linny Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 some foxes suffer for weeks with a so called well placed shot. I'd like to see guns band, and neither am I an anti cos I love to Hunt with a stick . You certainly sound like an anti in that post.what about that post and what about that I'd like to see guns band at least davyo says shot them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djrwood Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 it's not exactly the same but it's not a million miles away is it. Do you think that pheasants enjoy being hounded out of cover to a firing line to be either killed , injured , or best scenario missed ,so then it can be fed all week in the same place so it can go through the same procedure next shoot day . Get a grip . Sure I can see the similarities in cruelty between a fox being chased to the point of exhaustion by a gang of hounds and then being ripped to its death, to a pheasant which is reared, fed and then shot at. Obviously some are injured and die slow deaths but I personally see it as less cruel then dogs ripping it apart. Assuming you like to shoot driven phesant, I ask why bother? You should just be sporting and send your dog in the pen to rip them apart before any cruel ******* can shoot them. far more humane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stevo Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 ethical hunters hahaha jesus I love it here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stevo Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Obviously some are injured and die slow deaths but I personally see it as less cruel then dogs ripping it apart. Pure class !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayDT10 Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 and what about that I'd like to see guns band at least davyo says shot them there it went , straight over your head, he says band hunting with dogs as he likes to see them shot cleanly. I say ban guns as I like to beat them with sticks. Somone else may say ban sticks as I like to tickle them with a feather duster. Where does it stop. Get me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmytree Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Sure I can see the similarities in cruelty between a fox being chased to the point of exhaustion by a gang of hounds and then being ripped to its death, to a pheasant which is reared, fed and then shot at. Obviously some are injured and die slow deaths but I personally see it as less cruel then dogs ripping it apart. Assuming you like to shoot driven phesant, I ask why bother? You should just be sporting and send your dog in the pen to rip them apart before any cruel ******* can shoot them. far more humane. I don't like foxhunting, for years I enjoyed following the Quantock staghounds. I don't see why anyone should dictate to any other bloodsports follower about "degrees" of cruelty. Do you really think a slow painful death is ok for a tame bird but not for a predatory wild fox? Death for a hunted fox is about as quick as it can be, just like in a wild situation if it was preyed on by natural enemies. No animal or bird deserves a slow death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Pheasants are blanked in to drives by shouting men and slobbering ravenous dogs. Have you actually been on a driven shoot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Why do the anti hunting brigade always resort to emotive words to bolster their ill informed opinion? Bestowing an animal or bird with human feelings and emotions shows a breathtaking ignorance....... best we all stick to reading the anthropomorphic tales of peter rabbit and watching watership down than live in the real world eh? Or.....I suppose we could always ask the fox which way he would prefer to die?.............As if it makes any difference to the fox! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayDT10 Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Have you actually been on a driven shoot? that's how the anti's see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kennett Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Haha yes scilly, I run one. I was being facetious, and trying understand where this lot are coming from!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djrwood Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Obviously some are injured and die slow deaths but I personally see it as less cruel then dogs ripping it apart. Pure class !! Talk about a keyboard warrior Who said anything about ethical hunter? There has to be a line somewhere in what people chose to draw the line at with what they feel is acceptable. For me personally that line is hunting foxes with dogs. I detest foxes after having the necks of thirty chickens ripped out and not even eaten. Just killed by a fox because it wanted to. Therefore I have no problem in them being shot. Most aspects of field sports can be twisted to be shown as cruel, examples already on this thread with regard to shooting and fishing. Whilst i accept the fish on the end of the hook didn't want to have a hook through its lip, for me personally it's an acceptable amount of "cruelty". So i stand by comment regarding fox hunting being crueler than the slow death of a clipped pheasant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 I don't like foxhunting, for years I enjoyed following the Quantock staghounds. I don't see why anyone should dictate to any other bloodsports follower about "degrees" of cruelty. Do you really think a slow painful death is ok for a tame bird but not for a predatory wild fox? Death for a hunted fox is about as quick as it can be, just like in a wild situation if it was preyed on by natural enemies. No animal or bird deserves a slow death. I respect you view but why refer to fieldsports as "bloodsports"? This is just a word invented by the antis to emotionally influence an ill informed media and through them.....joe public! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stevo Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Talk about a keyboard warrior Who said anything about ethical hunter? There has to be a line somewhere in what people chose to draw the line at with what they feel is acceptable. For me personally that line is hunting foxes with dogs. I detest foxes after having the necks of thirty chickens ripped out and not even eaten. Just killed by a fox because it wanted to. Therefore I have no problem in them being shot. Most aspects of field sports can be twisted to be shown as cruel, examples already on this thread with regard to shooting and fishing. Whilst i accept the fish on the end of the hook didn't want to have a hook through its lip, for me personally it's an acceptable amount of "cruelty". So i stand by comment regarding fox hunting being crueler than the slow death of a clipped pheasant haha you crack on son , you get it off your chest , I promise you wont offend or upset me , I live for **** like this . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walshie Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Thought I'd logged onto the wrong site for a minute and not a hunting and fieldsports one. Not that i've done it, but foxhunting with hounds is actually better for the species than shooting as more often than not a healthy fox escapes. It weeds out the old and sick which obviously shooting can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WelshAndy Posted May 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Thought I'd logged onto the wrong site for a minute and not a hunting and fieldsports one. Not that i've done it, but foxhunting with hounds is actually better for the species than shooting as more often than not a healthy fox escapes. It weeds out the old and sick which obviously shooting can't. Good point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islandgun Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 how can we argue about ethics, a shot and wounded animal or one bitten to death, killed in a slaughter house, or boiled in a pan, the only people who have only a marginal argument against killing another animal is a vegan as long as they dont wear leather, drink milk, or even drive a car ! To me its a matter of degree, If I couldnt kill something then I wouldnt have the right to eat meat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil w Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Thought I'd logged onto the wrong site for a minute and not a hunting and fieldsports one. Not that i've done it, but foxhunting with hounds is actually better for the species than shooting as more often than not a healthy fox escapes. It weeds out the old and sick which obviously shooting can't. The most, ridiculous post of the week.Barr none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 The most, ridiculous post of the week.Barr none. I look forward to you posting an explanation of why you feel this! And the basis for you forming that opinion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 (edited) that's how the anti's see it. Quite possibly, but not many of them have been on driven shoots either. I'm quite indifferent to hunting with hounds personally, but I think where the hunting fraternity lost a lot of ground is that they couldn't decide whether they did it for 'sport' or pest control. Some, realising that chasing an animal across miles of open countryside to the point of exhaustion could be perceived by others as cruel, decided to attempt to justify what they did as pest control, to which the obvious counter solution of course was to simply shoot it. Some fox hunters then claimed that shooting wasn't selective, and that with hunting only the frail, elderly and sick foxes were culled. Fair enough, but the obvious counter argument to that is that if, as they claim, foxes are pests and fox control is carried out for that sole purpose, why on earth would anyone want to leave a super fit and healthy pest population roaming the countryside? Could it be they're better to chase? I shoot because I enjoy it, I don't have to justify it nor feel I should. The human race is where it is today because man is a hunter. There are many out there who feel we have moved on as a race, but in reality we're basically very very much the same; all that has changed is our ability to create the technology to create luxurious lifestyles where hunting isn't necessary and the technological capabilities to kill each other on a much grander scale, and all it will take to hurl us back into the middle ages is the lack of that technology for oh, about a month or so I would say. If you hunt because you enjoy the thrill of the chase then have the honesty to admit it. It's not my cup of tea but I can see appeal in the chase if not the kill. Campaign to have it made legal again. Stand up and be counted. Edited May 9, 2015 by Scully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Not that i've done it, but foxhunting with hounds is actually better for the species than shooting as more often than not a healthy fox escapes. It weeds out the old and sick which obviously shooting can't. There you go; knew there'd be one along in a minute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walshie Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 (edited) The most, ridiculous post of the week.Barr none. Why don't you explain why you think that instead of bumping your gums? Only one r in bar BTW. Edited May 9, 2015 by walshie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scolopax Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Hunting can be both sport and pest control. A bit like pigeon shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walshie Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 There you go; knew there'd be one along in a minute. By "one" I assume you mean someone who doesn't agree with your rose tinted version of the real world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil w Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Why don't you explain why you think that instead of bumping your gums? Only one r in bar BTW. Text vocabularies. BTW. your punctuation. Barrrrrrr none . Super **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walshie Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Text vocabularies. BTW. your punctuation. Barrrrrrr none . Super **** So you can't answer your inane statement you made earlier. Oh well, don't bother trying now, I'm off to do some actual shooting instead of the keyboard type like you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts