What's wrong with breaking the law?

[Ereiam_jh]

I took my dogs out this moring and we chased some red deer.

I could have stopped them but I chose not to.

Chasing deer with dogs is illegal.

If the police aren't prepared to enforce the law, why should I bother obeying it?

 

[celt]

How have you come to the conclusion that the police aren’t prepared to enforce the law? I accept that the police have limited resources and therefore need to prioritise their activities but to say that they aren’t prepared to enforce this piece of legislation is absolutely absurd and even so to openly flaunt the law as you have done speaks volumes about you’re character.
You are basically saying that whatever the police regard as not being high priority policing then we should all flaunt that piece of legislation and to hell with the consequences. Lets just see now, drugs have recently been downgraded in the list of police priorities, shall we all now try our hand at drug dealing, or how about a spot of people trafficking, we know that its rife in this country but it is low in the list of priorities, we could make a fortune.

 

[custard]

I agree with you celt, just because the Police are busy doesnt make it ok to break the law regardless. If everybody took that attitude, and lets face it too many already do, this country would be an even bigger s*** hole than it already is, so there!

 

[Ereiam_jh]

Thank you for your responses Custardsmum and Celt. It's good to have a debate about these issues.

I don't think you should bring my character into it Celt. It's best not to be personal about these things. BTW it's flout not flaunt.

People have broken unjust laws through out history. Many of our rights only exist because people have been prepared to break the law.

The Hunting Act states that rather than a brief chase from my harmless dogs I should shoot the deer that I flush out. I take the attitude that seeing as the deer run much faster than my collies there is no need or benefit in shooting them. If I refuse to shoot the deer I am a criminal and that goives the state the right to kill my dogs. I think that is wrong. I think the Government shouldn't be given the right to kill my animals because I refuse to kill my wildlife. I don't think any one should be killing anything in these circumstances.

Why would shooting deer make the country less of a ###hole?

If everyone who goes out with dogs didn't shoot any of the deer they flush out would it really make the country a worse place?

What exactly does the fact that I am not prepared to shoot deer say about my character Celt?

Surely if a law is SO stupid I have right to try and publicise that fact?

All I do to flush out deer is walk my dogs round my property. What exactly is so wrong about doing that?

Do the police really not make people use guns because it's not a 'priority' or has Parliament just got the law wrong?

If you know that walking your dogs was going to flush out deer would you be prepared to shoot the deer or stop walking your dogs or would you just break the law?

Is there any responsibility on Parliament to pass sensible laws or can they should they be able to make us obey any law however absurd.

I think that if people are prepared to openly flout the law and the police aren't prepared to take action then that means there is something wrong with the law, not the 'character' of the person that flouts it. Somne crimes are justified and I am perfectly justified in breaking the Hunting Act by flushing out and chasing deer as long as I do so in a manner that isn't cruel.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

BTW I'm not promoting hard drug dealing or people trafficing. the laws against these are sensible and should be enforced.

I'm promoting not killing animals. I don't think it makes sense for me to have to shoot my deer.

I think that the law should only require wild animals to be killed where it is absolutely necessary.

I'm sorry if you feel that that reflects badly on my character.

 

[celt]

My reference to you’re character was made on the fact that you are only too ready to break the law of the land, I openly apologise if this offended you and I agree with you that it was wrong of me to be so personal.
The laws of this country have been placed on the statute books following years of experience and in the case of the hunting act many hours of debate.
If you feel strongly enough about a piece of legislation then you should adopt a responsible and mature attitude by going about things legally such as lobbying you’re MP etc. You have other organisations such as the Countryside Alliance that could assist you and other like-minded people.
You have every right to publicise you’re feelings on the hunting act as long as you do it within the law, surely this has to make sense to you, imagine if everyone who disagreed with a piece of government legislation took you’re attitude, we would have widespread anarchy.
I don’t think that the hunting act insists that anyone should actually shoot any deer what it says is that it remains legal to shoot deer but illegal to hunt them with dog’s, there is a difference.
On the subject of you allowing you’re dogs to chase the deer then regardless of whether you think they are incapable of catching one is neither here or there as there is always a risk of an accident whereby the dog would injure the deer.
On the same lines can I just ask you what you’re thoughts are on dogs chasing sheep and other livestock, would this be ok as long as the dogs aren’t fast enough to catch the fleeing prey animal?

