Fox attacks people

[otherego]

Interesting:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-33360817

From the article:

A "vicious" fox trapped eight people inside a sports club for three hours as it stalked them from the car park.

The animal appeared as people were preparing to leave Alconbury Sports and Social Club, Cambridgeshire.

Panic reigned, with a woman being bitten, a man falling off his bicycle as he was chased and a pest controller being pursued back to his car.

Club chairman Bruce Staines, who was chased around the car park, said he had "never seen anything like it".

I just hope they tested it for rabies after it was killed - not something to be complacent about.

Apart from that, I suppose the whole thing was not without its funny side.

[electric*mayhem*band]

 I was referring to JD's post alone, and nothing you said previously. You flatter yourself thinking otherwise.

[jd.linklater]

---

@lambsy_uk wrote:

---

@jd.linklater wrote:

There is no need to bring back fox hunting despite the hunting fraternity spouting their nonsesnse about pest control. Urban foxes are only a pest in our cities because we are so profligate with our waste.  There is no such problem in the countryside.

If a farmer has problems with a fox taking livestock he is quite entitled to take a gun and shoot it without the inconvenience of a pack of hounds and an equally repulsive pack of hunters on horses trampling all over his land.

Fox hunting is nothing less than a bloodsport disguised in the garb of tradition.

---

I think you'll notice I made no mention of pest control! I said it would let some people have some fun, quite readily acknowledging that it is more to do with fun, recreation and sport than anything else! I believe there is some tradition invilvolved though, even though they may not be traditions that all find tasteful.

I'm not trying to disguise Fox hunting as anything but am quite happy to see those who take part get some enjoyment and recreation from it, at least this makes the Foxes of some use!

As for disguise, how about those who disguise class hatred as concern for animal welfare?!

---

So you have no problem with human beings obtaining fun, recreation and sport at the expense of another species. I find that a despicable attitude to take, exactly the kind of attitude that has led to us being responsible in the past for the extinction of more species than exist on the planet today.

And incidentally my post is purely in the defence of foxes, there are numerous ways for the rich to get their kicks without destroying wildlife. Every species on the planet has the right to exist,  no one species holds any more importance than another. At a cellular level we are all one.

[joamur_gosof]

don't tell the tories that they will dispute it and dispute it and dispute it and then ban animal rights and human rights and say lalalalal and replace it with the more British colonial way called british law. That way we can become vastly superior to everything else its so obvious dead things deserve it.

[upthecreekyetagain]

"no one species holds any more importance than another. At a cellular level we are all one"

Do you include all bacteria in that? ???

I'd be happy to see the cholera bacteria wiped out worldwide.

[joamur_gosof]

and foxes ?

[joamur_gosof]

I read somewhere that bacteria was the outer space component and wasn't actually part of the planet per say, unlike other mebias.

[jd.linklater]

Yes even bacteria have their place in the greater scheme of things. The bacteria in our stomachs are vital for our survival, without them we couldn't digest our food or absorb any nutrients from what we eat, everything we excreted would be in exactly the same condition as when it went into the other end. In short we would die without bacteria.  

Without soil bacteria nothing in the earth could decompose, it would be pointless burying our loved ones in cemeteries because they would still be there a thousand years later with nothing to decompose them.

The world would be a very different place without bacteria, in fact we wouldn't be here. 

[upthecreekyetagain]

Of course bacteria are important, without them we could not exist - we could however happily exist without the cholera bacteria and as such I'd be happy to see it wiped out as a species.

I don't go with the idea that all species are important - at the moment I'd be quite happy to see wasps wiped out!!!

[electric*mayhem*band]

Although wasps/hornets aren't as efficient as bees at pollination due to their bodies not being as hairy as a bee, they do still play a part. If we were to eradicate all wasps/hornets it would cause more problems than it would solve.

Seagulls on the other hand, do not have one redeeming feature in my opinion. I'd be happy to see them wiped off the face of the earth...humanely of course. Noisy, screeching, squawking, filthy, avaricious, dangerous, and aggressive. But I suppose members of the RSPB wouldn't agree with me.

