Who rules Britain? The Countryside alliance? The huntsmen, or the democratically elected MPs?
Simple, no nonsense choice. Who rules Britain?
Democracy? or Feudalism. The landowners? The huntsmen, or the person you elected?
If you decide that the hunting fraternity rules Britain? Then all that we fought and suffered for in the way of universal suffrage, is lost. Nothing to do with politics, it is a simple choice. Obey the law, or create chaos and anarchy, a chaos, that once started, could spread to others with an axe to grind, possibly, without bounds.
If red coated men and women on horses can ignore the law, then they set a precedence for a thousand other discontents! Think about it! For therein lies a breakdown of society as we know it.
There are many laws I loathe and detest, but I obey them. We fought against a dictatorial way of life, Are we “The British People” to allow others to circumvent the law, or the “Spirit of the law” that was enacted on a “Free” vote in ‘our’ Parliament and by our democratically elected MPs? Irrespective of their colour, or their party?
--
Posted by Dancing Ledge to swanage view
Posts
2 comments:
Have you noticed how the whole fox hunting debate was conducted without reference to facts? The pro hunters claim that if it were not for the actions of dozens, it not hundreds of public spirited citizens all the farm animals would be eaten by foxes. Unfortunately they do not point us to any study showing that farm animals are extinct in areas, like round here, with no hunt. In terms of cost it must be the most inefficient pest control system in history.
Strangely enough pro hunters make the opposite argument as well by saying that farmers only tolerate foxes on their land so they can be hunted. - No hunting = no foxes, pretty damned quickly. Can't decide which to believe.
I suppose not having to resort to facts to support your case is all part of the mind set which goes with imagining that a different set of laws should apply beyond the end of the speed limit, quite as if Robin Hood was alive and well and free to practice as a holdup man under the "laws of the greenwood".
Is there a country any more? Is it really just a thin suburb? When you look at the census figures you see that only a small proportion of country dwellers are engaged in agriculture or forestry. Most are either retired or commute to work in towns. Oddly enough a great many hunt members and followers live in cities and are not the "country folk" they would have us believe they are. Admittedly, a proportion have second homes in the country but that hardly transforms them into rustic swains.
Dancing Ledge is quite right; what we are seeing is a campaign by a group who think their pleasures are above the law and who bitterly resent the rest of us having an opinion on the matter. If they make the law unworkable the answer is to stregnthen the law.
When are those who flouted the law over the hunting of mammals with dogs going to be arrested? I have a suggestion that those who participate and condone acts of cruelty such as this should resort to hunting eachother and do us all a favour.They must be at the bottom of the gene pool.In fact such acts of cruelty are an indication that the creative imagination is severely lacking and borders on insanity. Interbreeding may have...etc...ect.....
Post a Comment