The RSPCA Told to Stop Trying to Prosecute Fox Hunters

Centauress said:
You are Rude in General....

What about That Thread about the Owner Asking if She thought Her Pony? Was Overweight and You Put Yes Disgusting...

And You have Been Rude to Me before when asking Questions about My Book......
Click to expand...

Err, have no idea what you are on about.
 
I am going to toddle off to find and read both links.. While no great fan of the Daily Mail, the actual article surprisingly, seemed well balanced.

Lots of conversation about the Heythrop. I can't find the thread but I am sure I read on here, from someone who knew the men concerned, that they eventually opted to plead guilty because they would have been personally liable for all costs had they lost. These are men on pretty low salaries.

I want the RSPCA to go back to being the charity it used to be. It's all too hit and miss and when I see their ads now, the sceptic in me is wondering how much of the donations go to where they should.
 
I can think of no other situation in this country where the police tolerate vigilante groups enforcing the law. That though is what hunt "monitors" are. The majority of hunts are obeying the law, hence the tiny number of successful prosecutions, thus large numbers of law abiding people are having their activities disrupted and being intimidated by balaclava wearing, unidentifiable activists. In what other walk of life would this be acceptable?
 
millikins said:
I can think of no other situation in this country where the police tolerate vigilante groups enforcing the law. That though is what hunt "monitors" are. The majority of hunts are obeying the law, hence the tiny number of successful prosecutions, thus large numbers of law abiding people are having their activities disrupted and being intimidated by balaclava wearing, unidentifiable activists. In what other walk of life would this be acceptable?
Click to expand...

An interesting point. I also wonder how Courts accept evidence which has been obtained by trespass and with only the corroboration of what generally appears to be a baying mob. Almost one pack pursuing another, it seems!!

There was also a programme on the telly the other night which centred around a guy who was obtaining evidence of paedophiles, and the Police were at the stage or writing to him and attempting to dissuade him from his path. Strange that! Perhaps it shows how seriously the Police and the Courts take the 'crime' of hunting, when offered up against the far more serious aspects of their work.

Alec.
 
I don't know why you put crime in inverted commas Alec. Illegal hunting is a criminal offence, full stop.

I think we'd all be upset if the Police put equal resources into stopping hunting as they do into stopping paedophiles. The same is true for many other offences, which are only prosecuted if they happen to be seen.

That doesn't make it right for you to choose to break the law.
 
Last edited:
millikins said:
I can think of no other situation in this country where the police tolerate vigilante groups enforcing the law. That though is what hunt "monitors" are. The majority of hunts are obeying the law, hence the tiny number of successful prosecutions, thus large numbers of law abiding people are having their activities disrupted and being intimidated by balaclava wearing, unidentifiable activists. In what other walk of life would this be acceptable?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry if your own hunt is genuinely hunting within the law and your sport is being disrupted.

But the report makes it clear that the law is widely being flouted, and uses the expression 'business as usual'.

Since this is happening, then I can understand why you are being targeted, and I think your solution is the same as a football club or night club which attracts unwanted behaviour, to arrange your own stewarding and pay for a Police presence.

I don't think it is reasonable to expect the Police to put the resources into protecting your minority sport when as Alec points out, there are paedophiles to be caught.
 
joycec said:
……..

That does not make it right for you to choose to break the law.
Click to expand...

Are you old enough to remember when the large Chain-Stores decided to 'Test' the Sunday Trading Laws, and in direct contravention of the said Law, opened their doors on a Sunday? Were there any repercussions? Were there any prosecutions? A ridiculous Law was 'Tested' and found to be wanting. Were it not for a minority of rabid antis, then the Courts and those who police this country would be equally disregarding of the 'crime' in question.

It's a Law with which I don't agree and so I ignore it. Right, I have things to do before I whip my pack in to shape, and go and draw the wood at the top of our lane!

Alec.
 
joycec said:
I'm sorry if your own hunt is genuinely hunting within the law and your sport is being disrupted.

But the report makes it clear that the law is widely being flouted, and uses the expression 'business as usual'.

