Desperate measures - 'UK foxhunters should be protected ethnic minority'

[Fred66]

And not as much as the criminal activity in drugs as a whole… legalise the lot and get rid of a huge amount of organised crime over night… it’s a double edged sword either way but criminalising drugs doesn’t stop their usage and causes massive amounts of damage.

Decriminalizing drugs will make them easier to access.

Personally I think strengthen the laws, turning a blind eye to personal use has not worked. If you can reduce demand then supply will also reduce

 

[palo1]

And not as much as the criminal activity in drugs as a whole… legalise the lot and get rid of a huge amount of organised crime over night… it’s a double edged sword either way but criminalising drugs doesn’t stop their usage and causes massive amounts of damage.

I just don't know - alcohol is legal but causes the police, nhs, the justice service and families an enormous cost. It is both a huge earner for the government and businesses as well as an appallingly dangerous, damaging and expensive substance. I am not sure I would like to see other substances add to that toll though I understand the argument for legalisation. Personally, I don't think we have the culture or the infrastructure here to make that safer or better.

 

[Caol Ila]

Well it's not currently criminalized for personal use and never was for Rastafarians. You have options...

It's not legalised, though. And the production and selling thereof remains quite illegal, which means to obtain it, you have to resort to dodgy street corner drug deals. Unlike in the great state of Colorado, where you can just go to a shop.

So if am on the receiving end of negativity for my beliefs that I’m a pink spotted purple hippopotamus I can appeal for this too then

If this gets taken up then it’s going to blast the door wide open makes for interesting watching with the popcorn if nothing else. The world has all gone a bit mad

I'll share your popcorn.

I'm struggling to articulate why this pisses me off. It has no bearing on my life. I don't have hunts tearing through my horses' fields and causing mayhem. Maybe as a Jew, seeing these twats equating their plight, their hobby, to groups who have suffered centuries of persecution and genocide just makes me want to shove their riding crops where the sun don't shine.

I just don't know - alcohol is legal but causes the police, nhs, the justice service and families an enormous cost. It is both a huge earner for the government and businesses as well as an appallingly dangerous, damaging and expensive substance. I am not sure I would like to see other substances add to that toll though I understand the argument for legalisation. Personally, I don't think we have the culture or the infrastructure here to make that safer or better.

I mean, Prohibition went well. If your name was Al Capone.

I'm actually a member of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and should therefore never have to work on a Tuesday and be allowed to wear a collinder on my head at all times.

 

[PurpleSpots]

It's not legalised, though. And the production and selling thereof remains quite illegal, which means to obtain it, you have to resort to dodgy street corner drug deals. Unlike in the great state of Colorado, where you can just go to a shop.


I'll share your popcorn.

I'm struggling to articulate why this pisses me off. It has no bearing on my life. I don't have hunts tearing through my horses' fields and causing mayhem. Maybe as a Jew, seeing these twats equating their plight, their hobby, to groups who have suffered centuries of persecution and genocide just makes me want to shove their riding crops where the sun don't shine.


I mean, Prohibition went well. If your name was Al Capone.

I'm actually a member of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and should therefore never have to work on a Tuesday and be allowed to wear a collinder on my head at all times.

I'm so sorry for pressing the 'laughing' response, as most of your reply definitely didn't warrant that, would have been the 'care' response... Right up until that last sentence which is I think the funniest thing I've read all week!!! I am trying to eat cereal but simply cannot carry on as I keep laughing so hard!!!

 

[Caol Ila]

I'm so sorry for pressing the 'laughing' response, as most of your reply definitely didn't warrant that, would have been the 'care' response... Right up until that last sentence which is I think the funniest thing I've read all week!!! I am trying to eat cereal but simply cannot carry on as I keep laughing so hard!!!

And you shall be so anointed by his Noodley Appendages.

 

[blitznbobs]

I just don't know - alcohol is legal but causes the police, nhs, the justice service and families an enormous cost. It is both a huge earner for the government and businesses as well as an appallingly dangerous, damaging and expensive substance. I am not sure I would like to see other substances add to that toll though I understand the argument for legalisation. Personally, I don't think we have the culture or the infrastructure here to make that safer or better.

