This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/05/anti-hunt-protesters-target-fami...
Whatever views people might have about hunting there is simply no excuse for the bile and vitriol that has been spouted following this girl's tragic death.
I'm inclined to think that a lot of such hate emanates from people who are less concerned about the welfare of foxes than they are about waging some sort of class warfare. They don't appear to be able to differentiate between a fox hunt and a drag hunt.
Whatever views people might have about hunting there is simply no excuse for the bile and vitriol that has been spouted following this girl's tragic death.
I'm inclined to think that a lot of such hate emanates from people who are less concerned about the welfare of foxes than they are about waging some sort of class warfare. They don't appear to be able to differentiate between a fox hunt and a drag hunt.
29
2
In reply to FesteringSore:
Dreadful story. Abusing the family of a dead child is obviously vile and that should go without saying but to pick up on your final point, the protesters wouldn't be the only group that sometimes struggle to differentiate between a drag and a fox hunt.
jk
Dreadful story. Abusing the family of a dead child is obviously vile and that should go without saying but to pick up on your final point, the protesters wouldn't be the only group that sometimes struggle to differentiate between a drag and a fox hunt.
jk
Post edited at 16:33
16
3
In reply to FesteringSore:
It will not be helped by the fact that the Telegraph article linked to in the OP does not mention that it was a "drag". It just keeps repeating the words "hunt" and "hunting".
It will not be helped by the fact that the Telegraph article linked to in the OP does not mention that it was a "drag". It just keeps repeating the words "hunt" and "hunting".
4
In reply to Ghastly Rubberfeet:
There were references elsewhere to a drag hunt although I can't recall where.
There were references elsewhere to a drag hunt although I can't recall where.
Post edited at 16:52
In reply to FesteringSore:
That may be true, but the last 2 articles I read (BBC and Telegraph) do not mention drag hunting. I think it is people's popular image of fox hunting that will prevail.
It would be nice if the press made the distinction then perhaps the cruel and hurtful posts may not have been penned.
That may be true, but the last 2 articles I read (BBC and Telegraph) do not mention drag hunting. I think it is people's popular image of fox hunting that will prevail.
It would be nice if the press made the distinction then perhaps the cruel and hurtful posts may not have been penned.
1
In reply to Ghastly Rubberfeet:
Good points.
> That may be true, but the last 2 articles I read (BBC and Telegraph) do not mention drag hunting. I think it is people's popular image of fox hunting that will prevail.
> It would be nice if the press made the distinction then perhaps the cruel and hurtful posts may not have been penned.
Good points.
In reply to FesteringSore:
I have just had a dig around and so far the results from the first page of Google are:
Don't mention Drag hunting - 7
Telegraph
BBC
Guardian
Independant
Mirror
Daily Mail
Daily Star
Do mention Drag hunt - 1
ITV
Not a lot of balance there is there?
I have just had a dig around and so far the results from the first page of Google are:
Don't mention Drag hunting - 7
Telegraph
BBC
Guardian
Independant
Mirror
Daily Mail
Daily Star
Do mention Drag hunt - 1
ITV
Not a lot of balance there is there?
5
1
In reply to FesteringSore:
Irrespective of whether it was reported as hunting or drag hunting is irrelevant; being so horrible about the death of a small child is just reprehensible.
Irrespective of whether it was reported as hunting or drag hunting is irrelevant; being so horrible about the death of a small child is just reprehensible.
19
1
In reply to Ghastly Rubberfeet:
Others who dont mention it was a drag hunt include the Cotswold Hunt and the countryside alliance. At least not in any of the quote I have seen.
> Not a lot of balance there is there?
Others who dont mention it was a drag hunt include the Cotswold Hunt and the countryside alliance. At least not in any of the quote I have seen.
3
In reply to FesteringSore:
Yet another example of the bile antis are capable of spewing. They really are foul hypocrites with no idea about country life.
Yet another example of the bile antis are capable of spewing. They really are foul hypocrites with no idea about country life.
16
28
In reply to Bimble:
I know a bit about country life, if you want to start an attack on antis please start another topic and I'll happily defend my position.
I know a bit about country life, if you want to start an attack on antis please start another topic and I'll happily defend my position.