Since this is happening, then I can understand why you are being targeted, and I think your solution is the same as a football club or night club which attracts unwanted behaviour, to arrange your own stewarding and pay for a Police presence.
At no point did I say that I either hunt, consider it sport or belong to a hunt, please do not make assumptions. The Government was warned by all enforcing authorities that the law against hunting was pretty much unenforcible yet continued to railroad bad legislation through Parliament using the Guillotine Act. It is not acceptable to harass large numbers of probably law abiding citizens in the hope of catching them doing something wrong, by people without accountability and with no identification. There are a lot of dodgy second hand car salesmen, that wouldn't make it o.k to photograph, trespass on property, intimidate every second hand car salesman in order to find a wrong 'un. If it is the law of the land, it should be enforced by a recognisable, accountable body, be that the Police or i.d. carrying RSPCA inspectors, if that is not possible, the law needs review or repeal.
Click to expand...
 
Alec Swan said:
Are you old enough to remember when the large Chain-Stores decided to 'Test' the Sunday Trading Laws, and in direct contravention of the said Law, opened their doors on a Sunday? Were there any repercussions? Were there any prosecutions? A ridiculous Law was 'Tested' and found to be wanting. Were it not for a minority of rabid antis, then the Courts and those who police this country would be equally disregarding of the 'crime' in question.

It's a Law with which I don't agree and so I ignore it. Right, I have things to do before I whip my pack in to shape, and go and draw the wood at the top of our lane!

Alec.
Click to expand...


No, I don't remember that. But I don't see how one day of action during which no animal or human was harmed compares with hunting week after week through the autumn, winter and spring.

If it happened, it was done to show the support of the public for Sunday opening as part of a decades long campaign to have the law changed. The shops still want complete liberalisation of Sunday trading hours, but they respect the law while they lobby to achieve that.

Fox hunters should be acting to get the law changed if you can, not routinely breaking it. As part of that, it will help if you can show that millions of the public actively support you in that aim, as those shops did. But you can't. Because they don't. And furthermore, in spite of the fact that you persistently dismiss their views, millions of the public are actively AGAINST you breaking this law.

Your signature at the bottom of your post is really funny Alec. What I wish for you when you eventually pop your clogs is to spend a period in a place where everyone only obeys the laws they want to obey.
 
millikins said:
joycec said:
I'm sorry if your own hunt is genuinely hunting within the law and your sport is being disrupted.

But the report makes it clear that the law is widely being flouted, and uses the expression 'business as usual'.

Since this is happening, then I can understand why you are being targeted, and I think your solution is the same as a football club or night club which attracts unwanted behaviour, to arrange your own stewarding and pay for a Police presence.
At no point did I say that I either hunt, consider it sport or belong to a hunt, please do not make assumptions. The Government was warned by all enforcing authorities that the law against hunting was pretty much unenforcible yet continued to railroad bad legislation through Parliament using the Guillotine Act. It is not acceptable to harass large numbers of probably law abiding citizens in the hope of catching them doing something wrong, by people without accountability and with no identification. There are a lot of dodgy second hand car salesmen, that wouldn't make it o.k to photograph, trespass on property, intimidate every second hand car salesman in order to find a wrong 'un. If it is the law of the land, it should be enforced by a recognisable, accountable body, be that the Police or i.d. carrying RSPCA inspectors, if that is not possible, the law needs review or repeal.
Click to expand...



Is the law against using a mobile phone at the wheel wrong because it is largely unenforceable?
Click to expand...
 
joycec said:
…….. What I wish for you when you eventually pop your clogs is to spend a period in a place where everyone only obeys the laws they want to obey.
Click to expand...

"Heaven will be what me most love on earth", someone once said. Quite clearly, I'm already in paradise!

The signature is a reflection upon my once-upon-a-time struggle to understand women. I'll admit that as others, I've rather given up. They are, I'm sure that you'll agree, rather strange creatures. I've done my best with them, and I've tried, trust me there have been countless attempts, but I've yet to meet one which could be considered to be normal.

'The shops still want complete liberalisation of Sunday trading hours, but they respect the law while they lobby to achieve that'. Your words, not mine. How is 'Testing the Law' by breaking it, showing respect?