[lambsy_uk]

---

@jd.linklater wrote:

---

@lambsy_uk wrote:

---

@jd.linklater wrote:

There is no need to bring back fox hunting despite the hunting fraternity spouting their nonsesnse about pest control. Urban foxes are only a pest in our cities because we are so profligate with our waste.  There is no such problem in the countryside.

If a farmer has problems with a fox taking livestock he is quite entitled to take a gun and shoot it without the inconvenience of a pack of hounds and an equally repulsive pack of hunters on horses trampling all over his land.

Fox hunting is nothing less than a bloodsport disguised in the garb of tradition.

---

I think you'll notice I made no mention of pest control! I said it would let some people have some fun, quite readily acknowledging that it is more to do with fun, recreation and sport than anything else! I believe there is some tradition invilvolved though, even though they may not be traditions that all find tasteful.

I'm not trying to disguise Fox hunting as anything but am quite happy to see those who take part get some enjoyment and recreation from it, at least this makes the Foxes of some use!

As for disguise, how about those who disguise class hatred as concern for animal welfare?!

---

So you have no problem with human beings obtaining fun, recreation and sport at the expense of another species. I find that a despicable attitude to take, exactly the kind of attitude that has led to us being responsible in the past for the extinction of more species than exist on the planet today.

And incidentally my post is purely in the defence of foxes, there are numerous ways for the rich to get their kicks without destroying wildlife. Every species on the planet has the right to exist,  no one species holds any more importance than another. At a cellular level we are all one.

---

It may be true that more species are extinct than those that exist but to claim we are responsible for the demise of them all is laughable! Most species put themselves first with little or no consideration for equality or importance. You may have been blessed with the capacity to reason but that''s no excuse to not find putting ourselves first to be reasonable.

Why do you mention the RICH getting their kicks? If this was an activity identified with the poor would you be using such language? "There''s better ways for the poor to get their kicks without destroying wildlife." Just affirms that many like to use the issue to hide their class hatred!

As for having a problem with others finding pleasure in such things, I concern myself with my own pass-times and recreation and don't concern myself with what floats everyone else''s boat, and I would advocate others taking a similar approach!

[jd.linklater]

---

@lambsy_uk wrote:

---

It may be true that more species are extinct than those that exist but to claim we are responsible for the demise of them all is laughable! Most species put themselves first with little or no consideration for equality or importance. You may have been blessed with the capacity to reason but that''s no excuse to not find putting ourselves first to be reasonable.

Why do you mention the RICH getting their kicks? If this was an activity identified with the poor would you be using such language? "There''s better ways for the poor to get their kicks without destroying wildlife." Just affirms that many like to use the issue to hide their class hatred!

As for having a problem with others finding pleasure in such things, I concern myself with my own pass-times and recreation and don't concern myself with what floats everyone else''s boat, and I would advocate others taking a similar approach!

---

I mentioned the rich getting their kicks because you insinuated that my motives for objecting to fox hunting were class related. Nothing could be further from the truth, I despise anyone who causes unnecessary suffering to animals regardless of their background, wealth or social status.

If you think humans aren't responsible for animal extinctions you clearly need to read more.

[electric*mayhem*band]

'As for having a problem with others finding pleasure in such things, I concern myself with my own pass-times and recreation and don't concern myself with what floats everyone else''s boat, and I would advocate others taking a similar approach' !

Then why are you even bothering to respond ? For someone who concerns themselves with 'their own pass-times and recreation and don't concerm myself with what floats everyone else's boat', you sure do have plenty to say for yourself. 

[lambsy_uk]

---

@jd.linklater wrote:

---

@lambsy_uk wrote:

---

It may be true that more species are extinct than those that exist but to claim we are responsible for the demise of them all is laughable! Most species put themselves first with little or no consideration for equality or importance. You may have been blessed with the capacity to reason but that''s no excuse to not find putting ourselves first to be reasonable.

