AA's question and the antis

[AlanE]

AA's question No. 5, or rather the 'answers' to it, make informative reading, don't they?

Not one of the anti -hunt people can actually answer his simple question, and instead, resort to embarrassing attempts to send him up, or suggest he's deranged!
A sort of text-book response by people who are vaguely aware that they have lost the plot, but seem morally inadequate and inept in their response.

 

[wurzel]

I don't think they understand.

I think they are totally confused with the Exmoor Foxhounds case.

They are forced to insist there should be more guns to ensure the animal is killed.

That must be hard for them !!!

 

[flying_change]

There's more than just a touch of the pot calling the kettle black in your second paragraph there. In one sentence you talk about attempts to send AA up or suggest he's deranged, and in the next you talk about antis who are morally inadequate.

But I'll answer your point anyway. The answer is... I dont really know the answer to AAs fifth question. As I've said many many times, this is a new law that requires a test case in the courts so that a judge can decide on the interpretation. This happens with just about every new law, and the idea of a test case is normal. So, I look forward to the time when AA is brought to court and the issue can be properly decided.

RS

 

[Hercules]

But he is unlikely to go to court.

Although he is clearly breaking the law, neither the LACS spies nor the police are interestedin his criminal activities.

Why is this?

Is it because he is not on horseback?
Is it because he doesn't fit the stereotypical toff image that you portray huntsmen to be?
Is it because he does not kill animals?

Or is it because the law is an embarrassment to th British judicial system?

Answers please.

 

[LACS]

The answer is he's not hunting with hounds.

 

[CARREG]

You dont have to be hunting with hounds to break the law............Carreg

 

[Fairynuff]

I have no problem with AA chasing deer with his hounds if it serves to disperse them resulting in less damage to his property. It is the deliberate and prolonged chase that I find unacceptable done in the name of sport. As I seem to remember being informed by someone on this forum, the deer is already chosen before the off and is run into the ground before being shot while held at bay by hounds. If this can be done in a fraction of the time by a marksman?????????????????????.Deer stalking in the Highlands of Scotland consist of marksmen and pulls in large amounts of foreign money which (hopefully) is put back into the environment. Cant it be done as such on Exmoor? No, would take away the enjoyment of many and chosen deer wouldnt have a chance(which he/she hasnt got anyway). Im off to blast some Leonard Skynard into the woods. Ciao, Mairi. :crazy:

 

[Hercules]

LACS,

You don't really understand, do you?

4 dogs, flushing/chasing and no guns = non exempt hunting.

Why isn't that breaking the law.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

LACS' position is quite simple, although the law says that flushing out is hunting it's just plain wrong. What he and/or she is saying is that that it's not that I've got the law wrong it's that the law has got itself wrong.

Basically if you don't like a law just close your eyes and pretend it's not there, hopefully it will go away.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

But Mairi, flushing out which the law bans is not chyasing at all. The animal is flushed out before it is chased. I've been through this at length with defra and they insist that I am breaking the law even if the dogs remain at my feet and drive the deer awy by barking at it. This is because one of the English meanings of 'hunt' is to drive away.

LACS however completely and utterly disagrees with the governments position on hunting and their interpretation of the law.

 

[LACS]

It's not hunting with dogs.

 

[Hercules]

What is hunting with dogs?

 

[Fairynuff]

In my mind, the law sucks on this one. Dispersal with hounds is a good thing when done with commom sense and lack of bloodshed to all involved. Can I come with you tomorrow? M. Ps, I like my eggs slighty runny and my soldiers well toasted with lots of Lurpack dobbed on the top.

 

[Hercules]

''In my mind, the law sucks on this one.''

At last some common sense.

However, what is hunting with dogs?

 

[Ereiam_jh]

According to the Government it includes chasing, dispersing, searching for, flushing out and stalking wild mammals with dogs. As well as presumably other things.

They've argued in court that what I do is illegal and it is within their rights for them to make me shoot the deer.

The High Court and the Court of Appeal have accepted their interpretation of the Hunting Act. They've accepted that what I do is illegal and that the Government is entitled to make it so.

The Government argued in court that I must shoot the deer so that my dogs don't kill it. They say on their website that the deer must be shot to stop them being persistently flushed out. It's quite clear that if I don't shoot those deer then they will be persistently flushed out. This is according to the Government exactly why they must be shot.

My case is due to be heard by the House of Lords soon and then it's on to Strasbourg.

With an international AR organisation agreeing with me that it is ridiculous for the law to define what I do as hunting with dogs, maybe there is hope.

Wish me luck, LACS!

 

[Ereiam_jh]

"I dont really know the answer to AAs fifth question."

Shrugs, I have to say I greatly admire your honesty., what troubles me a little is your apparent desire to have me hauled up before the beak.

I very much doubt that will happen. No one's going to prosecute me for just using a pack of dogs to chase wild mammals.

That would be ridiculous.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

You'd be very welcome to come hunting with me Mairi. It is a little ridiculous that the Government inist what I do is hunting isn't it? I argued this for quitre some time with them but it does seem that it is illegal.

Still who cares eh?

I have a perfect right to use my discretion as to which laws I obey and which I don't, and I will continue to excercise that right.

 

[flying_change]

"Is it because he doesn't fit the stereotypical toff image that you portray huntsmen to be?"

Please. I mean, please. I have never ever talked about hunters as being toffs.

As for your other questions... I would be as pleased as you to hear the answers.

RS

 

[flying_change]

"what troubles me a little is your apparent desire to have me hauled up before the beak."

Maybe I'm confusing you with someone else. But did you not write here about your informing the police about your intended activities ? If not, my apologies. If so, I hope you achieve your ambition.

RS

 

[Fairynuff]

What time do I have to be there and what is the dress code? Id come tomorrow if it was possible. As an Aunty, even I can the the stupidity in the law regarding dispersion. Im with you on this one AA. M.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

Jeans and a tee shirt or a wax cottton if it's wet!

 

[Ereiam_jh]

"But did you not write here about your informing the police about your intended activities ?"

My feeling is that if one is going to break a law out of principle then it's important to do it publicly.