Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hunters lose court battle (Centuries old Fox-Hunting to end Feb. 18th)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
truthpusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 02:06 PM
Original message
Hunters lose court battle (Centuries old Fox-Hunting to end Feb. 18th)
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/PA_NEWCOURT...

Hunters lose court battle
28 January 2005

Hunt supporters have lost their High Court battle to overturn the ban on hunting with dogs in England and Wales.

The centuries-old sport will be outlawed when the Hunting Act takes effect on February 18, unless the courts find the legislation legally flawed on appeal.

The Act, which was forced through last November amid a storm of cheers and jeers, will not only end fox-hunting but also deer-hunting and hare-coursing with dogs.

Lord Justice Maurice Kay, sitting with Mr Justice Collins, said: "It is common knowledge this legislation concerns great controversy, not only in Parliament but in the country."

more:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/PA_NEWCOURT...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. Good. If you gonna kill something, just do it, don't torture it.
I have never seen the need to chase something and harass it before killing it. This never seemed very respectful of the animal. If you are going to kill something, do it with respect. You can figure out other ways to get together with friends in the outdoors than terrorizing animals.


(please don't flame me about never killing anything and respect, that is over with the cooking rabbit/guinea pig in school topic.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RebelOne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 02:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. That is excellent news.
Edited on Fri Jan-28-05 02:33 PM by RebelOne
No fox hunting, no deer hunting and no hare coursing. I only wish we could outlaw hunting here in the U.S.

On edit: I believe it means no hunting deer or hares with dogs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gorbal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I think this is one issue that devides many Democrats
Edited on Fri Jan-28-05 02:27 PM by gorbal
I swear the reason the enviromental movement can't get off the ground is because of the rift between hunters and vegans. Polluters like us divided.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sgent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Amen
Most hunters would be much more supportive of the enviromental laws if they didn't feel like they were attacking hunting as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #3
48. no, the reason is because big business owns the government.
you really think redneck-ass hunters and granola crunching vegans have THAT KIND OF POWER in this society?

Wake up and smell the acid rain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #48
53. No shit. I hate this naive "if we could just make the NASCAR dads like us"
shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberallyInclined Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. outlaw hunting in the U.S.?
that would be a pretty boneheaded thing to do-

what would you suggest we do about the resulting overpopulation of deer...? let them all starve to death perhaps?

hunting is also big business for a lot of people in a lot of states.

I have absolutely no problem with legal sport hunting, unless the prey goes to waste.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RebelOne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:20 AM
Response to Reply #8
22. Legal sport hunting?
It's not a sport because the other side is not equally armed and does not even know that there is a game going on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 07:32 AM
Response to Reply #22
29. The " REAL" Sporting Ground is "IRAQ-NAM"
the other side is "ALMOST" equally armed-- no jet planes tho---

The "Rag-Heads" are stealthy and can put up quite a tussle at times.

Especially after one of their 2000KG IED's takes out a few sportsmen marines and makes HASH out of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #29
49. then is "sport" hunting just the practice? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberallyInclined Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #22
40. whatever.
and evolution is just a "theory" too, i suppose...
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hyphenate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #8
30. Unless you talk about
"canned hunting." This is barbaric.

When an animal gets too old to be in a zoo, the animal, usually a lion, tiger, bear or other large gets shipped off to a game farm. Some game farms are okay, but the majority stink.

The animal is confined to a very small cage, and it is here that its life is usually ended, as a so-called "hunter" is allowed to shoot the animal for trophies.

This is a horrific ending to an already sad story, and the hidden part of the treatment of zoo animals.

As far as legal "hunting" is concerned, I know that there are concerns about the deer population, but it's our own fault. If men hadn't wiped out all the deer predators, the overpopulation could be contained.

I think a culling is a better way to keep the population down, but end the horrendous hunting that is going on. If someone wants to give the deer equal odds for survival, I suggest that ALL hunters go with bow and arrow (as some already do) in their quest to bag a buck, and leave the powerful rifles behind. There simply is no contest when an animal is brought down by a powerful weapon that leaves nothing to chance. A culling would be dispassionate, and would not be done "for pleasure" in killing the animals.

