tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-627081175329856970.post9138694850349257453..comments2024-03-28T18:32:00.146+00:00Comments on Ambush Predator: Because It’s Different When We Do It!JuliaMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07844126589712842477noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-627081175329856970.post-74290321595069830852009-10-27T18:44:42.062+00:002009-10-27T18:44:42.062+00:00"But JuliaM there's a "consensus&quo...<i>"But JuliaM there's a "consensus" here. "</i> <br /><br />Another 'scientific' consensus. Like global warming...<br /><br /><i>"The case of Charlene Downes comes to mind. "</i> <br /><br />Indeed! Surprised that hasn't been in the news more. <br /><br /><i>"Have sick-bag handy. "</i> <br /><br />*sigh* What happened to British justice?<br /><br /><i>"Ahem... for once in their miserable existence, the RSPCA actually gets *something* right, so I don't see what the problem is..."</i> <br /><br />The problem is that it allows another animal campaign group to wave the 'holier than thou!' flag. And they are. Big time!<br /><br /><i>"Temple Grandin is a world expert on human slaughter..."</i> <br /><br />I've read her book, and seen one of the documentaries about her. Fanscinating!JuliaMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07844126589712842477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-627081175329856970.post-21317944761636315752009-10-27T18:40:35.614+00:002009-10-27T18:40:35.614+00:00"Why does the RSPCA think it has a 'juris...<i>"Why does the RSPCA think it has a 'jurisdiction'? They ain't the law."</i> <br /><br />They'd like to be. Very much so.<br /><br /><i>"Should someone tell them that Baboons aren't apes?"</i> <br /><br />I nearly did, but a CiF'ers comment that the AA must stand for 'Ape Assassin' was too good to puncture with the zoological truth.. ;)<br /><br /><i>"Yes, hunting can be fun, but it is in no way "naughty" to protect ones livelihood and in most cases it is no veil either."</i> <br /><br />True. But it's amusing to watch the liberal elite blow their stack over this. <br /><br />Less amusing though, when you view the complete absence of outrage over the successful appeal of the Baby Peter killer this afternoon.JuliaMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07844126589712842477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-627081175329856970.post-35445648257941991482009-10-27T17:33:49.169+00:002009-10-27T17:33:49.169+00:00Fat Hen said...
The loop and bolt method is the be...<i> Fat Hen said...<br />The loop and bolt method is the best way here, </i><br /><br />BOLLOX!<br /><br />What do you think they use on rampaging bvloody elephants? A kiddys fishing net and a hammer?<br /><br />Never heard of dart guns?<br /><br />OR you can do as we do here, shoot the bastard, whether it be dog, or wild boar, with your service pistol.Von Spreuth.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-627081175329856970.post-7952232492246950572009-10-27T16:42:21.781+00:002009-10-27T16:42:21.781+00:00Ahem... for once in their miserable existence, the...Ahem... for once in their miserable existence, the RSPCA actually gets *something* right, so I don't see what the problem is... <br /><br />The loop and bolt method is the best way here, a vet trying to inject a paranoid dog that hates people would only get bitten and the dogs would get stressed much more that way since it also takes considerably longer.<br /><br />Also see here: http://www.grandin.com/humane/cap.bolt.tips.html<br /><br />"A captive bolt stunning gun kills the animal and reduces it instantly unconscious without causing pain. A captive bolt gun has a steel bolt that is powered by either compressed air or a blank cartridge. The bolt is driven into the animal's brain. It has the same effect on the animal as a firearm with a live bullet. After the animal is shot the bolt retracts and is reset for the next animal. A captive bolt gun is safer than a firearm. "<br /><br />Note that there is almost always body movement after brain death, and this is taken to be 'suffering' by the uninitiated. It's not, the animal itself is dead and the thrashing you see is a nerve reaction. <br /><br />Also see this link: http://www.grandin.com/humane/insensibility.html for further info on this. <br /><br />Temple Grandin is a world expert on human slaughter (she designed the blueprint for McDonalds' facilities) and her books on animal psychology are wonderful. <br /><br />The problem in general is that people no longer keep livestock at home for their pot... a few chickens, quails and bunnies in the back garden would go a long way towards humane (and eco-friendly) guilt-free meat consumption and inject some much needed rationality and reality regarding life, death and genetics in general.<br /><br />;-)Fat Hennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-627081175329856970.post-13659333670367286022009-10-27T16:21:34.705+00:002009-10-27T16:21:34.705+00:00Fascinating reply and link, WOAR. Thank you. Thoug...Fascinating reply and link, WOAR. Thank you. Though I doubt that the (alleged) killers of Charlene Downes would have been in a position to mount the defence of necessity.<br /><br />WV = <b>mudparph</b>. No particular reason to quote it, except that it strikes me as a word in search of a meaning.Edwin Greenwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03639193560457674072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-627081175329856970.post-2836887907915417982009-10-27T15:27:10.200+00:002009-10-27T15:27:10.200+00:00Would the assuaging of hunger be a successful defe...<i>Would the assuaging of hunger be a successful defence?</i><br /><br />Me miss, me. The defence of necessity. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Dudley_and_Stephens" rel="nofollow">Dudley and Stephens</a>. No, it wouldn't, although the public were very sympathetic to the situation and were quite angry with the verdict, especially as it appeared that their attorney had been got at by the government who didn't want the defence to stand.