« Nasty party's priorities | Main | Now there are eleven »

December 27, 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


I think we need to avoid terms like 'toffs' as that does not help. I am not concerned about the social background of people, I am concerned about cruelty to animals in the name of 'sport'. I have known many people from what would be termed 'upper class' backgrounds who are just as against bloodsports as me and have done much to campaign against it. Don't forget also that many of those who make up the hunt (like terriermen are far from 'toffs'). The issue is cruelty to animals not class.


"We must make sure that it remains in force and that institutionally conservative police chiefs implement it."

Throughout history the police have been very adept in implementing laws.

Alas, it seems when a law is passed that prevents toffs from ripping apart wild animals the police are unable to do their jobs.

It's also obviously purely coincidental that the vermin on horses are solicitors, DR'S, Vets, and policemen.

As for the 'fox population exploding'. Hunts in many area's have been so terrified of a Fox shortage and the horror of nothing to kill they have been breeding Foxes for years.

Tim Cooper

I have acquaintances that hunt. They use the most facile excuses for seeking to resume their barbarity, one being recently; 'foxes kill for pleasure why shouldn't we?' and another,'we are carrying out a public service, without us the fox population will explode. It's already happening'. These ghastly people are pretenders to any form of humanity. They shriek their assumed 'class difference' either real or aspiring, by doggedly resisting the majority ban. We must make sure that it remains in force and that institutionally conservative police chiefs implement it.


Hi Patrick, I agree but I come back to the central point, they are not challenging it simply for pride, they HAVE to get rid of it long-term. This is a long process and one that will not be won by simply holding our hands up and saying nothing has been achieved.It has and if we hold the line and keep pressing on we will win in the end. I know for a fact that the hunting fraternity despite being brazen and full of bravado in public are in a state of panic behind the scenes. Don't let the hunters dicate the discourse of failure that they want you to!


It's interesting that in 2005 hunting wild animals with dogs was made illegal.

In 2011 (and no-doubt 2012) i see on a weekly basis the above taking place.

The powers that be have decided that it's a law they really don't want to bother with.

The 150 odd arrests since 2005 are simply a token effort. This number could have easily been arrested at any boxing day hunt.

This is a law that the politicians and police have decided they will not uphold.

Should i break the law, and assault a huntsman that is also breaking the law, i will be the only one arrested.

As an average hunt contains vermin inc policemen, solicitors, vets and doctors i will leave it to anybody to work it out.

The 'ban' will be challenged forever only for the sake of pride.

It will not and has not stopped hunting wild animals.

John Goss

As a mature student at Birmingham University I used to drive the minibus on behalf of the Anti-bloodsports group. I have never witnessed such abject cruelty - and not just to animals. One girl student was thrashed across the face with the riding crop of one of these saists on horseback.

On a different note can you please get your supporters to sign my epetition calling for the resignation of Dominic Grieve over not allowing an inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly. http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/26133


I do understand Patrick's frustrations. However, if the existence of the Act was not a long-term problem for the hunts they would not be trying so hard to get rid of it. They have ploughed millions of pounds into legal and political activity and continue to do do. They know that should it remain on the books they will have big problems. All social change takes a very long time and progress is often in very small steps, it was the same with slavery which went on long after the law banning it came about. However, in the end a marker is set down and society and the law reaches where is should be. Do not forget also that the Hunting Act bans hare coursing and you will not see the big organised coursing events now. None of this is pot noodle instant stuff but it is an important step and we must not let it be taken away. I write as someone who has been involved in campaigning on this since I was a teenager and who lives within a few miles of several hunts. I am very aware of what they get up to but I also know that to defeat these people is a long game.

Paul Flynn

The ban means that many hunts have adopted drag hunting and attracted more supporters. There were 160 convictions and the ban is effective enough to persuade the sadists to waste a fortune trying to overturn it. Thus yesterday's stunt.

The ban outlawed the most shameful, public use of animal cruelty. An act of wilful gratuitous suffering is celebrated as a social occasion. If that is permitted other forms of indifference to suffering will continue.


"Majority of MPs will back present law and probably insist on full enforcement"

Why will they have to insist on full enforcement?

Could it be that the 'ban' only exists in the minds of politicians, the urban based populace and people that never go outside?

The hunting 'ban' has led to record numbers of people hunting. It has given added 'rebel cred' to the followers. It has largely removed the sabs 'that get in the way'.

Anybody informing the police of a hunt going through their village are dealt with as enthusiastically as a group of JW'S turning up at your door.

What ban?


The hunting ban also covers the disgusting barbarisms of hare coursing/hare hunting and stag hunting. You do not hear the self-styled 'Countryside Alliance' or the BBC mention that very often..
Plus, how often do the media ever show an image of the animal being chased or dug out?? Almost never.
These ghastly throwbacks do not represent people who live in the countryside. They are in it for the kick they get out of chasing a wild animal to exhaustion before ripping it apart with a pack of dogs. Decent minded people across the country will fight to stop repeal.

The comments to this entry are closed.