Whether or not Prince Harry or a close friend shot some rare birds, you have to be a tool to enjoy shooting -any- birds as a pastime. It's something the Italians seem to enjoy.

and the Maltese.

I don't agree, pigeons and rooks need to be controlled.

Pheasant and duck are fine eating, not factory farmed like the salmonela infested chicken from the supermarket.

If Harry or his chums did shoot those birds they should face the full force of the law but somehow I doubt they would.

"pigeons and rooks need to be controlled"

Maybe magpies as well. But that shouldn't be a decision taken by a public-schoolboy with a gun and a lot of land.

public-schoolboy with a gun

I sense a bit of a jealous bias there. He, as are all that family, is well practiced in sportshooting as well as having his military training.

The fact is those were very rare birds and shooting them was an intolerable act. The culprit if found should be birched not fined.

Not allowed to shoot magpies now,there are far more than years ago [a secret never to be told is not uncommon] together with grey squirrels they must eat thousands of baby birds and eggs. This is probably why there are less small birds, nothing to do with farming methods. Even if Harry didn't shoot the birds the guards must know, I find it hard to believe strangers wander around Sandringham with shot guns,

You should never shoot any animal unless you or someone else is prepared to eat it. I don't see the fun in killing animals for "sport", myself.

Strictly for the pot... except vermin of course, and except necessary culling and putting sick or injured animals out of their misery.

I have shot the odd thing in my time and it never gave me any sense of satisfaction or exhilleration.. Rather I felt awful especially when I was forced by some wise farmer to gut skin clean and prepare my own meal from my kill..

Anyway I know others who really do get delight from such an activity and are prepared to pay the huge figures for a license.

It is a matter of taste... I may well have been one of the people throwing red paint at the wearers of mink coats and at the riders to the hounds. I lament the death of these birds and only hope the act was a mistake rather than a cynical or malicious disregard for their rarity.

BUT

No way do I see that my disdain should have the force of law to stop them.. This business of wanting to push others around really needs to be checked.

They are birds! Drop it. Why is this such big news?!

Hi Mrs C, I LOVE your new 'Nancy' bag! It's gorg. :) LoL

jonjii got it it one,well said du.The same attitude should be adopted by others for everything.Nothing can give anyone the right to control/ban because they personally dont see the point,the need,or indeed any reason for it.

And if you're a farmer whose stock is suffering from predators?

What sort of person enjoys shooting animals or birds, etc? Where is the pleasure in hunting animals and birds and destroying them?

Killing to eat and survive is the law of nature and there is, therefore, a logical reason for it to continue albeit in a humane way. But a ban on people getting a sadistic kick out of mutilating and killing... well what's wrong with that? There is too much of this 'rights' thinking. To live in harmony we simply don't have the 'right' to do just as we want all the time.

I personally dont shoot any animals,and dont agree with it unless its a neccessary thing.You cant ban a sadist,because his nature is to be that way,you'll never stop it,you can ban it a million times and accomplish exactly the same result as the iniquitous handgun ban,that is,ZIP,ZERO,NOTHING!!a SADIST WILL ALWAYS BE THERE,CRIMINALS WILL ALWAYS BE THERE,AND PERVERTS THE SAME,all with the same thing in common.A TOTAL disregard for laws,bans,the only people that banning anything effects,are those of us that are law abiding,and have a concience.Also,when something gets a "ban"laid on it,the only thing you gain,(if you can cal; it that)is a total loss of any control you may have had,however tenuous.

anyway it has been confirmed that no charges will be pressed following the disappearance of these hen harriers.

It seems the most likely explanation is that the birds were in a mutual suicide pact which happened just after a car back-fired in the nearby vicinity. They were immediately swallowed whole by a passing predator: a very large weasel maybe.

Well you have programs like "Im a Celeb GMOOH" which encourages people to kill and eat animals.

It may be interesting to note that the first winner, Tony Blackburn was a vegetarian and refused point blank to do anything which would mean him hurting or eating any animals.

