Turn on thread page Beta

Fox hunting to be legalised if Tories win 2015 General Election watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rainshadow)
    Just because foxes aren't people doesn't mean you can murder them???




    Why are foxes killed then? I'm interested.
    Because they maul livestock on a large scale. In my area, this mainly consists of chickens, but they have also been known to attack horses turned out in the fields. During lambing season, they can cause havoc, as they can traumatise ewes and cause them to miscarry or have complications in pregnancy, they also kill lambs. They tend to kill chickens en masse, not just for fun, but because they will kill ten, eat one and intend to return later for the rest (this tends to be more with free range chickens in my experience). That's why the numbers are kept down, I don't like it, but it is a bit of a necessary evil.

    Also, murder is a crime exclusive to humans. I might not have eaten meat or fish for the last ten years, but I still know the law.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Harold)
    No, I don't think they could justify doing that. It's just a desperate attempt to claw back some of the old boys' club back from UKIP.
    Either way they'd be bonkers to think that would be a good idea.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I could understand arguing against the party-political efficacy of such a policy, but how exactly is the hunting ban justified?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BitWindy)
    I could understand arguing against the party-political efficacy of such a policy, but how exactly is the hunting ban justified?
    Well how on earth is it justifiable to ride around fields with a pack of dogs with the sole aim of ripping an innocent creature to pieces?
    There is no need for it- nature can and will run its own course.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reue)
    To attempt to portray this horrific violent blood sport as anything other is disgusting.

    I can't see the ban being repelled. Thankfully. I just wish they would start enforcing it in the first place.

    TALLY-HO!
    *bang*
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Lord Harold)
    Well how on earth is it justifiable to ride around fields with a pack of dogs with the sole aim of ripping an innocent creature to pieces?
    There is no need for it- nature can and will run its own course.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    See: all the posts explaining why
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Harold)
    Well how on earth is it justifiable to ride around fields with a pack of dogs with the sole aim of ripping an innocent creature to pieces?
    There is no need for it- nature can and will run its own course.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Innocent?

    Stop anthropomorphising animals. There is not innocent or guilty in nature. It is hunter and hunted.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Could whoever determines how the "New on TSR" is worded please make it correct, hunting with dogs is still legal, they just aren't supposed to do the killing
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Harold)
    Well how on earth is it justifiable to ride around fields with a pack of dogs with the sole aim of ripping an innocent creature to pieces?
    There is no need for it- nature can and will run its own course.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    It's just the same as shooting them if you're concerned with "innocence", and no one is going to ban that.

    If the method is what irks you, then perhaps we'd ought to throw cats in prison for mauling pigeons, or shoot hawks for murdering innocent rabbits.

    It is justified, so far as liberty goes, because it harms no people. If you disagree with it ethically then that's something else entirely.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BitWindy)
    It's just the same as shooting them if you're concerned with "innocence", and no one is going to ban that.

    If the method is what irks you, then perhaps we'd ought to throw cats in prison for mauling pigeons, or shoot hawks for murdering innocent rabbits.

    It is justified, so far as liberty goes, because it harms no people. If you disagree with it ethically then that's something else entirely.
    Animals tend to kill out of instinct - mainly for food or because they feel threatened. There's no justification for literally scaring an animal to death for the amusement of humans.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by qwertyking)
    Animals tend to kill out of instinct - mainly for food or because they feel threatened. There's no justification for literally scaring an animal to death for the amusement of humans.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    What are you on?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by qwertyking)
    Animals tend to kill out of instinct - mainly for food or because they feel threatened. There's no justification for literally scaring an animal to death for the amusement of humans.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Ignoring economic arguments for fox hunting, part of the justification is that it does provide amusement to humans. I know it sounds callous to you, but it's true.

    Personally, I don't think I'd ever want to hunt foxes, but does this mean I support the use of state intervention to prevent others doing so? No, that would be even harder to justify.

    All too often people reduce ethical discussions down to banning or not banning, as if a normative statement is worthless without enforcement.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by qwertyking)
    Animals tend to kill out of instinct - mainly for food or because they feel threatened. There's no justification for literally scaring an animal to death for the amusement of humans.
    Sure there is, if it's a side-effect of performing a public good.

    And honestly, you can't regulate whether someone enjoys performing a particular task or not.

    The problem with your statement is that it suggests you would be fine with foxes being hunted by being 'scared to death' if it were done by vegans on quad bikes.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    If fox hunting is legalised, why can't dogfighting be? It all comes down to class, as usual.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    If fox hunting is legalised, why can't dogfighting be? It all comes down to class, as usual.
    Well, they're hardly comparable.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    If fox hunting is legalised, why can't dogfighting be? It all comes down to class, as usual.
    One is a spectator sport of 'you and him fight', which has no utility beyond entertainment; fox hunting has, from one perspective at least, a long-standing social utility in controlling a pest that has enjoyment as a side-effect.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    One is a spectator sport of 'you and him fight', which has no utility beyond entertainment; fox hunting has, from one perspective at least, a long-standing social utility in controlling a pest that has enjoyment as a side-effect.
    So's boxing. And if it's pest control, then they could just shoot them more humanely, with tranquilizer then gun, or whatever.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Well, they're hardly comparable.
    They both involve the slow, painful death of an animal.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    So's boxing.
    Consenting adult humans.

    And if it's pest control, then they could just shoot them more humanely, with tranquilizer then gun, or whatever.
    Possibly. But I don't think many people here actually have a full appreciation of how massive many farms are, or how difficult they are to maintain and protect.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    It is already happening.
    Maybe, and i still dont agree with it, but if it becomes legalised it will be even more widespread.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    They both involve the slow, painful death of an animal.
    This.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

1,062

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.