Better yet, catch and sterilize many does over the course of their lives, to keep that population to a manageable size. It works in some places already.

I know a lot of people hunt and enjoy the sport, but I find it the most distasteful. I found myself arguing with my uncle about it some years ago, and he confessed that he wouldn't be able to kill anymore--the last time he tried hunting, he stared into the deer's eyes and couldn't pull the trigger. I congratulated him on that insight. I know many of my cousins in Canada have come to that point, and I'm very happy to report that none of them has gone back to hunting deer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberallyInclined Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #30
39. i'm not a hunter.
ever since i looked into the eyes of a dying bird i shot with a pellet gun as a kid, i knew i could never kill anything again.

HOWEVER-

i have no qualms about those that do enjoy it, as long as it is done legally- although i do have a big problem with the fenced in type of "hunting" you described.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #39
57. Your post makes no sense.
Within on paragraph you go from:"ever since i looked into the eyes of a dying bird i shot with a pellet gun as a kid, i knew i could never kill anything again."

to:
"i have no qualms about those that do enjoy it"

Maybe I can understand why you tolerate it but having "no qualms" about it is fucking bizarre considering you claim you actually related to an animals suffering to the point you can no longer do them harm.

Yes I have friends and relatives that hunt but I cannot imagine what they are doing without feeling disgusted. I don't pretend that they are doing a service for the animal our society either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberallyInclined Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #57
80. it makes perfect sense.
personally, i'm not going to kill anything- but i still love the taste of meat fish and poultry, so i realize that someone has to do the killing- i just don't have the stomach for it.

i don't see what's so "fucking bizarre" about that...

if the actions of certain people disgusts you so much, i can't imagine how you could call them "friends"????

and you call my behaviour "fucking bizarre"???

well...backatcha :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #30
51. people need to stop pretending there is "deer over-population"
there is human overpopulation. There are less and less deer. We are invading their habitat, not vice versa.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #51
55. Another no shit to that.
Like we helped keep the American Buffalo population down. I am sure they are very grateful, so are the American Indians that actually used them for food, not sport.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
5. Hell, those hunts are just excuses for large meals and
...drunken parties. Everyone gets up, puts on stupid outfits, eats way too much eggs and bacon, drinks until they can barely get up on the horse, and then sends a poor little fox out of a cage, to be chased by a bunch of floppy eared dogs, followed by drunks on horseback.

They can still have their fun, they just have to send some servant out ahead of time dragging a scent bag over a designated course. Makes more sense, really, since so many of the people in the hunting party are shitfaced, and there's no way you can place a cellphone call to a fox asking him, hey dude, which way did you go? We can't find Fat Ollie, and we think he may have been so shitfaced he fell off his horsie!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthpusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Maybe the guy who came up w/boxing gloves for chickens...
...can figure out a humane way to do this one as well?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #6
67. Oh my gosh, you heard that too?
that is hyterical, I couldn't believe my ears.

However, I don't believe that that was a real reason, I believe that that is just a way to make cock-fighting legal. They just need to put the boxing gloves on themselves and beat the crap out of each other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Runcible Spoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #5
74. yes, that's called "mock hunts" and they are fun as hell.
I was in Pony Club for many years and we never went out on a real hunt. Instead we planned a course and as you said, dragged a scent bag over the course. In addition to being more ethical for the foxes, rabbits, etc. it was also safer for the horses and riders, since we could plot a clear course over jumps and avoid and holes, barbed wire, and other dangerous elements. As an equestrian, animal lover, and one against elitist selfish class-driven activities, I think this is a great compromise. IN my area, there weren't many rich people, and there was a hunt club that had many members who chipped in to support the costs of keeping a group of hounds. We had a couple of rich benefactors, but nobody ever really cared about that divide, it was for fun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rolleitreks Donating Member (282 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
7. Sorry to hear it.
Dems in the U.S. would do well to take the opposite approach and woo hunters and fishermen into the party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snoochie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #7
34. Both groups care about the environment
It hould be a natural fit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #34
59. For different reasons on the environ.
Hunters want to preserve game stocks so the can kill. That is usually about the extent of a "hunters" care for the environment. True environmentalists are into the idea of us being able to breathe and not destroy the earth for reasons that have nothing to do with killing or sport. It really is a different mentality. Not really compatible when you really look at it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #59
81. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #7
54. Hunters and fishermen need to get their heads out of their asses
and fight for the preservation of their hunting grounds before they get turned into a coal mine or nuclear waste dump.

