J Darcy 5,871 Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 I think everyones clouding the issue....hunting foxes is still illegal, and after the amendment will still be illegal. They are in exactly the same boat as us. The amendment is for using more than two hounds, NOT to legalise foxhunting. We should all be supporting this....it is a step in the right direction. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DIDO.1 22,845 Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 It's a step to test the snp and the Lords....if your worried about lurchers and coursing then get out there and promote it....rather than bitching about nasty toffs 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
perthshire keeper 1,239 Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 The most important word in all this; 'Intent'. and that is a VERY difficult thing to prove"beyond all reasonable doubt" see for me this is/could be/would be great news! i only dig to terriers legally i only run my lurcher on rabbits and only have 2 hounds...but would love more theirs 2 ways of looking at this IMO who do you know that now dose any thing diffrent with their dogs?? for me not a fecking soul! so why worry or theirs the "any step in the right direction is a good step" and i agree 100% with that Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jeemes 4,498 Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) I think everyones clouding the issue....hunting foxes is still illegal, and after the amendment will still be illegal. They are in exactly the same boat as us. The amendment is for using more than two hounds, NOT to legalise foxhunting. We should all be supporting this....it is a step in the right direction. I agree. I was annoyed at first hearing it,but realise now I over reacted and in fact it is has you say still moving in the right direction with support from government for hunting with dogs..lobbying@countryside-alliance.org Edited July 9, 2015 by jeemes 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DIDO.1 22,845 Posted July 10, 2015 Report Share Posted July 10, 2015 No, i didn't mean it like that, but bitching about toffs isnt the answer. Some people think Cameron can click his fingers and say he's a new law...they forget it has to pass two houses 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DIDO.1 22,845 Posted July 10, 2015 Report Share Posted July 10, 2015 .....and the leftwing jocks Quote Link to post Share on other sites
nothernlite 18,089 Posted July 10, 2015 Report Share Posted July 10, 2015 Lol @dildo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
WILF 47,588 Posted July 10, 2015 Report Share Posted July 10, 2015 It would be nieve to think that the CA would push the government into anything other than helping hunts. At best we could hope to get a blanket repeal but though i've always fought for it i've always known the CA ain't interested in the likes of me. For lurcher & terrier folk nothing will change and its hardly a step in any direction! And that is perfectly put mate, and as usual, completely on the money Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Printer 34 Posted July 10, 2015 Report Share Posted July 10, 2015 I’ve always held the opinion that there was far more to the hunting ban than we were led to believe at the time and as I have got older and become more cynical this is what I now believe may have happened to bring about the hunting ban in the first place. Basically the Prime Minister was told in no uncertain terms by his “friend” from across the Atlantic that we were to help in the invasion of Iraq. To enable this to pass through parliament the PM would certainly need the backing of the back benchers and fortunately for him these same back benchers had been pushing for years for one thing which was a ban on hunting.So in my opinion they did a trade off……the back benchers allowed the PM to help out in Iraq and so consequently they were rewarded with the ban on hunting. Someone certainly made sure the media was keeping the public occupied with coverage of the ban and hunting in general, time wise it dragged out and played perfectly into their hands and when they were all content that they had what they wanted they threw in the Parliament Act to put a finish to it. I honestly hope my opinion is wrong because we may have lost our rights to enjoy the way we hunt in this country but people and families from all different countries throughout the world will have lost far more………but if there happens to be any truth in my post and I hope someone in a position far more qualified than me (maybe Sir John Chilcot?) can tell me I am wrong then we shouldn’t be pussy footing about with a repeal, it should go to a far far higher court than what we have in this country and sorted once and for all. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
twobob 1,497 Posted July 10, 2015 Report Share Posted July 10, 2015 Before everyone gets excited, where has any of this been said? Any links? just before the election before last 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.