Look what happened with prohibition in the states… as soon as you ban something it opens up a market for serious crime. And the rich can still access it by some legal loop hole… (a note from their expensive doctor usually ) and the poor end up criminalised. If drugs were decriminalised a massive amount of criminals would be out of business overnight. Also most (not all) of the medical problems to do with drugs would disappear. Most of the od s are caused by products being cut with other things … if you could buy your heroine from boots then you know exactly what you are getting. I wouldn’t see all the injury caused by their being flour, talc whatever in it which is usually more serious than the drug itself. If we could sell it legally it would be taxed and that tax could set up the infrastructure. When I left the nhs (might have changed now so not sure of up to date figures) the tax on cigarettes more than paid for all of the NHS…

It’s not just drug crime that would reduce though. Most human trafficking is all wrapped up in drugs work the violent gangs all over the world are mainly involved in drugs production and supply… all their trade screwed over night if drugs are legalised.

 

[skinnydipper]

From the Guardian

In the video, Swales said: “We see it as a really important part of wildlife management … We’re actually doing people a service. We’re picking up the foxes or the hares or the deer or the rabbits that are either old, they’ve got no teeth, they can die of starvation, or they’ve got the disease, or they’re just not adapted to outperforming a dog in that chase. So we’re happy with that natural selectivity.”

He also said hunting was not cruel. “I can tell you for a fact it is not cruel because I take no delights in the suffering of an animal. I am as animal welfare friendly as anyone I have come across, and my hunting compatriots are the same.”

Isn't it funny how you can get the wrong impression. I thought these people hurtled round the countryside on horseback with a pack of dogs, terrorising and killing wildlife because they enjoyed it.

But here they are telling us they are selflessly providing a service.

And this would appear to be present tense:

"We’re actually doing people a service. We’re picking up the foxes or the hares or the deer or the rabbits that are either old, they’ve got no teeth, they can die of starvation, or they’ve got the disease, or they’re just not adapted to outperforming a dog in that chase."


As far as I'm concerned it doesn't matter whether someone is working class or landed gentry, it is equally abhorrent.

 

[SaddlePsych'D]

He also said hunting was not cruel. “I can tell you for a fact it is not cruel because I take no delights in the suffering of an animal. I am as animal welfare friendly as anyone I have come across, and my hunting compatriots are the same.”

Apart from the Bambi lovers. Who are too animal welfare friendly apparently.

Do they not understand that we can see them? Like very literally see them and what they do.

 

[palo1]

It's not legalised, though. And the production and selling thereof remains quite illegal, which means to obtain it, you have to resort to dodgy street corner drug deals. Unlike in the great state of Colorado, where you can just go to a shop.


I'll share your popcorn.

I'm struggling to articulate why this pisses me off. It has no bearing on my life. I don't have hunts tearing through my horses' fields and causing mayhem. Maybe as a Jew, seeing these twats equating their plight, their hobby, to groups who have suffered centuries of persecution and genocide just makes me want to shove their riding crops where the sun don't shine.


I mean, Prohibition went well. If your name was Al Capone.

I'm actually a member of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and should therefore never have to work on a Tuesday and be

Look what happened with prohibition in the states… as soon as you ban something it opens up a market for serious crime. And the rich can still access it by some legal loop hole… (a note from their expensive doctor usually ) and the poor end up criminalised. If drugs were decriminalised a massive amount of criminals would be out of business overnight. Also most (not all) of the medical problems to do with drugs would disappear. Most of the od s are caused by products being cut with other things … if you could buy your heroine from boots then you know exactly what you are getting. I wouldn’t see all the injury caused by their being flour, talc whatever in it which is usually more serious than the drug itself. If we could sell it legally it would be taxed and that tax could set up the infrastructure. When I left the nhs (might have changed now so not sure of up to date figures) the tax on cigarettes more than paid for all of the NHS…

It’s not just drug crime that would reduce though. Most human trafficking is all wrapped up in drugs work the violent gangs all over the world are mainly involved in drugs production and supply… all their trade screwed over night if drugs are legalised.

Yes, I agree with so much of what you are saying and totally agree in theory, but I cannot imagine any UK govt actually investing in infrastructure to support legalised substance use and treatment, rehab etc. I am not sure it would get much support in parliament to start with either.

I would absolutely never support prohibition either - a total non-starter! But the statistics around alcohol related issues are very, very troubling and that is a form of substance use/misuse which is entirely legalised and yet treatment for alcohol misuse/addiction is very limited and largely reliant on charity. There is a vanishingly small amount of govt money spent on support or recovery options in spite of quite considerable levies on alcohol.

Returning to hunting...Falconry has received protection for its practices and culture through other mechanisms: it is a shame that some of the vital but less contentious aspects of hunting culture: the language used with hounds, for example, and the regulated breeding and recording of breeding and naming hounds, which is ancient, horn calls, songs and aspects of dress (possibly!) were not also protected through that mechanism as that would have kept alive things that are central to the culture but would be inoffensive to the vast majority of people.