Dumbass reactionary hunters. Of all the dumbass arguments, this one, that democratic pro-environmental policies are worse for hunters than republican 'rape the earth for all it's worth' polcies, is the dumbassest. I'm not directing this at you, but people need to know which side their bread is buttered on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #54
60. Yes I was trying to make that point.
Hunters claim to care about the environment but when it comes down to it most hunters I know support politicians with the worst environmental policies you could dream up. For them it is about preserving a sport not true environmental protection.

At least to them it is not worth sacrificing eternal war on brown people and tax cuts for the rich.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #60
62. Reminds me of that habitat song.
"Ya got to have a habitat to carry on cause
Once ya lose your habitat
Whoops!
You're gone!"

If the habitat goes to the right, so does the prey.

I think more and more hunters are finding this out the hard way.

It's one more case of politics making strange bedfellows.

The working-class white male's love affair with big-business republicans is one of the worst cases of battered-wife syndrome I have ever seen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #62
90. Hunters Teaming Up With Organic Farmers to Preserve Land
Is something I've heard about in recent years. Good for hunters because they have access to fallow fields on the chase. Good for farmers, because they have people with NRA clout on their side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
9. a good thing (Nomex on)
Unlike hunting in the US, which is mainly geared to wildlife management and, to a lesser extent, subsistance harvesting, the UK fox hunts are as others described:

A bunch of rich guys terrorizing an animal for sport.

There is NO wildlife management benefit, or any subsistence use, from hunting foxes specially-kept for hunting.

FWIK, if these "fox hunter" guys were among the dozen or so actual "agricultural farmers" left in the UK, then they could just either trap a nuisance fox or even shoot it (after getting police permission).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. If it was just fox hunting....
I'd have far less of a problem with it. But it isn't, it also covers deer hunting. It's all fun and games unto that 140 pound buck comes flying through your windshield...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redstone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. They're not banning ALL deer hunting...
just chasing the deer down with packs of dogs.

I say, good. I'm all for deer hunting (the people who say that shooting a deer with a high-powered rifle is cruel apparently have not considered that it's probably a lot less pleasant for a deer to starve to death, as many in our state have done), but there's no need to make a "sport" out of being deliberately cruel to aniimals.

And we in America think of the Brits as being so "civilized!"

Redstone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. It's hard to hunt deer with a rifle...
when rifles are banned. If all you have is a shotgun, you need to get the deer close to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #14
32. Rifles are not banned in the UK
Deer stalking is still legal, with rifles, eg http://www.shooting4all.com/advert08.asp

The ban in the UK was on handguns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. how often does that happen?
Edited on Fri Jan-28-05 04:41 PM by Romulus
I mean, hunting deer with hounds? I think it's probably illegal in many places in the US (like my resident state of MD):

http://www.dnr.state.md.us/huntersguide/deerregs.asp

Dogs
Dogs cannot be used to hunt deer except trained tracking dogs may be used to find dead, wounded or injured deer. The dog handler must maintain physical control of the tracking dog at all times and only the hunter and dog handler may carry a firearm or bow while tracking the deer. Prior to tracking the deer, the hunter must notify by telephone or in person the local regional Natural Resources Police Office. If the nearest regional office is unavailable, the hunter must notify the DNR Communication Center for Assistance phone number. The hunter may dispatch the deer only during legal shooting hours and by means legal for the current hunting season.


For fox hunting:

http://www.dnr.state.md.us/huntersguide/furbearers.asp
Unarmed fox chasing is not classified as hunting by law, and is therefore not subject to DNR hunting regulations. . . . The use of light and/or dogs is permitted while hunting raccoon, fox, opossum or coyote on foot.

