# Dr.Brian May's SAVE ME campaign



## Scratchline (18 April 2010)

Dear members, Brian May the Queen guitarist has started a campaign to save our wildlife from the brutal inhumane slaughter they used to face at the hands of now illegal hunting.
Having gained nearly six thousand supporters in only a few days this really is a cause for us all to support. I have added my voice please consider adding yours.

Use your vote to ensure that the present laws protecting animals from cruelty are kept in place, more carefully monitored, legally tightened up, and fully enforced.
We are a group of people who believe that every creature deserves a decent life and a decent death. We are not a charity, and we are not affiliated to any political party. We are therefore free in the coming weeks to support any political candidate we choose  any politician who serves the needs of animals. 
We believe that there is a grave danger that Britain will soon revert to the barbaric past, when it was legal to hunt down our wildlife with dogs. The current Tory party leadership has vowed, if they win this coming election, to try to repeal the Hunting Act  a law which it took animal-lovers 80 years, and 700 hours of parliamentary debate to bring into effect, by democratic process, in accordance with the will of at least 75 per cent of the population. 
IF this law were repealed, it would become legal to hunt to the death, with brutalised packs of dogs, not only foxes, but stags, hares, and other wild creatures in Britains countryside. 
The Tory party leadership has also confirmed that it will immediately dismantle the current 5-year plan for vaccinating badgers against Bovine TB, and instigate a cull instead; in effect, nothing less than the eventual extermination of our native badgers. 
We believe that the British public needs to be clearly told the truth. We do not want the next government of Britain to be able to bully the whole of Britain into policies supported only by a minority  a minority that cannot let go of blood sports. 
We as a group pledge to support any candidate, of any political party, who promises to vote against a repeal of the Hunting law, and against a Badger Cull. We will also help any candidate campaigning to improve the treatment of wild animals, farm animals, laboratory animals, and domestic animals. 
We already have supporters from all three major parties


----------



## muffinino (18 April 2010)

As I said in Latest News - Horse & Hound forum (and, at risk of being the candidate specialising in the bleeding obvious, this is the HUNTING forum) = clue's in the name


----------



## oakash (18 April 2010)

Not sure whether Scratchline is homophobic or what..why is this Dr Brian May a 'Queen?' If he were intelligent then he would be supporting the repeal of the Hunting Act, surely? And why is hunting 'cruel'? How are the hounds 'brutalised' - havent you seen them at a meet licking children? Does Brian maybe a queen know what he's talking about? Does anyone know what and who he is and where he is?


----------



## muffinino (18 April 2010)

oakash said:



			Not sure whether Scratchline is homophobic or what..why is this Dr Brian May a 'Queen?' If he were intelligent then he would be supporting the repeal of the Hunting Act, surely? And why is hunting 'cruel'? How are the hounds 'brutalised' - havent you seen them at a meet licking children? Does Brian maybe a queen know what he's talking about? Does anyone know what and who he is and where he is?
		
Click to expand...

They are referring to Brian May, the guitarist in Queen - there certainly was a queen in that band and it was not him  He holds a doctorate in astrophysics (very impressive, I must say!), though I'm not sure why the OP thought it necessary to add Dr to his name as most people will know him as just Brian May, the guitarist. Maybe they thought it would lend their hilarious post more weight, who knows?

ETA Save Me is a Queen song, so that's why it's been used as the title of the campaign.

*Disclaimer* I am not being nasty when I call the dearly departed Freddie a queen - I adore him and his music and regret I was too young to see him sing live. But there's no denying the queenliness of the man


----------



## CorvusCorax (18 April 2010)

I think Oakash was being tongue in cheek 

Does anyone want to address the claim of "brutalised" packs of dogs?


----------



## FestiveSpirit (18 April 2010)

Oh dear - as The Watcher said in NL, pop stars should stick to what they are good at, same as actors   This thread is all the more irritating because now I am singing 'Save Me' to myself


----------



## muffinino (18 April 2010)

CaveCanem said:



			I think Oakash was being tongue in cheek 

Click to expand...

Oh, ok, it did seem odd. Now I can't get the image if a camped up Brian May out of my mind and like Gazehound, have a Queen song stuck in my head, though in this case it's I Want To Break Free


----------



## Scratchline (18 April 2010)

muffinino said:



			As I said in Latest News - Horse & Hound forum (and, at risk of being the candidate specialising in the bleeding obvious, this is the HUNTING forum) = clue's in the name 

Click to expand...