32
6
6
29
23
1
16
6
In reply to Bimble:
I have a Machiavellian mind... An effective way to sway public opinion agains the Sabs would be to launch an attack such as this...
I have a Machiavellian mind... An effective way to sway public opinion agains the Sabs would be to launch an attack such as this...
5
1
In reply to Donald82:
What's wrong with people who think it's ok to mock & celebrate the death of a young child just because she was participating in a perfectly legal activity?
Last time I checked, drag hunting wasn't illegal.
What's wrong with people who think it's ok to mock & celebrate the death of a young child just because she was participating in a perfectly legal activity?
Last time I checked, drag hunting wasn't illegal.
7
5
In reply to Bimble:
A lot, obviously.
But still, what's wrong with you? Your post of 19:34 is really unpleasant.
A lot, obviously.
But still, what's wrong with you? Your post of 19:34 is really unpleasant.
12
6
In reply to FesteringSore:
Having been on the receiving end of antis verbal attacks, i'm talking 30 years ago when sabbing was in its prime, I'm not entirely surprised by their action.
There were always a percentage (not all, most were perfectly decent people) that were so "hardcore" that they failed to recognise boundaries in their words or actions. Hate rather than beliefs seemed to be their driving force.
Having been on the receiving end of antis verbal attacks, i'm talking 30 years ago when sabbing was in its prime, I'm not entirely surprised by their action.
There were always a percentage (not all, most were perfectly decent people) that were so "hardcore" that they failed to recognise boundaries in their words or actions. Hate rather than beliefs seemed to be their driving force.
10
5
11
2
In reply to Donald82:
You have a bizarre definition of "really unpleasant"!
The post was a simple, but blunt, question that was readily answered by the person that it was addressed to.
I'd suggest that asking someone "what's wrong with you?" is slightly more unpleasant than the original question.
> A lot, obviously.
> But still, what's wrong with you? Your post of 19:34 is really unpleasant.
You have a bizarre definition of "really unpleasant"!
The post was a simple, but blunt, question that was readily answered by the person that it was addressed to.
I'd suggest that asking someone "what's wrong with you?" is slightly more unpleasant than the original question.
Post edited at 13:19
8
8
In reply to timjones:
Putting a question mark on an insult doesn't miraculously make it a genuine reasonable question.
Bimble's post was unnecessarily unpleasant and antagonistic.
jk
Putting a question mark on an insult doesn't miraculously make it a genuine reasonable question.
Bimble's post was unnecessarily unpleasant and antagonistic.
jk
14
5
In reply to jkarran:
It appears to be a perfectly valid question in view of the post that it was replying to. Never mind the question mark at the end the opening "do you...." denotes it as a question.
> Putting a question mark on an insult doesn't miraculously make it a genuine reasonable question.
> Bimble's post was unnecessarily unpleasant and antagonistic.
> jk
It appears to be a perfectly valid question in view of the post that it was replying to. Never mind the question mark at the end the opening "do you...." denotes it as a question.
4
8
In reply to timjones:
Does it? Really? I can't see anywhere where L'Eyore appeared to be associating him/herself with the people involved in the abuse (whoever they may be) nor condoning their behavior.
Oh well that changes things. In that case it's definitely a genuine question rather than a thinly veiled insult.
jk
> It appears to be a perfectly valid question in view of the post that it was replying to.
Does it? Really? I can't see anywhere where L'Eyore appeared to be associating him/herself with the people involved in the abuse (whoever they may be) nor condoning their behavior.
> Never mind the question mark at the end the opening "do you...." denotes it as a question.
Oh well that changes things. In that case it's definitely a genuine question rather than a thinly veiled insult.
jk
12
2
In reply to jkarran:
How should the question have been phrased to avoid anyone jumping to the conclusion that it was a "thinly veiled insult"?
> Does it? Really? I can't see anywhere where L'Eyore appeared to be associating him/herself with the people involved in the abuse (whoever they may be) nor condoning their behavior.
> Oh well that changes things. In that case it's definitely a genuine question rather than a thinly veiled insult.
How should the question have been phrased to avoid anyone jumping to the conclusion that it was a "thinly veiled insult"?
3
In reply to lummox:
Never mind, I'm not sure the post was worth an apology.