And for rabbits (hares) and chasing with dogs:

<nada>

I remember looking at a "rabbit hunters of America" website or something, and it seemed like you HAD to use beagles to hunt them (at least everyone on the website used them) :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #13
43. "And we in America think of the Brits as being so "civilized!""
Well they did just make a law banning it. That seems pretty civilized. We can't even ban cock fighting here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #13
56. I'm a redneck and grew up in redneck rural Virginia
and whenever a dog was seen running deer out in the woods where I lived, that dog was shot on sight.

I guess coursing, or whatever it's called, never caught on there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack_DeLeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. I agree with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
10. Anybody want to bet what the net result will be?
property damage and human fatalities will increase drastically as overpopulation of deer leads to far more vehicle accidents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. If you HAVE to have a dog to track your game
...you are a limp excuse for a hunter. All this law does is take the dog out of the equation, it does not outlaw the hunting of deer.

And no one ever shot the poor fox, they'd ride after the dogs, who would run the thing to ground, and then the dogs would set on it and tear it to shreds, while the drunks passed the flask around and laughed.

The Oscar Wilde quote, above, says it all!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PaulaFarrell Donating Member (840 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:06 AM
Response to Reply #10
21. Very, very few deer are hunted with hounds
Deer-stalking will still be legal as I understand it. Parts of Britain are already massively overpopulated with deer, but this isn't raelly going to affect it all. BTW, most every environmentalist I've spoken to is in favour of a massive deer cull, but it wouldn't wash well with the general public. Animal rights not = environmentalism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #10
44. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #10
58. from the deers perspective:
"damn, why do these assholes keep moving into our neighborhoods and hitting us with cars?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fertilizeonarbusto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:21 PM
Response to Original message
11. "Fox hunting:
the inedible pursued by the unspeakable"
Oscar Wilde
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
18. Sorry, have to disagree. If a bunch of English landed gentry wanna-bes
want to chase a fox around, let them. It's not my idea of a good time, but it's theirs. So what?

I don't think foxes are on the endangered species list.

This is the kind of gov't intervention that the right associates with "tree-hugging left wingers" etc. We need gov't intervention to feed hungry children and prosecute fat cat Enron bastards, not to curtail people's hobbies.

This is the holier-than-thou political correctness that makes us seem to always be peeing on somebody's fun fire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. Some of them are disrespectful peckers
I lived in farm country in the UK, and many of my farming neighbors were very put out by these wealthy assholes who come in at the weekend, do their stupid, drunken fox hunting, and leave the gates open, allowing the sheep or cattle to wander off into the lanes, in danger of being hit by cars or farm vehicles.

If you use a scent bag, you can plan the course so you don't inconvenience the farmers, cause damage to their property and ensure that the hunters have permission to cross the land of the course. It is unlikely that you can persuade even the brightest fox to not cross Farmer Jones's property, oh, and be sure not to cut through Farmer Wilson's sheep farm, either--and mind the hydrangeas!!!

Also, it is just cruelty for cruelty's sake to take a starved, weakened fox, and allow it to be chased, then tortured and torn to death by a pack of dogs.

It is an antiquated exercise, from back in the day when the rich really were rich, and owned scads of land. Nowadays, you cannot assure that a fox hunt won't go beyond the bounds of some rich pecker's property, and cause property damage to one's neighbor's land.

Plus, those fucking horns are loud, and wake you up on the one day you have to sleep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack_DeLeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. Doesnt the UK have laws against tresspassing?
Just lock your gates, and if they still dont get the message kick them out. Albeit here thats a bit easier thanks to firearms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #18
61. "somebody's fun fire"?
for one, this is England, not the U.S., so this is not about American democrats.

for two, I happen to believe, as do many people and certainly the majority in England, that animals, despite where they land on that quaint little human hierarchy of existence, have a right to not be tortured, or as Jeremy Bentham put it, "the question is not 'can they think', or 'can they reason', but can they suffer."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #18
63. "tree-hugging left wingers" never let the freepers define you
Why do you fall for that shit? Lets see freeper fun vs animal cruelty. Tough choice, not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #63
84. I don't think animals are the same as humans. When birds stop killing
bugs, and cats stop killing birds, and dogs stop killing cats, and a chimpanzee writes "Hamlet," then I'll think different.

