Turn on thread page Beta

fox hunting watch

Announcements
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Geordie_in_HK)
    It's got nothing to do with class war - people who live in the country aren't rich, they're farmers scraping a living. The vast majority of the upper and middle classes live in cities and the suburbs not country mansions!

    And all this BS about only 1% of foxes being killed by hunting with dogs it's like saying only 10 people per year are stoned to death in country X so we shouldn't care! Oh and stoning people to death is a tradition so we should keep it.

    Like stoning people to death, fox hunting is outdated and should be banned.
    The fact that it is so closely associated with the upper-classes is enough to push it right up Blairs agenda.

    The fact that only 1% of foxes are killed by hunting with dogs is not "BS", and there are far more pressing political issues than this.

    It is a disgrace that Tony Blair can bump something up the agenda with little or no support, by shoving the Parliament act in the face of democracy.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Of course there are more pressing political issues but fox hunting is important to many people. If Labour was a half decent government it would be able to work on the NHS, crime, transport etc at the same time as fox hunting. Blair should have taken less time putting the fox hunting bill through, he doesn't have the balls.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Geordie_in_HK)
    Of course there are more pressing political issues but fox hunting is important to many people. If Labour was a half decent government it would be able to work on the NHS, crime, transport etc at the same time as fox hunting. Blair should have taken less time putting the fox hunting bill through, he doesn't have the balls.
    Yup, its a minor concern for many people, but i doubt many people regard it as "important", and when they voted for Tony Blair, they did not vote for 8 years of Tony Blair fiddling with the system for his own personal interests.
    He hasn't even finished off fox hunting.
    The ban, like many of Tony Blairs ventures, was just a waste of time.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by beekeeper_)
    This certainly does not support the ban that Tony Blair imposed.

    Fox hunting is effective, i think that what you mean to say, is fox hunting with dogs is ineffective.

    I think that something like 1% of foxes are killed by hunting with dogs, among the methods, there are far more brutal, more traditional methods (which are not covered by the ban).
    If so few foxes are killed this way, what was the point in Tony Blairs ban? Hell, it can't even be imposed.

    The fact is that Tony Blair has wasted the best part of a decade trying to force this through Parliament, even though it only aims to prevent hunting with dogs, and it is almost impossible to impose.

    It smacks of class war to me, and Tony Blair knows it.
    But if fox hunting is something that is taken up by people from all calsses (as you and many supporters would have us believe) then how is it a class war.
    Could it not simply be that we think it is a barbaric past time with no place in a civilised society? The fact that many hunts have now moved to france - where they can hunt away happily just shows it wasn't the local farmers for whom they were trying to rid of pests. They just loved their little blood sports.

    And when push comes to shove, an dsomething you DIDN'T acknowledge earlier is that the hunting ban had the majority support of the nation
    crikey, we went to war with Iraq with much less upoort. So why not ban fox hunting.
    certainly it is supported by more than 'Tony and a few of his cronies'
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by foolfarian)
    But if fox hunting is something that is taken up by people from all calsses (as you and many supporters would have us believe) then how is it a class war.
    Because many who oppose it percieve it to be an upper class activity and make their decision based on that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by foolfarian)
    But if fox hunting is something that is taken up by people from all calsses (as you and many supporters would have us believe) then how is it a class war.
    Fox hunting isnt a class war, the basis for banning it is.

    Could it not simply be that we think it is a barbaric past time with no place in a civilised society?
    Those in support of the ban, yes. There are also those who believe it is not barbaric and delivers a livelihood and service to the rural community. There are also those who believe that it is barbaric, but since it is the choice of others to pursue that sport, there is no impeding reason why one should support a ban.

    The fact that many hunts have now moved to france - where they can hunt away happily just shows it wasn't the local farmers for whom they were trying to rid of pests. They just loved their little blood sports.
    Indeed, it was a great source of enjoyment for a great number of the rural and urban community alike.

    And when push comes to shove, an dsomething you DIDN'T acknowledge earlier is that the hunting ban had the majority support of the nation
    crikey, we went to war with Iraq with much less upoort. So why not ban fox hunting.
    Because going to war in Iraq was a decision of national security taken for our nation. Banning fox hunting pertains to a small community whose livelihood and way of life was put in the hands of a majority many of whom had never been effected by or experienced fox hunting and the possible repercussions of a ban.