Alec.
 
Alec Swan said:
.

'The shops still want complete liberalisation of Sunday trading hours, but they respect the law while they lobby to achieve that'. Your words, not mine. How is 'Testing the Law' by breaking it, showing respect?

Alec.
Click to expand...

It isn't. The reference to respecting the law was to the current day. In addition, it was a one off, not a week after week breaking of the law.It does not compare, as you tried to make it, with the wilful refusal to stop fox hunting, a law whose principles are supported by millions in this country.
 
joycec said:
It isn't. The reference to respecting the law was to the current day. In addition, it was a one off, not a week after week breaking of the law.It does not compare, as you tried to make it, with the wilful refusal to stop fox hunting, a law whose principles are supported by millions in this country.
Click to expand...

There are at least as many in favour of it that oppose it, with the significant majority being pretty much not bothered either way. However despite the report saying the evidence reviewed shows the law is largely ignored there is actually very little evidence to support this. There might be a lot of anecdotal opinions from the likes of LACS, POWA who are biased in the extreme and who did contribute to the report, I would like to see what actual evidence there is to say the hunts are regularly breaking the law. They are doing there best to stay within the ridiculousness that is this law.
 
The smoking ban is more relevant. That is almost impossible to police, it only works because smokers are prepared to comply with it probably not because of fear of the consequences but because most smokers are pleased with anything that makes them smoke a bit less.
 
Alec Swan said:
……..

'The shops still want complete liberalisation of Sunday trading hours, but they respect the law while they lobby to achieve that'. Your words, not mine. How is 'Testing the Law' by breaking it, showing respect?

Alec.
Click to expand...

joycec said:
It isn't. The reference to respecting the law was to the current day. In addition, it was a one off, not a week after week breaking of the law.It does not compare, as you tried to make it, with the wilful refusal to stop fox hunting, a law whose principles are supported by millions in this country.
Click to expand...

Ah, Now I'm starting to understand. So breaking the Law 'then' was a more acceptable practice than it would be now? Further, so you think that a 'one off' disregard for the Law is acceptable, but that the current practice isn't acceptable.

I'm sorry joycec, but you have a curious form of logic. :)

Alec.
 
millikins said:
But it isn't unenforcable. The POLICE stop and fine those that are seen and phone records aresoughtied in any accident and insurance is invalid if phone was in use.
Click to expand...


It was largely unenforceable because there had to be an accident or they had to be seen by the police.

You know as well as I do, if you have sight, that there is a widespread disregard for the law by more people than are illegally hunting fox. On Alec' s rules, that means that law should be repealed.

At the moment, increasing numbers of prosecutions of mobile phone usage are taking place using evidence from car and cycle and passer by cameras - vigilantes, in other words. Why should fox hunting not be be policed the same way?
 
Alec Swan said:
Ah, Now I'm starting to understand. So breaking the Law 'then' was a more acceptable practice than it would be now? Further, so you think that a 'one off' disregard for the Law is acceptable, but that the current practice isn't acceptable.

I'm sorry joycec, but you have a curious form of logic. :)

Alec.
Click to expand...


I said that it wasn't comparable, not that it was acceptable.
 
joycec said:
It was largely unenforceable because there had to be an accident or they had to be seen by the police.

You know as well as I do, if you have sight, that there is a widespread disregard for the law by more people than are illegally hunting fox. On Alec' s rules, that means that law should be repealed.

At the moment, increasing numbers of prosecutions of mobile phone usage are taking place using evidence from car and cycle and passer
by cameras - vigilantes, in other words. Why should fox hunting not be be policed the same way?
Click to expand...
Is there? I was unaware of that. I thought you just told us it was unenforceable.
 
Centauress said:
You are Rude in General....

What about That Thread about the Owner Asking if She thought Her Pony? Was Overweight and You Put Yes Disgusting...

And You have Been Rude to Me before when asking Questions about My Book......
Click to expand...

Completely off topic but can I just ask why you have randomly capitalised words in your post? It actually makes it quite difficult to read?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top