Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ShootingEgg

Hunt rider beat sab

Recommended Posts

Red ribbon on its tail means it's a kicker, if that's the case she should have turned the horse on the piece of mucus and let him have both barrels. Down and out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the sake of some balance.  The horse rider was seen in the footage to be riding her horse in an aggressive manner against the group of protestors who were standing still.

In order to protect himself and the other protestors one of the anti's took hold of the horses rein, effectively attempting a proportionate and reasonable defence from aggressive action by the horse rider.

At that point the rider could have opted to hold her horse steady and attempt to reason with the protestor, but instead she repeatedly struck him well beyond what would be considered reasonable and proportionate relative to the level of implied threat.  The rider was in close proximity with other riders as well as hunt stewards on foot, the latter who intervened at the end.

From the footage I have seen I think the horse woman is a fool who has done herself and her hunt no benefit whatsoever and handed the anti hunting brigade a fantastic piece of video propaganda.  Her actions and reactions were foolish and excessive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, grrclark said:

For the sake of some balance.  The horse rider was seen in the footage to be riding her horse in an aggressive manner against the group of protestors who were standing still.

In order to protect himself and the other protestors one of the anti's took hold of the horses rein, effectively attempting a proportionate and reasonable defence from aggressive action by the horse rider.

At that point the rider could have opted to hold her horse steady and attempt to reason with the protestor, but instead she repeatedly struck him well beyond what would be considered reasonable and proportionate relative to the level of implied threat.  The rider was in close proximity with other riders as well as hunt stewards on foot, the latter who intervened at the end.

From the footage I have seen I think the horse woman is a fool who has done herself and her hunt no benefit whatsoever and handed the anti hunting brigade a fantastic piece of video propaganda.  Her actions and reactions were foolish and excessive.

I don't think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JDog said:

I don't think so.

Care to expand?

From the footage I have seen that is slightly more extended at the beginning, and only that footage as we do not know what may or may not have happened outside of that, then I am entirely comfortable to stand behind my opinion.  The rider was irresponsible in aggressively riding towards the sabs and she provoked the reaction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, grrclark said:

Care to expand?

From the footage I have seen that is slightly more extended at the beginning, and only that footage as we do not know what may or may not have happened outside of that, then I am entirely comfortable to stand behind my opinion.  The rider was irresponsible in aggressively riding towards the sabs and she provoked the reaction.

Shouldn't be on the land in the first place, dressed in an intimidating manor to add to that too..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, evolution380 said:

Shouldn't be on the land in the first place, dressed in an intimidating manor to add to that too..

 

What does being dressed in an intimidating manner mean?

Does someone being dressed in dark clothing with a face mask merit being hit by a riding crop?

Whether or not they have a legal entitlement to be on the land is entirely irrelevant to her actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've obviously seen more than me BUT by taking the reins he's attempting to take control which the rider prevents? My opinion obviously 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gonk said:

You've obviously seen more than me BUT by taking the reins he's attempting to take control which the rider prevents? My opinion obviously 

From the linked video clip in the OP I think that is fair.

If you watch this clip from 1:40 you will see the rider is deliberately riding her horse towards the protestors.

https://metro.co.uk/video/hunt-saboteur-whipped-woman-horseback-1576330/?ito=vjs-link

For avoidance of doubt I am no apologist for the actions of SABS groups, but in this case I believe the rider put herself in a hugely compromised position and inflamed the situation way more than was ever necessary.

Despite what we may think think about the SABS and the more extreme anti's it is not an excuse to behave in an unacceptable way and my thoughts are this lady got it very badly wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's strange how sabs will target legal trial hunts but never confront illegal hare coursing... Wonder why..... There would be a frew less sabs if they attempted to stop the coursing... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When anti hunts where at hare coursing they always chaperoned by the police .I had one an anti stand toe to toe with me at the Waterloo cup and I was asked to move on by police officer as I was bigger then the anti even though he had a large wooden placard and was trying to provoke me by questioning my parenthood and the ability of my mother to provide me with sexual favours...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would argue that the sabs legal entitlement (or not) and dress have everything to do with it. 

A masked individual on private property with no right to be there would reasonably be assumed to be up to no good. It would be entirely reasonable to tell such an individual to leave. 

It would also be reasonable to assume that given his dress and clear association with anti hunt group his intent was to intimidate, prevent the lawful business of an individual and perform other illegal activities. On that basis it would be proportionate to intimidate in return to convince him to leave private property where he had no right to be.  Much like you don't have to politely ask a burglar to leave before anything else. The rider is clearly shown remonstrating with the sabs prior to riding at them when they failed to leave. I would argue proportionate escalation.

The counter would be that the sab grabbed the reins to protect himself, however he shouldn't have been there. Much like a potential thief confronted on private property would be open to prosecution should he cause the owner harm in defending himself from the proportionate actions of the owner. (In the scenario the perpetrator is only a  potential thief as He hasnt actually stolen anything, however as he is where he shouldn't be it is reasonable to assume intent to perform further illegal activity)

The sab was also in a position to let go of the reins and retreat - which he should have done. 

Having failed to let go, the rider thrashing him with a crop was entirely proportionate to the threat posed. 

Ergo, sab should face several charges from trespass on up. The riders actions were still proportionate. 

(I ain't a lawyer though....) 