As I have posted in Latest News the vast majority of forum members have not shown themselves to be pro hunting.


----------



## Scratchline (18 April 2010)

Gazehound said:



			Oh dear - as The Watcher said in NL, pop stars should stick to what they are good at, same as actors   This thread is all the more irritating because now I am singing 'Save Me' to myself 

Click to expand...

David Cameron enlisted Gary Barlows support for his campainging so all is fair is it not.


----------



## Scratchline (18 April 2010)

muffinino said:



			Oh, ok, it did seem odd. Now I can't get the image if a camped up Brian May out of my mind and like Gazehound, have a Queen song stuck in my head, though in this case it's I Want To Break Free 

Click to expand...

As a hunter shouldnt that be 'Another one bites the dust'?


----------



## FestiveSpirit (18 April 2010)

Scratchline said:



			David Cameron enlisted Gary Barlows support for his campainging so all is fair is it not.
		
Click to expand...

Good heavens, really   I shall add that to my list of 'reasons I will never vote Conservative' I think


----------



## Serenity087 (18 April 2010)

My undying love for Otis Ferry means I cannot comment in the involvement of aging rock stars in the hunting debate....


----------



## Scratchline (19 April 2010)

To those of you who question Brian May's involvement in such a harsh way someone else has already tried it lol

This courtesy of Bri's blog via the SAVE ME campaign ( with permission).

**Mon 19 Apr 10**
HUNTING: ROCK STAR WARNED OFF 

Councillor David Parsons wrote:

Queen guitarist Brian May may have jumped on the anti-hunting stage, but I fear people in rural communities are not going to take lectures from a cosseted London rock star on how the countryside should be run.

The Quorn Hunt and others like it are part of the fabric of our countryside tradition.

Many people who haven't made millions from the music industry have traditionally relied on it to help their living, or in the case of farmers, defending their livestock.

This is a subject that needs to be debated by those who know about it, rather than a rock celebrity who has not chafed his hands on anything other than a guitar neck.

Councillor David Parsons, leader, Leicestershire County Council.

---

Brian replied : 

EMBARRASSING COUNCILLOR WARNED OFF

Dear David,

I just read your attack on myself and my campaign against the repeal of the Hunting Act, in the local Leicester newspaper.  News travels fast, these days 

How dare you presume to judge me, and insult me? You don't know anything about me, little man.  A "cosseted London rock star", am I?  You have absolutely no idea about what it cost me to get where I am, or how chafed my hands are.  I assume yours are chafed by the pen you push. 

I live in the Country too, you ignorant man. I know exactly what I am talking about. And since I began this campaign, I have been deluged with letters from country people, including farmers, who regard the Hunt as a menace to their livestock, their pets, their property, and even their children. You are a disgrace to your office, and I hope the majority of the good people of Leicestershire will soon remove you from it. I'm glad to see some of them have already told you what an embarrassment you are. Countryside Tradition my arse. Oh! You are defending people's livestock from the bad foxes, are you?  What a brave man. 



Well, you'd better be as brave as your words, because if you ever come within sniffing distance of me I'll have your guts for garters, you pathetic, arrogant, jumped-up, snivelling little dweeb. 

Dr. Brian May, CBE.


----------



## Eagle_day (19 April 2010)

"Well, you'd better be as brave as your words, because if you ever come within sniffing distance of me I'll have your guts for garters, you pathetic, arrogant, jumped-up, snivelling little dweeb."

How typical of the antis' usual thuggish behaviour.  I hope Councillor Parsons has reported these threats to the Police.


----------



## CorvusCorax (19 April 2010)

Oh my, sounds like he is going to beat someone to death with one of his clogs.


----------



## oakash (19 April 2010)

Thankyou CaveCanem for your perception!

I had a quick word with this Dr May, and he replied as follows:

'My good man, don't you realise I am a CELEBRITY! How dare you have your own opinion on this matter - I am FAMOUS, and therefore know much more than you do about EVERYTHING.'

I pointed out that I do live on Exmoor and had some small knowledge of the rural infrastructure, and the way the hunts contributed to humanitarian control and conservation of what would otherwise be agricultural vermin, but he was not to be swayed. ' But,' he said,' from my years of playing in a band, just like Paul Macartery, I KNOW hunting is bad for the countryside. I AM A CELEBRITY SO IT MUST BE TRUE'.

