Discussion
kingston12 said:
Surely, that depends on what the issue is? I’d agree that we shouldn’t have had a public vote on Brexit as it is far too complicated for most to understand.
Eh? Leave or Remain isn't complicated. The devil's only in the details for some. kingston12 said:
I don’t see fox hunting being nearly as complex an issue. Over all the pages of this thread, anyone who is against hunting is told that they don’t understand or are ignorant, but when they ask what they are ignorant of, very little is forthcoming.
For or against, again, isn't complicated. The issue is made harder to discuss here on an emotional level by people who basically troll anyone and show incredible rudeness to anyone who isn't for fluffy brown fleabags. In fact it does actually seem harder to discuss on here than Brexit due to the excess vitriol involved.popeyewhite said:
For or against, again, isn't complicated. The issue is made harder to discuss here on an emotional level by people who basically troll anyone and show incredible rudeness to anyone who isn't for fluffy brown fleabags. In fact it does actually seem harder to discuss on here than Brexit due to the excess vitriol involved.
In fairness, there seems to be quite a lot of that going on from both ‘sides’.There will always be people who get too emotionally involved with things like this, but not everyone.
I’d definitely not class myself as someone who gets carried away with my opposition to hunting. I dislike
It, I think it’s cruel and distasteful. I’d certainly not be turning up to a hunt to protest against it, but I’d definitely vote against it if there was a public poll.
I also see myself as a relatively open-minded, and I’d welcome the counter argument from people closer to the issue than I am. I just haven’t seen that yet.
Edited by kingston12 on Friday 11th January 17:22
popeyewhite said:
For or against, again, isn't complicated. The issue is made harder to discuss here on an emotional level by people who basically troll anyone and show incredible rudeness to anyone who isn't for fluffy brown fleabags. In fact it does actually seem harder to discuss on here than Brexit due to the excess vitriol involved.
In fairness, there seems to be quite a lot of that going on from both ‘sides’.There will always be people who get too emotionally involved with things like this, but not everyone.
I’d definitely not class myself as someone who gets carried away with my opposition to hunting. I dislike
It, I think it’s cruel and distasteful. I’d certainly not be turning up to a hunt to protest against it, but I’d definitely vote against it if there was a public poll.
I also see myself as relatively open- minded, and I’d welcome the counter argument from people closer to the issue than I am. I just haven’t seen that yet.
Edited by kingston12 on Friday 11th January 17:52
popeyewhite said:
For or against, again, isn't complicated. The issue is made harder to discuss here on an emotional level by people who basically troll anyone and show incredible rudeness to anyone who isn't for fluffy brown fleabags. In fact it does actually seem harder to discuss on here than Brexit due to the excess vitriol involved.
In fairness, there seems to be quite a lot of that going on from both ‘sides’.There will always be people who get too emotionally involved with things like this, but not everyone.
I’d definitely not class myself as someone who gets carried away with my opposition to hunting. I dislike
It, I think it’s cruel and distasteful. I’d certainly not be turning up to a hunt to protest against it, but I’d definitely vote against it if there was a public poll.
I also see myself as relatively open- minded, and I’d welcome the counter argument from people closer to the issue than I am. I just haven’t seen that yet.
Edited by kingston12 on Friday 11th January 17:54
LDN said:
NomduJour said:
UK welfare standards are generally very high, but the process of turning animals into food is never going to be “nice”. That’s just the way it is, and it’s something that doesn’t even register with most people, who wouldn’t give it a moment’s thought - whilst decrying evil hunting, shooting etc.
It’s registering with more and more people now, though. And hunting and shooting is included in that.I would absolutely agree that fox hunting is declining in attendance.
Perhaps not things like the Boxing Day meetings where the public turn out in droves, but certainly the average Wednesday/Saturday/Sunday hunts are less well attended by the public, and I think that in the future very few Fox Hound packs will still exist. There won’t be the desire to be part of the hunt as there once was.
But the point I must speak up about is shooting.
There has been nothing but an increase in the interest in shooting by the public for many years now.
Firearms licences (Rifles etc) are notably up, shotgun licences are less of an increase over the last 10 years or so, but still increasing overall.
Numbers of guns held by the pubic has increased significantly.
Pheasant and Grouse shooting has experienced huge surges in popularity over the last decade, with many shoots being revived and now flourishing.
I’ve personally witnessed commercial shoots expanding rapidly over the last 10 years, and being totally sold out season after season.