Edited by Lord v

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lord V, the mode of someone's dress cannot in anyway be a justifiable action for striking them with a weapon.

The fact that the SABS are potentially guilty of a civil offence of trespass and might look a bit menacing or scary does not in anyway give the right for a rider to deliberately physically intimidate someone and using their horse to do so.  The riders of the hunt are not there to police the behaviours of others who might also be there.

What really concerns me is that nearly all the other commentators on this thread are guilty of a hugely subjective bias because they disagree with the actions of the SABS, I disagree with the SABS approach as well, but I do not believe in any way that excuses the rider for handling her horse in a way that causes legitimate fear and concern for the protestor of immediate physical harm.

I think in this case the rider got it wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

grrclark - the first video I saw was when the sab already had hold of the reins and the rider was telling him to let go. If she deliberately rode towards them, she was wrong, but he could have just walked away. I have not seen that version.

As Steven Gerrard can attest - if she was in fear, because of his mask / grabbing the horse and felt threatened - she could act pre-emptively.

The sabs go looking for trouble, this one got it. Sadly, it is cause and effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, grrclark said:

... for a rider to deliberately physically intimidate someone and using their horse to do so. 

Erm - isn't this what the police do with their horses?  Same difference in my view!

The rider was struggling to retain/regain full control of her horse from someone who was trying to take control from her - by holding the bridle.  Fully justified self-defence in my eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gordon R said:

grrclark - the first video I saw was when the sab already had hold of the reins and the rider was telling him to let go. If she deliberately rode towards them, she was wrong, but he could have just walked away. I have not seen that version.

As Steven Gerrard can attest - if she was in fear, because of his mask / grabbing the horse and felt threatened - she could act pre-emptively.

The sabs go looking for trouble, this one got it. Sadly, it is cause and effect.

I added a link a few posts above Gordon where you can see she was deliberately riding towards a guy with the camera shouting at him to get back on to the road.

If she was alone or reasonably isolated from the rest of the hunt, or if she had no easy route of escape then I would whole heartedly agree her actions would be justifiable to me too, but in this case there were several other riders as well as hunt stewards on foot in very close proximity and the sab grabbing the reins was as a direct result of her behaviour, so in this case I think she got it wrong.

I do agree that the sabs do set out to cause trouble and provoke a reaction, but the hunt riders know this more than anyone else and need to be savvy to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He wasn't beaten because of how he was dressed, but because of his actions in grabbing the reigns. 

How someone is dressed goes along way to establishing intent. If I walk down a high Street carrying a crowbar the reaction I would receive would be very different depending on whether I was wearing full hi Vis with boots and hard hat or trakie bottoms and a hoody. Action and location is the same , result likely very different.

You appear to be arguing two different things here, whether the rider was wise in her actions and/or reasonable which are different things.

I also disagree quite strongly that trespass does not give you the right to be intimidating. If you looked out at your garden now and saw an individual masked up skulking at the bottom you would be well within your rights to tell him in no uncertain terms to go away. The only crime committed so far is one of trespass, but telling him to eff off is intended to be intimidating.

If he failed to leave (and for some reason didn't respond) advancing on said individual to see him off your property would be reasonable, but also intimidating. 

If on reaching him he grabs your arm looking to control you because he 'fears for his safety', a physical reaction from yourself would be entirely proportionate. 

Whether the last two points are the wisest course of action is open to debate, retreating and calling the police maybe seen as a better option. But your actions would, in my opinion , still be deemed reasonable.

Edited by Lord v

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi grrclark In the second one with the extra footage it does look worse on the lady on the horse because she does ride towards and near the sabs. but they were never in any danger of being hit. It goes wrong when the sab tries to take control of the horse, he can't have been scared or intimidated by her actions, none of them are, the commentary from them sounds worse than the actual events in the footage. I'm still happy she did the right thing in seeing off the threat but take your point on her thinking before acting in the future. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, grrclark said:

Lord V, the mode of someone's dress cannot in anyway be a justifiable action for striking them with a weapon

So if someone walked into your house or garden, somewhere they shouldn't be wearing a mask how are you going to react? Pop the kettle on? The likelihood is the hunt followers who are acting lawfully have been getting grief and impeded all day maybe week in week out, she advances telling them or him to do one, he grabs her reins, so she properly let's him have it, she doesn't strike him until he grabs the reins.

the sabs are no different to the folk on scooters going round wearing masks robbing people. If they want to peacefully protest then crack on, stand where its safe jeer boo whatever, start grabbing at horses and you get what's coming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

grrclark - your posts have made me look again - which is no bad thing - your posts usually cause me to look at the other side. I can see blame on both sides, but mainly on the sabs. I don't believe that a prosecution will ensue for either party. I trust both will re-consider their actions, however unlikely that is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've watched both the vids and the second longer one shows this for what it is. .

The sabs where there to break laws and cause disruption to law abiding people .they followed the hunt horses over fields and constantly impeded thier passage .the sab should be charged with assault on the female rider and the horse. 

To see this any other way is to condone illegal activity and grrclarks comments only serve to give power to law breakers who cannot find a peaceful way of airing their narrow minded and obviously wrong agendas .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Valid point Gordon and Grr, voice of reason as always. The best thing the lady could have done is move away. Having ridden many years ago ( would need two shires at least now, one for each buttock) It could be seen that grabbing the reins was an attempt to unseat the rider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...