Sometimes, the team lost out as a result of this, however many respected his position and it did not prevent him being voted the winner.

Cliff

RedAnarchist


What if a lion was on the loose from a zoo and was about to
kill some children.

Would it be right to shoot it? Afterall if you are not going to eat it....

Cliff

Well said, Jess.
While we are on the subject. I was just reading about one of the most violent lot of hunt supporters in the country. Members of the Heythrop Hunt have attacked hunt monitors, damaged their cars, driven at people, been fined for trying to run over a woman, and laughed and jeered at a 60-year-old woman who was knocked flying down a steep slope because she was filming the hunt to get evidence of their breaking the hunting ban.

Could David Cameron confirm or deny that he is closely associated with the Heythrop Hunt, having ridden with it, being a friend of the hunt secretary, having other friends who work for this hunt, and having been helped by them in his election campaign (because DC supports the hunt and will re-legalise the barbaric activity if elected to government)? Is it true also, that DC has shot deer in Scotland and ridden with the Old Berks Hunt, run by his wife's stepfather Lord Astor?

I would dearly like to get Gordon Brown out of office, because of his Stalinist traits (especially his obsession with ID Control) and his continuance of the spin and deceit of the Blair government, but I don't want to replace him with someone who wants to restore barbarism, even though he is allegedly bringing caring and compassion to the Tory party.

I guess I will be voting Lib-Dem, but I wish Vince Cable could stay as their leader.

Ask the game shooters all over the country, and the wildfowlers, and the deer-stalkers. They come from different walks of life. Whether they can separate the joy of shooting and the joy of the social occcasion from the joy of hitting the target is a grey area for many, I suspect.

Some of the biggest slaughterers become great conservationists, like Peter Scott.

Well I disagree with haxley. Because the wild Mallard shot and given to me by the farmer whose farm B&B I was staying in while wiorking in Milton keynes in the 90's were absolutely unbelieveably delicious.

Mind you, I took my kids to see a "community farm" when they were about three and seven. Their reaction to the new born lambs was "Dad, how long wil it be before you can kill them and serve them with mint sauce". They got some pretty horrified looks from other parents, all of whom were in designer wax jackets and green wellies and clearly taught their kids that meat comes from the planet sainsbury's.

Another question could be: what sort of person enjoys shooting or beating-up people? The answer is a person who has no conscience or empathy, who has not developed a taboo against violence or killing, who believes others have no rights at all and so puts their own gratification before the wellbeing of others. Psychopaths have these characteristics. People of this type generally regard laws against violent behaviour as not applicable to them. I think the same traits are present in those who kill animals for pleasure.

In other situations where killing is inevitable, of humans in war, or of animals to end their suffering, we would not expect the perpetrators to get pleasure out of the killing. They are trained professionals, and this is sometimes part of their job which they are expected to do in spite of their instincts against it. We would be horrified if a soldier said he loved killing people, or a vet said he got a kick out of putting down an animal.

I do not intentionally kill animals. (May have trod on an ant by mistake at some point?)

However the answer to your question is pest control.

For example. to us personally cats are a pest.

One keeps coming into our garden trying to eat our goldfish.

What do you do? Kill one animal or let one animal slaughter lots of your animals?

Suppose you look after 100 animals and ironically are using these just for product rather than meat.

E.g. free range hens.

You have a choice. Kill a fox that has just come onto your land.

Or leave it alone and allow it to kill 100 hens.

If you answer "kill the fox, save the chickens" you now understand farming.

Furthermore, they will have the view "kill some animals save the crops".

It is a sad reality but it is country life.

btw we have NEVER killed a cat. We have ran up to it, threw a pebble about 2 metres away from it.

But never actually harmed one.

As we know it is someone's pet somewhere, we just wish they would keep it indoors away from our goldfish.

(we dont know whose cat it has been)

Cliff

Nicely put.(the post before last)

As for the cat, I hear Lion excrement works well.