'Ah', I said ' then you haven't read the recent book by David Harrison called 'Silent Summer'. Contributions from 40 scientists indicate that hunting is a great force for conservation in the countryside'. 'David Harrison?' said Dr Maybe 'now wasn't he lead guitar with the Wassoons..?


----------



## rosie fronfelen (19 April 2010)

May is an insulting ********. he doesn't have a clue about hunting or the way of life in the country, he might live in it, probably like folk who watch"escape to the country" but still have no clue. trouble is, his "fans" are so fickle and gullible they will believe anything cos hes a CELEBRITY!!!!!


----------



## Serenity087 (20 April 2010)

So how come when one group of aging rock stars has an opinion, LACS recons they should be shot, but as soon as one of their peers supports "The Cause", then it's a different story?

They're ALL a bunch of old buffoons.  Really.  And if that REALLY IS May replying then I officially just lost any respect for him.  PLEASE someone tell me it's a hoax?


----------



## marmalade76 (21 April 2010)

CaveCanem said:



			Oh my, sounds like he is going to beat someone to death with one of his clogs.
		
Click to expand...

 LOL, I wear cloggs myself, love 'em, sooo comfy!

I am rather surprised at Brian (re. the reply he made to the councilor, if true) , the only time he has ever appeared to be a bit narked in an interview was when someone took the p*ss out of his cloggs!


----------



## pootleperkin (21 April 2010)

Dunno if their facebook page has been mentioned, but they are asking pro-hunting folk to answer their Q's on there - nobody has, and they are taking the silence to mean that there aren't any good reasons and that pro's are all immbeciles who can't put forward their reasons.

However, I'm guessing pro's haven't replied as you have to 'like' the page, i.e. add your support, in order to write on the wall......not sure who is calling who on this one!

If anyone fancies pawning their 'like' vote to give them an erudite answer.......


----------



## Scratchline (22 April 2010)

pootleperkin said:



			Dunno if their facebook page has been mentioned, but they are asking pro-hunting folk to answer their Q's on there - nobody has, and they are taking the silence to mean that there aren't any good reasons and that pro's are all immbeciles who can't put forward their reasons.

However, I'm guessing pro's haven't replied as you have to 'like' the page, i.e. add your support, in order to write on the wall......not sure who is calling who on this one!

If anyone fancies pawning their 'like' vote to give them an erudite answer.......
		
Click to expand...

I think that may be because you cannot answer the facts and come up with LAME EXCUSES.

The Lame Claims File
The fox-lovers handbook of answers to lame claims  as to why its acceptable to torture foxes to death.
Lame Claim Answer 
1. Its a BAD law... Baa-aad! Unenforceable... confusing... we dont understand it. Read it more carefully! Improve it, tighten it up, monitor violations more rigorously, enforce it more diligently. If the law against child molestation was found to be unenforceable, what would we do? Repeal the law? I dont think so.  
2. It took up too much parliamentary time. No it didnt. This law was introduced by proper parliamentary process  in accordance with the will of the majority of the British public, who consider hunting with dogs barbaric and unacceptable, and see this law as a flagship move towards better treatment of ALL animals wild animals, farm animals, and laboratory animals. The fact that Tim Bonner of the Countryside Alliance boasts that the Tories could smash this law in a day is proof that these people care nothing for the will of the people. God help us all if they seize power. 
3. Foxes are vermin; if we didnt hunt them, wed be overrun with them. So... how come the Hunts construct artificial earths to encourage the breeding of foxes, and, when foxes become scarce in a particular area, the hunts re-introduce them? Hunt supporters have elsewhere actually claimed that if there were no foxhunting, foxes would have been extinct by now. Surely there must be more humane ways to save an endangered species?