Hey, if God didn't want us to eat animals, why did he make them out of MEAT?

Seriously though, my main point if we start embracing PETA, we're gonna lose any resonance with American mainstream and RIGHTLY SO.

A medical advance that can cure Alzheimer's is worth a million billion rats, whether they "feel" or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:41 AM
Response to Original message
23. Crap.
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 06:42 AM by Commie Pinko Dirtbag
When someone mentioned bullfights in Spain, I could always answer, "yeah, but what about fox hunting in England?"

Now we're alone in animal-abusing shame.

Edit: for those who don't know, I have dual Brazil/Spain citizenship.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:53 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. Not quite...
you're forgetting Mexico.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:58 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. They torture the bulls to death like in Spain?
In Portugal, you can't kill the bull.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 07:04 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. Yep...
pthe picadors driving pikes into the bull's neck, etc...basically the traditional corrida...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 07:10 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. I wish I believed in hell
So all those fuckers would burn in it. And that includes the audience.

Believe it or not, bullfights are broadcast on TV as if it's a sport, with narrator, commentator, the works. They judge the "performance" of the "athletes" the way you'd comment on the quality, or lack thereof, of some 40-yard throw. What you see onscreen is an animal being tortured with sharp objects for half an hour, then stabbed, vomiting blood and dying slowly.

Anyone willing to defend this atrocity will not have any guarantee of civilized treatment on my part. I've SEEN it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rolleitreks Donating Member (282 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #27
33. A bad bullfight
is disgraceful. But a great one is art. You're free not to attend if don't approve, but you should leave us primitives to our crude enjoyments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #33
35. Bill Frist? Is that you?
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 10:33 AM by Commie Pinko Dirtbag
Yes, I know your thing is cats.
But still.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #33
50. Same thing about crucifixions and executions.
I am sure some people think those are an art form as well. "you should leave us primitives to our crude enjoyments." I would prefer to see the "primitives" take the place of the tortured animals. To me that would be "art".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #50
71. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Runcible Spoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #71
77. LOL nobody thinks crucifixions are art????
Paging Michelangelo!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rolleitreks Donating Member (282 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #77
78. Good joke, bad logic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Runcible Spoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #78
79. umm..bad reply, no logic....
???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rolleitreks Donating Member (282 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #79
83. Can you not distinguish
between crucifixion as subject, and crucifixion as act? I'm sure you are not being willfully obtuse, but the initial post clearly compared bullfighting to crucifixion, not the photographing of bullfights to the painting of crucifixions. Your post was illogical because it pretended to equate the rendering of a subject with approval of the depicted subject, a logical faux pas of which I am sure you are incapable.

Cheers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #33
64. I saw an awesome bullfight on Max Ex the other day!
It was amazing, there's this bull with two swords sticking out of his neck, and somehow the matador falls and the bull rushes over and gores him in between the legs and carries him about 20 yards like that...and it's so weird, because everyone in the crowd is having a conniption fit and shrieking and crying, and then the bull drops him and they take the man out of the ring.

I was tripping. Here is the man sticking swords in the back of a bull and the bull ponders this and says, "look here buddy, how about I stick one on my horns up your ass and carry you around like a shiskabob for a while and see how you like it" and proceeds thusly, and the crowd thinks this is diabolicial. Bad, bad bull. Fair play not allowed.

The man ended up being okay. No word on whether he will ever have issue, or if he now wears a colostomy bag, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #33
85. I agree. A bull is a damn bull. What kills me is the people expressing
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 11:50 PM by mistertrickster
all the outrage are sitting there with their leather furniture, belts, shoes, and car seats eating hamburgers.

But even though that steer got its nuts cut off and herded into a feed lot with about a thousand other cattle all eating each other's excrement, and hit over the head with a sledgehammer, they are not guilty of "cruelty," because they oppose bullfighting. <sarcasm>

A lot of men like a test of courage like bullfighting, bullriding, and bronch-busting. They like hunting and fishing, and yes that poor little walleye has to die. Get over it.