There are many protections afforded to people that may be difficult for others to accept or take seriously but I don't think pulling up the drawbridge of tolerance is generally the way to go. I do understand about feeling that another person's or group's claim may feel demeaning or ridiculous but thankfully democracy in the UK doesn't work that way. I remember less tolerant times too - no one benefits from that.

 

[I'm Dun]

Look what happened with prohibition in the states… as soon as you ban something it opens up a market for serious crime. And the rich can still access it by some legal loop hole… (a note from their expensive doctor usually ) and the poor end up criminalised. If drugs were decriminalised a massive amount of criminals would be out of business overnight. Also most (not all) of the medical problems to do with drugs would disappear. Most of the od s are caused by products being cut with other things … if you could buy your heroine from boots then you know exactly what you are getting. I wouldn’t see all the injury caused by their being flour, talc whatever in it which is usually more serious than the drug itself. If we could sell it legally it would be taxed and that tax could set up the infrastructure. When I left the nhs (might have changed now so not sure of up to date figures) the tax on cigarettes more than paid for all of the NHS…

It’s not just drug crime that would reduce though. Most human trafficking is all wrapped up in drugs work the violent gangs all over the world are mainly involved in drugs production and supply… all their trade screwed over night if drugs are legalised.

In order to do that we would need the capacity to deal with the people who abuse drugs, to stop the things that drive them to form an addiction, to help those that do develop a problem. And we don't. Not even close. It being illegal and hard to access does stop a large number of people from trying it in the first place. If you could get it in the co-op then that barrier is gone.

 

[canteron]

Would you have to prove hunting was in your family bloodlines to hunt?

You can’t just claim to be a traveller, or Rastafarian to have their legal privileges.

If so, I would say that would cut out an awful lot of people?

 

[palo1]

Would you have to prove hunting was in your family bloodlines to hunt?

You can’t just claim to be a traveller, or Rastafarian to have their legal privileges.

If so, I would say that would cut out an awful lot of people?

I don't think there is any element of ethnicity to be claimed...but similarly to ethical veganism I suspect people would need to demonstrate, in some way, both a level of knowledge and continuity of engagement with hunting related practises and possibly a history of formal affiliation to some organisation to pass a threshold for personally significant beliefs etc.

You can actually convert to Rastafarianism, legally speaking, in the UK and elsewhere.

 

[criso]

It is still legal to hunt a fox with one couple of hounds to guns and to also use a bird of prey, and is also legal to hunt deer with one couple of hounds to guns.

Does this exception not provide the welfare service they are claiming and also allow them to practice their 'beliefs'?

 

[blitznbobs]

In order to do that we would need the capacity to deal with the people who abuse drugs, to stop the things that drive them to form an addiction, to help those that do develop a problem. And we don't. Not even close. It being illegal and hard to access does stop a large number of people from trying it in the first place. If you could get it in the co-op then that barrier is gone.

I would dispute that drugs are hard to access anywhere in the western world. The work that has been done to disuade people from smoking is a good example of what can be done with a legal substance - making it difficult to obtain but perfectly legal to do so. The tax revenue from the drugs could more than offset the costs of the abuse of the drugs as is shown by smoking and smoking related illness

Equally the cost reduction at border controls would be substantial

 

[Fred66]

I would dispute that drugs are hard to access anywhere in the western world. The work that has been done to disuade people from smoking is a good example of what can be done with a legal substance - making it difficult to obtain but perfectly legal to do so. The tax revenue from the drugs could more than offset the costs of the abuse of the drugs as is shown by smoking and smoking related illness

Equally the cost reduction at border controls would be substantial

People still smuggle in cigarettes and alcohol even though they are legal.

 

[webble]

I would dispute that drugs are hard to access anywhere in the western world. The work that has been done to disuade people from smoking is a good example of what can be done with a legal substance - making it difficult to obtain but perfectly legal to do so. The tax revenue from the drugs could more than offset the costs of the abuse of the drugs as is shown by smoking and smoking related illness

Equally the cost reduction at border controls would be substantial

Drugs are not difficult to access in the UK. Weed can be bought online and delivered without you even having to leave the house

 

[palo1]

Does this exception not provide the welfare service they are claiming and also allow them to practice their 'beliefs'?

Possibly, although I think that this is seen as a very reduced way of working that would not safeguard the future of hound breeding or houndwork/scenting and pack dynamics as a continuation of cultural knowledge and practice etc.