By the way... DEFRA defines which animals are classed as vermin in the UK. The fox is not among them. Foxes are NOT vermin. This is in fact a very old argument  only now heard from hunting advocates who have not kept up. Its so obviously a lie, that it has been replaced in the mouths of most Countryside Alliance members with this next (pretty much opposite) argument. 
4. We dont persecute foxes - we love them... we conserve them... we preserve a balance - we even enoble them by hunting them - and we strengthen the breed by picking off the weakest. Well, make up your minds - just now, they were vermin - pests - to be controlled. Now suddenly they are precious - and I bet they enjoy being enobled by being pursued and dismembered alive by dogs. Yes, folks, if there were no foxes, the foxhunters would have no fun. So they make sure there are enough to hunt  and the numbers go down in a particular area, they import them. (Oh, and by the way, if being hunted is good for the species... perhaps wed better instigate the hunting of humans... itll improve the strength of our species too... goody!) If we really want to get technical, my ecology advisor adds, This whole savannah theory of maintaining balance by removing predators only applies when those species have coevolved together and are infact in a delicate balance. We did not co-evolve predating foxes in this manner, so this argument is ecologically unsound. 
5. Its traditional - traditions are good - they are our birth-right. Oh, really? So the traditions of wife beating, bear baiting, slave whipping, burning of supposed witches, birching of schoolchildren (and so many more atrocities)... were all traditions that ought to have been preserved... right?! Just because something has been done for years does not make it right. If traditions were always upheld, women would still not have a vote. Traditions my ass. 
6. Foxes are vicious and cruel - havent you seen what they do to a chicken coop if they get in? They kill all the birds for pleasure. Not true - its another bit of outdated propaganda. If a hungry animal suddenly finds food, it will eat it... just like we do... but the foxes kill extra chickens with the purpose of burying them for future use, when the pickings are slim. Left to themselves they will come back and bury those chickens... but they are not completely stupid; if there is a farmer with a gun waiting to shoot him, Mr. Fox is not going to come back and collect the food supplies. Killing for pleasure? Make no mistake... there is only one animal that does this... MAN. 
7. Foxes are dirty. Nope - theyre not... our rescued foxes spend at least as much time grooming themselves as the average domestic cat; in fact they are very cat-like in many ways... this is something I never realised until I spent time with these delightful animals. They dont cover up their poo, but neither do any of our domestic dogs. Its not the end of the world, and certainly not a good enough reason to persecute them.


----------



## Scratchline (22 April 2010)

8. Its NATURAL for men to hunt foxes, just like Lions hunt antelope. Well, the flaw in this argument is blindingly obvious. Lions kill for food... but humans do not eat foxes. There is only one reason to hunt down and murder a fox... for fun... for sport. Its not in any way justifiable. Its barbaric, and its cruel - its also clearly a crime, as defined by the 1909 Cruelty to Animals act. By the way, have we not noticed that it is NOT the hunters who manage to pull off this great sporting achievement - its the hounds? 
9. Ah well, yes - it's natural for DOGS to kill foxes. Rubbish. It is in no way natural. Weve already published pictures of our local dogs playing with the rescued foxes... along with deer and various birds. The fox is a naturally, delightfully gentle creature  timid, and built for running. The average dog, when decently looked after, is also playful, gentle and peaceful. The only way to make dogs vicious - ready to tear apart Foxes, Stags, Hares, or even Humans - is to brutalise them - half-starve them - deprive them of affection, and house them in such wretched conditions that they go berserk when allowed out to run. The Hunts test the hound puppies on fox cubs. Its the charming practice of cubbing, wherein, once the parent fox has been slaughtered, the tiny fox-cubs are poked out or dug out from their homes, and forced into the path of the young hounds - already toughened up and ready to mutilate. The young hounds eat the fox pups alive. If the young dogs are not vicious enough, the Huntsmen shoot them - another nice piece of natural selection designed to make the pack not only healthy but also as vicious as possible. Even leaving aside this abhorrent cruelty to foxes, in a decent society it ought to be illegal to raise a dog for the sole purpose of killing. (In fact, as noted in LC 11, currently it IS illegal to breed dogs for dog-fighting... we logically we need to bring things into line... so that what is law for the yobs is law for the toffs too.