This is NOT a liberal issue. And when we make it one, we alienate millions of men who have seen their authority and place in society become de-valued and marginalized. Liberals, wrongly, are seen to be part of that de-valuation when we get all bent out of shape over fox hunting, for gosh sakes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #85
89. If I hold an opinion
I'm going to speak out loud what it is. This "not a liberal issue blah blah blah we should blah blah blah we're alienating blah blah blah" bullshit is getting old fast.

I live in Brazil. Here, cattle live outdoors, eat grass and grain, and are kiled quickly with a blow to the head. American meat looks so f**ked up I think I'd become a vegetarian if I went there. Well, no, I'd still eat fish.

But I don't think people who protest against those abuses (either at the farm or for "sport") should be morally required to forgo beef, anymore than Mothers Agains Drunk Driving should abstain from driving.

And if you want a test of skill and courage, go watch/do auto racing. Or skiing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberallyInclined Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #26
41. I went to a bullfight in Reynosa.
disgusting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #41
88. I wish I could find a bullfight broadcast from Spanish TV.
Then I'd like to ask the apologists their opinion again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hyphenate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 07:23 AM
Response to Original message
28. Good! The rich in Britain
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 07:24 AM by hyphenate
Will now have to occupy themselves with less than lethal sports.

I know it's not all the "rich" and all that, but the issue of fox-hunting is as old as the bluebloods in Great Britain, and they were the ones who wanted to hang on to the bloodthirsty sport as long as possible. Prince Charles led the call to keep the sport around.

There has to be something said about one poor little (but cunning!) fox fighting for his life in a world where packs of dogs, many humans outweighing the fox, and lots of horses chase him until he's practically dead, and then let the dogs rip him apart.

In addition, both the dogs and horses are injured as well, and left to die or be shot to death.

Here's one webpage of many that talks about how cruel this so-called "sport" is, and the reasons it should end.

In addition, Britain is one of the few countries which attempts to be more progressive in terms of animal rights. I only wish that the U.S. could follow her example and make the killing of animals a true crime.

Ooops--forgot link:
http://www.idausa.org/facts/foxhunting.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
31. Ironic that foxhunting is still high sport in the US -
- especially in the original colonial states. The difference is that US foxhunting focuses on the chase and not the kill. The fox is run to ground and lives to run another day.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hollowdweller Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #31
36. Coon hunting in the US is the barbaric sport. Where they shake him out
of the tree and the dogs tear him apart. I'm not sure either should be outlawed, I heard all the Brits were going to France now to do it, but I think they should be looked down on to the point where nobody does it.

I hunt deer and eat them but this just killing stuff for sport has always seemed wrong from a Great Spirit perspective. I have never understood hunters who even hunted deer and then gave away the meat. Like why did people originally hunt? Not just for the sake of killing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. I've coon hunted before -
- and it was done in the same spirit as fox hunting. The coon was treed - the hounds bayed like crazy - and then the hounds were pulled back and we all went home. No coon was killed or injured. The sport was the chase and not the kill.

I think those who hunt deer and give away the meat do it more for the sport of the hunt than the actual kill. At least someone is nourished by the meat.

I love to fish but many times I will release instead of keeping what I catch. Rather the same thing where it's the thrill of catching the fish that's the sport - not the killing of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #37
47. I respect the spirit of the hunt.
But there is no longer a need for people to kill wild animals for food. We need to evolve. I wish I could easily be a vegetarian, I am not. But at the same time I am not one of those douche bags that goes on and on about the tasty steak I had last night on a PETA thread.

There are things people can do to satisfy their love for the hunt without causing suffering to animals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hollowdweller Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #37
69. That's a good way to coon hunt.

People still get to test their dogs yet the coon lives another day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #36
68. I don't like hunting in any sense
but the way that you describe is the predator/prey relationship. I would prefer that you killed them with your bare hands like all other predators do (well, except spiders) but some could say the human brain is a weapon.

