Why shouldn’t Press cover hunt meetings? (From Worcester News)
Get involved! Send your photos, video, news & views by texting WN NEWS to 80360 or e-mail us
Why shouldn’t Press cover hunt meetings?
12:50pm Friday 14th January 2011 in Read
SIR – Simon McCulluogh (Letters, January 6) demands the Worcester News no longer reports on the hunt meetings over Christmas.
Those with an antihunting axe to grind would like to curtail the freedom of the Press and free speech to suit their agenda. Now Mr McCullough wants to change our whole democratic system just to keep the discredited Hunting Act (2004) in place.
Contrary to Mr McCullough’s claims, hunting using the exemptions within the Act is not illegal. If he has any evidence of hunting outside the law then he should contact the police.
Since 2005 there have been only six huntsmen convicted for contravening the Act, that’s one conviction for every 32,000 hunting days.
The other 150-something convictions are mostly for catching rats and rabbits.
The Hunting Act has been heavily criticised by judges and senior police officers, and many Labour MPs who voted for it now accept it is terminally flawed.
Mr McCullough is correct on one thing; our Worcestershire countryside is a very beautiful place but he must realise that country sports have helped create and maintain much of what he rightly admires.
JON BURGESS
Worcester
Comments(5)
tub_thumper
says...
4:57pm Fri 14 Jan 11
.
Before the ban, the WN never published stories on the successful rescuing of a defenceless animal by activists. The stories that you did see were the negative, such as activists being arrested for ‘disturbing the peace’. Who disturbed the peace first? The hunt. Why doesn’t the Worcester News publish the negative on hunts instead of praising them all of the time? Why is an offence to prevent cruelty to animals? Why is it not an offence to gallop around the countryside, trespassing on peoples property and land with a pack of hounds and followers, pets being savaged, injury to their own animals, blocking of roads and just general snobbery and rudeness?
New Kid on the Block
says...
11:47pm Sat 15 Jan 11
news.co.uk/news/4832
642.Fury_as_hunt_hou
nds_run_wild/#commen
tsList
You make wild accusations of law breaking, with no evidence to back up what you say.
Don't forget that contrary to your claims it is possible to hunt perfectly legally and the lack of prosecutions would tend to show that this is what happens in the vast majority of cases.
Having said my piece I now intend to shut up and allow people to rant about "Toffs in Red Coats" until they get bored, because there is no chance that most antis will admit that you don't have to be a "Toff" to hunt.
I also wish to make it clear that I do not hunt and have no connection with any Hunt. But I do believe, having spoken to a large number of people from various walks of life that hunting should not be banned and banning hunting will not save the life of a single fox. In fact the reverse is probably true, more foxes are now being trapped or shot than ever before.
tub_thumper
says...
11:35am Sun 16 Jan 11
.
The law breaking does happen. I’ve seen it with my own eyes.
.
I never mentioned anything about “toffs in redcoats” nor did anyone else. You are now using your own propaganda to attack me (and others) before they even write. I mentioned snobbery and rudeness. I didn’t aim this at any specific class of people. Maybe, as you have never had anything to do with hunting, this is your own uneducated view of the people that do hunt?
.
Hunting is cruel by design. Foxhounds are not as quick as foxes. The fox will outrun the hounds but will get weak and tired. The hounds will soon overpower it and rip it to shreds. If the hounds catch the fox straight away it is not considered as a sport.
.
In my eyes, a sport is a fun activity in which there are two equal sides. Can’t really see that in fox hunting.
.
Why are you so ‘for’ hunting when you have no interest in it?
tub_thumper
says...
10:46pm Mon 17 Jan 11
New Kid on the Block
says...
4:45pm Mon 24 Jan 11
You may not have made comments about "Toffs in Red Coats" but large numbers of letters certainly do contain an element of class hatred (or envy). It has even been admitted by certain members of the labour party that the hunting bill was not about animal welfare but purely anti "toff"
As to whether hunting is or isn't cruel I refer you to Lord Burns who chaired the enquiry set up by the labour party "Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel... The short answer to that question is no."
My support for Hunting which I don't consider to be ranting, comes after talking to large numbers of people on both sides of the fence.
Those who appeared to make most sense and speak with the most knowledge were in favour of hunting. As a result I support the pro hunting side.
Comment now! Register or sign in below.
Log in with us
Fields marked with * are mandatory.
Or
Log in with