 

[polyphonic]

i wouldn't apologise. Ereiam_jh posts quite often like this, mainly for a response and debate. Best advice i can give you is to ignore this person. I will say you most find most police officers i fields on moors etc. i still have not quite worked out the reason Ereiam_jh posts

 

[Romansmum]

please remember we have many many brilliant laws that still exist and you could be charged for breaking:

you may not transport a pig in a car
you may not carry a ladder on sunday
in chester you can only shoot a Welsh person with a bow and arrow inside the city walls and after midnight.
It is illegal for a Member of Parliament to enter the House of Commons wearing a full suit of armour.

i know these are olde laws but i hope if this law is not changed or removed this is what it will change into.

 

[Tia]

Errr.....I think you are totally missing Ereiam's point.

He is telling you that he is breaking the law by NOT killing the deer that his dogs flush out.......

His point is a very good one.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

"The laws of this country have been placed on the statute books following years of experience and in the case of the hunting act many hours of debate. "

That's precisely why I find breaking with complete impunity it is so damned funny.


"If you feel strongly enough about a piece of legislation then you should adopt a responsible and mature attitude by going about things legally such as lobbying you’re MP etc. You have other organisations such as the Countryside Alliance that could assist you and other like-minded people."

I've done that and taken it to court. the courts have upheld the government's riht to make me slaughter deer.

"You have every right to publicise you’re feelings on the hunting act as long as you do it within the law, surely this has to make sense to you, imagine if everyone who disagreed with a piece of government legislation took you’re attitude, we would have widespread anarchy. "

Precisely. If everyone stood up to idiotic laws by breaking them they would have to change them. Crime can be a force for good.

"I don’t think that the hunting act insists that anyone should actually shoot any deer what it says is that it remains legal to shoot deer but illegal to hunt them with dog’s, there is a difference."

The hunting act allows deer to be flushed out by up to two dogs but only if the deer is then shot. Allowing flushed out deer to escape without injury is a crime.

"On the subject of you allowing you’re dogs to chase the deer then regardless of whether you think they are incapable of catching one is neither here or there as there is always a risk of an accident whereby the dog would injure the deer. "

Maybe but then shouldn't the law just require the person in control of the dog to prevent the deer being chased once it has been flushed out. Requiring the deer to be shot in order to prevent some remote possibility of injury is plain crazy.


"On the same lines can I just ask you what you’re thoughts are on dogs chasing sheep and other livestock, would this be ok as long as the dogs aren’t fast enough to catch the fleeing prey animal? "

I let my dogs chase livestock but control them so it doesn't cause cruelty. They are sheepdogs and the livestock are my own sheep and cattle. Sometimes the dogs get so close that they nip the livestock's ankles. I wouldn't let them chase other people's livestock. However if we had the equivalent of the Hunting Act with respect to livestock then it would require people to shoot sheep in order to stop dogs chasing them. I'd be happy to break the law.

At the end of the day livestock are other people's property and they can't escape from the field. The deer on my land are my own property and I'm not being cruel. The Hunting act is unjustified and it is my right to break it.

If you want a right, you don't plead nicely with the Government for it. You go and take it. I want the right to break the Hunting Act. The only way to get that right is to go out and publicly break the law so that is what I do.

Where a law is absurd there is nothing wrong with breaking it.

 

[polyphonic]

well if he is breaking the law by NOT killing them then letting his dogs flush out said deer in the first place is a stupid act of irresponsibility.
laws are there for a reason, to protect others in this country. there are some laws that i do not agree with but i do not break them because i believe it my right to take something back. Your attitude of "if the law is adburd there is nothing wrong with breaking it" is pathetic and irresponsible. Sometimes in life, situations are nto fair and dont go your way. Save your injustice, and hard done by chip for yourself.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

I flush out deer by walking my dogs on my property. It's now illegal to flush out deer without then shooting them. I believer I should be allowed to let the deer escape without being shot.

