Hunt saboteur hit by crop
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
jamiemartin721  Reading 28 Nov 17 10.46am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
Not really. No trespassing in the first place would've meant no incident at all. Could've been worse, they could try and illegally interrupt a shoot next time. Unless they were actually fox hunting, in which case a criminal act would have occurred. Whilst trespassing is an offence, only the use of reasonable force is allowed for self defence or apprehension of a criminal. Trying to run people down with a horse is not reasonable force, and if that's what happened, then striking them with a whip after doing so, is assault.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
 npn Crowborough 28 Nov 17 11.15am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Unless they were actually fox hunting, in which case a criminal act would have occurred. Whilst trespassing is an offence, only the use of reasonable force is allowed for self defence or apprehension of a criminal. Trying to run people down with a horse is not reasonable force, and if that's what happened, then striking them with a whip after doing so, is assault. Of course the problem is they hadn't actually started hunting (legal drag or illegal fox) so they couldn't claim to be preventing something illegal taking place when nothing at all had yet taken place. It would be like taking someone down who was about to go out just in case he assaulted someone later. I'm really not an apologist for hunting, but people taking the law into their own hands and being a pain in the *rse to law-abiding citizens and then trying to claim moral high ground wind me up. If they can show them to be hunting, notify the police, complain, write to MPs, etc, and see them prosecuted. Direct action is not going to end well (and it's not your place to do so), and I don't actually feel it's necessary now that hunting with dogs is illegal and you have the law on your side
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| jamiemartin721 Reading 28 Nov 17 11.43am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by npn
Of course the problem is they hadn't actually started hunting (legal drag or illegal fox) so they couldn't claim to be preventing something illegal taking place when nothing at all had yet taken place. It would be like taking someone down who was about to go out just in case he assaulted someone later. I'm really not an apologist for hunting, but people taking the law into their own hands and being a pain in the *rse to law-abiding citizens and then trying to claim moral high ground wind me up. If they can show them to be hunting, notify the police, complain, write to MPs, etc, and see them prosecuted. Direct action is not going to end well (and it's not your place to do so), and I don't actually feel it's necessary now that hunting with dogs is illegal and you have the law on your side But how could you do that, without trespassing? And what would be the outcome? I doubt the police will take more interest in fox hunting, than my last stolen car. Sometimes, if you don't take some kind of action, nothing gets done. That said, I think if you got looking for trouble, you shouldn't be surprised if it finds you either. These people probably deserve each other...
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| elgrande bedford 28 Nov 17 12.18pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Trespassing is just that,going on to someones land illegally,if you do that and are aggressive,then you can't really expect to be greeted with a cup of tea. If someone came on my property and was aggressive they would get a clump. You have to seperate the hunting from the trespassing.
always a Norwood boy, where ever I live. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 28 Nov 17 2.58pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Oliver
To be convicted of aggravated Trespass you must be preventing someone carrying out lawful activity Read the following again:
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Oliver Bodega Bay 28 Nov 17 2.59pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by elgrande
Trespassing is just that,going on to someones land illegally,if you do that and are aggressive,then you can't really expect to be greeted with a cup of tea. If someone came on my property and was aggressive they would get a clump. You have to seperate the hunting from the trespassing. What if they entered your land and you were illegally killing an animal or a human. Can't be separated. The saboteurs wouldn't be there otherwise.
I have prepared one of my own time capsules. I have placed some rather large samples of dynamite, gunpowder and nitroglycerin. My time capsule is set to go off in the year 3000. It will show them what we are really like. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 28 Nov 17 3.02pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Unless they were actually fox hunting, in which case a criminal act would have occurred. Whilst trespassing is an offence, only the use of reasonable force is allowed for self defence or apprehension of a criminal. Trying to run people down with a horse is not reasonable force, and if that's what happened, then striking them with a whip after doing so, is assault. Which, from all the available evidence, they weren't. So no criminal act was incurred by them and the saboteurs were the ones acting illegally. No one was run down with a horse and, IMO, hitting someone who has grabbed your horse's reigns, while you are on it, is reasonable force. Kicking him wouldn't have been out of the question either, and if the horse had injured him he'd only have himself to blame.
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 28 Nov 17 3.03pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by npn
Of course the problem is they hadn't actually started hunting (legal drag or illegal fox) so they couldn't claim to be preventing something illegal taking place when nothing at all had yet taken place. It would be like taking someone down who was about to go out just in case he assaulted someone later. I'm really not an apologist for hunting, but people taking the law into their own hands and being a pain in the *rse to law-abiding citizens and then trying to claim moral high ground wind me up. If they can show them to be hunting, notify the police, complain, write to MPs, etc, and see them prosecuted. Direct action is not going to end well (and it's not your place to do so), and I don't actually feel it's necessary now that hunting with dogs is illegal and you have the law on your side 100% agree.
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 28 Nov 17 3.04pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
But how could you do that, without trespassing? And what would be the outcome? I doubt the police will take more interest in fox hunting, than my last stolen car. Sometimes, if you don't take some kind of action, nothing gets done. That said, I think if you got looking for trouble, you shouldn't be surprised if it finds you either. These people probably deserve each other... Send a bloody drone up to film them. Use long lenses. Use an insider etc.
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Midlands Eagle 28 Nov 17 3.08pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
Send a bloody drone up to film them. Use long lenses. Use an insider etc. And if the police aren't interested send the film to the media as they would love a story that combines toffs breaking the law combined with police looking the other way
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Oliver Bodega Bay 28 Nov 17 3.15pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
Read the following again:
I know this it's called aggravated trespass. It's only covered by criminal law if you are preventing legal activity. You need the two elements the entering of the private land and the prevention of legal activity.
I have prepared one of my own time capsules. I have placed some rather large samples of dynamite, gunpowder and nitroglycerin. My time capsule is set to go off in the year 3000. It will show them what we are really like. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 28 Nov 17 3.32pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Oliver
I know this it's called aggravated trespass. It's only covered by criminal law if you are preventing legal activity. You need the two elements the entering of the private land and the prevention of legal activity. No you don't, those activities are covered by criminal law. Other forms of trespass are covered by civil law.
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.