Early humans would have NEVER hunted just to kill, because the origins of hunting, sight hunting and tracking took hours for execution and you would have to expound a tremendous amount of energy for that one kill. Ironically, this is where the tradition of hunting the biggest, most mature male came from (which deer hunters follow today). They had to track the animal to exhaustion before the invention of the arrow and bow, so they chose the animal that had the most weight to carry, ie, the largest set of horns. This shoots holes through that story hunters use about thinning the herd of the weak and sick when everyone knows sport hunters chose the healthiest strongest looking male to kill.

More and more evidence suggests that early humans gained the majority of their animal protein from trapping small animals like rabbits in snares than by hunting large game. We probably learned to crack open bones from carrion and eat the marrow by watching wild dogs. There is no evidence that humans EVER hunted extremely large prey like mammoth and mastodon, so the "great hunter" myth is essentially a lie, especially when one considers that the early tribes gained about 80% of their food from the gathering activities of the women, children and elders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hollowdweller Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #68
70. That's real interesting. I never knew that but it makes total sense.

Also probably at least to some degree that would explain the relationship between dogs and humanity, since they could chase and kill(but not totally eat) larger animals, leaving some for humans.

What you way about killing stuff with bare hands or bow and arrows would be more sport as far as the struggle. I used to bow hunt a lot but I kind of gave it up because the amount of time,(generally speaking) between when you shoot an animal with a bow and when it dies . Since I only hunt deer mainly for food and it bothers me to see something suffer more than is absolutley needed I use a gun cause I feel like it is quicker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rolleitreks Donating Member (282 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #68
73. I wouldn't say "no evidence" . . .
In fact, projectile points are often found in proximity to mastodon, mammoth and bison bones. Here's an example where the point was in bone:

"Washington - The point of a bone spearhead was found imbedded and broken off in a mastodon's rib at the Manis Site, Olympic Penninsula, Washington state. The rib showed partial healing, proving it to be an old wound. The skeleton of the mastodon was found in a pond or bog and dated to almost 12,000 years B.P. The bones showed signs of butchering, however, proving that man had attacked again and had slain the mastodon at last (Gustafson and Daugherty, 1978)."

http://www.csasi.org/2004_october_journal/pointed_weapo...


"This shoots holes through that story hunters use about thinning the herd of the weak and sick when everyone knows sport hunters chose the healthiest strongest looking male to kill."

Hunters take excess game -- the numbers are estimated by game departments based on the carrying capacity of the land. A certain number of animals will starve during winter on any plot of land. That is why managed sport hunting does not damage game herds. The animals taken are usually healthy. Coyotes, wolves and puma hunt the weak and sick.

While many hunters do seek trophies (again, sanctioned by the game departments), others simply wish to fill the larder and take does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fedsron2us Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
38. This controversy is exactly what Blair wants
The policy to outlaw Fox hunting was in Labours 1997 manifesto yet mysteriously no serious effort was made to put it on the statute book until after the invasion of Iraq. I wonder why.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
42. Wow, I never thought it would be possible to get a government
to protect animals from cruelty. I have not read the thread yet but I imagine the anti PETA pro animal cruelty crowd has already showed up to cry about this.

One of the best ways to judge a persons character by how they feel about animal cruelty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
45. Tony Blair's probably trying to make Dubya happy...
to protect his good buddy Rupert Murdoch and his denizens from Fox News from being hunted down when they visit the U.K. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
46. In reading the entire thread, why is it -
- that no one has advocated on behalf of the horse that is used in foxhunting?

Bound with leather, a metal bit shoved into its very sensitive mouth, a hulking weight perched upon its back, forced to run and jump over sometimes difficult and dangerous terrain - all to chase a fox for mere sport.

Yet, sympathies seem to run for the fox and the plight of the poor horse is ignored.

What is this world coming to???

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #46
52. I feel for all the animals involved actually.
I cannot count how many hunters I know that have lost their dogs on a hunt. We need to quit fucking with animals for our pleasure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #46
65. now that's a good point.
Even Koko the gorilla figured that one out.
She knew sign language and she had a cat named "All Ball."

One day her handler showed her a picture of a horse with riding gear on it.

She looked at the photo and pointed to the horse's mouth and then made two hand signs.