<br /><br />Seven hundred miles from St Helena i.e. one of the loneliest spots on earth, the Migonette was wrecked. Captain Dudley managed to get the three other crew members in to the lifeboat and kept them going for as long as he could, but they eventually resorted to killing the youngest crew member, Richard Parker, in order to be able to survive on him. They believed themselves to be covered by the Custom of the Sea which, in a seafaring age, was known to everyone. <br /><br />As Neil Hanson* explains, the case coincided with a wave of Irish nationalism which 1884 had led to the first instances of duress offences where people not necessarily connected with the events found themselves threatened if they did not carry out a crime. The British government was anxious to remove the defence.<br /><br />The defence of necessity still exists but in very specialized circumstances. The most recent one was the case of the Conjoined Twins "Jodie and Mary", where the court ruled that doctors carrying out a procedure which would inevitably lead to the death of one of the twins would not thereby be held liable for a criminal act.<br /><br />Regarding Charlene Downes - the IPCC have <a href="http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/news/pr151009_lancashire.htm" rel="nofollow">recently reported on this case</a> (15 October) and why the prosecution collapsed. Have sick-bag handy. <br /><br /><br />*Hanson, Neil [(1999). The Custom of the Sea: The Story that Changed British Law. Doubleday. ISBN 9780385601153.]woman on a raftnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-627081175329856970.post-45837080125661830762009-10-27T12:09:07.838+00:002009-10-27T12:09:07.838+00:00"You mean, if he’d eaten it, it would have be..."<i>You mean, if he’d eaten it, it would have been perfectly ok with you? </i>" <br /> <br />Now that opens up all sorts of interesting moral and legal considerations. The case of Charlene Downes comes to mind. Suppose I were to murder someone, then eat them. Or indeed chop them up and put them into pies.<br /><br />Would the assuaging of hunger be a successful defence?Edwin Greenwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03639193560457674072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-627081175329856970.post-74448186035501086322009-10-27T11:42:01.444+00:002009-10-27T11:42:01.444+00:00"apparently eight inspectors, including some ..."apparently eight inspectors, including some very senior and experienced, decided it was the best course of action."<br /><br />But JuliaM there's a "consensus" here. The correctness of the RSPCA decision is therefore "settled". You should know better than to question the "experts" on animal cruelty.Umbongonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-627081175329856970.post-23014545364440914022009-10-27T10:40:37.946+00:002009-10-27T10:40:37.946+00:00Speaking as someone who is generally pro hunting a...Speaking as someone who is generally pro hunting and pro guns I have to say that I find Gill's comments appalling in suggesting that hunting an animal which can be a pest is nothing but a "veil for naughty fun".<br /><br />Yes, hunting can be fun, but it is in no way "naughty" to protect ones livelihood and in most cases it is no veil either. It is necessary and, in many circumstances, preferable as a method of control than other means such as trapping.<br /><br />It's people like Gill - a city boy by birth and upbringing - who give hunting a bad name. People like him are no friends of the countryside or rural communities and they'd be better off sticking to what they know - which in his case happens to be eating other peoples food (wow, what a skill!).<br /><br />As someone who was brought up in a semi-rural community (now swallowed by the over development of Slough) I despise these townies who see the countryside as nothing more than their playground. They are as bad as the insufferable "environmentalists" who want to carpet our beautiful landscape in hordes of ugly monstrous wind farms.Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15007863347348182876noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-627081175329856970.post-45925128375176526842009-10-27T10:21:25.998+00:002009-10-27T10:21:25.998+00:00"he shot the ape during a safari. "
Sho...<i>"he shot the ape during a safari. "</i><br /><br />Should someone tell them that Baboons aren't apes?<br /><br />Just like multiculturalism requires no knowledge of other cultures, animal rights activism requires no knowledge of animals.Rosshttp://fountain.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-627081175329856970.post-12162626718463540062009-10-27T10:12:31.979+00:002009-10-27T10:12:31.979+00:00beyond its UK jurisdiction.
Why does the RSPCA t...<i>beyond its UK jurisdiction</i>. <br /><br />Why does the RSPCA think it has a 'jurisdiction'? They ain't the law. The legal right to hear a case and determine the law belongs to the court, not them. <br /><br />All it has is a devolved capability to launch criminal prosecutions in England and Wales, equivalent to the DWP being able to bring cases of benefit fraud, or the RIPA powers of local authorities to bring cases, such as was tried against Mrinal Patel in Harrow. <br /><br />Because of the growth of agencies who can bring criminal prosecutions it is important these days to check whether a rubbish prosecution is being put forward by the CPS or somebody else. After all, even a private individual can bring a criminal prosecution if they can back it up - but it will usually be taken over and discontinued by the CPS. If I do bring a criminal prosecution, it still doesn't mean I have or am "a jurisdiction" - I'm just a complainant or acting as the prosecutor. <br /><br />I'm just waiting (hoping) for the CPS bringing a case against the RSPCA.woman on a raftnoreply@blogger.com