Simon Cowell thinks hunting should stay banned!

[Starbucks]

Gone a bit of topic from Simon Cowell then.

Seems like he’s getting a bit big for his boots at the moment!

 

[cptrayes]

Combat-Claire, this one is a catch 22. It is, of course, impossible for me to name the hunts that I know are hunting fox without endangering lives. Come and visit me in person with references from your hunt and I will send you out with a hunt hunting fox. Until then, please stop accusing me of lying, I do not lie.

I have told you before that I am not intolerant, and I happen to believe the Police have better things to do with their time than catch illegal fox hunters. I'd rather it was burglars in Court and they haven't enough time to chase both.

 

[muffinino]

*Disclaimer*

I don't care what Cowell's opinion on hunting is because I don't care what his opinion on aything is.

 

[Girlracer]

The trouble is IMO is the hunting act can very very easily be perceived in many different lights. So when one person believes the law is being broken, anothers view may feel it isn't. And that's why the hunting act is so usless in many ways, it's un-clear and has to many 'grey areas'.

I do believe personally that the majority of hunts are sticking to the law, however i have witnessed those that aren't.

I really wish we could all do as the law suggests and then at least we can't look like the one's breaking the law, IMO that would do it the world of good. Just wish you could slap some people and tell them to think ahead a little!!! If we want the ban repealled i think we have to be on our best behavouir and give no reason for anti's to say we're breaking the law!!

Un-fortunately a small majority still wish to continue as before and that's no help in the long run.

 

[SueEllen]

I think if the city/country numbers was more even you would get more celebs standing up for the sport but at the moment it would be viewed as career sucicide to stick your neck out, given the masses are in the citys/subberbs etc. I pressume.

 

[MrWoof]

Hello there - this is ME you replied to.
Did you mean this post for someone else?
I thought that me and thee were batting for the same side?

 

[cptrayes]

Well siad Lanim.

 

[rosie fronfelen]

well, Simon Cowell has certainly reopened a can of worms!!come on everyone, its christmas, just say to yourselves, there are those who hunt and those that don't, there are those that approve and those that disapprove- we are never going to all agree, SC or no!!on this hunting forum we should really be supportive of each other else what hope have we?

 

[countrygirl45]

Well, as ever, there are 2 sides to every argument. As someone who hunted for many years, I can say I have never been that happy at the thought of the fox being chased (watching the Belstone Fox never helped either mind!) and the panic that it must feel. On the other hand, as a farmer and landowner who has always let the hunt over my land I have been furious with them galloping down the middle of the fields. A later conversation the suggestion was made that I go up and down the field a couple of times with a quad to put the divots back in. They are very lucky they did not get banned altogther - and that was one of the masters! It really does make you wonder.
Still not sure where I stand but the pro-hunting camp could really do with some famous figures shouting their corner.
The only problem is that with no "proper hunting" we have too many foxes and that will mean a less lambs surviving to summer.

 

[spacefaer]

Sue Ellen your generalisation is perfectly sensible and almost certainly true. The counter to it is to find a celebrity will equal impact who will talk for you every time a Simon Cowell talks against you.

Unfortunately Otis Reading won't do - it was his Dad I was in love with at 15 !

(quietly, not wishing to cause offence at your ignorance, as you know all about fox hunting )

I think you mean Otis Ferry.....

 

[countrygirl45]

Unfortunately Otis Reading won't do - it was his Dad I was in love with at 15 ! [/quote]

(quietly, not wishing to cause offence at your ignorance, as you know all about fox hunting )

I think you mean Otis Ferry..... [/quote]

hee hee hee - could not work out what was wrong with that name - thanks. :grin:

 

[cptrayes]

Combat-Claire, this one is a catch 22. It is, of course, impossible for me to name the hunts that I know are hunting fox without endangering lives. Come and visit me in person with references from your hunt and I will send you out with a hunt hunting fox. Until then, please stop accusing me of lying, I do not lie.

