Judges Rule Against Fox Hunting Ban Challenge

[Admiral Valdemar]

Just been announced by the Beeb that the challenge to the bill to ban fox hunting with dogs has been defeated and that the ban will go ahead as per original plans.

It's funny watching the interviewed hunting supporters go on about how this law is "wrong" and infringing on their human rights and that many will break the law to prove a point that hunting will go on.

Morons. I'll be laughing when their appeal to the House of Lords is also shot down in flames, then all they have is the ECHR to cry to and hopefully no one will listen to them this time.

[Plekhanov]

They never had a chance as if the court was ever going to rule against the parliament act.

It'll be interesting to see just how far against their established positions these guys love of killing small furry animals will take them, after the police give them a bit of a kicking they suddenly discover police brutality and the concept of human rights after decades of denying the possibly of such a thing when it was left wingers at the wrong end of a baton. Now the Europhobic Tory assholes are going crying to the ECHR which is a bit of a u-turn after the years of bitching about it's decisions when it was tory policies being struck down.

That said, much as I love seeing the hunters wail, moan and generally make fools of themselves the ban is an infringement on their liberties and should repealed.

[TheDarkling]

I love it when they scream about class discrimination.

The only class discrimination involving blood sports has been in there favour, dog fighting, cock fighting, badger baiting and the other traditional "workingman’s" blood sports were banned decades ago, it is only due to their undue influence that fox hunting escaped banning for this long.

Frankly I'm in favour of the ban just to annoy these prats complaining about it, irrespective of any other benefits.

[Plekhanov]

I love it when they scream about class discrimination.

The only class discrimination involving blood sports has been in there favour, dog fighting, cock fighting, badger baiting and the other traditional "workingman’s" blood sports were banned decades ago, it is only due to their undue influence that fox hunting escaped banning for this long.

On the whole that's true though hare coursing which is a cross class pursuit was legal till very recently. There are also qualitative difference's between bear bating, cock fighting and so forth in that foxes need to be kept down any way so why shouldn't people enjoy it?

The fact that toffs political influence has been a major factor in preventing a ban on fox hunting doesn't mean that those pushing for a ban aren't motivated by class antagonism. Overwhelmingly people support a ban because

1.They think foxes are cute
2.They dislike posh people, who ride horses, wear red coats.

I know hunt sabs who aren't even vegetarians for fucks sake, they do it because they find it exciting and like getting into fights with the police and posh twats. It truly astonishes me that the same British public who support the factory farming industry think they have the moral authority to ban fox hunting when its pretty clear which one causes the most suffering to animals.

Frankly I'm in favour of the ban just to annoy these prats complaining about it, irrespective of any other benefits.

That's rather my point much as it is fun to pay them back for banning “dancing to repetitive beats” in the 96 Criminal Justice Act and so forth, I think you need to have a better reason than that to criminalise people.

Merely morally disapproving of an activity isn't enough you have to actively show that fox hunting does harm and that criminalising it will remedy this. Seeing as how fox hunting does no harm to anybody and that this law will to nothing but waste police time and bring the state into conflict with significant numbers of people it is a bad law and should be repealed.

[A Big Flying Fish]

Quite frankly, I gave up caring about the decision long ago.
Cries of class descrimination are just sad, since the hunt masters seem to forget just how little terrier men and stable hands generally earn, and I doubt they socialise terribly much with the huntsmen.
The most annoying thing is that when the Countryside Alliance et al say they will simply ignore the law is simply becuase its seems like it would be so easy to do. You'd have to prove that the hunt meets were actively chasing a fox, not just taking their horses out for a ride with the dogs, and a few dogs just got out of control and chased a fox (a dumb explaination, but a viable one).
The other options didn't look much better though, with regulation having the same problems, and no ban leaving the same bitch fest.

[TheDarkling]

On the whole that's true though hare coursing which is a cross class pursuit was legal till very recently. There are also qualitative difference's between bear bating, cock fighting and so forth in that foxes need to be kept down any way so why shouldn't people enjoy it?

The usefulness of fox hunting as a means of population control is of some debate beside which there are more humane ways of putting an animal down then chasing it until it's heart gives out or it is torn to shreds.

The fact that toffs political influence has been a major factor in preventing a ban on fox hunting doesn't mean that those pushing for a ban aren't motivated by class antagonism. Overwhelmingly people support a ban because

Only in that people see the Toffs getting away with something they can't because their blood sports were banned, as such they are right to feel the upper class are getting preferential treatment.

1.They think foxes are cute
2.They dislike posh people, who ride horses, wear red coats.

Posh people who ride horses and wear red are some of my favourite people....... from the 19th century.
I favour a ban on hunting simply because the law should be consistent.

I know hunt sabs who aren't even vegetarians for fucks sake, they do it because they find it exciting and like getting into fights with the police and posh twats. It truly astonishes me that the same British public who support the factory farming industry think they have the moral authority to ban fox hunting when its pretty clear which one causes the most suffering to animals.

When its going to cost you personally then it is a different matter, it is rather selfish but that is the way of the world I am afraid.

That's rather my point much as it is fun to pay them back for banning “dancing to repetitive beats” in the 96 Criminal Justice Act and so forth, I think you need to have a better reason than that to criminalise people.

Actually I wish to pay them back for getting into fights with the police, rank disrespect for the law and invading the heart of our democracy.
I have similar feelings about Fathers for Justice as well so it isn't a class issue it is about people taking things to far because they have "poor me" complexes and thus think they can do whatever the hell they like to reverse their imagined persecution.

Merely morally disapproving of an activity isn't enough you have to actively show that fox hunting does harm and that criminalising it will remedy this.

It harms about as much as cock fighting of dog fighting (and more in the animal’s case), decriminalise them as well.

Seeing as how fox hunting does no harm to anybody and that this law will to nothing but waste police time and bring the state into conflict with significant numbers of people it is a bad law and should be repealed.

It shouldn't be repealed for the simple fact that repealing the law would be giving into this mob and it will only encourage others to follow in their footsteps.
As for it bringing people into conflict with the government, if you are truly serious about that then you should favour populist ideas that would have us withdrawing from Europe, building a huge wall around the country and telling foreigners to stay out)although these measures would have far more support than keeping Fox hunting does).

I wouldn’t be happy living in such a country although your average Daily Mail/Sun reader would.

Politicians aren't there to translate the will of the mob they are there to do what they think is best for the country and they are judged upon how well they fulfil that role every 4-5 years.

Of course in this case they are following the will of the public just not the more vocal pro hunting faction.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Eh, just have all the hunting enthusiasts move to Wyoming. They're rich enough to provide a boon to the state economy, and there are no laws against any forms of hunting whatsoever on private property there, so they could buy a few square miles and use maxim guns on deer herds for all the government cares.

[HemlockGrey]

How could such a ban be enforced? Are the British going to dispatch police officers to roam the countryside on horseback trying to ferret out underground fox-hunters?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

How could such a ban be enforced? Are the British going to dispatch police officers to roam the countryside on horseback trying to ferret out underground fox-hunters?

The obvious solution is to spend several billion pounds on a fleet of UAVs fitted with cameras to patrol the English countryside.

[Sharp-kun]

How could such a ban be enforced? Are the British going to dispatch police officers to roam the countryside on horseback trying to ferret out underground fox-hunters?

I don't think so. What I would imagine is that they'll deal with it as they find it, and hope that a few high profile convictions will discourage others.

[BenRG]

How could such a ban be enforced? Are the British going to dispatch police officers to roam the countryside on horseback trying to ferret out underground fox-hunters?

Remember that fox hunting in the UK is nothing like hunting in the US. Hunts are huge, organised groups of dozens of people on horseback with a support crew of up to 100 both back home and out trying to flush the prey out of the undergrowth. Additionally, there are lots of people blowing hunting horns, just because it makes them feel cool.

Simply put, fox hunting, UK aristocrat-style, is something that you simply cannot do covertly. The noise and the number of people will alert everyone for several miles in every direction that a hunt is on. They will need just one helicopter for observation a few patrol cars and some black marias waiting at the muster point to surround the hunters and then carry everyone off.

The main objection is that you can't exactly lock someone away for life for defying a hunting ban. These guys have already said that they will just not pay their fines, do whatever time (probably never more than 12 months) that they are sentanced to and then keep coming back to hunt. What are you supposed to do? Shoot them?

This is another one of those problems that can only be solved by education. Once you have got a 99.9%-0.1% population split agreeing that killing for kicks is wrong, then even the most determinedly psychotic of them will go away and learn to sate their bloodlust by shooting small animals with high-calibre rifles.

[Rye]

How could such a ban be enforced? Are the British going to dispatch police officers to roam the countryside on horseback trying to ferret out underground fox-hunters?

It wouldn't be that difficult; police officers have to stake out hunts regularly already because of the sheer amount of protesters and sabateurs that show up. All they have to do is view the rich people as bad too and problem solved.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Meh. This stinks of another European "we decided that we don't like this so we'll ban it" law. I like my guns and hunting here. Way too statist and culturally condescending over there for me.

[Sharp-kun]

I like my guns and hunting here.

Do you also like setting the hounds on the animals you hunt?

[TheDarkling]

Meh. This stinks of another European "we decided that we don't like this so we'll ban it" law. I like my guns and hunting here. Way too statist and culturally condescending over there for me.

The US has laws against dog fighting and the like and that is essentially what fox hunting is.

Setting a pack of hounds on a fox is little different than setting one dog on another.

[TheDarkling]

The main objection is that you can't exactly lock someone away for life for defying a hunting ban. These guys have already said that they will just not pay their fines, do whatever time (probably never more than 12 months) that they are sentanced to and then keep coming back to hunt. What are you supposed to do? Shoot them?

They say that but I'm willing to bet spending year after year in jail will change their minds.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I'm sure the fox cares so much if I give it a gut-sucking blow-out exit wound with my Magnum over letting a dog catch it. It isn't as if they are not hunted by predators in the wild.

[Illuminatus Primus]

The US has laws against dog fighting and the like and that is essentially what fox hunting is.

Setting a pack of hounds on a fox is little different than setting one dog on another.

Dog fighting has precisely zero objective contribution to society. Fox hunting does. And foxes are less intelligent animals than dogs.

[TheDarkling]

I'm sure the fox cares so much if I give it a gut-sucking blow-out exit wound with my Magnum over letting a dog catch it. It isn't as if they are not hunted by predators in the wild.

Being chased till your heart gives out (or you get kidney failure due to stress) or until you are torn to pieces sounds worse than being cleanly shot to me.

And as I said the US bans dog fighting which would seem to be a ""we decided that we don't like this so we'll ban it" law." indicating it isn't just a European phenomena.

[Sharp-kun]

It isn't as if they are not hunted by predators in the wild.

In the wild they aren't chased across the country by packs of dogs and horses, horns being blown etc.

What reason is there to hunt with dogs over just normal hunting?

[TheDarkling]

Dog fighting has precisely zero objective contribution to society. Fox hunting does. And foxes are less intelligent animals than dogs.

Dog fighting produces entertainment the same as fox hunting.

Fox hunting in Britain accounts for a rather small percentage (single digits) of Fox deaths so it isn’t an effective means of population control.

[Plekhanov]

I'm sure the fox cares so much if I give it a gut-sucking blow-out exit wound with my Magnum over letting a dog catch it. It isn't as if they are not hunted by predators in the wild.

Being chased till your heart gives out (or you get kidney failure due to stress) or until you are torn to pieces sounds worse than being cleanly shot to me.

That's stuffs unpleasant and emotive but doesn't approach the levels of suffering endured by factory farmed animals. Why is it that people who support the factory farming industry which condemns millions of animals to short tortuous lives feel that they can criminalise an unpopular minority who get there kicks unnecessarily drawing out the deaths of a few cute animals who up until they encounter the hounds have had compared to factory farmed animals blissful, free lives?

It isn't as if they are not hunted by predators in the wild.

In the wild they aren't chased across the country by packs of dogs and horses, horns being blown etc.

What reason is there to hunt with dogs over just normal hunting?

Why should they have to have a reason other than that they like doing it?

Your question implies that the burden of proof is on the hunters to prove that hunting with hounds is logically justifiable or we can justifiably criminalise it. Surely the reverse should be true and their should be a presumption against banning activities unless it can be shown that they are so harmful to society that the extreme measure of outlawing them.

You clearly find fox hunting objectionable, so do I, which is one of the reasons why I don't go fox hunting. Would you care to explain to me logically why fox hunting is an evil that we need to start arresting and imprisoning it's practitioners?

Dog fighting has precisely zero objective contribution to society. Fox hunting does. And foxes are less intelligent animals than dogs.

Dog fighting produces entertainment the same as fox hunting.

If foxes need to be kept down why shouldn't people enjoy doing so?

Fox hunting in Britain accounts for a rather small percentage (single digits) of Fox deaths so it isn’t an effective means of population control.

So what if it's ineffective? Unless you a suggesting that only the most efficient form of any activity be legal what difference does that make to anything? So long as the hunters don't expect the state to subsidise their woefully inefficient pest control practices what business is it of yours?

Seeing as you brought up the issue of efficiency, I assume you are a meat eater, if so are you aware that raising animals to slaughter is an extremely inefficient means of food production and that adopting a vegetarian diet would mean you consume less than ¼ of the environmental resources you consume as a meat eater?

