flying_change
Well-Known Member
"you are not answering the question"
That's because I think you're logic-chopping to an absurd degree.
That's because I think you're logic-chopping to an absurd degree.
Is it me?
- Thread starter severnmiles
- Start date
Ereiam_jh
Well-Known Member
It's completely clear that you don't think what I do should be illegal. It's a shame you can't admit it. Then we could move on with the debate. I have to say I am dissapointed.
Don't complain about a lack of debate if you are unwilling to engage in one.
Don't complain about a lack of debate if you are unwilling to engage in one.
Ereiam_jh
Well-Known Member
Well RS you say it is 'tough' that I have to obey the law.
The fact is, like it or not that it is 'tough' that I don't have to.
As you can't give me any sensible reason why I should I'll just carry on breaking it.
The fact is, like it or not that it is 'tough' that I don't have to.
As you can't give me any sensible reason why I should I'll just carry on breaking it.
Onyxia
Well-Known Member
Couldnt agree more!
Not so long ago( think about last christmas in particular) we could talk idears/views through and debate the rights and wrongs of each others views.Yes, we had the odd troll but on the whole posts were informative well thought out and really made you think about your own views on the subject( for me the mark of a good debate).
Fingers crossed it goes back to the way it was- soon.
Nigel
Well-Known Member
Hi Anima,
I have to ask this question, did you have anybody to debate with or did you share the same view and agree with one another?
Cheers & Chuckles
Nigel
I have to ask this question, did you have anybody to debate with or did you share the same view and agree with one another?
Cheers & Chuckles
Nigel
Onyxia
Well-Known Member
No we had real debates.
Im pro by default so dont agree with many- not "hardcore" enough for "real pros" and too cruel for the antis so am often the odd one out!
HHO as a whole has gone downhill in recent months, which is why I am not on as much as I was last year.
Im pro by default so dont agree with many- not "hardcore" enough for "real pros" and too cruel for the antis so am often the odd one out!
HHO as a whole has gone downhill in recent months, which is why I am not on as much as I was last year.
Nigel
Well-Known Member
Hi Anima,
So if you had real debates then you must have had real opposition, what happened to them?
Cheers & Chuckles
Nigel
So if you had real debates then you must have had real opposition, what happened to them?
Cheers & Chuckles
Nigel
Ereiam_jh
Well-Known Member
That's probably about where I stand, more middle way than anything else.
If we are going to have a law then it at least should be a sensible one that centers on animal welfare.
If we are going to have a law then it at least should be a sensible one that centers on animal welfare.
Clodagh
Well-Known Member
I agree with SM!
What happened to Endymion? Could have a proper debate there. Perhaps when the new season starts things will pick up, when theres more topical stuff to discuss rather than 'pro', 'anti'.
Know some good goss on Simon Upton, though!!
What happened to Endymion? Could have a proper debate there. Perhaps when the new season starts things will pick up, when theres more topical stuff to discuss rather than 'pro', 'anti'.
Know some good goss on Simon Upton, though!!
Ereiam_jh
Well-Known Member
RS is not too bad but when you get too close he just goes quiet.
I think he goes off and has a good think...
"mmm how am I going to get out of this one."
These "lord blairites" etc aren't that interested in debate, just crowing and are pretty ignorant of the facts and the law anyway.
I think he goes off and has a good think...
"mmm how am I going to get out of this one."
These "lord blairites" etc aren't that interested in debate, just crowing and are pretty ignorant of the facts and the law anyway.
Ereiam_jh
Well-Known Member
Mind you I'm sure Rs and Endy would hold Lord Blairite in utter disdain, he's hardly a good advertisement for their cause.
flying_change
Well-Known Member
Or perhaps he just likes to consider the issues and formulate a reply without always shooting from the hip, as it were.
So....
"Don't complain about a lack of debate if you are unwilling to engage in one. "
I well understand that you are greatly concerned about the issue of your dogs flushing deer, and the legality thereof.
I just dont happen to be greatly concerned about it myself, and I dont think, given the wider scheme of things, that it gives rise to an interesting debate.
"As you can't give me any sensible reason why I should I'll just carry on breaking it. "
I can give you a very good reason.... because, whether you like it or not, it's the law. We dont get a choice as to whether to comply with laws or not, we dont get to cherry-pick the ones we like and ignore the ones we dont like. You dont get to pick and choose. The idea is that we all comply with them all.
So....
"Don't complain about a lack of debate if you are unwilling to engage in one. "
I well understand that you are greatly concerned about the issue of your dogs flushing deer, and the legality thereof.
I just dont happen to be greatly concerned about it myself, and I dont think, given the wider scheme of things, that it gives rise to an interesting debate.
"As you can't give me any sensible reason why I should I'll just carry on breaking it. "
I can give you a very good reason.... because, whether you like it or not, it's the law. We dont get a choice as to whether to comply with laws or not, we dont get to cherry-pick the ones we like and ignore the ones we dont like. You dont get to pick and choose. The idea is that we all comply with them all.
flying_change
Well-Known Member
TBH, I used to think Blair and New Labour were a force for good. And I think you have to admit that our economy is in far better shape than under the last Tory government.
But the health service is sacking staff and closing wards due to bad funding practices; we're engaged in no-win wars in Iraq and Afganistan; criminals are not being caught or punished; immigration is a complete mess; we're open to terrorist attack; and we're still trying to be the world's policeman and following the USA in whatever they do.
So, I have the feeling that the Labour government has just run out of steam (it happens to all governments in the end). Time for a change. If only the other candidates amounted to anyhting.
RS
But the health service is sacking staff and closing wards due to bad funding practices; we're engaged in no-win wars in Iraq and Afganistan; criminals are not being caught or punished; immigration is a complete mess; we're open to terrorist attack; and we're still trying to be the world's policeman and following the USA in whatever they do.
