-
Fair enough - I don't any any evidence beyond anecdotal about fox populations pre and post ban right now so will look in to it later. TBH I think that's symptomatic of the whole debate - largely based on emotions and with scant evidence. In terms of the hunting, most people who partake don't do it for the sick thrill of seeing an animal killed (the vast majority of the field are nowhere near when a fox is killed). Rather, they do it as it's damn good fun thundering around the countryside at high speed with your mates. That's a key misunderstanding, encapsulated by the cunt-slinging brigade in here, because it immediately writes off a large number of decent people (who might have different views towards the death of animals due to the nature of living in the countryside, but are by no means psychopaths) as bloodthirsty lunatics. People in the countryside feel like their way of life has been needlessly interefered with based on prejudice and misunderstanding, and would like to reverse the ban to stick one in the eye of the 'townies'
kimchi-
Still cunts though.
-
Fair enough; but is it then just a matter of tribal​ politics that means they can't just accept thundering about the countryside without the killing at the end of it?
Wouldn't a shotgun loaded with buckshot do for a fox? (I've only ever shot at inanimate objects....)
-
In terms of the hunting, most people who partake don't do it for the sick thrill of seeing an animal killed (the vast majority of the field are nowhere near when a fox is killed). Rather, they do it as it's damn good fun thundering around the countryside at high speed with your mates.
Well hold on a moment. If they aren't in it for the killing, why the fuck are they involved with a hunt. You don't need to try and kill a fox in a fundamentally unhumane way to thunder around the countryside at high speed. So any involvement is pretty much condoning the practice.
People in the countryside feel like their way of life has been needlessly interefered with based on prejudice and misunderstanding
As a person who grew up in the countryside and has always been against hunting, I think I can safely say that that statement is
largely based on emotions and with scant evidence
Here's the thing though, despite the prejudice and misunderstanding, there's a lot of evidence showing that the practice is inhumane. Arguing for it, and by extension, participation in a hunt, whether you see the kill or not, is a statement that you think it's acceptable. What else then is acceptable to hunt members? Kitten punching, kicking buzzards, shitting in the eyes of a badger?
Perhaps we ought to look at another side of an argument and ask what is it about people participating in a hunt that doesn't make them terrible people trying to preserve a redundant yet elitist and inaccessable tradition?
-
People in the countryside feel like their way of life has been needlessly interefered with based on prejudice and misunderstanding, and would like to reverse the ban to stick one in the eye of the 'townies'
Kudos for sticking your neck out on this. I've found I was wrong to make the assumption, based on my own experience, that it was just ignorant, predjudiced 'townies' that opposed hunting, just as it's wrong to assume it's only the posh who hunt, or are involved in hunting. It's not been brought up yet that many who support hunting don't hunt themselves, but are part of the economy that relies on it. None of this, however, diminishes people's perfectly valid moral reaction against bloodsports.
snottyotter
Thrustvector
The_Seldom_Killer
William.
I've never found the population control argument that convincing; have fox populations exploded since the hunting ban? As to shooting, is there any reason why you need trained marksmen to shoot foxes but not rabbits?
I can see there's an appeal to thundering around the countryside in a group - I quite like to do the same on a bike - but I don't see why that urge can't be fulfilled by point-to-points and drag hunting.