"Horse." "Sad."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #65
86. Apes can't talk. Period. Koko's signs were "interpretations" by humans,
Edited on Sun Jan-30-05 12:16 AM by mistertrickster
who can talk.

Koko signed all over the place and her human handlers (who were getting funded to study her, btw) picked and chose which signs they wanted to turn into language.

Premire linguist Noam Chomsky, the closest thing we've got to a leftist in this country, said that if animals could communicate with language (and that would include even a primitive sign language), they would. There would be huge evolutionary advantages.

It's like a species of bird that could fly but didn't know how until some human came along and taught it to fly.

What the ape studies show beyond a shadow of a doubt is that animals CAN'T communicate with anything like a human language. This is the generally accepted conclusion of the scholarly linguistic community after half a century of investigation.

**************

"Horse" "Sad" is actually a good example of Koko's lack of language. Does it mean the horse is sad because it is bridled? Does it means that the horse looks sad because the bridle pulls the horse's mouth into a frown? That seeing the horse makes her (Koko) sad? That Koko sees a horse and signs "horse" and then signs "sad" because she's sad about something entirely unrelated?

It's the human who make language out of her signs, because we have language, heh. She doesn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
antigone382 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #46
72. Fox-hunting is dangerous and often deadly for horses, but riding isn't.
I own two horses, and I use leather tack and a metal bit. The bit isn't sharp, and I make an effort to be gentle so that my horse's mouth will not harden. She's a very active and intelligent horse, and she truly enjoys being ridden. If I don't ride her or exercise her enough, she gets bored and frustrated. The human-horse relationship goes back thousands of years, and riding them, provided you are not grossly overweight, is not harmful to their overall health.

Most certainly, there are horses who are abused, but not the majority. The bond between horse and owner is one of the closest you will find between animal and human; in my experience, even closer than that between dogs and their owners. Horses are competitive animals, and if they are trained and handled correctly, both horse and owner get tremendous benefit from the relationship.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Runcible Spoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #46
76. fox hunting can be dangerous, but a well-schooled horse enjoys being....
ridden. yes the bits are metal but a good rider can direct the horse with very subtle pressure from hands, legs, and seat. I am schooled in dressage, google it and learn. As far as "bound up with leather", well if you're a woman, do you wear a bra? Or does your sister/mother/wife wear one? It is tantamount to that, the horses are conditioned to become accustomed to the feeling, and will let you know if they are being pinched or rubbed. Well-fitted and conditioned tack is soft, pliable, and does not cause discomfort. If you really want to get angry about horse abuse, do some research on thoroughbred racing! I own an off-the track thoroughbred, and I can tell you stories about what it was like rehabilitating her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barb162 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
66. this is a good thing (and about time)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Runcible Spoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
75. I have fox hunted...let me tell you my story....
when I was a little kid I belonged to a very rich Pony Club, which was affiliated with a hunt club owned by wealthy pricks. I was not a rich kid, but I was invited to join because I had won the regional USPC Know-Down (it's like horsey-Jeopardy) championship and had gone on to represent our state at the Nationals. One time the Pony Club went fox hunting with the club. I can't lie, it was great fun, until the end. I had always been an animal lover, and had stuffed foxes. Well, when the dogs made the kill, and then ripped the carcass the shreds, the hunt master took a piece of the bloody mess and dipped his thumb in blood. All of the first-time fox hunters, most of us kids about 8-12 years old, were "stamped"- he took his thumb and stamped our cheeks with fox blood. I swear it felt so barbaric and meaningless, I cried. I quit that Pony Club because of that and also because they were mean assholes. I re-joined the less well-heeled Pony Club after that, and we would go on "mock hunts" instead, where the dogs followed a scent that had been dragged over the course, and at the end they would get some chopped up liver. It was much safer for the riders and horses, and no animals (unless you count the liver, which is another can of worms!) were killed/injured in such a barbaric manner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
82. Hallelujah!
There is some justice in this cruel world! Animals rarely get a break, and I am thrilled that this hideous "sport" will soon be ended.
O8)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Piperay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 04:00 AM
Response to Original message
87. TERRIFIC
at last progress is made on something! :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Dec 29th 2014, 12:39 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC