Went online yesterday and found a fantastic video from ukanimalrights embedded in the article published about the sabs taking control of the Rockwood Harrier hunt this week just gone!
The sabs turned up, the hunt didn't know what to do and then decided to run into a valley and try to get down to some hunting. The sabs followed in order to see why they were so quick to run away and upon arriving at the hunt, could see that the hunt were hunting for fox cubs in the said valley - now that is a surprise!
The sabs entered a field and then took control of the pack in order to stop the scum from hunting wild mammals and continuing to break the law.
The hunt losing half a pack then decided to dispatch the two whipper-ins in order to get the hounds back from the sabs.
Which they failed to do!!!!
On the video you can hear the usual crap from the hunt staff banging on about "we can't help if the hounds fall off the trail onto fox scents" and "accidents". This really fucks me off in all fairness.
Hunt filth have lied for decades about their 'sport', the whole existence of hunting is founded on nothing but lies and now they are getting desperate; they will even use their own CHILDREN in order to make slanderous accusations just to deflect prying eyes from their saddistic ways. One video on YouTube actually shows a rider possibly master of a hunt scapegoating his little child in order to abuse and assault hunt monitors who were videoing him and the hunt which was some distance away; sick bastard.
The hunting with hounds act deals with scum who try to use accidental kills as a get out of jail free card, the following cut and paste shows this:
Part 3
Interpretation
(1)In this Act “wild mammal” includes, in particular—
(a)a wild mammal which has been bred or tamed for any purpose,
(b)a wild mammal which is in captivity or confinement,
(c)a wild mammal which has escaped or been released from captivity or confinement, and
(d)any mammal which is living wild.
(a)a wild mammal which has been bred or tamed for any purpose,
(b)a wild mammal which is in captivity or confinement,
(c)a wild mammal which has escaped or been released from captivity or confinement, and
(d)any mammal which is living wild.
(2)For the purposes of this Act a reference to a person hunting a wild mammal with a dog includes, in particular, any case where—
(a)a person engages or participates in the pursuit of a wild mammal, and
(b)one or more dogs are employed in that pursuit (whether or not by him and whether or not under his control or direction).
Section 3 of the act deals with interpretation (meaning "the action of explaining the meaning of something" [Oxford English Dictionary]) of the law and it is clearly shown that sub-section 2(b) gives rise to the undenible fact that if you bring hounds to an area and they riot after a mammal, then you still are guilty of breaking the law - mainly because no chase would have happened if you hadn't brought the hounds in the first place.
THERE CAN BE NO ACCIDENTAL KILLS
So as stated the whipper-ins couldn't retrieve the hounds so the hunt then decided to send in the big boys who started to give the sabs a bit of a hiding. When the hunt realised that some fun could be had, one member of the hunt; Anthoney Oakes decided then to steal one of the video cameras and the hunt piled in to give the sabs more of a kicking.
Two sabs needed medical attention for serious injuries, police present helped to patch up the sabs (one had broken teeth and a broken nose) but did not act when the perpetrators were pointed out to them - once again the police failing to act.
This is the other thing that sickens me; the police. They seem to have completely forgotten that in 2004, it was made illegal to hunt mammals with hounds. Indeed some constabularies are still thinking it is pre-ban times (Surrey Police) with idiotic arrests for aggrevated trespass - I mean good grief!
The one thing that the morons normally numbered in double figures (pre-ban) and numbering single figures if lucky (post-ban) need to realise - YOU DO NOT NEED TO SEE THE FOX RUNNING WITH HOUNDS ON IT'S TAIL to know that illegal hunting is taking place! We are talking about the 'profession' which is supposed to uphold the law! So in that case, do they need to see a thief walking down the road in a blue striped jumper and a mask with a bag labelled swag on their back before they suspect something is fishy?!?!?!?!
No.
So why not learn more about hunting and know what to look for such as:
The Trail Line - Does it go where a human cannot? Does the trail always have to go through and on top of fox coverts? Why are the hounds not trained for a completely opposite scent being there are no more pre-ban hounds?
Hound Speak - Are they constantly babbling and going into full cry when very close to the trail runner? Or are they quiet when cast, then slight noise only to go into full cry periodically with no runner in sight?
Hound Line - Are the hounds running constantly with noses down and a relatively good (straight) line? Or are they constantly being cast out into woods by the hunt scum then forming the running line once in cry? Are they running across roads and the like?
The Field Position - Are the field in constant motion as would be expected with a PROPER drag hunt? Or are they being positioned out of the way of the hunt staff whilst they draw a covert just like pre-ban times? Are there mounted field riders on point?
Season - Why on Earth are they getting up so early with a selected field dressed in tweeds during cubbing season just to excercise hounds or trail hunt?
Terrier scum - Why are these filthy bastards even present at the hunt? If they are staff (which is 100% the case) why are they needed because the gamekeeper excemption does not allow for them to be there? Why are the hunt riding close to fox coverts so that they can tell the terrier scum about the coverts if they are a legitimate trail hunt (they don't want to 'accidentally' pick up a fox scent do they?!)? Why are coverts and setts being blocked up? Why do they need the hunt to tell them about possible coverts when the hunt has hunted that country for decades or possibly one or two centuries? If they are just following the hunt, then why are they travelling on agricultural vehicles (quad bikes) outside the allowed radius of where the vehicles are registered? If they are just following the hunt why are they going equipped? And armed?
These are just a few points that the pathetic police should be addressing if they are TRULY policing the hunts.
Anyways brilliant one for the sabs in dealing so well with the scum.
For the law (ban), the hunted animal, the brave who stand against the evil scum and the poor badger
Cheers
You can follow the link below which will take you to the page.
http://animalrightsuk.org/hunt-sucessfully-sabotaged-huntsmen-turn-nasty/
No comments:
Post a Comment