Its interesting that perhaps the foxhunting community of people have been in a sense brutalised, too  brought up in a way that has desensitised them to the cruelty around them. 
10. By hunting we eliminate the weakest animals, so we strengthen the species. The foxes are either killed, or get away if they are strong. Just like in Africa. Good try. But this is just another sly (yes, its the humans who are sly  not the dear old foxes) attempt to bend the truth. In fact, the appallingly cruel methods used in the Hunt ensure that the chances survival of a fox in no way depend on its natural strength. Foxes are routinely imported, kept in bags so they are weakened and disoriented when they are let out in front of a pack of brutalised hounds. And the truth is that the occasional fox who actually does manage to elude the dogs is usually accounted for, by digging out and being shot anyway. No-one should be allowed to treat animals this way. 
11. Its all about class! The middle and working classes are jealous of the toffs, and want to deprive them of their rights - among them, the right to treat any animal on their land any way they see fit. Nonsense. It is nothing to do with class. Decent people are equally outraged if a young thug in Yorkshire goes out with his pit-bull terrier and encourages it to savage wild animals, or if a rich land-owner in Berkshire goes out with HIS brutalised dogs and commits an atrocity on a fox, or rabbit, or otter. None of us care a jot about class. We care about animals. Brutal behaviour is brutal behaviour. There is no excuse.  
12. You people who live in towns dont understand the ways of the countryside. Leave us alone and mind your own business! This is a good one... so glib... so ALMOST convincing. The Countryside Alliance is very keen to tell the townie politicians how to run the whole of Britain - and has managed to make farming the most heavily subsidised industry in the land. Yet these same people deny the towns people the right to protect animals in the countryside... as if country people OWNED our wildlife. Imagine land-owners insisting that, if child-abuse happened on their land, nobody in town had the right to try to stop it. Wed all say... these children might be on your land, but they still have rights - we reserve the right to monitor your behaviour and stop the cruelty where we find it. Yet these Countryside Alliance stalwarts would have us accept that wild animals straying on to their land legitimately become subject to their every whim. Its a vile conceit.  
13. You are taking away our human right to socialise in our traditional way. Not at all. We absolutely defend your right to meet up on a crisp country morning, dressed up in pinks, and scamper about on your horses. What we dispute is your right to trample everything in your path, endangering peoples property, children, pets and livestock. And we dispute your right to kill animals for your pleasure, in a hideously cruel manner.

Drag hunting, with the hounds following a scent other than fox, gives you all the socialising you need, and all the exercise; and it has the huge advantage that the path of the hunt can be pre-planned, so that your neighbours are not threatened by invasion. If you refuse to accept this as a decent alternative, it can only be that you need the thrill of killing, and that you actually crave the feeling of wanton disregard for anyone around you... that feeling of superiority, perhaps  Lords of the Manor and all that? Its time to come into the 21st century. 
14. If we are prevented from killing foxes using dogs, farmers have to control these pests by shooting them. Farmers are poor marksmen, so many foxes die a lingering death from gunshot wounds - which is inhumane. Inhumane? Excuse me?!!! Given the choice of being pursued until your muscles are paralysed and then ripped apart by hounds; or shot with a bullet, with the chance of an instant death, which would you choose? I asked this question to the man who would be the new head of DEFRA (the Department of the Environment and Farming and Rural Affairs) if the Tories were elected in May. He at least had the decency to say he wasnt entirely sure. But many of the Countryside Alliance propagandists continue to insist that being killed by hounds is a desirable option. Sorry, but... simply not believable. We always come back to the same conclusion... the only reason to be indulging in this filthy blood sport is that you enjoy causing unnecessary pain to animals.  
Own up, guys. You are cornered  and about to be run to Earth!

Thankyou to Brian May for his permission to use this piece. It speaks for itself and I will not enter a debate about it for fear of arguements and none constructive discussion. Please digest at your leasure.


----------



## Xlthlx (22 April 2010)

Scratchline said:



			Given the choice of being pursued until your muscles are paralysed and then ripped apart by hounds; or shot with a bullet, with the chance of an instant death, which would you choose?
		
Click to expand...

The dogs because there would be a greater chance of escaping if I was young and fit and also a greater chance of a quick death.

Also given the chance of getting rid of shooting and cars which kill approx 200,000 a year or hunting I'd get rid of the factors that kill more foxes with more agony.

If you also gave me the option of having my numbers regulated by predators rather than human control I might go for that one too.


----------



## Xlthlx (22 April 2010)

" If you refuse to accept this as a decent alternative, it can only be that you need the thrill of killing"

But most people that hunt are not involved in the kill.  Hunts have converted to trail hunting not drag as drag is not suitable for a lot of the riders and followers.  However a lot of antis still object to it even though it does not involve live quarry.

If they cannot accept trail hunting as an alternative it can only be because of their hatred of the people involved.