    Why was it necessary for the government to introduce legislation to prevent a nationwide ban?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by foolfarian)
    But if fox hunting is something that is taken up by people from all calsses (as you and many supporters would have us believe) then how is it a class war.
    Could it not simply be that we think it is a barbaric past time with no place in a civilised society? The fact that many hunts have now moved to france - where they can hunt away happily just shows it wasn't the local farmers for whom they were trying to rid of pests. They just loved their little blood sports.

    And when push comes to shove, an dsomething you DIDN'T acknowledge earlier is that the hunting ban had the majority support of the nation
    crikey, we went to war with Iraq with much less upoort. So why not ban fox hunting.
    certainly it is supported by more than 'Tony and a few of his cronies'
    You have missed my point entirely. When i said the following:
    "The fact that it is so closely associated with the upper-classes is enough to push it right up Blairs agenda"
    I was making a slight hint that it does not neccessarily have to be a class war, as long as Tony Blair's supporters think it is.

    It may have had the majority support of the nation, but it was one of the most ugly forms of utilitarianism i had seen in a long time. The working classes getting together to impose new laws on what they believe is just a sport of the upper classes. Absolutely disgusting.
    Tony Blair knew it, and so did Parliament, he effectively waved the Parliament Act in the face of anyone who objected to his measures.


    It was not because it is "cruel and barbaric", but because it is thought of as the preserve of the upper classes. If Tony Blair (and the 'majority') were really bothered about barbaric sports, then this is not the ban they would have wanted. Fox hunting with dogs is not nearly as barbaric as other methods.


    If you imposed new laws on minorities every time there was a majority in support, what do you expect England would look like?

    It was an insult to democracy.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonD)
    What about the argument: "It's my damned land"?
    not your damned fox though.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beekeeper_)
    Absolutely disgusting.
    Tony Blair knew it, and so did Parliament, he effectively waved the Parliament Act in the face of anyone who objected to his measures.


    It was not because it is "cruel and barbaric", but because it is thought of as the preserve of the upper classes. If Tony Blair (and the 'majority') were really bothered about barbaric sports, then this is not the ban they would have wanted. Fox hunting with dogs is not nearly as barbaric as other methods.


    If you imposed new laws on minorities every time there was a majority in support, what do you expect England would look like?

    It was an insult to democracy.
    i think your dislike of tony blair is getting in the way of your argument
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beekeeper_)
    It was not because it is "cruel and barbaric", but because it is thought of as the preserve of the upper classes. If Tony Blair (and the 'majority') were really bothered about barbaric sports, then this is not the ban they would have wanted. Fox hunting with dogs is not nearly as barbaric as other methods.
    Could you explain to me which methods of killing a fox are more barbaric than chasing it for miles before ripping it to shreds?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sophieD)
    i think your dislike of tony blair is getting in the way of your argument
    I have not stated that i dislike Tony Blair, and my argument is not centred around him.


    I suggest you read through my post again.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fleff)
    Could you explain to me which methods of killing a fox are more barbaric than chasing it for miles before ripping it to shreds?
    Hunting with dogs makes up only a small proportion of foxes killed.

    The alternative methods are poison, gas, snare, "humane trap", or shooting.

    There are no legal poisons or gasses available for fox control in the UK, and such methods invariably wind up killing the wrong species.

    Snares are a wire loop that catches and tightens on an animals neck or leg. They are set on a known path the animal takes. It is not uncommon for animals to gnaw their own legs off when caught by such devices in order to escape. Humane traps are boxes or cages with a one way door in which an animal will be held. Wild animals show considerable distress in such conditions. Both snares and other traps have the sole purpose of holding the animal until such time as someone arrives to kill the animal and put it out of its suffering. There is no relocation for these animals as there is no where for them to go.
    I have highlighted the bits that demonstrate how cruel the other methods are.

    These are not convered in the ban.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    they should hunt paedophiles instead.
 
 
 
Poll
Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?
Useful resources

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.