Is it me?

[flying_change]

"Which is exactly the point I've been making"

OK, so it's been decided by those in authority that it's not presently in the public interest to prosecute you. That of course does not give you carte blanch to continue to break the law.

If you want to try and provoke a prosecution, you may want to walk your dogs while naked and while shouting racist, sexist, or age-ist slogans; refusing to pay your council tax may also help. I look forwards to reading about it in the papers.

 

[Sooty]

I think we have to look for someone who is single minded and ruthless, which brings to mind Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung or Margaret Thatcher! And yes, that is when he did it - he is credited with having the vision to see aircraft as a weapon of war. No doubting his intelligence!

 

[Ereiam_jh]

I'm not going to do anything of the sort RS the laws against all of the things that you mention are sensible laws which would get enforced.

I'll just carry on breaking the Hunting Act which as it applies to me, is not a sensible law and won't get enforced.

As usual this weekend I'll be flushing with four dogs.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

I don't flush out accidently I do it on purpose.

How could it be accidental if I know it's going to happen.

That would be like running someone over accidently when I knew I was going to do it before I got in the car.

The law just doesn't work like that.

Fore knowledge as far as the law is concerned IS intent.

 

[flying_change]

I'd be looking for someone kind, thoughtful, who loves this country, and had great wisdom.

OK, that could be difficult......

 

[flying_change]

Well, just keep a detailed note of all these transgressions so that if/when you're nicked for soemthing you can ask for all these other offences to be taken into consideration.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

Hey this is a bit more like it, maybe not up to a titanic RS vs Severnmiles clash but still, not too bad.

All you need is a few people of reasonable IQ and earnest opinions.

 

[flying_change]

Using the word 'Titanic' makes me wonder which of us sank......

 

[severnmiles]

You of course....it would be a swear word to think that I had..... :-D

I truly am the unsinkable debater.....

 

[Onyxia]

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.

Exactly.
TBH I ( and just me, not claiming to speak for anyone else) would have been much more happy if hunt staff could still go out and do their job but followers had been stopped.
Personally, I cant see anything wrong with hunting as it was but do understand why people object to the sporting aspect of it and wouldnt have a problem with that part being removed -provided that hunt staff were still allowed to do their job.
Only problem then would be how to fund it......

 

[Ereiam_jh]

It's funny because the situation we have now is completely the opposite of the one you describe.

The followers won't get prosecuted under any circumstances, whether the Hunt Staff are doing anything illegal or not. This is where RS's justification of the law falls down as he thinks it stops people getting pleasure out of the process.

Of course if you stopped followers you would also ban the hunt monitors as legally they are just as much followers as the followers, if you see what I mean.

In my opinion the only law that stands a real chance would be one against cruelty to wild animals, this would however have to apply equally to all activities which affect wild animals, not just Hunting.

 

[severnmiles]

OMG OMG OMG!!

No way! Hunting is better the way it is than to have no followers...I really don't see that argument!

I'd cry and cry and cry if they had banned hunt followers and not hunting with hounds!

 

[Ereiam_jh]

I don't really think it's practical to make laws against enjoying something. One has to realise that an objection to people getting enjoyment out of something is purely a moral one.

IMO people need to be a little more tolerant. Have laws to stop people doing things, but not against what is in their heads, please.

In effect you are proscribing a feeling.

It's thought crime.

 

[Onyxia]

OMG OMG OMG!!

No way! Hunting is better the way it is than to have no followers...I really don't see that argument!

I'd cry and cry and cry if they had banned hunt followers and not hunting with hounds!

Yes, it would upset me too.
But what REALLY matters is that the hunts can do their job, if that ment stopping followers then so be it.IMHO, trad fox huning is still the most efective method to controll the population.Surely its more important that hunts are able to get on with that then it is for us to enjoy a day out?

 

[Onyxia]

While I do agree completly with what you say if the enjoyment is purely from an animals suffering then it is wrong, no way around that.
I have hunted properly and drag, enjoyed one as much as the other.
Followers could get as much pleasure form drag if it was a well thought out route.

What I ment was that I would like the hunt staff to be able to go out and do their job ( minus followers) and drag with them.Trying to be real here, the ban is here and although fingers,toes and well everything is crossed that one day the stupid law will be over turned I think that way would be a good comprimise- for the time at least.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

"if the enjoyment is purely from an animals suffering then it is wrong, no way around that."

I quite agree but I don't think that that's got much to do with hunting.

I've got a barn full of cows, if I got enjoyment from an animalo suffering I'd be torturing them.

You can't legislate against people getting enjoyment from something.