----------



## Xlthlx (22 April 2010)

The Countryside Alliance is very keen to tell the townie politicians how to run the whole of Britain - and has managed to make farming the most heavily subsidised industry in the land.

The CA campaigns on rural issues not urban ones so this is nonsense.

The subsidy system was not instigated by the CA this is total rubbish.


----------



## Xlthlx (22 April 2010)

" None of us care a jot about class."  I could produce thousands of quotes from discussion forums showing this to be a complete lie.


----------



## Xlthlx (22 April 2010)

"Foxes are routinely imported, kept in bags so they are weakened and disoriented when they are let out in front of a pack of brutalised hounds"

Please show me a shred of evidence that foxes are being imported into Britain.  We have 400,000 foxes here why would we import them risking rabies etc.


----------



## Xlthlx (22 April 2010)

"The only way to make dogs vicious - ready to tear apart Foxes, Stags, Hares, or even Humans - is to brutalise them - half-starve them - deprive them of affection, and house them in such wretched conditions that they go berserk when allowed out to run."

Rubbish.  My dogs are well fed, live their whole lives outside or in open farm buildings, are not brutalised in any way and there is nothing they like better than giving chase to a fox or a deer.


----------



## Xlthlx (22 April 2010)

"its also clearly a crime, as defined by the 1909 Cruelty to Animals act."

That law did not ban fox hunting


----------



## Scratchline (22 April 2010)

marmalade76 said:



 LOL, I wear cloggs myself, love 'em, sooo comfy!

I am rather surprised at Brian (re. the reply he made to the councilor, if true) , the only time he has ever appeared to be a bit narked in an interview was when someone took the p*ss out of his cloggs!
		
Click to expand...

The attack on Brian by the tory councillor is now making the nationals. All wonderful news for the Save Me campaign.


----------



## Xlthlx (22 April 2010)

This is the thing about antis - they like to rant - but when challenged they get out of their depth very quickly and just throw a temper tantrum.


----------



## guccigivi2001 (22 April 2010)

it does make me giggle how 'Dr Brian-I-Live-In-The-Country-Side-Play-Guitar-And-Lick-Foxes-For-A-Living loses his temper so quickly in his letter. This intrigues me as much as sctratchlines awfully rubbish arguements as regards to views on foxhunting.   roll on David Cameron and his over-turn to the hunting ban... its not like Dr Brian or scratchline will ever come into paower now is it? what on earth would they do? tear down farms set pigs and so forth loose into the british countryside to leap around with the foxes that apparantly arent vermin and apparantly dont cause trouble with livestock? 
and, for the record, i would LOVE a pair of clogs....do they sell them made of fox with B*gger the ban stamped on them?


----------



## pootleperkin (22 April 2010)

Scratchline assumed incorrectly that I'm completely pro-hunting, whereas I see it more in shades of grey, rather than black and white - I guess I'm more for than against, but not overtly so. I have hunted on a handful of occasions, but freely admit that was to bring a young horse on and enjoy the ride, rather than to see hounds work and I agree I could do that drag hunting if I had had that option at the time. I live with someone who was completely against hunting, but has become slightly polarised by the actions of antis across the years, and who finds their hate and the extremism exhibited by some very worrying.

I also find it very difficult to support any group, such as some antis, that is so extreme that they would see other beings, whether they be human, canine or equine, hurt in order to gain their end - to stop another creature being being hurt or killed. 

What I did find intriguing on the Facebook page was the venom being exhibited and the fact that the people who were 'calling out' the pro's were actually being a little dim in expecting people to join a group that would add their support to a cause that they were against, just in order to comment and then most likely get a load of abuse rather than a sensible debate. Why is there such a blindness to the fact that there are some sensible and founded arguments that can be made by both sides, though I guess I am asking a futile question? People are generally guided by their passion and prejudices.

I would respect those who abhore hunting who can honestly say they have never partaken in use or abuse of any other animal, but for all of those particularly furious antis who have ever worn leather, eaten farmed meat or utilised animal derived or tested products, then I don't understand the need for so much hate. I could understand it far more if people were getting so worked up about genocide, the reign of Mugabe or other atrocious global problems that affect millions.

If I were more proactive myself, then the cause I would take up would be to completely bring the rearing and care of farmed animals up to scratch. If you gave me a choice, I would far prefer to be a hunted fox than an intensively or semi-intensively farm reared animal, taking my chance as it comes.

