Jump to content

Amending the Hunting Act.

DulwichFox

By DulwichFox
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

steveo

steveo

Posted
Posted

The HIV/Cancer argument doesn't fly, a better comparison would be focussing on a hangnail when there's HIV out there


In my idyllic rural youth I've dragged torn apart chickens out of batteries, seen badly performed pig castrations, unpicked dead lambs from barbed wire fences, seen botched slaughtering in abbatoirs and a whole lot more.


Townies don't care how it got to the table but they do like dictating to the shires.


I think that's more what the marches/barricades were about

Peckhamgatecrasher

Peckhamgatecrasher

Posted
Posted

WIth regard to MPs (filthy, tory scum or otherwise), I would check out how they voted on fox hunting and then see how they voted on abortion.


That's rank hypocrisy in my book. Not ok to tear apart a fox. Fine to tear apart a baby.



Room for me there, steveo?

DulwichFox

DulwichFox

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Just for clarification...


I did not start this thread as a Topic of Discussion....


I started this thread solely for Information so those people who abhor Fox Hunting can lobby their MP on the matter.


Feel free to discus, but I will not be getting involved in any discussion on the subject.


Everyone knows my views.


PS.. How can a Thread on The Hunting Act be turned in to a thread on Abortion..

They are not related. Please start your own thread.



DulwichFox

PokerTime

PokerTime

Posted
Posted

'Townies don't care how it got to the table but they do like dictating to the shires.'


I think this is unfair. Taking an animal to slaughter for food is not on the same par as chasing a fox to it's death of being ripped apart by dogs.....that's what most people rightly find so disgusting.


Similarly, abortion comes within stict regulations. There is good scientific evidence for shaping those regulations. Fetuses are not torn apart. To compare the two is nonsense. How about we legalise the chasing of a small child by a pack of dogs before tearing it apart, if you really want to compare like for like.


Edited to add; This thread is about fox hunting specifically. Justifying the cruelty of this sport by comparison to other perceived levels of crulety is neither here nor there. Just because regulated abortion is legal doesn;t mean we should tolerate obscene cruelty elsewhere.

StraferJack

StraferJack

Posted
Posted

Is this why the toffs keep lobbying for cock fighting and badger baiting to come back too?


The narrative "metro liberals dictating to shires" isn't without some merit but by itself it doesn't explain the opposition


Loz' two categories is over simplistic


I give not one fig about foxes OR what rural types get up to


But I am suspicious of people who derive pleasure from cruelty visited upon anything that has no say


And that goes for any class.


Plenty of townies do care about where their meat gets to the table. But then they get ridiculed too

Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

unlurked Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> The only people that want fox hunting are tories. End of.


And your proof for that is...? And your explanation for the dozen or so Labour MPs that voted against the banning legislation is...?


> Slipping your riding boots on loz?


Don't like the very concept of hunting and I'm not a Tory, so no.

unlurked

unlurked

Posted
Posted

Loz Wrote:

------------------------


> And your proof for that is...? That the CONdem Govt is trying to sneak it back in. And your

> explanation for the dozen or so Labour MPs that

> voted against the banning legislation is...? Dicks/closet tories.

>

> > Slipping your riding boots on loz?

>

> Don't like the very concept of hunting and I'm not

> a Tory, so no.

Glad to hear it, not all bad then x

aquarius moon

aquarius moon

Posted
Posted

I was born in the countryside and lived there for 30 years, so I was surrounded by people who were brought up with hunting and thought it was ok. I also knew many people who loathed it.


It definitely is not ok.


Ripping an animal to shreds for sport is sick and barbaric.


There are plenty of country dwellers who think the same as me.


It's about loving animals and respecting a life.


The people who agree with fox hunting are the same people who agree with shooting and other blood sports.


To them, a living creature means absolutely nothing.


Shame on them all.

Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

aquarius moon Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> The people who agree with fox hunting are the same

> people who agree with shooting and other blood sports.


I don't that is entirely true - or at least not in reverse. I have a big problem with an animal being chased across the countryside for half an hour until it is exhausted before being ripped to shreds by a pack of dogs. I have less of a problem with shooting, especially things like game birds, etc.


Maybe it's a touch hypocritical of me, but I think there is a difference.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • Forest Hill Climber
      Are we now under a flight path?

      By Forest Hill Climber · Posted

      In 2016 London City Airport began using concentrated flight paths. When there's a predominantly westerly wind, incoming aircraft approach from East London (north of the River. When there's a predominantly Easterly wind, incoming aircraft approach the airport from the West: circling through Forest Hill, Dulwich, Vauxhall, Tower Hamlets, Docklands. This latter flight path affects many of us in South East London. https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/london-city-airport-concentrated-flight-paths The planes going into City are often below 2,000 ft, so very noisy. Sometimes we have incoming Heathrow at the same time, flying higher. The early flights that I hear e.g. 04:30 are incoming to Heathrow. They are scheduled to land at 05:30 but are 'early'. Apparently the government allows a percentage of flights to arrive early and late (but these are now established as regular occurrences, informally part of the schedule). IMHO Londoners are getting very poor political representation on this issue. Incredible that if you want to complain about aircraft noise, you're supposed to contact the airport concerned! Preposterous and designed solely in favour of aviation expansion.
    • DulwichParker
      Local plumber and gas engineer - Jafar - Portrait Plumbing

      By DulwichParker · Posted

      Yet another recommendation for Jafar. Such a nice guy, really reliable and fair. He fixed a problem with our boiler and then incredibly kindly made two more visits to replace a different part at no extra cost. 
    • Sue Klein
      Are we now under a flight path?

      By Sue Klein · Posted

      I didn't have any problems with plane noise until city airport started flying planes to and from about 5-8 minutes apart from 5.30 am or  6 am,  and even with ear plugs and double glazing I am woken at about 6 well before I usually would wake  up. I have lived here since 1986 and it is relatively recently that the planes have been flying far too low over East dulwich. I very much doubt that they are headinbg to Heathrow or from Heathrow. As the crow flies we are much , MUCH closer to City Airport than Heathrow or Gatwick. I even saw one flying so low you could see all the windows, when I was in Peckham Rye Park.
    • Jenijenjen
      The Chapel of Rest

      By Jenijenjen · Posted

      Robert Redford

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...