The process is very simple, the deer concealed in the undergrowth become aware of the dogs and come out into the open and run off. The dogs are collies they briefly chase them and the whole thing is over in an instant. This scene is repeated all over the country every day.

I've worked hard for what i own and having access to my own land with my dogs is important to me.

I don't feel that the fact that this causes deer to be flushed out means I am irresponsible.

Maybe you should think about it from the deers point of view. If you were a deer in the undergrowth and a dog came nearby which would you prefer, the opportunity to escape or a bullet in the head. It's really that simple.

I'm sure that if you were faced with such an absurd and unjust law you would just lie down and take it. However bear in mind one thing. Many of the rights you now enjoy were won for you by the criminals you so despise. I'm not saying I'm on a par with the tollpuddle martyrs however as a matter of principal I will not obey the Hunting Act as it takes away my rights to peacefully enjoy my property without shooting the deer my dogs flush out.

If I were prepared to obey this law I wouldn't do it by not taking my dogs round my land, I'd do it by exterminating the deer.

Just out of interest Flintus, do you have a dog and if so have you taken any steps since the hunting ban to prevent them flushing out wild mammals?

Thanks for not ignoring me BTW it's good to talk about these matters!

 

[polyphonic]

Just out of interest Flintus, do you have a dog and if so have you taken any steps since the hunting ban to prevent them flushing out wild mammals?

i have two terriers, who have never hunted or flushed out any wild animals

 

[Ereiam_jh]

BTW #2 I was sorry to read about your problemns with Flint. I do hope you get to keep him.

The government has the right to shoot my dogs because I refuse to shoot the deer they flush out. I wonder how you'd feel if they took the right to shoot your horse in such ridiculous circumstances. I think if you were faced with such an absurd law you wouldn't feel it pathetic to break it at all.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

Really so if you take them into a wood you really don't disturb any wild mammals? How do you acheive that? I suspect that moist of the wild mammals I flush out I don't even see. They simply run out of the other side of the undergrowth.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

i have two terriers, who have never hunted or flushed out any wild animals

Have they never flushed out a bird? My dogs flush out birds all the time especially pheasants. I flush out pheasants and deer in the woods even if I don't have the dogs with me. How on earth could I stop the dogs flushing out deer if I couldn't even stop myself flushing out deer?

 

[polyphonic]

1) thank you and yes its looking that way! v supportive OH regarding flint

2) they dont leave my side at all. be it in fields or woods they potter along beside me, if they run off out of sight i call them and both return. i CAN see your point, i do. But if you dont let the dogs flush the deer out then the shooting of your dogs are taken out of the equation

 

[polyphonic]

if you mean flushing out by disturbing them accidently then theres a difference between that and purposly going out to flush the deer. If its purposely done, then self control?

 

[Ereiam_jh]

But even if I kept the dogs by my side we'd still flush out deer! I'm afarid I don't I let them run all around the place off the lead. I enjoy doing that and feel i should have a right to on my own land. They are collies, they've only ever killed the odd rabbit.

I think I shouldn't have to shoot the deer and the government shouldn't have the right to shoot my dogs. Why all the killing? I just don't see the point!

Are you saying that if I can't stop my dogs from flushing out deer I should either have to stop taking them out or shoot the deer that we flush? Do you really think that if I refuse to do either of those two things then I am being pathetic and irresponsible?

Could I suggest a better alternative might be, when the dogs flush out a deer for me to stop them chasing it too far by calling them off. It seems to me that this is a much more welfare freindly method of preventing a deer being chased than killing it.

I just don't see the point of shooting the deer at all.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

if you mean flushing out by disturbing them accidently then theres a difference between that and purposly going out to flush the deer. If its purposely done, then self control?

