caught, sometimes none.
They are organised hunts and organised months or weeks in advance. Land owners permission is always required.

So, in fact what you are saying is that you go looking for foxes, whether they are there or not. It really makes little difference.

I thought that this was supposed to be about pest control, and yet you don't only look for cases where the "pest" is actually there...

This is exactly what a lot of people don't understand. A farmer/land owner will agree for a hunt to take place on his land due to foxes being a nuisance eg harassing and killing livestock. The hunt will come along and try to keep down the fox population.

So much of a nuisance that they are willing to wait months for a hunt...?

All of these are not a fool proof as the hunting method and are less humane. There is a higher chance of the animal being maimed using these methods.

Hunts are fool proof? You said - "The foxes are not always caught as the scent may go cold. Sometimes a large amount are caught, sometimes none."

Don't reply to this if your going to give me the same old bullshit about a fox being ripped to shreds and all of that crap because those situations are a minority and are spread about to'inform' people about what is happening. These stories then snowball and people think that it is true.

So no fox is ever "ripped apart"?

So how are they killed, if not by the dogs?

Former Member · September 2002

Originally posted by Gandalf
How many of you have actually been hunting? Most of people against it have third hand views from other people who then have it from other people.

I've done quite a bit of hunting, but not with dogs and horses.

Originally posted by clair:

'Having been on a few hunts myself I can honestly say from exprience that the fox dies very quickly. If you were to try and shoot a fox, the chances are (even the most accurate shooters will admit this) that the fox will be hit in the leg or similar i.e. a non fatal injury which will lead them to crawl off into a ditch and die slowly and painfully.'

This is exactly what a lot of people don't understand. A farmer/land owner will agree for a hunt to take place on his land due to foxes being a nuisance eg harassing and killing livestock. The hunt will come along and try to keep down the fox population.

If the hunt DID NOT do this, then a Farmer may resort to doing it himself. This could include anything from gassing them, snaring them or shooting them. All of these are not a fool proof as the hunting method and are less humane. There is a higher chance of the animal being maimed using these methods.

Foxes are hunted in the US for the same reasons. Farmers go so far as to put a bounty on the animal in some cases. Traps are often used (usually live cage traps these days), or a marksman may go and sit in a blind for a shot. Having shot a few fox in my younger days, I can tell you that the fox doesn't suffer at all when being shot. Extremity shots are rare (at least among the hunters I know). It does take skill.

In the USA, we've gone through all the arguments about hunting and not hunting. Areas that have banned hunting have learned their lessons fairly rapidly as wildlife populations extend and deer and other wildlife encroach on gardens, crops, etc. The most dangerous effect in the US in some areas has been the uncontrolled expansion of predators, and the resultant danger to humans (bears in New Jersey!).

Hunting remains the most effective means of wildlife management, and a good wildlife management program results in a larger wildlife population than an unchecked population (primarily because of starvation deaths in winter). Whether you think hunting is barbaric, etc. or not, the facts remain that it is the most efficient and effective way to control wildlife population, and that is more humane on the whole than allowing disease and starvation to run its course.

Former Member · September 2002

Greenhat, it's not hunting that is at issue, but hunting with dogs. That is all that the proposed law covers, as is the case in Scotland.

Former Member · September 2002

Originally posted by Man Of Kent
Greenhat, it's not hunting that is at issue, but hunting with dogs. That is all that the proposed law covers, as is the case in Scotland.

Well, as I stated, I don't have any experience with hunting with dogs, or horses. However, I do believe the argument that hunting with dogs is more humane than some of the alternatives is flawed. I don't know how humane hunting with dogs is, but it can't be any more humane than a 72gr bullet delivered at 2500 feet per second to the shoulder or head.

Former Member · September 2002

Foxes are killed by a single bite to the neck, this is very quick. The foxes themselves tear chickens, lambs and newborn calves to death....

Skive · September 2002

There's no point in banning hunting with dogs unless you introduce large fines for snaring and poisoning too. As far as I can see the only properly 'humane' method of killing these animals is by the bullet.

I find it bizzare that people can get so worked up this issue though, why do they get so upset about killing a fox when they'd quite happily put poison down for rats another warm blooded mammal. In my opinoin poisoning would be a death far worse than hunting. It's a shame that people who put all this energy into banning fox hunting couldn't put it into campaigning for something far more worthwhile like the homeless or something.

What's next after fox hunting - shooting or maybe even fishing. It worries me!

Former Member · September 2002

Originally posted by Gandalf
No class divisions have nothing to do with opposing hunting! .

....If anything it is because fox hunting is an upper class sport that its followers think they are above everyone else!'

You've just contradicted yourself na dthats exactly the kind of 'classism' and generalisations I was talking about.

No I haven't contradited my self. I meant that some people think that most people hate fox hunting because it is an upper class sport, but they really hate it because it is cruel. The thing is though that the only reason that it has never been outlawed is because it is done by upper class people who think they are above the laws of cruelty to animals! That is not the same as saying we hate fox hunting becuase it is carried out by upper class people! That was just an explanation of why it has never been banned in the past!

Former Member · September 2002

Erm, are you just full of bullshit? It isn't just the preserve of the upper classes anymore, lots of people take part in it, mainly from the Middle and Working class.

I'll say this again GET A BLOODY JOB.

Former Member · September 2002

Originally posted by Whowhere
Erm, are you just full of bullshit? It isn't just the preserve of the upper classes anymore, lots of people take part in it, mainly from the Middle and Working class.

I'll say this again GET A BLOODY JOB.

I was giving the rason why fox hunting wasn't banned and that was becuase it done by upper class people whether or not working class people also take part in it or not is irrelevent. The upper classes don't wnat their sports banned and think because they are upper class they have a right to keep their sport!

How come every other cruel sport has been banned such as bear baiting, and dog fighting, because it had no upper class following!!!

I'll say it again why don't you go and join the BNP or Combat 18 where you belong!!!:mad:

Former Member · September 2002

Originally posted by stee1gate
I'll say it again why don't you go and join the BNP or Combat 18 where you belong!!!:mad:

Says the White Separatist.

LMAO

Who is Going on 'The March'?

Comments