What are your thoughts on the League Against Cruel Sports?

Scratchline

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 March 2009
Messages
730
Location
Cornwall
I disagree 100% with your reasoning, a pair of equally matched fighting dogs will fight for several hours inflicting serious pain and injury to each other before 1 or both die or are eventually lifted/parted, a badger baiting session could go on for hours wih the poor creature being tortured by god knows how many dogs, a fox caught by hounds is killed in seconds.
I stated very clearly 1 on 1 so dont confuse the situation for your own ends with 'god knows how many dogs'. You view of dog fighting is more more sensible than many I have come across but remember at the point either dog turns its head or shoulders away from its opponent the fight is broken and that dog can pull out. The point I would like to make VERY clearly is both fighters want to partake, the fox doesnt. Badger baiting of course is very different but my statement only gives my view on the cruelty aspect.

You say in your other posts that shooting an animal is quicker therefore less cruel than hunting, in this thread you are saying that animals fighting for hours with no means of escape is less cruel than a fox being killed in a few seconds, so by your reasoning a 10 hour dig to a fox with a terrier [both being about the same size] would be one of the least cruel methods of fox control, as a terrierman I would like to thank you for your unintentional support...............Carreg
As a terrierman do not expect my support but I do not dislike you and what you do in any similar way to huntsmen who hunt with hounds. Ive bred pit bulls and now have a patterdale x lakeland and none of my dogs have ever or will ever have battle scars. Game as you like, take on anything and the pits would have won but I simply would never allow my dogs any fighting contact because I cannot bare the cruelty.
Whatever you do dont call me for that stance please CARREG.
 

CARREG

Well-Known Member
Joined
26 July 2004
Messages
248
Scratchline
I think we have different opinions on what constitutes cruelty, I cant honestly see your logic, while 2 pitbulls may want to fight, sometimes to the death and for hours on end its men that give them the opportunity to inflict hours of pain and serious injury to each other, badger baiting by its very nature nearly always involves more than 1 dog, it would still be a pitiful affair involving just 1 dog, I would never "call" you on your stance against cruelty I just happen to think your views and opinions are wrong, you are however fully entitled to them as I am to mine.............Carreg
 

oakash

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 July 2007
Messages
216
Rosie, I only wish that were true! It is a fatal mistake which some hunting people make. If we don't get a government in which will overturn this ridiculous law, then they will not just leave us be, we may get one which will strengthen it and REALLY harm the countryside and animal welfare.
 

rosie fronfelen

Well-Known Member
Joined
5 February 2009
Messages
2,430
Location
welsh hills!
what is one to do then, the election is full of mishandlings and corruption, lack of postal vote forms etc, so it'll be the same as the last fiasco- 38% voted. so we no doubt will have no choice and no voice! its looking more likely to be a hung parliament, what then for hunting?? can they put all of us hundreds and thousands in jail,dont think so- so carry on regardless- what other choice will we have?
 

Scratchline

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 March 2009
Messages
730
Location
Cornwall
Scratchline
I think we have different opinions on what constitutes cruelty, I cant honestly see your logic, while 2 pitbulls may want to fight, sometimes to the death and for hours on end its men that give them the opportunity to inflict hours of pain and serious injury to each other, badger baiting by its very nature nearly always involves more than 1 dog, it would still be a pitiful affair involving just 1 dog, I would never "call" you on your stance against cruelty I just happen to think your views and opinions are wrong, you are however fully entitled to them as I am to mine.............Carreg
I think that is it in a nutshell Carreg, what constitutes cruelty to each individual. I havent all of a sudden become anti blood sports and very much hear what some of you say and understand why you say it.
The others who hit me with 'your a townie', or 'you dont understand because you have never seen it', etc etc and sometimes bloody etc ( lol), I admit do my head in. All I have dome myself is change sides and my own outlook on life but I have done so through experiences which nobody can take from me.
Anyway, agree to differ, Scratchline
 

Scratchline

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 March 2009
Messages
730
Location
Cornwall
what is one to do then, the election is full of mishandlings and corruption, lack of postal vote forms etc, so it'll be the same as the last fiasco- 38% voted. so we no doubt will have no choice and no voice! its looking more likely to be a hung parliament, what then for hunting?? can they put all of us hundreds and thousands in jail,dont think so- so carry on regardless- what other choice will we have?
The choice YOU HAVE, as I do not speak about you, you could stop posting about me to your friends on the rather nasty Bring back Hunting fb page. Last time you did was Saturday night!! For absolutely no reason!!
Rosemary, if you have a problem with me please face it and deal with it on here or just ignore me. Carrying on some sort of vendetta away from this forum against me will do you no favours, is rather spitefull and it would be wise for you to stop. Thankyou, Scratchline.
 

Eagle_day

Well-Known Member
Joined
8 December 2005
Messages
450
Location
Lincolnshire
Misreading like you people who claim the Burns report supports your cruelty stance on hunting yet ignore its view on fox welfare which is seriously compromised?!
Next you will claim cubbing is to disperse the cubs ( whilst you drive them back into the mouths of the hounds!!).
You have been fact-checked and you are wrong.

ED
 

Scratchline

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 March 2009
Messages
730
Location
Cornwall
You have been fact-checked and you are wrong.

ED
"this experience seriously compromises the welfare of the fox".

None of the legal methods of fox killing were "without difficulty" but lamping, the use of torches and rifles at night, "has fewer adverse welfare implications".
 

oakash

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 July 2007
Messages
216
Just to point out the obvious: The Burns Inquiry suggested that all forms of control 'compromised the welfare' of the fox. Burns also pointed out that his remit was not to decide whether foxhunting was 'cruel'. Subsequent to the Inquiry he said that to the question,'..is foxhunting cruel..' the answer was 'no'.'He also, I would particularly emphasize, was and is not an expert on the inter-relationship of wild animals and human beings, nor does he have any experience of fox predation on sheep, which many of us do in full measure. Personally, I know I am right when I maintain that hunting with hounds is the most natural and humane way to control fox populations. You may believe you are right to have alternative views - you have every right to do so - but it doesn't alter the fact that you are wrong!
 

perfect11s

Well-Known Member
Joined
10 September 2008
Messages
3,877
Location
cheshire....
I think we should make friends with them and give them a donation of some SOAP
I feel sorry for them they always look so bedraggled surely they would be better off having a good bath and going down the pub to spend their dole money instead..
 

Simsar

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 December 2008
Messages
3,714
Location
Surrey
I think we should make friends with them and give them a donation of some SOAP
I feel sorry for them they always look so bedraggled surely they would be better off having a good bath and going down the pub to spend their dole money instead..
While smoking w**d!
 
Top