I have told you before that I am not intolerant, and I happen to believe the Police have better things to do with their time than catch illegal fox hunters. I'd rather it was burglars in Court and they haven't enough time to chase both.

it seems like you have "evidence" and are not prepared to use it , if you are afraid to why ? or is it the same as most of the other evidence the antis have come up with , just supposition and what they thought the saw .
as far as being intolerant , you are , if i want to kill foxes by any legal means then i should be allowed to , if you want to kill a horse by riding it , then you should be allowed to .

back to the topic .
if coell wants to stick his awe in to my life then i say we should ban all tv shows like his as they give a lot of feckless people the dream they are a superstars

Skiddaw lad tell me how I can win on this one - you don't even post under your real name and I have no idea who I am talking to. A man was killed by antis earlier this year, have you forgotten. Come here and see for yourself. I'll even offer you a bed for the night. My name, by the way is C P Trayes. What's yours?

 

[cptrayes]

Of course I meant Otis Ferry. I'm getting old timers disease!

Why was the sarcasm necessary? It does not help your cause to be gratuitously nasty to people who don't share your opinion.

 

[cptrayes]

You accuse me of lying. You offer me no way of proving that I am not without naming names on a public forum to people whose identity I have no idea of.

Come and see for yourself and until then stop accusing me of lying, I do NOT lie.

Your name is relevant because you don't even want people to know who you are yet you are happy to accuse me, anonymously, of being a liar. I think the least you owe me if you are going to be so rude is to tell me the name of my accuser.

 

[spacefaer]

Not being sarcastic - merely pointing out that if you set yourself as the expert in fox hunting (and as such, one who chooses not to take part), then you should get your facts right. and I had a fab image of Otis Reading too...

I truly have no problem with your drag hunting - I do have difficulty with your very aggressive attitude to everyone who you perceive as disagreeing with you - it makes for very uncomfortable reading.

 

[cptrayes]

Good grief! The sensible people who want to see the fox hunting ban removed must be pulling their hair out about some of the posting going on on this thread! Who needs antis when people on your own side are shooting themselves in the foot the whole time!

 

[cptrayes]

Not being sarcastic - merely pointing out that if you set yourself as the expert in fox hunting (and as such, one who chooses not to take part), then you should get your facts right. and I had a fab image of Otis Reading too...

I truly have no problem with your drag hunting - I do have difficulty with your very aggressive attitude to everyone who you perceive as disagreeing with you - it makes for very uncomfortable reading.

Do we forget on these forums that people are humans? I made a human slip with Otis Ferry's name, which was completely immaterial to the argument going on, and your comment in response certainly read as sarcastic. Since the boy is named after Otis Reading it was hardly comparable with not knowing my facts, was it?

When did I set myself out as an expert?

When was I aggressive?

 

[cptrayes]

Have I got that wrong? Was he named after the lift company instead, I'm not sure now ..... :grin:

 

[cptrayes]

You accuse me of lying. You offer me no way of proving that I am not without naming names on a public forum to people whose identity I have no idea of.

Come and see for yourself and until then stop accusing me of lying, I do NOT lie.

Your name is relevant because you don't even want people to know who you are yet you are happy to accuse me, anonymously, of being a liar. I think the least you owe me if you are going to be so rude is to tell me the name of my accuser.

I NEVER ACCUSED YOU OF LYING DID I
you seem to have a complex about lying as i said you are afraid to use the evidence you have , that hasnt stopped antis in the past , btw they must be the people i know then seeing as we are in the same county

You are strongly implying that you do not believe me that I know of hunts hunting fox. If you do not believe me when I say that I can show you the evidence, then you must, by definition, be accusing me of lying.