Just some ramblings, but hopefully rational to some. Scratchline, I'm not suggesting that you are particularly furious or angry yourself, more that you are someone that has an informed opinion, like me would do everything they could to help an animal in distress in a certain time and place, and a valid point of view that is just far more polarised in one way than mine. Maybe you just care more, but then so do pro-hunters for what they believe in.


----------



## somethingorother (23 April 2010)

pp, yes there are many other issues, and intensely farmed animals are a huge one, but the hunting ban was a step in the right direction for animal welfare and realising that there is no need for animal cruelty. Fox hunting is most certainly animal cruelty. If the ban gets overturned, then what does that say about these other important issues? That it doesn't matter how many people feel strongly against something, it can be overturned just like that, because a few people (and in the general public it has been shown to be minority) don't agree. That's not supposed to be the way a 'civilised' culture such as ours works... but never mind that eh, people wanna kill foxes. 

i'm not sure if this will work, but it has just swayed me from otherwise voting for Cameron, who i really do like for all their other policies... but i couldn't live with myself if i helped them to overturn something rather than doing what they should be. Which is finding ways to reinforce the LAW. 

Edited as i am actually not willing to add such an offensive picture. It is in fact a picture of a dead horse in a busy street, with a post stuck through it's middle and a sign saying 'If you ban hunting there will be lots of these'.  The most ridiculous argument for hunting yet.


----------



## Eagle_day (23 April 2010)

Meawhile, LACS campaign goes from strength to strength .... er, not:

Northampton Evening Telegraph 22.4.10 Chicken puts some excitement into election campaign, but fox fails to hunt down target - ELECTION BLOG - Deputy editor Neil Pickford continues his election diary - Finally, at long last, some excitement has been injected into the election in the form of a man in a chicken suit and an egg-thrower. Unfortunately, an attempt at a similar stunt in Corby this week backfired horribly. The League of Cruel Sports sent a man in a fox suit into the town, and assured us they would be "hunting" Conservative candidate Louise Bagshawe. Unfortunately, Louise was nowhere to be seen and the fox was seen forlornly posing for photographers alone.


----------



## Scratchline (23 April 2010)

Hi pootleperkin. I am angry that some people wish to see the end of the hunting with dogs ban. Not only does the ban protect foxes from being ripped apart by hounds it also protects many other animals from cruelty. I dont want a return to hare coursing either, it is just another blood sport.
You are right that I care about animals and no I would not stand by whilst a human allowed his dogs to rip apart a living creature. Tbh the reason I do not attend hunts anymore as there is no way I would be able to control myself. It is absolutely sick in my opinion and the people involved are sick. When there are other far more humane ways to deal with say problem foxes it is all about fun for the hunters. There is no other way to put it.


----------



## Scratchline (23 April 2010)

Xlthlx said:



			This is the thing about antis - they like to rant - but when challenged they get out of their depth very quickly and just throw a temper tantrum.
		
Click to expand...

When challenged about humane trapping and dispatch of foxes instead of hunting with hounds YOU refuse to respond, instead talking about deer!


----------



## minesadouble (23 April 2010)

Well, you'd better be as brave as your words, because if you ever come within sniffing distance of me I'll have your guts for garters, you pathetic, arrogant, jumped-up, snivelling little dweeb. 

Dr. Brian May, CBE.[/QUOTE]

I reckon I could take Brian May on and I'm a girlie!!!!


----------



## Eagle_day (23 April 2010)

He signed his letter : 'Dr. Brian May, CBE'?

Pompous @rse


Eagle Day BSc Hons (Dunelm) FCA


----------



## Serenity087 (23 April 2010)

1. Its a BAD law... Baa-aad! Unenforceable... confusing... we dont understand it. 

I went "illegal hunting" with a brittany (if you know the dog, you'll see why thats funny!) because the law states it's intentional hunting thats illegal, not killing things.
I've also been "illegal" intentional hunting with my cat (she found a fox and I hoped she killed it!).  Which, whilst not covered directly by the act, does rather question the point of the act.  Why is my dog more cruel than my cat if I have the same intent for both?  The dog never got into fox hunting, but the cat relished it.  Where I stand as the intentional huntee of both animals is lost in waffle about how cute foxes are, and how evil tories are...

