03luffmb Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 surely killing a bird in ur garden is classed as protecting public health dirty feral pigeons, and if that pigeon was shot in the neck then it would of died almost instantly. Stupid ******* townies should just get over it and face the real world. Ive been shooting since i was about 12 and it aint done bad to me. Maybe they should look at there own kids shooting at other kids and carrying knifes. Not some poor man teach his son some real stuff unlike the **** they teach u at school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col s10 Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 be affraid be very affraid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuart92 Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 i should of been exacuted by now the amount of pigeons crows and tree rats ive shot in my yard o.0 lol stuart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newsportshooter Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 Get BASC involved they'll sort it for him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biffo1262 Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 (edited) The sentence may seem excessive and being found guilty may be open to interpretation. I have had quite a few dealing with the RSPCA in my professional career and on quite a number of occasions I have had to question their motives for making such a fuss. The RSPCA tackled this case on two fronts judging by the statement of the RSPCA Inspector. If they weren't going to get him for the actual act of shooting the pigeon his comments ensured a conviction of 'causing unnecessary suffering to...' and who's going to contradict such a 'law abiding' official when he states the bird dies in his hand. Well I have had to question the 'law abiding' bit as on more than one occasion I have been present when they have said to an animal owner ' I'm not going to arrest you but...'. Now that statement intimates that have extraordinary powers of arrest and such is not the case but what they say isn't actually illegal .... just very misleading and intended to intimidate. They frequently try to get members of the emergency services to abuse their powers of entry on their behalf. Well I got wise to that one a long time ago and insisted they either got a Police Officer do it or showed me a warrant, which would have to be accompanied by a Police Officer in any case. The other reason they make such a fuss of seemingly minor cases is that they have to remain very high profile as a charity in order to get the donations they need, so soft cases are on their list of 'must haves'. As far as the fine goes I would certainly appeal as a fine is based on a defendants ability to pay and in the case of an unemployed person this is a swingeing fine. However to qualify that statement, none of us are privy to the defendants antecedents (criminal history). I this is a first offence then I he must appeal. Now, why don't we ask ourselves why they don't or haven't pursued the members of the Royal Family or the Gentry over such matters as urging a minor to kill an animal with a gun? Easy, the old boy network, shooting one's patrons in the foot etc come to mind. So let's bash those who are easy targets eh! The RSPCA is guilty of gross hypocrisy and always has been. Edited January 19, 2009 by Biffo1262 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
03luffmb Posted January 20, 2009 Report Share Posted January 20, 2009 This country gonna fall apart soon any way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian E Posted January 20, 2009 Report Share Posted January 20, 2009 I think your missing something here guys, he "pleaded guilty" so the court had no choice but to impose a fine\sentance. I feel sorry for the guy, but hes broken the law, weather he knew he was breaking the law when he let a child shoot the gun is another matter, but it's no defance. £2,700 would of got him a lot of days out at the local air gun range, which is the correct place to shoot the weapon he was using. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted January 20, 2009 Report Share Posted January 20, 2009 I rather felt that he was irresponsible, despite the grey areas of the General License he chose not to humanely despatch the shot and injured bird. That doesn't promote proper practices at all. He may have been dealt with heavily especially in comparison to harsher crimes, but that doesn't make what he did right. But I do feel that the JP's should be held accountable for their judgements, especially when much more serious crimes are given seemingly far less punishment to fit the crime. This is where the system fails, not the law itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nikharr Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 Give it a few more years, you will probably have a body protecting rats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cometa24/7 Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 hi guys, have a look at the (BASC) AIRIFLE CODE OF PRACTACE (REVISED JULY 2008) on there web site. perhaps that will clear some things up for people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airssassin Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 I think that this guy's attitude may be a contributing factor. If he had said that the pigeons were pooing on his patio (causing health risk), eating his vegetables or discouraging established song birds then he might have had a leg to stand on legally. In theory there is nothing wrong with shooting pigeons in your garden if you have a reason other than " I can't stand the f%^$%^& things, death to all vermin, exterminate, exterminate" AND you follow your legal obligations to keep the pellets on your land, not shoot within x feet of the highway.. etc. Leaving a pigeon to flap about is not on either. A quick and humane kill or coup de grace is essential. It is basic respect for your quarry and also leaves less of a PR opportunity for opportunist RSPCA officers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airssassin Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 On the subject of the punishment. I think it was entirely disproportionate. This is symptomatic of the warped view that many hold towards animals in general. I would have expected more of the legal profession than to effectively anthropomorphise a pigeon by giving an equal (or even harsher) sentence for this alledged offence than if the defendant had assaulted a human being. I strongly object to animal cruelty but I also cherish the right that I and others have to responsibly hunt for food and carry out pest control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enemyofthecrow Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 i concure here here and death to all pidgeons(well not all cos then what would i shoot at work) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markbivvy Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20090130/tuk-s...sh-6323e80.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amateur Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20090130/tuk-s...sh-6323e80.html NFNC - or normal for New Cross Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.