 

[Kaylum]

I hope weed never gets legalised. It rots teeth so badly so quickly, it puts people into a long lasting mental state, makes them paranoid and violent. Having been on the end of one episode it's one time too many. It leads to worse things and heavier drugs. Those who don't take it as well as those who do suffer greatly.

 

[Peglo]

Drugs are not difficult to access in the UK. Weed can be bought online and delivered without you even having to leave the house

I wouldn’t recommend this to anyone doing it. The drug dogs would come into the sorting office regularly when I worked for the Royal Mail and also the packages bloody stink and it’s very obvious, not that I grassed on anyone but some might.

so many people abuse alcohol so they’re just as likely to do the same with drugs if they were legal. I think the damage it would do would be colossal considering one hit of heroine can make you addicted. Also don’t like the idea of the likes of Rohypnol being so easily accessed.

 

[palo1]

I hope weed never gets legalised. It rots teeth so badly so quickly, it puts people into a long lasting mental state, makes them paranoid and violent. Having been on the end of one episode it's one time too many. It leads to worse things and heavier drugs. Those who don't take it as well as those who do suffer greatly.

Yes, although for some people, some preparations of weed are genuinely therapeutic. It should be easier to have that prescribed however. Weed can be incredibly dangerous to some people - it's not as safe a substance as many people portray it to be.

 

[criso]

I wouldn’t recommend this to anyone doing it. The drug dogs would come into the sorting office regularly when I worked for the Royal Mail and also the packages bloody stink and it’s very obvious, not that I grassed on anyone but some might

You're assuming they're using RM and not a courier that just drops off the package on your doorstep and there are other drugs which are much more discreet and smell much less though wouldn't fool a dog.

There are people all over the country in very respectable professional jobs buying and using recreational drugs. They earn a lot so financing it isn't an issue and they won't get stopped and searched because they don't fit the profile the police use so unless it comes to light as part of a search for something else will never come to light.

 

[Peglo]

You're assuming they're using RM and not a courier that just drops off the package on your doorstep and there are other drugs which are much more discreet and smell much less though wouldn't fool a dog.

There are people all over the country in very respectable professional jobs buying and using recreational drugs. They earn a lot so financing it isn't an issue and they won't get stopped and searched because they don't fit the profile the police use so unless it comes to light as part of a search for something else will never come to light.

I’m not assuming, having worked at the Royal Mail I know people use it for getting their drugs. The police would be in at least once a week investigating suspect packages. There’s plenty of rumours how harder drugs gets smuggled up here (I live on an island) but the RM is one way some get them. I obviously can’t comment on what happens on the mainland.

 

[Caol Ila]

To go back to the whole culture of foxhunting as something somehow deserving of legal protection, surely you can do all the things except for chasing and killing a live fox. You can breed dogs who like chasing scents across the countryside and gallop after them on horseback and have your red coats and your hierarchy of masters and so on. Isn't that what they tried? But the hunts continued to hunt foxes and cause chaos for other landowners/countryside users and let hounds run riot and kill pets. If all the hunts had behaved themselves after the ban, I doubt this thread would even exist.

Saying they are fulfilling the same ecological role as wolves is laughable. You think wolves would chase a fox for many miles across the countryside? That's not how predators hunt. Takes too much energy.

 

[palo1]

To go back to the whole culture of foxhunting as something somehow deserving of legal protection, surely you can do all the things except for chasing and killing a live fox. You can breed dogs who like chasing scents across the countryside and gallop after them on horseback and have your red coats and your hierarchy of masters and so on. Isn't that what they tried? But the hunts continued to hunt foxes and cause chaos for other landowners/countryside users and let hounds run riot and kill pets. If all the hunts had behaved themselves after the ban, I doubt this thread would even exist.

Saying they are fulfilling the same ecological role as wolves is laughable. You think wolves would chase a fox for many miles across the countryside? That's not how predators hunt. Takes too much energy.

The presence of predators in a landscape is slightly more nuanced I think, but responding to the first bit: the Hunting Act was deliberately framed with loopholes that could/would very likely be exploited because that was the only way the act could get through even a very limited parliamentary process (using the Parliament Act...) It was bad law from the off. There was not a clear consensus about many of the claims and counter claims about hunting. The Labour Party accepted huge amounts of money from an interested party to get the law through. There is much written about this by those legislators, including Daniel Greenberg who recognised the principle of hunting being a significant cultural activity.

