Laws And Consequences

October 19, 2009 at 9:48 am

So, Nick Herbert (Shadow DEFRA Secretary) has been interviewed on this morning’s Today programme on Radio 4 confirming the Conservatives’ intention to hold a free vote in Government time to repeal the ludicrous ban on hunting. Ludicrous for so many reasons – it’s anti-libertarian, was only good old-fashioned lefty revenge for the miners’ strike and it plain doesn’t work. Even supporters of a ban would accept that having legislation on the statute book which was written with all of the legal draftsmanship of a crystal meth user given a crayon and a beermat isn’t helpful to anyone. Ditto the Dangerous Dogs Act, the Government of India Act 1935 and anything put before Parliament after May 1997. If you want to do something, do it properly, chaps.

So, as hunting has carried on regardless of the ban, what extra benefits would we get by repealing it? How about hunting eco-loons? From the Telegraph:

Chief inspector Linda McCarthy of Nottinghamshire police said on Sunday: ”There have been reports of some protesters receiving dog bites and other injuries as a result of a concerted effort to pull down fences and enter the site.

One protester, Laura McFarlane-Shopes, 23, wore a bandage on her arm to cover a bite she had received from one of the dogs.

She said: “We were near the fence and some people were trying to get over. I was just in front of them. Horses and dogs started charging down. Police shouted that they were coming. They let the dogs on to me and one leaped up and bit my arm.”

Seems like fun. Tally ho!