WILF 48,307 Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 If hunting with lurchers is banned on the grounds of animal welfare and you can be prosecuted then should stalkers/shooters who only wound quarry be liable to prosecution also? Just a thought? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SEAN3513 7 Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 I think.... if proven.....they can be I once heard of a farmer shooting a dog that was worrying his sheep only he didnt kill it , and he was questioned by the police and the rspca.....no prosecution was brought due to "lack of evidence" Quote Link to post Share on other sites
WILF 48,307 Posted February 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 Didn't know that pal, of course the answer is neither of them should be but it boils my piss hearing stalker / shooters harp on about animal welfare and how their killing is better than another lads killing Quote Link to post Share on other sites
paulus 26 Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 killing is killing, end results always the same, just the means of getting there that differs 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
danw 1,748 Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 (edited) If hunting with lurchers is banned on the grounds of animal welfare and you can be prosecuted then should stalkers/shooters who only wound quarry be liable to prosecution also? Just a thought? IMO non of us should question another's sport, hunting with dogs is banned and rather than comparing or bringing into question other sports we should be standing together to repeal it not bitching about what others are on with. Edited February 17, 2012 by danw 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
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.