Deer stalking is also experiencing a surge, which partially accounts for the increase in firearms licences.
Business is absolutely booming in the UK shooting scene, and it now accounts for a massive £2.5 Billion within the economy.
There is significantly more to come as well with the well encouraged rise of the female shooter. Very few women shoot at present compared with men, but the interest levels and the number of women trying it and liking it are quite astounding.
There is of course an element of clay shooting in all of this, but you tend to find that the more people get into it, the more they want to attend a pheasant shoot to experience a ‘real shoot’ for themselves.
We are getting more and more groups of all female shooters booking days at the shoot I attend.
LimaDelta said:
Lets take track driving as an example. Like fox hunting there are a tiny number of participants as a % of the population as a whole. What benefits does track driving bring, versus the noise, pollution, waste, etc? In these very environmentally-conscious days, it would not be a hard sell to persuade the public to ban track days. Just silly little men playing at racing drivers for the day. There would be those who take part which would vehemently defend it, and NIMBYs and environmental extremists who would criticise it, but the majority of the population probably wouldn't care one way or another, because it is not part of their everyday experience. Fox hunting is only on the agenda because certain types with vested interests want it on the agenda. For 99% of the population it has no bearing on their life at all. They will probably live their lives and never even see a fox, let alone a hunt. It could quite easily be track days or private aviation or even meat eating next. We are just one more ban away from utopia...
Fantastic bit of white flag waving PH style! When the debate is lost resort to literalism and whataboutery (or in the case of Rovinghawk put your fingers in your ears and shout lalala not listening):People objecting to noise that affects no-one = zero
People objecting to pollution from track days = some, but not many. The extra pollution will be minimal in the scheme of things.
People objecting to "waste" = as above.
Yet of course this is completely comparable to fox hunting for the PH literalist even though:
People objecting to a sentient animal being killed for sport = the majority.
You might as well have compared fox hunting to golf or football (all those stadium lights wasting electricity!). Yes sirree, the fox hunting ban lead to a massive bandwagon of killjoys campaigning to ban track days, golf, football etc. etc.!
Not having a direct "bearing on their life" is irrelevant. I'm immensely thankful that as a race we care about many things that don't have a direct bearing on us as individuals. Of course the PH 'I want to do what I want when I want' gang have to stamp their feet and invoke the slippery slope argument, but sorry - you don't get everything your way, no-one does.
kingston12 said:
In fairness, there seems to be quite a lot of that going on from both ‘sides’.
There will always be people who get too emotionally involved with things like this, but not everyone.
I’d definitely not class myself as someone who gets carried away with my opposition to hunting. I dislike
It, I think it’s cruel and distasteful. I’d certainly not be turning up to a hunt to protest against it, but I’d definitely vote against it if there was a public poll.
I also see myself as a relatively open-minded, and I’d welcome the counter argument from people closer to the issue than I am. I just haven’t seen that yet.
I know several people involved in 'the hunt' in disparate ways - from a farmer that gives permission, to a woman that just loves all things horsey and I'm absolutely convinced there's a lot more to hunting than just killing a fox. I'm also in favour of country ways and British culture, so I'm pro. I also don't see much difference between a sab that trespasses on private farm land and someone trespassing in my garden - what I do on my own property is no body else's business provided it's within the law. On the other hand sabs (when behaving and not harassing people on horses going about their lawful business) earn a bit of admiration from me for their willingness to get dirty for what they believe in. However it's a political football now so whatever gleans the votes.. .There will always be people who get too emotionally involved with things like this, but not everyone.
I’d definitely not class myself as someone who gets carried away with my opposition to hunting. I dislike
It, I think it’s cruel and distasteful. I’d certainly not be turning up to a hunt to protest against it, but I’d definitely vote against it if there was a public poll.
I also see myself as a relatively open-minded, and I’d welcome the counter argument from people closer to the issue than I am. I just haven’t seen that yet.
Edited by kingston12 on Friday 11th January 17:22
kingston12 said:
In fairness, there seems to be quite a lot of that going on from both ‘sides’.
There will always be people who get too emotionally involved with things like this, but not everyone.
I’d definitely not class myself as someone who gets carried away with my opposition to hunting. I dislike
It, I think it’s cruel and distasteful. I’d certainly not be turning up to a hunt to protest against it, but I’d definitely vote against it if there was a public poll.
