Fox hunting

[aakfish]

The said:

Because Oily didn't charge in here with guns blazing.

I'm actually quite nuetral on this issue. I'm American so it doesn't direct me. One of the nice things about being removed from the arguement is I'm not emotionally involved.

You are. And it's showing.

To be effective in an arguement you need to be able to keep your head and use logic instead of emotions. Dissassciate yourself from the topic and if you can't, bow out. These are all tried and true debate techniques. I'm not just making stuff up here.

Thanks for the advice, it was sooooooooooooooo useful.

[teghan62]

Aak said:

Thanks for the advice, it was sooooooooooooooo useful.

And this just proves Kiddo's point even more.

[aakfish]

Well I am off to bed, it's been great talking to you.

I still stand by my earlier comment that i wish I was a police officer smashing the faces of those countryside gits.

Good night.

[Tdyans at work]

Well, it's a good thing you don't take joy in hurting living things.

[Crystal at school]

Guest-Tdyans said:

Well, it's a good thing you don't take joy in hurting living things.

I read through the entire thread and all I can say is: What Tdyans said.

I'm relatively neutral. Fox-hunting is something I've never seen and I don't know what happens.

[Killix]

I am not pro sport hunting, It just reminds me of what happened to the beautiful Thylacine, an animal people wanted to "control" basically because they looked mean. The people accused the animal of attacking sheep and people (which was never proven) and a bouny was place on them. Humans ultimately hunted them to extinction. When they realised what was happening it was too late and before they knew it, the last one was dead.

I'm not relating this case in any way to the Fox hunting debate and I'm not saying this is going to happen. It's just something I want people to keep in mind.

[Jessica Coconut]

hmm. I think it's quite cruel to hunt for sport, but if your protecting livestock then I suppose it's alright.

So, I'd say that you need to get a license.

I'm an animal lover too, but I'm fair. You have to consider the other side. I debate a lot, and I'm not afraid to take the opposite side when that's what we need for a class debate. I can do either, though I have my preferences. Aak, you're kind of making other animal lovers look bad because of the way you make your argument.

Oh,and about the fun thing, I think your a bit confused.

See, it goes "We fox-hunt, and it's fun." Not "It's fun to fox-hunt"

See? You fox-hunt for other reasons first, and if it happens to be be fun, fine. You don't say "Lets go fox-hunting. Haven't done that for a while, it'll be fun!"

[Rishiy]

A lot of MP's were brought up in rural areas though. And foxes come into my garden and kill peoples cats and stuff... I dont try and kill them.

Weak argument --;;...

[Oily]

Wolves used to kill foxes to keep the population down, till we hunted wolves to extinction. Now, we hunt foxes. Mostly slow, older foxes are caught.

I've discovered not all foxes are shot before they are killed, but the dogs do not rip them up and play with them. They kill them quickly with a bite to the neck once they've caught them.

It is not just "toffs" who hunt. Many farmers lend/rent out land for hunting, and make money off it. Those who look after the dogs, shoe the horses etc etc are normal people who stand to lose jobs they can precious afford to lose.

Poison, snares - it kills many other animals, leaving them to die in agony. They hunt the fox to find it - there's not really another way to quickly find and track a fox than dogs. The adrenalin of the chase actually deadens any pain the fox might feel. Or would you rather the hunters stopped "having fun" and let the fox's insides melt by feeding them poison?

Banning fox hunting does not stop the foxes being killed. It leaves them to die in worse ways.

The hunting industry uses 180 000 hounds and 50 000 horses. It turns over hundreds of millions of pounds a year.
All that will be lost when it's banned.

If you're an animal lover, who wish to save the lives of thousands of dogs and kill foxes humanely, you'd be pro-hunting


The Government pushed this act through using the Parliament Act. (The three other times this Act was used, it was for discrimination, sexual abuse and a war something or other.) The House of Lords can't throw it out. The ban cannot be amended too much. They are banning a minority interest, that has no greater benefit to the majority at all. Apparently, 56% of the country are pro hunting, with only 38% against (others undecided.) It makes me sick that the Government do this just to win votes.
(That's not really a reason to be pro, but it leaves me cold that the Government can do this.)