Re: Yesterday we received the great news that the Hunting Bill will be reintroduced to the Commons next week.
From: Matthew Maddock (matthew.maddock_at_mmaddock.com)
Date: 09/12/04
- Next message: Mr Kyle wot is called Phil: "Re: Done the Deed II"
- Previous message: Dr. Edward Warren: "Re: "THE BANTAMS: The Untold Story Of World War One.""
- In reply to: Oz: "Re: Yesterday we received the great news that the Hunting Bill will be reintroduced to the Commons next week."
- Next in thread: Jill: "Re: Yesterday we received the great news that the Hunting Bill will be reintroduced to the Commons next week."
- Reply: Jill: "Re: Yesterday we received the great news that the Hunting Bill will be reintroduced to the Commons next week."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:38:43 GMT
Well said sir!
Personally I don't particularly believe in fox hunting, but neither do I
believe the propaganda banded around my the "anti" group loonies (and
most of them are) purporting to be naturists etc, they are usually townies
who think that eating organic vegetables, and not having a wash means
that they understand the Countryside.
I grew up deep in the West Yorks Countryside surrounded by farms of all
shapes and sizes, I DO understand the Countryside!
If you see the mess a fox can make of your pet cat, or farmed chickens/ducks
etc. you would not have much sympathy for them. Just because they look
a bit "cute" does not mean they are any less of a nuisance than a rat, and
no-one
complains about the very pleasant death they endure from poisoning!
Sorry folks, but to the countryside, foxes are vermin, and nothing more.
How is hooking a fish by its mouth and dragging it into land against its
will
any less cruel? - because fish are not cute, and more people are involved
in the "sport", that is how. Believe me, this sort of interference in our
right to
do as we please will not stop at fox hunting, beware.
Matt.
"Oz" <oz@farmeroz.port995.com> wrote in message
news:esNIzwC9wvQBFwPQ@farmeroz.port995.com...
> In article <amboqk$jmt$1@helle.btinternet.com>, Charlie <Charlie@Farm-
> direct.co.uk> writes
>
> >As for hunting itself I have never been for it when they come crashing
over
> >your fields, but never really thought about the foxes as round here there
> >are far more foxes killed on the roads than are ever caught by the hunt
it
> >is just an excuse for people to tear around the country on horses which
they
> >could just as easily do without going after a fox.
>
> 1) I don't ride a horse.
>
> 2) I don't allow the hunt on my land.
>
> 3) I rather like foxes, as long as they keep well away from people and
> chickens (which they never do).
>
> 4) I have asked a lot of people who have seen foxes killed by the hunt,
> both people for and neutral (bordering on anti) foxhunting. They all
> report death as near instantaneous (which is more than you can say about
> the foxes victims).
>
> 5) There is no doubt in my mind that horses love the hunt. Far too many
> people who have had horses that have been in a hunt have reported this.
>
> 6) In general the anti-hunt people seem not to be country folk and do
> not seem to understand nature at all well.
>
> 7) Given the many and unpleasant ways that foxes would die in the wild I
> believe the hunt is more humane than nature, and by a long way. The
> natural way for a fox to die is slowly, thirsty and starving, of
> disease, injury or old age. Quite frankly this is a very slow and
> unpleasant way to die.
>
> 8) I have used a rifle on rabbits. Like soldiers who can operate with
> missing limbs for a surprisingly long time, and seriously wounded people
> who can live with serious injury for days it's quite hard (I would say
> impossible) to guarantee to kill humanely with a rifle. I thus do not
> believe that shooting is a humane alternative.
>
> 9) Generally, IMHO, foxhunting is not about eradicating foxes and never
> has been. It basically maintains the population at about the level where
> the fox does not need to predate on human stock for food. Any that do
> appear to be specifically hunted down in areas where this facility is
> required frequently.
>
> 10) The anti's seem to be uniformly in three groups:
> A) Those that through ignorance believe differently to the points above
> and who are relatively easily convinced otherwise.
> B) The class warrior who has pretty well no knowledge of nature or
> hunting but who sees the hunt as comprising the 'ruling classes' and
> thinks by fighting the hunt he is fighting the ruling classes. This is
> something the 'ruling classes' are very happy to allow to continue as it
> keeps them out of their hair.
> C) Animal rights activists who simultaneously want things natural, want
> no introduced species and who oppose the removal of introduced species.
> They are seriously ignorant, seriously schizophrenic and if exposed to
> nature would soon leave the gene pool.
>
> 11) I support the right (and it is a right) for people to do what they
> wish on their own land so long as it doesn't harm other people.
>
> 12) Fishing and shooting is next.
> Longer term the banning of livestock and pets.
>
> --
> Oz
> This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
>
> BTOPENWORLD address about to cease. DEMON address no longer in use.
> >>Use oz@farmeroz.port995.com<<
> ozacoohdb@despammed.com still functions.
>
- Next message: Mr Kyle wot is called Phil: "Re: Done the Deed II"
- Previous message: Dr. Edward Warren: "Re: "THE BANTAMS: The Untold Story Of World War One.""
- In reply to: Oz: "Re: Yesterday we received the great news that the Hunting Bill will be reintroduced to the Commons next week."
- Next in thread: Jill: "Re: Yesterday we received the great news that the Hunting Bill will be reintroduced to the Commons next week."
- Reply: Jill: "Re: Yesterday we received the great news that the Hunting Bill will be reintroduced to the Commons next week."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|