Under the law you have to prevent your dogs chasing, flushing out and killing deer. The Government inist what I was doing is now illegal. I can't just carry on doing the same thing and pretend it is an accident. I'm perfectly aware they flush out deer I could stop them, I could shoot the deer. I'm not prepared to do either. That makes me a criminal.

Actually I quite enjoy crime. I was always put off by bthe fact that it used to entail doing something wrong. Now that you can do crimes without doing anything wrong I find it rather fun. Have you ever committed crime? Don't knock it until you've tried it!

 

[polyphonic]

but why do you beleiev you may have this divine right to break the law? the chances though of you being caught are slim-nil, as i said its not very often i see a local bobby in the woods, across fields and on moors. It could be a strong case of because you feel the need to break the law your giving the anti hunt supporters exactly the portrait they they had of hunters before, be it game, foxes etc. I would personally find another way to lobby my case, but we are all different

 

[Ereiam_jh]

Well I have been 'caught' because I've confessed all, to the police.

I think I have a right to break the law because I think that law is absurd and also because I know the police don't stop me.

I'm not sure that I really represent the portrait that anti's want to portray of hunters. I find it hard to beleive that antis want to portray hunters as people who refuse to kill animals.

What never ceases to surprise me is that so many antis seem to disagree with me. Why are they so pro killing if they are meant to be anti?

Do you think I should kill those deer?

 

[polyphonic]

i dont think you should let your dogs flush them out, then we wouldnt be having this conversation!

 

[Ereiam_jh]

How do you think I should stop my dogs from flushing out a deer?

 

[polyphonic]

discilpline? i manage to control mine and stop them doing such things

 

[Ereiam_jh]

Next time you come across a deer, try stopping it running away then maybe you'll see my point. Now try the same thing but have a dog with you.

You'll have to break the law but don't worry too much about that.

The only way I can think of to stop the deer runjing away is to shoot it. That's kind of the whole point of the law.

IMO it's better just to let it run away. That's what it wants to do. Shooting deer to stoip them escaping really wasn't what the Hunting Act was meant to be about.

Maybe they've just stuffed up the law, have you considered that? If they've just cocked it up then surely it's best just to break it. The deer shouldn't have to pay for our politicians incompetance.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

Discipline? Really? The deer gets flushed out because it becomes aware of the dogs. Should I discipline the dogs to make them invisible or discipline the deer to stop them running away?

maybe I should tie the deer to a tree.

How on earth can I get deer not to run off when I go past them with my dogs? That's all flushing out is. It's got nothing to do with chasing.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

Say someone was unable to discipline either his dogs or his deer to stop the dogs flushing out the deer but instead kept the dogs on a lead to prevent the deer being chased once they were flushed out. If that person then carried on flushing out deer and refused to shoot them.

Do you think he would be being pathetic?

Do you think what he did should be illegal?

Do you think he should be prosecuted for breaking the law in this manner?

 

[Tia]

You are completely right......it is the most stupid law ever!

Of course dogs will flush out deer if they are around.....it cannot be helped, dogs running about in undergrowth where deer are mooching, are inevitably going to flush them whether by mistake or on purpose.

Because you are not willing to shoot the deer that happen to pop out due to your dogs rooting around....you are breaking the law and that seems absurd to me!

LOL!! My dogs flush them every day - I am never sure whom is more surprised to be honest, the deer or the dogs. Thankfully we don't have silly laws like this over here and what happens on my land happens.

 

[Ereiam_jh]

Well done Tia and thanks a lot for saying that! Of course I am right! It's so completely obvious.

My dogs never harm the deer so what I do shouldn't be illegal. Killing the deer would be a pointless waste of time.

You'd be amazed the vitriol that has been poured on me for saying this. I've had letters to the press demanding I be imprisoned. I've been followed by camera wielding antis. I've been had up in court by LACS. I've even had one guy from this forum writing to my Chief Constable compaining about his failure to take action.

It's not the people who break absurd laws but the people who MAKE them who are the real culprits in all of this.