So, I have the feeling that the Labour government has just run out of steam (it happens to all governments in the end). Time for a change. If only the other candidates amounted to anyhting.
RS
Ereiam_jh
Well-Known Member
My feeling exactly.
Ereiam_jh
Well-Known Member
"You dont get to pick and choose. The idea is that we all comply with them all. "
I think we are almost on the same lines here.
The fact is I SHOULDN'T be able to pick and chose. But I CAN. I don't agree with the law (and nor do you and nor doi they) so I break it and they do nothing to stop me.
Why?
Because the fact is even though neither you, the police nor LACS can admit it, you don't agree with the law. That's why although the law says I cannot flush out with more than two dogs and must shoot the animal. The simple fact is I DO flush out with four dogs and refuse to shoot the animal.
I can openly and repeatably break the Hunting Act. It's called Civil Disobedience. Where a law is clearly absurd people can and should break it. The authorities have a right to prosecute them if they so wish. If the law is clearly absurd then they won't.
This law may not be important but the law is.
I think we are almost on the same lines here.
The fact is I SHOULDN'T be able to pick and chose. But I CAN. I don't agree with the law (and nor do you and nor doi they) so I break it and they do nothing to stop me.
Why?
Because the fact is even though neither you, the police nor LACS can admit it, you don't agree with the law. That's why although the law says I cannot flush out with more than two dogs and must shoot the animal. The simple fact is I DO flush out with four dogs and refuse to shoot the animal.
I can openly and repeatably break the Hunting Act. It's called Civil Disobedience. Where a law is clearly absurd people can and should break it. The authorities have a right to prosecute them if they so wish. If the law is clearly absurd then they won't.
This law may not be important but the law is.
Sooty
Well-Known Member
You've put your finger on it there RS - where is the opposition? I read the other day that Charles Kennedy is going to try and get his job back, and TBH I think he stands a good chance of getting it! The Tories have gone for an identikit Blair and woolly policies. They can't even use Iraq against Labour as they supported it. I don't know if it is because I am getting older, but I can never remember such a useless government, and yes - I did live through other Labour governments! I remember general strikes, spiralling inflation, then the Tory 3-day week fiasco, but we never had the additional problems with the NHS, law and order, education etc. Mind you, the NHS did far less in those days as medical science wasn't as advanced as it is now. My ex's wife has just been made redundant from her position as a senior midwife and will find out in three months if she is actually going. Apparently, this is the only way the hospital can get rid of its management layer. Shameful.
Ereiam_jh
Well-Known Member
I MIGHT have a go at obeying the law this winter, but only if I've got an outlet or room in the freezer for the venison. Also the deer are often in groups and I'd only want to shoot one, so I'd still be breaking it if I flushed out more than one.
I definitely wouldn't stop taking my four dogs out on my land. I have slaved for years to get what I own (yes I know that sounds corney) I love my dogs and think I should have the right to take them wherever I want on my own land, even though doing so flushes out the odd deer, fox, squirrel, hare etc.
If I do, I'll post a picture for you.
I definitely wouldn't stop taking my four dogs out on my land. I have slaved for years to get what I own (yes I know that sounds corney) I love my dogs and think I should have the right to take them wherever I want on my own land, even though doing so flushes out the odd deer, fox, squirrel, hare etc.
If I do, I'll post a picture for you.
flying_change
Well-Known Member
When have I ever said that I disagreed with the law ? Do stop making things up !
flying_change
Well-Known Member
If possible, try and get a video of sufficient quality that it could be used in court.
severnmiles
Well-Known Member
I agree with SM!
What happened to Endymion? Could have a proper debate there. Perhaps when the new season starts things will pick up, when theres more topical stuff to discuss rather than 'pro', 'anti'.
Know some good goss on Simon Upton, though!!
Spill Clodagh, spill!! :-D
flying_change
Well-Known Member
TBH, given the situation our country is in at the moment (and I dont think it's all bad by the way, there are still a lot of good bits), not even Churchill could put it right.
Not quickly, anyhow.
Not quickly, anyhow.
Ereiam_jh
Well-Known Member
Sorry, I'll rephrase that you refuse to answer as to whether or not you agree with it.
Ereiam_jh
Well-Known Member
I've already given them completely watertight proof that I am breaking the law. What good would a video be?
flying_change
Well-Known Member
Just to avoid multi-thread confusion, you're asking if I agree with the Hunting law ?
flying_change
Well-Known Member
If you feel that would not provoke a prosecution, why not write to the Chief Constable of the county in which you live (or the CPS) to ask why they dont want to prosecute you.
Sooty
Well-Known Member
Well, Churchill was a good wartime leader but not much else. He was deeply unpopular after the disastrous Dardanelles campaign, and was booted off the front benches so went back to the army in a huff! You just like him because he created the Royal Navy air service... Oh, and he didn't write all his own speeches, despite being a journalist at one point and an author after the war.
Ereiam_jh
Well-Known Member
It's funny you should say that rs because I did. Her legal adviser wrote back to say that a prosecution would not be in the public interest.
Which is exactly the point I've been making.
Which is exactly the point I've been making.
flying_change
Well-Known Member
OK, feel free to insert the name of your choice in my earlier post!
[TBH, I didnt know he created the Navy Air service.... I guess while he was First Lord of the Admiralty ?].
[TBH, I didnt know he created the Navy Air service.... I guess while he was First Lord of the Admiralty ?].
Ereiam_jh
Well-Known Member
I'm asking if you feel people should be prosecuted if they deliberately break the law by refusing to shoot the animals their dogs flush out.
flying_change
Well-Known Member
No,I should prefer initially to seek clarification as to whether accidental flushing was intended to be covered byt he wording of the act.