Many hunts have demonstrably hunted legally since the ban, some haven't. Very often the law totally muddied the water, even if the moral imperative was clear. I don't think you can use those that break the law as a reason to sanction those that dont: We don't ban alcohol or pubs because of drink drivers, or ban football because of hooliganism, or protests because of violent/disruptive activists. In the same way that the law and police practice now allows you to do weed in a personal, discreet and limited way, that is still illegal, as you said up-thread. It also supports other illegal activities at times. People use the legal loopholes in that arrangement probably because they think legislation against the use of weed is nonsensical/it doesn't suit them etc. People will inevitably do that, but that doesn't ever really convey the whole landscape of an issue.

 

[palo1]

To go back to the whole culture of foxhunting as something somehow deserving of legal protection, surely you can do all the things except for chasing and killing a live fox. You can breed dogs who like chasing scents across the countryside and gallop after them on horseback and have your red coats and your hierarchy of masters and so on. Isn't that what they tried? But the hunts continued to hunt foxes and cause chaos for other landowners/countryside users and let hounds run riot and kill pets. If all the hunts had behaved themselves after the ban, I doubt this thread would even exist.

Saying they are fulfilling the same ecological role as wolves is laughable. You think wolves would chase a fox for many miles across the countryside? That's not how predators hunt. Takes too much energy.

Wolves absolutely do hunt for miles and engage in many different hunting behaviours. Wolves are very well recorded hunting prey animals, quite determinedly over long distances.

 

[skinnydipper]

Following the fox hunting ban, what scent is used to train the hounds?

 

[Miss_Millie]

It's not a case of just a few bad apples. More than half of hunts were involved in illegal activity last season. I'm sorry but if any other sport broke the law this frequently, it would have been banned a long long time ago. Here are some statistics:


Fox Hunting Season 2022-23 Statistics

Statistics from the hunting season November 1st 2022 to April 1st 2023.

Statistics in brackets include reported incidents from the cub hunting season running from August until the start of the hunting season in November.

General Overview

Incidences of a hunt suspected to be illegally hunting: 361 (526)

Individual incidents of hunt havoc: 621 (841)

Hunt havoc/illegal hunting occurred in 47 (50) different counties

Number of hunts involved in illegal hunting or hunt havoc: 108 (122) (out of circa 170 fox hunts)

Number of reports of a fox being visibly pursued: 315 (400)

Reported kills: 24 (33)

Reported suspected kills: 16 (24)

Hunt havoc

Road interference: 129 (183)

Railway trespass: 7 (8)

Other trespass: 180 (220)

Livestock worrying: 55 (80)

Domestic animal worrying: 22 (29)

Chasing other wildlife: 60 (64)

Sett interference: 43 (57)

Horse and hound welfare: 40 (64)

Public mental distress: 38 (52)

Conduct of the hunting party: 47 (84)

 

[Burnttoast]

Following the fox hunting ban, what scent is used to train the hounds?

As far as I understand it, it's fox urine. Also not a pleasant process for the foxes concerned, I'd imagine.

 

[palo1]

It's not a case of just a few bad apples. More than half of hunts were involved in illegal activity last season. I'm sorry but if any other sport broke the law this frequently, it would have been banned a long long time ago. Here are some statistics:


Fox Hunting Season 2022-23 Statistics

Statistics from the hunting season November 1st 2022 to April 1st 2023.

Statistics in brackets include reported incidents from the cub hunting season running from August until the start of the hunting season in November.

General Overview

Incidences of a hunt suspected to be illegally hunting: 361 (526)

Individual incidents of hunt havoc: 621 (841)

Hunt havoc/illegal hunting occurred in 47 (50) different counties

Number of hunts involved in illegal hunting or hunt havoc: 108 (122) (out of circa 170 fox hunts)

Number of reports of a fox being visibly pursued: 315 (400)

Reported kills: 24 (33)

Reported suspected kills: 16 (24)

Hunt havoc

Road interference: 129 (183)

Railway trespass: 7 (8)

Other trespass: 180 (220)

Livestock worrying: 55 (80)

Domestic animal worrying: 22 (29)

Chasing other wildlife: 60 (64)

Sett interference: 43 (57)

Horse and hound welfare: 40 (64)

Public mental distress: 38 (52)

Conduct of the hunting party: 47 (84)

That data is inaccurate in several ways but I imagine it is not from an impartial/accurate source. It certainly doesn't reflect Ministry of Justice, Police or Wildlife Trust (for example) data.

 

[palo1]

As far as I understand it, it's fox urine. Also not a pleasant process for the foxes concerned, I'd imagine.

It's more likely to be the huntsman's urine these days!