I am not an anti, by the way, or I would have already told the LACS and got them stopped. I'm a not-for-me-thankyou and you can do what you like as long as you stay within the law,

 

[rosie fronfelen]

we are farmers and landowners too, although we have the hunt pack here we still enjoy seeing healthy foxes in summer, also late spring when cubs are about. we are not heartless human beings but the fox numbers have to be controlled as they are as you know prolific breeders! we do not want our lambs decimated either- as i pointed out as decently as poss.earlier there are2 sides to every arguement- but why argue???

 

[countrygirl45]

I wasn't really arguing - just thinking that I am not sure where I am these days in regard to hunting (the old way- not that it makes a jot of difference!). Great to see more people out these days at the meets anyway.
Good to see someone else on here besides cptrayes and skiddaw - chill now people. Think nice thoughts. Agree to disagree.

 

[juventino]

How about buying Killing in the Name by Rage Against The Machine in the current campaign to prevent Johhh from getting his Christmas number one?

 

[countrygirl45]

what's happening there then??? I know, I know, I'm just nosy

 

[countrygirl45]

Great idea - come on people - let's do it!!

 

[cptrayes]

Skiddaw lad please stop and think for a moment. If I say "this happens" and you say "I don't believe you that happens", then you MUST be saying that I am not telling the truth. I happen to object to anonymous people saying that I am not telling the truth. Wouldn't you?

 

[rosie fronfelen]

thank god there'ssomeone on here talking sense. why all the accusations etc. its crazy!! and all because of bloody Simon Cowell!!

 

[tootsietoo]

It's good to read some articulate and balanced posts on the subject.

And Simon Cowell's got by far the most posts on the hunting forum tonight. He's going to make a shedload from the phone in afer his election debate, isn't he?!

 

[Daisychain]

I personally would absolutely love to hunt for the thrill of the ride, and the sheer magic of the hunting field. I have worked with hunters for many years.

BUT i still can't justify that wonderful and thrilling ride across country knowing there is an animal (very similar to my own pet collie) fleeing for its life. And i am also very aware of all the sinister things that go on within the inner core of fox hunting, and i just can't get my head round it. A hunt local to me takes foxes to another hunt many miles away.... the stress etc on the animal is inexcusable.

Its no good thinking its all about pest control, to my mind this is a bit of an excuse too many...

But it is much easier to believe this, and i have been in the past and it is easy to desensitive yourself to it, because you love the ride!

I am not an out an out anti by any means, but i am just very well informed and aware of what really happens and i wish i could switch off and enjoy the'chase' but you know what... I can't.

 

[spacefaer]

but daisychain.... since the ban, we're hunting within the law - you should have no problem with it now

Come out and have some fun this Christmas!

Who's your local hunt?

 

[Herne]

Quote CPTrayes:

<<What is it that there are people who cannot accept that there are perfectly valid and justifiable reasons for feeling that fox hunting with hounds is wrong? You may not agree, but it will get you nowhere to keep treating intelligent and informed people as if there is no validity whatsoever to their point of view.>>


That is a fallacious claim. It is not logically possible to accept that there are "perfectly valid and justifiable reasons for feeling that fox hunting with hounds is wrong" and yet still think that it is right.

There are valid and justifiable reasons for thinking that fox hunting MIGHT be wrong, and valid and justifiable reasons for not liking it or wanting to take part.

But, if you believe, as we obviously do, that the other factors outweigh these ones, then it is not possible to belive that there are valid and justifiable reasons for feeling that fox hunting with hounds IS wrong.


Especially when we then read statements like: <<we should [not] get our fun by causing fear and pain to another creature>>.

Hunting people do NOT derive fun from causing fear and pain to another creature. We derive fun from other aspects of an activity that also involves causing fear and pain to another creature, and there is a very significant difference.

People who do the former are sadists, people who are able to do the latter are merely more callous or harder-hearted than you - and, again, there is a very, very significant difference.


The problem is caused by people who choose to say "My moral judgement is superior to yours, therefore I am going to pass laws to prevent you from exercising yours" - especially when said moral judgements are based on erroneous assessments in the first place.