Prosecution for NOT using a gun

Ereiam_jh

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 June 2006
Messages
2,776
Location
Sunny Devon
This is a good article on the Tony Wright case:

http://www.westpress.co.uk/displayN...&sourceNode=145792&contentPK=15020400

"It is understood the hearing will hinge on whether Mr Wright, as the huntsman in charge of proceedings that day, ensured that he had a trained and competent marksman within close range of any fox flushed out by the hounds."

So the League are prosecuting him for NOT shooting foxes which apparently then escaped.

Eh?

It can't be in the public interest for the law to be used to force people to use guns. Surely there is a serious public order issue here. Imagine the public outcry if a law required people to carry guns on the streets of Bristol!

Why is it any different in the countryside?
 

Karla

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 July 2006
Messages
117
"It is understood the court, which will be led by District Judge Farmer, will be told by the defence that..."

Somehow I think Tony will get off!
 

Ereiam_jh

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 June 2006
Messages
2,776
Location
Sunny Devon
I dashed off a quick missive to the WDP (self publicising little git that I am), I wonder if they will publish it:

Dear Sir,

Your recent article "FIRST HUNTSMAN TO BE TRIED FOR HUNTING WITH DOGS READY FOR COURT SHOWDOWN " 29 July 2006 shows the absurdity of the Hunting Act.

This article states "It is understood the hearing will hinge on whether Mr Wright, as the huntsman in charge of proceedings that day, ensured that he had a trained and competent marksman within close range of any fox flushed out by the hounds."

Why do we have a law that requires people to carry amd use guns? Would anyone tolerate such a law that increaded gun use and consequential risk to the public on the strteets of Bristol? Why is the countryside any different?

Why is LACS, masquerading as an animal welfare organisation prosecuting someone for NOT shooting a fox?

It's no wonder that the police wanted nothing to do with this case or this law. Only an extremist politically motivatred organisation would dream of prosecuting someone under such a ridiculous law. It's time to say NO to the sensless shooting of our wildlife and oppose the ridiculous law that requires it.

We need instead a law that promotes animal welfare above prejudice.
 
Top