I also see myself as a relatively open-minded, and I’d welcome the counter argument from people closer to the issue than I am. I just haven’t seen that yet.
Not only that, but the pure scurrying around and twisting logic/facts (ie no polls are factual!).There will always be people who get too emotionally involved with things like this, but not everyone.
I’d definitely not class myself as someone who gets carried away with my opposition to hunting. I dislike
It, I think it’s cruel and distasteful. I’d certainly not be turning up to a hunt to protest against it, but I’d definitely vote against it if there was a public poll.
I also see myself as a relatively open-minded, and I’d welcome the counter argument from people closer to the issue than I am. I just haven’t seen that yet.
Edited by kingston12 on Friday 11th January 17:22
Roman Rhodes said:
LimaDelta said:
Lets take track driving as an example. Like fox hunting there are a tiny number of participants as a % of the population as a whole. What benefits does track driving bring, versus the noise, pollution, waste, etc? In these very environmentally-conscious days, it would not be a hard sell to persuade the public to ban track days. Just silly little men playing at racing drivers for the day. There would be those who take part which would vehemently defend it, and NIMBYs and environmental extremists who would criticise it, but the majority of the population probably wouldn't care one way or another, because it is not part of their everyday experience. Fox hunting is only on the agenda because certain types with vested interests want it on the agenda. For 99% of the population it has no bearing on their life at all. They will probably live their lives and never even see a fox, let alone a hunt. It could quite easily be track days or private aviation or even meat eating next. We are just one more ban away from utopia...
Fantastic bit of white flag waving PH style! When the debate is lost resort to literalism and whataboutery (or in the case of Rovinghawk put your fingers in your ears and shout lalala not listening):People objecting to noise that affects no-one = zero
People objecting to pollution from track days = some, but not many. The extra pollution will be minimal in the scheme of things.
People objecting to "waste" = as above.
Yet of course this is completely comparable to fox hunting for the PH literalist even though:
People objecting to a sentient animal being killed for sport = the majority.
You might as well have compared fox hunting to golf or football (all those stadium lights wasting electricity!). Yes sirree, the fox hunting ban lead to a massive bandwagon of killjoys campaigning to ban track days, golf, football etc. etc.!
Not having a direct "bearing on their life" is irrelevant. I'm immensely thankful that as a race we care about many things that don't have a direct bearing on us as individuals. Of course the PH 'I want to do what I want when I want' gang have to stamp their feet and invoke the slippery slope argument, but sorry - you don't get everything your way, no-one does.
popeyewhite said:
Halb said:
(ie no polls are factual!).
They're not Halb, They take a tiny portion of the electorate (say 2000 people) and extrapolte to cover the population. As a manner of seeing trends they can be quite helpful.Halb said:
popeyewhite said:
Halb said:
(ie no polls are factual!).
They're not Halb, They take a tiny portion of the electorate (say 2000 people) and extrapolte to cover the population. As a manner of seeing trends they can be quite helpful.popeyewhite said:
I know several people involved in 'the hunt' in disparate ways - from a farmer that gives permission, to a woman that just loves all things horsey and I'm absolutely convinced there's a lot more to hunting than just killing a fox. I'm also in favour of country ways and British culture, so I'm pro. I also don't see much difference between a sab that trespasses on private farm land and someone trespassing in my garden - what I do on my own property is no body else's business provided it's within the law. On the other hand sabs (when behaving and not harassing people on horses going about their lawful business) earn a bit of admiration from me for their willingness to get dirty for what they believe in. However it's a political football now so whatever gleans the votes.. .
I’d also count myself as somebody who admires tradition and British culture in general, but I don’t like the British being associated with that particular tradition. 
I’m not sure it is even that much of a political football anymore. Corbyn has expressed his wish to strengthen the ban if he got into power.
The Conservatives have (rightly) knocked this a long way down the agenda, but even if it did get to the top, surely they’d be unlikely to repeal the ban as they’d risk losing more votes in tight urban marginals than they would gain in rural strongholds? (i know there are exceptions to both.)
kingston12 said:
I’d welcome the counter argument from people closer to the issue than I am. I just haven’t seen that yet.
About foxes rather than hunting- I've seen the devastation when one gets into a henhouse. Taking one for food is fair enough but bloodlust will ensure it kills thousands before leaving if that's what's there.They are vermin & their death is easy to justify.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff