News5 mins ago
A Nation Of Animal Lovers?
I think not!
I'm absolutely astounded this person was found not guilty! Do you agree with the verdict?
https:/
:(
I'm absolutely astounded this person was found not guilty! Do you agree with the verdict?
https:/
:(
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by divegirl. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Lankeela - If course that's what they do.
And if they happen to scare up a fox, and their hounds chase it, then they have to follow the hounds so they don't lose them, and if the hounds happen to kill the fix, we'll, there's nothing they can do is there, that's just unfortunate, hounds will do what hounds will do ...
Tune in next week, when we discuss the reality of the Tooth Fairy.
And if they happen to scare up a fox, and their hounds chase it, then they have to follow the hounds so they don't lose them, and if the hounds happen to kill the fix, we'll, there's nothing they can do is there, that's just unfortunate, hounds will do what hounds will do ...
Tune in next week, when we discuss the reality of the Tooth Fairy.
Some random facts:
The RSPCA never inspected the horse.
The horse was not injured in any way according to vets who did inspect the horse.
The horse is still owned by the same woman.
There was a court case and the woman was found not guilty.
The woman has lost her job and had death threats sent through her letterbox.
I don't know anything about horses. Of those who do, I would guess that a lot of them think what she did was perfectly normal and reasonable, and a different lot think what she did was terrible - so not very helpful. It seems to me a storm in a teacup, given that the horse wasn't injured, and that the bigger crime was the death threats and the "court of social media" that produces them.
The RSPCA never inspected the horse.
The horse was not injured in any way according to vets who did inspect the horse.
The horse is still owned by the same woman.
There was a court case and the woman was found not guilty.
The woman has lost her job and had death threats sent through her letterbox.
I don't know anything about horses. Of those who do, I would guess that a lot of them think what she did was perfectly normal and reasonable, and a different lot think what she did was terrible - so not very helpful. It seems to me a storm in a teacup, given that the horse wasn't injured, and that the bigger crime was the death threats and the "court of social media" that produces them.
AH so you are making this about fox hunting rather than the actual case in question. Typical and from your remarks this woman would not have got a fair trial if you were involved as you profess to know what her thoughts are because of your opposition to hunting. Personally had I seen her do what she did to the horse I would have done the same to her, in any equestrian setting, but I would not use my personal feelings on hunting to cloud the issue which so many are obviously doing without any knowledge of the real situation. Try educating yourself before spouting off.
Seeing that horse wince away from her should be enough to tell anyone it wasn't happy. She had hold of it and it was calm when she started bashing and kicking it - it wasn't playing up - and no, horse lovers would not think that what she did was perfectly normal and reasonable. It wasn't. She was venting her anger on the poor creature.
Ellipsis - It's not necessary to physically injure any animal in order to upset and frighten it, which is cruelty.
If you only measure cruelty to any animal on the basis of physical damage, you are going to miss a massive amount of cruelty.
If I shut a puppy on a box for three days and nights without food or water, it will emege without a mark on it, but no-one could reasonably argue that it had not been cruelly treated.
If you only measure cruelty to any animal on the basis of physical damage, you are going to miss a massive amount of cruelty.
If I shut a puppy on a box for three days and nights without food or water, it will emege without a mark on it, but no-one could reasonably argue that it had not been cruelly treated.
Lankeela - I am not making the issue about fox hunting.
I pointed out the irony of someone who's defence of cruelty is that she 'loves animals', when she has, and quite probably still does, hunted foxes to death in a barbaric 'sport'.
I have no idea what this dreadful woman thinks, nor do my posts imply any such notion.
It is ironic, that you accuse me, without foundation, of 'knowing what this woman thinks', and then you do exactly the same thing by suggesting that you know how I would vote in a trial in which she was the defendent.
There's only one poster 'spouting off' on this thread....
I pointed out the irony of someone who's defence of cruelty is that she 'loves animals', when she has, and quite probably still does, hunted foxes to death in a barbaric 'sport'.
I have no idea what this dreadful woman thinks, nor do my posts imply any such notion.
It is ironic, that you accuse me, without foundation, of 'knowing what this woman thinks', and then you do exactly the same thing by suggesting that you know how I would vote in a trial in which she was the defendent.
There's only one poster 'spouting off' on this thread....
lankeela - // And maybe if she had been riding out across fields on her own without the hunt saboteurs interfering and filming everything there would never have been a court case anyway. Still doesn't make what she did right, but ask yourself who pressures them to take these cases to court? //
Does that mean that the fault is not with the abuser, but with the people who exposed her abuse?
If she was not filmed, she would not have been taken to court.
But she was, and she was.
Does that mean that the fault is not with the abuser, but with the people who exposed her abuse?
If she was not filmed, she would not have been taken to court.
But she was, and she was.
lankeela - // "when she has, and quite probably still does, hunted foxes to death in a barbaric 'sport'." - where is your evidence for this? //
I don;t actually need 'evidence' to offer an opinion, but the fact that this woman has hunted in the past is a matter of fact, she belongs to a hunt.
As for my suggestion that she probably still does - it's just that, a suggestion, it does not require 'evidence'.
I don;t actually need 'evidence' to offer an opinion, but the fact that this woman has hunted in the past is a matter of fact, she belongs to a hunt.
As for my suggestion that she probably still does - it's just that, a suggestion, it does not require 'evidence'.
PP - // can I ask mods to be less poncey when they post please ? - along with their rights - being able to delete without review, they also have duties - not to behave capriciously the rest of the time //
You can ask, but i suspect your request will be ignored, on the basis that Mods post as AB'ers, and are as entitled to offer their opinions in the way they choose, as any other AB'ers.
As for your nonsense about Mods being able to 'delete without review', you know, because i have told you endless times, that all Moderator actions are reviewed by the Editorial team, and reversed if deemed to be inappropriate.
That said, Moderators do not have 'duties not to behave capriciously' as you so sniffily put it.
We are Moderators, not school prefects.
Hopefully I won't have to tell you this again - it is becoming seriously tedious.
You can ask, but i suspect your request will be ignored, on the basis that Mods post as AB'ers, and are as entitled to offer their opinions in the way they choose, as any other AB'ers.
As for your nonsense about Mods being able to 'delete without review', you know, because i have told you endless times, that all Moderator actions are reviewed by the Editorial team, and reversed if deemed to be inappropriate.
That said, Moderators do not have 'duties not to behave capriciously' as you so sniffily put it.
We are Moderators, not school prefects.
Hopefully I won't have to tell you this again - it is becoming seriously tedious.
Latest Posts
Technology11 mins ago
Economy Shrank In January........
News23 mins ago
ChatterBank27 mins ago