I'm currently more bothered about the father who posted on here about getting some small B3 boots for their daughter. I gave away my wife's Boreal boots along with (if I remember correctly) crampons that fitted plus an ice axe. In return I asked for a donation to mountain rescue and a photo of the boots back in use - I was going through a rough time and just needed a bit of encouragement to lift me a bit.
Did the father/daughter die? Did the email go astray? Did they think I was weird for asking for a photo and decided to stop all contact? I have no idea.
Never mind, I'm not sure the post was worth an apology.
I'm currently more bothered about the father who posted on here about getting some small B3 boots for their daughter. I gave away my wife's Boreal boots along with (if I remember correctly) crampons that fitted plus an ice axe. In return I asked for a donation to mountain rescue and a photo of the boots back in use - I was going through a rough time and just needed a bit of encouragement to lift me a bit.
Did the father/daughter die? Did the email go astray? Did they think I was weird for asking for a photo and decided to stop all contact? I have no idea.
6
In reply to timjones:
What about those people mocking the death of a 9yr old girl too?
vs
Do you defend your comrades mocking the death of a 9yr old girl too?
What about those people mocking the death of a 9yr old girl too?
vs
Do you defend your comrades mocking the death of a 9yr old girl too?
5
In reply to elsewhere:
I think that people are being far too sensitive if they perceive a major difference between those 2 options. Especially if you take into account the wording of the post preceding it.
> What about those people mocking the death of a 9yr old girl too?
> vs
> Do you defend your comrades mocking the death of a 9yr old girl too?
I think that people are being far too sensitive if they perceive a major difference between those 2 options. Especially if you take into account the wording of the post preceding it.
1
9
In reply to timjones:
1. the other person said they'd be happy to defend antis (new term to me) on another thread. The very clear implication is that they don't think the abuse of a dead child's family is okay. Otherwise they would be happy to defend antis on here..
2. It's just f*cking rude. Imagine if people you share some common views with do something horrible - and someone turns round and says pointedly, "do you defend this?"... like it's something you might actually do?
So, I do wonder what's wrong with Bimble, that makes him think that's okay? And I think he should spologise. Likewise you.. What's wrong with you that you think that's okay?
1. the other person said they'd be happy to defend antis (new term to me) on another thread. The very clear implication is that they don't think the abuse of a dead child's family is okay. Otherwise they would be happy to defend antis on here..
2. It's just f*cking rude. Imagine if people you share some common views with do something horrible - and someone turns round and says pointedly, "do you defend this?"... like it's something you might actually do?
So, I do wonder what's wrong with Bimble, that makes him think that's okay? And I think he should spologise. Likewise you.. What's wrong with you that you think that's okay?
6
2
In reply to timjones:
Really? Really? Really really?
You think those two are pretty much the same!
Imagine, if you will, a thread about terrorist attacks in Paris. Someone has a go at Islam generally. Someone else says he'd be happy to defend Islam on another thread. Then someone else says... do you defend the suicide bombing of civilians by your Muslim brothers?
And you think that's okay! Wow Tim Jones. Wow!
What is wrong with you man? Really... just wow.
> I think that people are being far too sensitive if they perceive a major difference between those 2 options. Especially if you take into account the wording of the post preceding it.
Really? Really? Really really?
You think those two are pretty much the same!
Imagine, if you will, a thread about terrorist attacks in Paris. Someone has a go at Islam generally. Someone else says he'd be happy to defend Islam on another thread. Then someone else says... do you defend the suicide bombing of civilians by your Muslim brothers?
And you think that's okay! Wow Tim Jones. Wow!
What is wrong with you man? Really... just wow.
2
1
In reply to Bimble:
Like this you mean?
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10209533317433507&set=a.1084929...
I really don't understand why "everyone" has no idea, surely there are people on both sides who do have an idea. You seem to be saying, "If you don't agree with me........"
> Yet another example of the bile antis are capable of spewing. They really are foul hypocrites with no idea about country life.
Like this you mean?
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10209533317433507&set=a.1084929...
I really don't understand why "everyone" has no idea, surely there are people on both sides who do have an idea. You seem to be saying, "If you don't agree with me........"
1
3
In reply to Donald82:
I've had it happen to me, it really wasn't a problem.