2. It took up too much parliamentary time. 

It took up more time than a war against the will of the majority of the british people.  Great.  Foxes are worth more than lives of children who have their limbs melted from their bodies in UK bombing raids.
I love that this government is also responsible for my healthcare (worryingly, Stafford hospitals don't have a very good record for that!)

3. Foxes are vermin; if we didnt hunt them, wed be overrun with them. 

Thank the Gods they haven't banned shooting! Yet...


4. We dont persecute foxes - we love them... we conserve them... we preserve a balance - we even enoble them by hunting them - and we strengthen the breed by picking off the weakest. 

Wolves are vemin, in that they eat a fair few farm animals and occasionally babies.  But they still warrant a great deal of respect.
It's a tough thing, respect, only a few understand the concept of it.  Apparently, antis don't (proven, I feel, by their wish to condem foxes to lingering deaths!)

5. Its traditional - traditions are good - they are our birth-right. 

Ouch, thats a contradiction.  Written by another anti?  It is traditional, but not all traditions are good, and none are certainly a birthright.
As for other "traditions", google the S.O.P.H.I.E. campaign, it's about a girl kicked to death for being Gothic (associated with Witches).  Apparently hunting isn't the only tradition still very much in force.

6. Foxes are vicious and cruel - havent you seen what they do to a chicken coop if they get in? They kill all the birds for pleasure. 

Motive aside, those birds are there to make you eggs that you demand, and your current demand for free range puts foxes in an interesting position.  An all you can eat buffet of 7,000 birds is a little bit expensive, don't you think?  Nevermind, as you love them so much, I reckon you can foot the bill!


7. Foxes are dirty. 

I can honestly say this is the first time I have EVER, in my LIFE, heard this as an excuse to hunt foxes.  And I'd hardly call them "clean".  I've also never met a litter trained fox (although, they seem to favour children's sandpits the same way cats do!  Oh well, our government already showed it values foxes over children!  Next we'll have children criminalised for disturbing fox dung, which indicates the border of a foxes territory!)


----------



## Serenity087 (23 April 2010)

8. &#8220;It&#8217;s NATURAL for men to hunt foxes, just like Lions hunt antelope.&#8221; 

Wolves hunt foxes, Lions kick hyena's spotty backsides, individual tigers/leopards etc don't appreciate others of their kind knocking on their door (unless they're hot, female and single!).  Predators kill other predators.  Get it?


9. &#8220;Ah well, yes - it's natural for DOGS to kill foxes.&#8221; 

I'd love to know how we brutalise them and half starve them (ever wondered what happened to all the little boy cows you saved from veal?).  A foxhound is one of the few breeds I would trust with children, and I'm not alone.  I wouldn't, however, trust a westie, horrid little dogs, bred for their horrible attitude to everything rather than hunting foxes.  

10. &#8220;By hunting we eliminate the weakest animals, so we strengthen the species. The foxes are either killed, or get away if they are strong. Just like in Africa.&#8221; 

True story!  Unfortunatly, a bunch of chavvy council estate foxes have infiltrated the countryside, bringing their argos catalogues and McDonalds fetishes, which makes it harder to see the difference hunting makes.

12. &#8220;You people who live in towns don&#8217;t understand the ways of the countryside. Leave us alone and mind your own business!&#8221;

The same people who think sheep eat people, chickens enjoy living in 3,500 bird free range units, that mud is put next to gates by nasty farmers, that farmers delibratly milk at 5am to annoy the neighbours and that church bells are a waste of time?
Wow.  They know SOOO much about country ways...

13. &#8220;You are taking away our human right to socialise in our traditional way.&#8221; 

Sometimes, I wish they'd bugger off and socialise at a drag hunt.  The field do my nut in!

14. &#8220;If we are prevented from killing foxes using dogs, farmers have to control these pests by shooting them. Farmers are poor marksmen, so many foxes die a lingering death from gunshot wounds - which is inhumane.&#8221; 

I met a czechslovacian marksman with a .303 rifle (thats a very very big gun, but you should probably know that, right?) who was delighted that he'd just shot a fox, and I quote "it's guts just fell out".
Now, if you can explain to me how "it's guts just fell out" is any different to "it's guts were torn out" then you deserve a Nobel Prize for Talking Rubbish!!!


----------

