Bring Back Fox Hunting - Page 40

TheDaddy · 10-09-2010, 06:27

Another attack

Annie Bradwell was bitten on the ear by a fox who came into her house while she was asleep, and said she was very distressed by the thought that "one would come all the way through my flat and attack a sleeping adult".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11249182

Angua · 10-09-2010, 09:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Another attack

Annie Bradwell was bitten on the ear by a fox who came into her house while she was asleep, and said she was very distressed by the thought that "one would come all the way through my flat and attack a sleeping adult".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11249182

Just waiting for the claims this is all the fault of the hunting ban.

What is needed is a proper solution to the urban fox menace. The hunting ban has at least stopped the deliberate breeding of foxes for hunting. So fewer are likely to migrate from the countryside.

TheDaddy · 30-12-2010, 21:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

So has it been confirmed then. The tories are not going to allow a free vote on allowing fox hunting again. I dam well hope so.

Yes, confirmed until 2012 at the earliest

The Government is to shelve a promised vote on repealing the ban on foxhunting until 2012 at the earliest

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...g-2169474.html

Sirius · 30-12-2010, 21:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Yes, confirmed until 2012 at the earliest

The Government is to shelve a promised vote on repealing the ban on foxhunting until 2012 at the earliest

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...g-2169474.html

Quote:

A minority of MPs – 253 out of 650 – are committed to repealing the Act, and 22 Conservative MPs are among more than 300 who would vote against repeal, according to the League Against Cruel Sports (Lacs).

Excellent

Flyboy · 31-12-2010, 12:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Yes, confirmed until 2012 at the earliest

The Government is to shelve a promised vote on repealing the ban on foxhunting until 2012 at the earliest

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...g-2169474.html

So, a postponement, rather than a commitment to not raise the issue again.

**Chris** · 31-12-2010, 12:51

Why would they commit not to raise the issue again, when they are already committed to a free vote to repeal? You seem to think this is some sort of half-baked attempt to make the anti-hunt lobby think they have backed down. It is nothing of the sort.

It is postponed because Parliamentary time is currently required for more pressing issues. Incidentally, had Tony Blair not allocated vast, wasteful swathes of Parliamentary time to the issue in the first place, this highly illiberal, ineffective and vindictive piece of legislation would never even have made it on to the statute book.

Flyboy · 31-12-2010, 13:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

Why would they commit not to raise the issue again, when they are already committed to a free vote to repeal? You seem to think this is some sort of half-baked attempt to make the anti-hunt lobby think they have backed down. It is nothing of the sort.

It is postponed because Parliamentary time is currently required for more pressing issues. Incidentally, had Tony Blair not allocated vast, wasteful swathes of Parliamentary time to the issue in the first place, this highly illiberal, ineffective and vindictive piece of legislation would never even have made it on to the statute book.

You may see it as "vindictive," most other sensible people don't give a damn about the false perspectives of some disgruntled blood thirsty morons.

**Hugh** · 31-12-2010, 13:55

Wow - three sweeping generalisations in one short sentence.

Is this a record?

Flyboy · 31-12-2010, 14:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

Wow - three sweeping generalisations in one short sentence.

Is this a record?

But not any less accurate.

**Hugh** · 31-12-2010, 14:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

But not any less accurate.

iyo.....

**Chris** · 31-12-2010, 15:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

But not any less accurate.

It's accurate to the extent that it's consistent with your tedious, left-wing urban agenda. No further.

Sirius · 31-12-2010, 16:44

In my case i just dont like fox hunting full stop and have made my feeling clear on many an occasion .

I dont give a flying ho ho who carries out the sport i just feel there is a better way than using one animal to rip another animal to bits for the fun and gratification of some idiot on a horse.

Peter_ · 31-12-2010, 16:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

Why would they commit not to raise the issue again, when they are already committed to a free vote to repeal? You seem to think this is some sort of half-baked attempt to make the anti-hunt lobby think they have backed down. It is nothing of the sort.

It is postponed because Parliamentary time is currently required for more pressing issues. Incidentally, had Tony Blair not allocated vast, wasteful swathes of Parliamentary time to the issue in the first place, this highly illiberal, ineffective and vindictive piece of legislation would never even have made it on to the statute book.

I am quite happy for this law to stay in place as the hunting a wild animal with a pack of animals has no place in a modern society and is actually quite sick.

**Chris** · 31-12-2010, 16:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

In my case i just dont like fox hunting full stop and have made my feeling clear on many an occasion .

I dont give a flying ho ho who carries out the sport i just feel there is a better way than using one animal to rip another animal to bits for the fun and gratification of some idiot on a horse.

And from my point of view, it doesn't matter how stupid the person on the horse is. It's his right to be an idiot (assuming, of course, that he is an idiot).

This is a grossly illiberal piece of legislation sponsored by a lobby whose knowledge of the natural world comes courtesy of Walt Disney.

---------- Post added at 16:50 ---------- Previous post was at 16:49 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Masque

I am quite happy for this law to stay in place as the hunting a wild animal with a pack of animals has no place in a modern society and is actually quite sick.

Why does it have no place? Why is it sick? You make assertions but you offer no reason why anyone should agree with you.

Digital Fanatic · 31-12-2010, 16:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

And from my point of view, it doesn't matter how stupid the person on the horse is. It's his right to be an idiot (assuming, of course, that he is an idiot).
This is a grossly illiberal piece of legislation sponsored by a lobby whose knowledge of the natural world comes courtesy of Walt Disney.

---------- Post added at 16:50 ---------- Previous post was at 16:49 ----------

Why does it have no place? Why is it sick? You make assertions but you offer no reason why anyone should agree with you.

A right to have an animal ripped to shreads for fun?

Are we as a race, not better than this?

---------- Post added at 16:57 ---------- Previous post was at 16:56 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

In my case i just dont like fox hunting full stop and have made my feeling clear on many an occasion .

I dont give a flying ho ho who carries out the sport i just feel there is a better way than using one animal to rip another animal to bits for the fun and gratification of some idiot on a horse.

Totally agree