Why do you mention the RICH getting their kicks? If this was an activity identified with the poor would you be using such language? "There''s better ways for the poor to get their kicks without destroying wildlife." Just affirms that many like to use the issue to hide their class hatred!

As for having a problem with others finding pleasure in such things, I concern myself with my own pass-times and recreation and don't concern myself with what floats everyone else''s boat, and I would advocate others taking a similar approach!

---

I mentioned the rich getting their kicks because you insinuated that my motives for objecting to fox hunting were class related. Nothing could be further from the truth, I despise anyone who causes unnecessary suffering to animals regardless of their background, wealth or social status.

If you think humans aren't responsible for animal extinctions you clearly need to read more.

---

Actually I suggested humans are not responsible for all of them! I also said that some seem to disguise class hatred as concern for animals, I did not suggest you were of such ilk! During past discussion people have moaned about Toffs, Oiks and Hooray Henry's leading me to believe their concern for Foxes is secondary to their distaste at wealthy people enjoying hunting.

I always said that pro-hunt people should have just come clean and say they hunt because they enjoy it and like to keep traditions going rather than go down the pest control route. Similarly those who really are concerened for Foxes should steer away from Toff-Bashing as it detracts from their argument and makes them seem more bothered about Toffs than Foxes.

[lambsy_uk]

---

@electric*mayhem*band wrote:

'As for having a problem with others finding pleasure in such things, I concern myself with my own pass-times and recreation and don't concern myself with what floats everyone else''s boat, and I would advocate others taking a similar approach' !

Then why are you even bothering to respond ? For someone who concerns themselves with 'their own pass-times and recreation and don't concerm myself with what floats everyone else's boat', you sure do have plenty to say for yourself. 

---

Its a discussion! I don't care if people find pleasure in hunting but I do like to ask questions and discuss matters of interest!

[jd.linklater]

---

@lambsy_uk wrote:

---

I always said that pro-hunt people should have just come clean and say they hunt because they enjoy it and like to keep traditions going rather than go down the pest control route. Similarly those who really are concerened for Foxes should steer away from Toff-Bashing as it detracts from their argument and makes them seem more bothered about Toffs than Foxes.

---

That's one thing we are agreed on, a little honesty from both sides of the argument would be a refreshing change.

I live in the Gloucestershire countryside and shortly before the Hunting Act became law there were notices posted all over the county exclaiming "59% SAY CARRY ON HUNTING". Anyone who was unaware of the issue would think by the wording that there had been a National vote on the subject but in fact all it amounted to was 59% of a show of hands in the Beaufort Hunt Supporters' local pub.

[lambsy_uk]

---

@jd.linklater wrote:

---

@lambsy_uk wrote:

---

I always said that pro-hunt people should have just come clean and say they hunt because they enjoy it and like to keep traditions going rather than go down the pest control route. Similarly those who really are concerened for Foxes should steer away from Toff-Bashing as it detracts from their argument and makes them seem more bothered about Toffs than Foxes.

---

That's one thing we are agreed on, a little honesty from both sides of the argument would be a refreshing change.

I live in the Gloucestershire countryside and shortly before the Hunting Act became law there were notices posted all over the county exclaiming "59% SAY CARRY ON HUNTING". Anyone who was unaware of the issue would think by the wording that there had been a National vote on the subject but in fact all it amounted to was 59% of a show of hands in the Beaufort Hunt Supporters' local pub.

---

Nice to see we have some common ground. What I don't like about such statistics is let's say a certain percentage want to ban hunting; that's a certain percentage of those who actually give a damn. It could be that most people don't care either way and so why make changes (ban something) for the sake of small interest group?

[bankhaunter]

It rather depends if there is good reason to ban something, I'm not to keen on the banning of things simply because some don't like them and it's a political decision where the group that loses out isn't powerful enough to object.

Fox hunting has the cruelty aspect but the banning of single shot .22 pistols was done purely for votes.

For a lot of the anti hunt people, it was a class thing, they cared little for animals.