Saturday
Reuters reports that the hunting with hounds is more popular than ever despite the move by parliament last year to outlaw the hunting of foxes with hounds. (Incidentally, foxes are increasingly a problem in the cities as they scavenge for food. I used to live in Clapham and the place was full of them).
It makes me wonder about whether the vote by MPs this week to ban smoking in public places, including private members' clubs, will be easily enforced. Let's hope it meets the same fate as the anti-foxhunting measure. I say this as someone who does not smoke or hunt on horseback (despite being a Suffolk farmer's son, hunting with hounds never appealed, although I have shot the odd bunny rabbit from time to time).
Johnathan there really shouldn't be any need to qualify your remarks with the statement that you are not a smoker or hunter. Especially here. Please.
Posted by Bernie at February 18, 2006 03:02 PM
Absolutely Verity. And by smoking hunters too. And hounds for that matter.
Posted by Bernie at February 18, 2006 03:28 PM
It could be through the corridors of Westminster. I don't know anything about horses, but have a feeling they might slip on the carpets, so bag the horses. Just set some packs of hounds loose when Blair makes one of his rare visitations to the House and let nature take its course. I don't know how you'd get 40 or so hounds into the Palace of Westminster, so this idea will take some further work.
Posted by Verity at February 18, 2006 03:39 PM
It would be interesting to see the statistics on the average deaths in a previous year of foxes hunted in the countryside by horse and hounds, compared to the amount of foxes killed (poisened & shot) in our towns and cities. I wouldn't be surprised if urban "pest control" killed more foxes per year than those countryside Hunt Clubs. It's just a thought.
Posted by Samsung at February 18, 2006 04:55 PM
I'll slip this in here. There's a new bumper sticker wending it's way through the internet.
I'd rather hunt with Dick Cheyney
Than ride with Ted Kennedy.
Posted by Verity at February 18, 2006 05:05 PM
Bernie, 'scuse me, but I don't always take my readers' opinions for granted! Just in case some nanny statist comes across this blog, it is always good to make some things clear.
Posted by Johnathan Pearce at February 18, 2006 05:40 PM
Johnathan there really shouldn't be any need to qualify your remarks with the statement that you are not a smoker or hunter. Especially here. Please.
One of those ironies of life with inconsistent(read: hypocritical) opponents. Of course no one should have to cite being a non-smoker as credentials for opposing smoking bans since smoking bans themselves are a vote for personal preference over the rights of others. But of course, those on the other side actually half believe their "public health" claptrap (despite the fact that they consistently fail to ban a whole host of other obvious health rists).
The town I live in here has a blanket smoking ban. If this is any guide to how things will play out in the UK, don't expect the law to prove ineffective. Police here originally said they wouldn't enforce the ban, but once complaints from the busybodies started rolling in they did. They now occasionally patrol bars just to catch people smoking (as though they have nothing better to do in a college town...). Outside any bar in the back alley is a whole group of people smoking. Bar tab profits are clearly down (though recently recovering, I hear - the ban went into effect a year ago), but this hasn't swayed city council one bit. In addition, I am what the muslims would call regularly "provoked" by the sight of sheep walking around with "property rights suck I love smoke-free Bloomington" buttons on their backpacks. The whole thing has been a giant bitch-slap in the face for those of us who love liberty.
Posted by Joshua at February 18, 2006 06:00 PM
But, how on earth can the health nuts who voted for this draconian legislation possibly justify exclusion of the Palace of Westminster from the smoking ban?
Posted by Freeman at February 18, 2006 07:01 PM
But, how on earth can the health nuts who voted for this draconian legislation possibly justify exclusion of the Palace of Westminster from the smoking ban?
They know what they have done and want to die?
Posted by chris at February 18, 2006 09:17 PM
I would like to see hunting of Blair with hounds.
I'd settle for Tony Blair to receive an invite to go quail shooting with the Cheneys ...
Posted by Julian Taylor at February 18, 2006 11:38 PM
Julian Taylor - I would love to say I could go with that. I would LOVE to say it. But Cheyne's fellow shooter stepped out of the line and got peppered through no fault of the shooter.
Posted by Verity at February 19, 2006 03:09 AM
... OTOH, Blair's just vapid enough to step out of line for a photo op. ... Yeah. I could go with that.
Posted by Verity at February 19, 2006 03:26 AM
There was no need to qualify your statement by identifying the bunny rabbits you shot as being odd.
Posted by triticale at February 19, 2006 05:50 AM
One does hope that Blair's support for something is guaranteed to reduce its popularity.
It seems, btw, that Kate Hoey MP is in the wrong party: anti-hunt-ban, anti-war, anti-smoking-ban, anti-ID-card, anti-anti-terrorism laws, outspoken against the Mugabe regime and SA support for it...
Will Mr Blair convince her to cross the floor?
Posted by guy herbert at February 19, 2006 07:08 AM
As much as I respect Kate Hoey I can't see her crossing the floor to the Conservative Party with Nice But Dim Cameron in charge it, would be too much of a case of out of the frying pan and into the fire. On the other hand if she defected to UKIP or the LibDems ... now that would be interesting.
By the way it might not be the best idea to invite Cherie to shoot with the Cheneys - she's a descendant of John Wilkes Booth (he's her great-great-great grand-uncle).
Posted by Julian Taylor at February 19, 2006 10:48 AM
Interesting about Cherie. I always knew she was a wrong 'un. Oddly enough, I have always said, often on these pages, that she looks like a murderer.
The joke, though, is that Cheyney was speaking to Bill Clinton, whose wife is running for president against a Republican.
Posted by Verity at February 19, 2006 01:07 PM
