Hurrah! I'm not a criminal!

[loopyloop]

Gingermare, your so right, the deer should def give way to you on a bridleway!

BUT

I think I've got it,

aslong as if we encounter deer while out with dogs aslong as you flap your arms and say shoo tecnically I don't think we've flushed them?!?

I can safely say thank's to bunce I don't understand this hunting act oen little bit, although I did this time yesterday..... so now who's adding confusion to the ban?!?

 

[antiantianti]

"As a rational human being it is my right to break laws passed by incompetant lunatics"
Now that is GILES, do we remember the petition to make it legal to break the law? Hmmmm?

I think you are confusing yourself now, you claim Bunce is saying you are being suspected guilty before being proved innocent but you are admitting you are breaking the law, therefore guilty.

Guilty as hell Wrighty. I wouldn't have it any other way. There is no shame in being guilty of not killing animals.

 

[antiantianti]

if you are techn ically proficient enough in these matters to be able to shoo without flushing then hats off to you! Personally I don't bother.

Flush em! The fact that it is illegal adds spice and it's not as if any one actually gives a toss!

 

[antiantianti]

I CANNOT understand what is wrong with breaking this law.

Please explain.

WTF is it for? Why do those deer have to be shot? I fond it very distasteful that people put the law above lives? People have a right to resist.

 

[wrighty]

You don't bother because of several reasons.
You want to keep on harping on about how good you are at letting your dogs chase the deer, how you will keep breaking the law in this little way until you make people see how silly this part of the law is (Some people, including Anti's are with you on this) BUT people will not back/help you as you go out to chase (hunt) the animals, if you controlled your dogs and the deer ran off (as they naturally do) there would be more people agreeing with you.

Try going out WITHOUT the idea of chasing the deer, just walk your dogs on your land, stop your dogs from chasing the deer and take your head out of your arse long enough to listen to the people who agree with you, keep on with your present flapping and more people will get pissed off with your ranting and multiple personalities.

 

[antiantianti]

Oh for Gods sake don't be ridiculous! Two of my dogs are octogenarian in dog years and the other two are pure bred collies, there only interest is in round1ing them up. They are perfectly used to animals including my sheep and cattle.

Answer me one question: Do you honestly think it would be better for me to shoot the deer my dogs flush out?

 

[wrighty]

Once again you've not listened to a word that has been said, in this thread and others, this is your problem.
Stop ranting and read the f***ing posts.

 

[wrighty]

I'll try again but I don't think Giles knows who he is these days.

"Email from me to CA
"Could you please tell me if Rory Featherstonehaughis a member of your staff as a letter sent to someone has been posted on a forum. Thank you. Jackie."

Reply from CA
"Dear Jackie, No, he is not a member of our staff - what has been said?
Regards, Jill
Jill Grieve
Head of CommunicationsCountryside Alliance"

Come on Giles, tell the truth for once."

Do we get an answer Giles/Anti x3/any other name you're using?

 

[the watcher]

wrighty, did you seriously think that what was produced on this forum was a genuine correspondence between the named person and any organisation? I read it as a spoof and a joke, and it was actually quite funny.

There is a danger sometimes of people taking themselves too seriously - certainly Bunce is one of those.

 

[jessop]

I can't believe that Wrighty actually wrote to the CA!! Surely her letter is a spoof as well!

If Everard isn't Giles then he must be Reginald! I know that Reginald was frantically trying to deny that the Hunting Act made it illegal to flush out deer earlier on.

This law must be a complete mess if even antis try and deny what it actually says.

I don't think Giles should be arrested. I think that the police are right to refuse to enforce the law. Where laws are clearly wrong they should be changed and people a right to break them. Anyone can see that the Government messed this up. I am quite sure both antis and pros know that.

 

[Aesop]

It is very heartening to hear that people who are anti hunting are beginning to acknowledge the injustice inherent in the Hunting Act.

Maybe you would consider joining the alliance and helping us to campaign for its repeal.

 

[Everard_Busby]

I had a lovely walk today with my dogs. They scared a deer away at one point and it was a blessed relief to know I wasn't breaking the law letting them do so. I've had a couple of beers and will probably have a few more. I wish everyone a very happy evening!

 

[antiantianti]

LOL did you let them chase the deer?

Haha how did you stop the deer getting flushed out?

 

[bounce_back]

As you will be aware if in scaring the deer you deliberately caused them to be flushed out then you are committing a criminal offense. Scaring deer in it's self is not a crime it is only a crime if the scared deer are flushed out.

TBH Everard I think the entire forum is completely fed up with this. The law is perfectly clear and sensible.

You are universally despised by pros and antis alike.

 

[only_me]

hi ya bunce- its not that nice to have you back.

 

[CARREG]

wrighty, did you seriously think that what was produced on this forum was a genuine correspondence between the named person and any organisation? I read it as a spoof and a joke, and it was actually quite funny.

There is a danger sometimes of people taking themselves too seriously - certainly Bunce is one of those.

My sentiments exactly, if you think those letters are for real you're a retard............Carreg

 

[brighteyes]

There's one expert fisherman on here - every time he dangles the bait, at least three stupid little fishes bite straight away. Then, he reels them in and lands them! Pity he can't bash them on the head and then we'd be done with them.

They'll be banning fishing next..............

 

[antiantianti]

There is a fair point in all of this though.

Here's a picture just after it has been flushed out:

why is the above only legal if there is someone on hand to do this:

and here is the result of applying this absurd law:

Now maybe i have missed something here but when laws are passed that are this wrong surel;y there is nothing wrong with comitting crime.

It's very simple logic.

If the law is good the crime is bad

If the law is bad the crime is good

 

[wrighty]

Fake or not I was more concerned about the use of insulting terms such as "retard" being used in the thread.
There use should be picked up on by Admin and banned.

On the subject of if the email was real, I asked if it was and was told "Hello wrighty, yes, the Alliance genuinely thinks I'm retarded to claim that I'm hunting when I shoo deer away with my dogs"
From this answer I had to assume it was from the CA, now we can assume it was fake I will also have to assume that Everard/Giles is bullshitting about everything else.


As for "They'll be banning fishing next...." I hope it will be, just another cruel sport that should no longer be tollerated in this modern world.

 

[antiantianti]

Fake or not I was more concerned about the use of insulting terms such as "retard" being used in the thread.
There use should be picked up on by Admin and banned.

On the subject of if the email was real, I asked if it was and was told "Hello wrighty, yes, the Alliance genuinely thinks I'm retarded to claim that I'm hunting when I shoo deer away with my dogs"
From this answer I had to assume it was from the CA, now we can assume it was fake I will also have to assume that Everard/Giles is bullshitting about everything else.


As for "They'll be banning fishing next...." I hope it will be, just another cruel sport that should no longer be tollerated in this modern world.

You're more concerned about someone calling you a retard than a law that requires animals to be shot for no reason?

FFS!!!!!

 

[wrighty]

Anti X3, read my posts and you will see I think the law on shooting the deer is wrong BUT the intentional flushing/chasing of deer should be illegal and the people doing it should be arrested.

I am concerned about people being called "Retard" and many other insulting terms(Including racist and sexist terms), the letter (fake or not) was actually directed at Everard and not me but it still doesn't make it any less of an inapropriate comment.

 

[Aesop]

"BUT the intentional flushing/chasing of deer should be illegal and the people doing it should be arrested."

Wrighty it is generally acknowledged that the Hunting Act is wrong to make it illegal to take a dog into a wood merely with the intention of making a wild animal run out. Both the police and LACS are standing aside and allowijg people to break the Hunting Act in this manner. If they did start prosecuting people on such absurd grounds it would only show the law up for the ridiculous piece of legislation it is.

 

[minkymoo]

I am just going to poke my head in, make a comment & then dash out again ok?

Why is it legal to shoot a deer (whether or not you flushed or shooed) but if you don't shoot it you get put in prison, yet, it is ok to let a hundred odd horses to starve and get a slap on the wrist?

This is why I will never understand people who are SO anti hunting, shouldn't people focus on all forms of cruelty? I honestly find it so peculiar I rarely join debates like this. I am neither pro or anti, I just feel it is sad that the law has worked so hard to prevent people hunting and seems like it can't be bothered to do anything to prevent horrors like Amersham.

Answers on a postcard...

 

[brighteyes]

Just wondering. Deer seem to be panic-stricken by anything that moves, so if you went walking in the woods and flushed a deer out personally, are they any more scared than if dogs were doing the flushing?

 

[antiantianti]

I completely agree with you minkymoo. They spent huge amounts of time banning things that arew cl;early not cruel in a way that they are forced to ignore the law that they made.

Why didn't they revamp the laws against cruelty to wild mammals as a whole rather than banning just one activity completely.

This is exactly what the CA was saying. They should have extended the Animal Welfare Act to cover wild mammals as well.

The truth is that doing the job properly would have required massive extra resources and they just don't actually care enough to do that.

 

[Basil_Gadshrew]

"Just wondering. Deer seem to be panic-stricken by anything that moves, so if you went walking in the woods and flushed a deer out personally, are they any more scared than if dogs were doing the flushing?"

There have been a number of scientific studies of the deer's ultra sensitive hearing. In one case in 1996 a herd of deer was flushed out of a small wood by the sound of a snail sneezing 200 yards away.

 

[minkymoo]

I find it incredibly annoying that if you hit a deer in your car, you can't take it home. If someone hits it in front of you and then drives off, how are you supposed to get it in the back of your car on your own?

Am being serious, this happened to me last year. Not helped by not wanting to get blood on my work clothes either.

 

[antiantianti]

I doubt you were as annoyed as the deer.

 

[bounce_back]

Typical pro idiot making fun out of an animal's suffering.

The sooner you are behind bars the better.

 

[only_me]

hi bunce