I suspect that major reason you don't adopt such an efficient diet is because you enjoy eating meat, in other words you consume resources unnecessarily and cause suffering to be inflicted upon factory farmed animals for fun. Just as fox hunters inefficiently torture foxes for fun.

So please explain why should fox hunting be criminalised whilst the consuming of meat by those without a medical need to do so remains legal? And when composing your answer please do bear in mind that a hunted fox endures at worst a few deeply unpleasant hours whereas a factory farmed pig for example endures a lifetime of suffering.

[TheDarkling]

That's stuffs unpleasant and emotive but doesn't approach the levels of suffering endured by factory farmed animals. Why is it that people who support the factory farming industry which condemns millions of animals to short tortuous lives feel that they can criminalise an unpopular minority who get there kicks unnecessarily drawing out the deaths of a few cute animals who up until they encounter the hounds have had compared to factory farmed animals blissful, free lives?

I'm not necessarily sure farm animals do suffer more but as I said, that is an issue that hits people in the pocket.
That aside from the fact that eating is a necessity, getting a particular form of enjoyment isn't.

If foxes need to be kept down why shouldn't people enjoy doing so?

Fox hunting kills very few foxes so it isn't justifiable as a measure of population control.
It is justifiable (and practiced) as a form as entertainment like the other blood sports.

So what if it's ineffective? Unless you a suggesting that only the most efficient form of any activity be legal what difference does that make to anything? So long as the hunters don't expect the state to subsidise their woefully inefficient pest control practices what business is it of yours?

That is a rather odd reading of my post.

My point was that it doesn't usefully contribute to society anymore than dog fighting, the effect on the fox population is very low and if fox hunting didn't take place then the fox population would be kept down in other means (disease, farmers, cars, food limitations).

I am not saying it should be banned because it is inefficient (and I again find it very odd that you would draw such a conclusion) only that the supposed benefit as pest control doesn't really exist.

Seeing as you brought up the issue of efficiency, I assume you are a meat eater, if so are you aware that raising animals to slaughter is an extremely inefficient means of food production and that adopting a vegetarian diet would mean you consume less than ¼ of the environmental resources you consume as a meat eater?

Since you are misrepresenting what I said I have no need to answer this.

I suspect that major reason you don't adopt such an efficient diet is because you enjoy eating meat, in other words you consume resources unnecessarily and cause suffering to be inflicted upon factory farmed animals for fun. Just as fox hunters inefficiently torture foxes for fun.

True and if the government banned the eating of chicken because is it was inefficient then it would only be consistent if they did the same for other meats, however they haven't done it for any meat thus the law is consistent.

So please explain why should fox hunting be criminalised whilst the consuming of meat by those without a medical need to do so remains legal? And when composing your answer please do bear in mind that a hunted fox endures at worst a few deeply unpleasant hours whereas a factory farmed pig for example endures a lifetime of suffering.

I state fox hunting should enjoy the same level of criminality as other blood sports, whether that means fox hunting should be criminalised or dog fighting/cock fight etc should be legalised is something I haven't commented on.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I'm sure the fox cares so much if I give it a gut-sucking blow-out exit wound with my Magnum over letting a dog catch it. It isn't as if they are not hunted by predators in the wild.

Being chased till your heart gives out (or you get kidney failure due to stress) or until you are torn to pieces sounds worse than being cleanly shot to me.

And as I said the US bans dog fighting which would seem to be a ""we decided that we don't like this so we'll ban it" law." indicating it isn't just a European phenomena.

You have a lot more of them. Like "we don't like offensive speech, so we'll ban it" and "we don't like guns, so we'll kneejerk and ban them too."

And I like how glided over the fact that dogs are more intelligent animals than foxes.

I'd like to ask you if dogs are subjected to horrifying medical experiments in the U.K. like elsewhere.

[Rye]

You have a lot more of them. Like "we don't like offensive speech, so we'll ban it" and "we don't like guns, so we'll kneejerk and ban them too."

And you have the holy writ of the constitution, "faith based initiatives", creationists and over half the voting population voted for Bush twice. So fucking what?

And I like how glided over the fact that dogs are more intelligent animals than foxes.

So? Foxes are smarter than roosters, aren't cockfights still illegal at your end? Not that this is all that relevent anyway, what the fuck do you think laws are based on, if not what the population doesn't like and doesn't want to continue? Jesus.

I'd like to ask you if dogs are subjected to horrifying medical experiments in the U.K. like elsewhere.

I'm sure they are. So what? You're not going to try and draw an analogy between medical vivisection and fox hunting are you? Because I would love to see you try and make that one stick.