Anyone who took offence on my behalf would have been both foolish and wrong!
> 1. the other person said they'd be happy to defend antis (new term to me) on another thread. The very clear implication is that they don't think the abuse of a dead child's family is okay. Otherwise they would be happy to defend antis on here..
> 2. It's just f*cking rude. Imagine if people you share some common views with do something horrible - and someone turns round and says pointedly, "do you defend this?"... like it's something you might actually do?
> So, I do wonder what's wrong with Bimble, that makes him think that's okay? And I think he should spologise. Likewise you.. What's wrong with you that you think that's okay?
I've had it happen to me, it really wasn't a problem.
Anyone who took offence on my behalf would have been both foolish and wrong!
1
1
In reply to timjones:
I've been punched and it really wasn't a problem.
jk
> I've had it happen to me, it really wasn't a problem.
I've been punched and it really wasn't a problem.
jk
1
2
In reply to jkarran:
I rest my case about some people lacking a sense of perspective!
A simple question that it should be easy for any decent person to answer is worlds apart from being punched.
> I've been punched and it really wasn't a problem.
I rest my case about some people lacking a sense of perspective!
A simple question that it should be easy for any decent person to answer is worlds apart from being punched.
1
1
In reply to timjones:
No way! My argumentum ad absurdum appears to lack perspective? Well there's a surprise.
jk
> I rest my case about some people lacking a sense of perspective!
No way! My argumentum ad absurdum appears to lack perspective? Well there's a surprise.
jk
1
1
In reply to jkarran:
One or other of us has lost the plot!
> No way! My argumentum ad absurdum appears to lack perspective? Well there's a surprise.
> jk
One or other of us has lost the plot!
2
This has gone way, way off topic and has descended to the usual puerile UKC willy waving.
4
In reply to FesteringSore:
If that is true,
Bimble and Tim Jones you are horrible people.
> This has gone way, way off topic and has descended to the usual puerile UKC willy waving.
If that is true,
Bimble and Tim Jones you are horrible people.
3
2
In reply to L'Eeyore:
You've missed out the rudest person on the thread
> If that is true,
> Bimble and Tim Jones you are horrible people.
You've missed out the rudest person on the thread
1
1
In reply to FesteringSore:
I did write quite a lengthy take on the whole hunt vs sabs nonsense, then I deleted it. Suffice to say, it has nothing to with foxes
I did write quite a lengthy take on the whole hunt vs sabs nonsense, then I deleted it. Suffice to say, it has nothing to with foxes
2
1
In reply to toad:
Well done. My initial post was meant to try to focus the discussion on the hate of the few people that posted very hurtful messages online and nothing else.
I still haven't come out and stated whether I'm for or against hunting (Bimble please note this and try to learn from it).
Well done. My initial post was meant to try to focus the discussion on the hate of the few people that posted very hurtful messages online and nothing else.
I still haven't come out and stated whether I'm for or against hunting (Bimble please note this and try to learn from it).
2
In reply to Bimble:
And this is yet another example of the bile animal murderers are capable of spewing.
> Yet another example of the bile antis are capable of spewing. They really are foul hypocrites with no idea about country life.
And this is yet another example of the bile animal murderers are capable of spewing.
1
4
In reply to Rylstone_Cowboy:
Yawn, you can't 'murder' an animal.
Kill them, yes (like the chicken thieving ginger bugger I got last night) but not murder.
As for apologising, I may have been somewhat blunt but all of you taking offence at a simple question need to grow a bit of backbone.
Yawn, you can't 'murder' an animal.
Kill them, yes (like the chicken thieving ginger bugger I got last night) but not murder.
As for apologising, I may have been somewhat blunt but all of you taking offence at a simple question need to grow a bit of backbone.
Post edited at 08:09
2
In reply to Rylstone_Cowboy:
So what are YOUR thoughts on the points raised in my OP. DO YOU condemn those who have spewed bile about the death of a nine year old girl? Yes or no; no ifs, no buts.
> And this is yet another example of the bile animal murderers are capable of spewing.
So what are YOUR thoughts on the points raised in my OP. DO YOU condemn those who have spewed bile about the death of a nine year old girl? Yes or no; no ifs, no buts.
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...