Deer poachers

[Malt 379]

Aye, it's Magdon.

 

SH - The thing is mate, you cannot judge a man's intellect by the way that he writes on an internet forum.

 

He's a man that argues on technicalities, yes a man who jumps a fence and takes a single rabbit to take home for the pot, is technically theft, if that rabbit 'belongs' to someone else other than him, and he takes it without permission, but to suggest it is the same as robbing an old lady of her pension money, is somewhat silly. Even the powers that be can differentiate between the two, and for a man as apparently 'intelligent' as Greek Phil, this should be obvious and not even worth discussing. He just likes to cause an argument and attempt to belittle others, it's pathetic, a man who tries to build himself up by putting others down.

 

Nooooo!

 

Theft is a crime against the person which involves taking something that a person has ownership over. Poaching is the act of taking game from private property. Rabbits are not even game, so the offence you're committing by taking a rabbit from somewhere you haven't got permission is completely different again...

[Greek Phil 5]

Not interested any more , too much trouble in this world to concern myself with this.

 

If everyone just stops answering him he will hopefully piss off. Its all a wind up.

 

 

Bye Mark. Till we meet again

 

Let me know when the next get together is and I'll post it up on here for you.

[Greek Phil 5]

Aye, it's Magdon.

 

SH - The thing is mate, you cannot judge a man's intellect by the way that he writes on an internet forum.

 

He's a man that argues on technicalities, yes a man who jumps a fence and takes a single rabbit to take home for the pot, is technically theft, if that rabbit 'belongs' to someone else other than him, and he takes it without permission, but to suggest it is the same as robbing an old lady of her pension money, is somewhat silly. Even the powers that be can differentiate between the two, and for a man as apparently 'intelligent' as Greek Phil, this should be obvious and not even worth discussing. He just likes to cause an argument and attempt to belittle others, it's pathetic, a man who tries to build himself up by putting others down.

 

Nooooo!

 

Theft is a crime against the person which involves taking something that a person has ownership over. Poaching is the act of taking game from private property. Rabbits are not even game, so the offence you're committing by taking a rabbit from somewhere you haven't got permission is completely different again...

 

Damn! Just when you thought that you had them.

 

Well done Malt.

 

I concede. But you have to admit it was a decent run.

 

Atb

[Ideation 8,216]

But what is the 'need' here? And why refer to the 'ignorant masses'. . . .. so you identify poaching as theft, big whoop?

 

Another question might be, if someone never knows something has been taken, and said something is naturally replaced, is it still theft? Does theft require a victim, or indeed a victim that is aware.

 

We all know that the laws surrounding 'poaching' were largely a means to societal control, rather a means of punishing someone for a crime that caused serious detriment or harm to an individual or society.

[fat man 4,740]

Not a huge number then. Still It was a Thursday night.

 

True I could do as you suggest. But if you hold views and opinions why not express them. Admittedly, some get blown out of proportion, but is that entirely my fault ?

 

Even you have bitten in the past at what was in reality perfectly reasonable posts. Having I suspect been wound up by 3rd parties and sent on your way to try and do the deed. No harm done and no offence taken on my part.

 

I've never said poachers were in the same league as rapists. But poaching is theft, yes?

Only if there farm reared animals,or estate born and reared,otherwise there wild,how can anyone claim a wild deer belongs to them if they did not actually rear the animal in the 1st place,just because it happens to be on a shoot you stalk or farmland you do the stalking on,does not give anyone the right to say its there's.If cattle broke from 1 farm on to a neighbours,could he claim them as his own,no he could not,but in saying that leaving carcasas behind or killing for the fun of it is imo a disgrace.

[Ideation 8,216]

Aye malt, perhaps one of the kings deer may have been a better example. . . .

[Malt 379]

Aye malt, perhaps one of the kings deer may have been a better example. . . .

 

Off with their heads!!

[Ideation 8,216]

Notice i said, 'if that rabbit belongs to someone else'. . . . .

[Malt 379]

Notice i said, 'if that rabbit belongs to someone else'. . . . .

 

A pet rabbit, perhaps?

 

PS. Empty your PM box mate..

[Ideation 8,216]

No mate, in the dark, dark future when the corporations own EVERYTHING, including the rabbits.

 

P.S - It's empty sweet cheeks.

[Greek Phil 5]

But what is the 'need' here? And why refer to the 'ignorant masses'.

.

 

IIRC It was by way of response to the nature of the reply. But It was some time back and I can't be bothered to search back for the specific post.

 

Another question might be, if someone never knows something has been taken, and said something is naturally replaced, is it still theft? Does theft require a victim, or indeed a victim that is aware.

 

What the eye doesn't see and all that. Technically the act is the prima facie evidence. Whether it needs or has a witness other than the portraiture of the sad act is not a point I am qualified to discuss.

 

We all know that the laws surrounding 'poaching' were largely a means to societal control, rather a means of punishing someone for a crime that caused serious detriment or harm to an individual or society.

 

The laws surrounding poaching go back as far as the 11th century and their function and effect are manned and varied. I'm sure some bright and budding law student could write an whole doctoral thesis on the subject. I think having your hand cut of or ending up on some transportation hulk was considered pretty serious punishment by the individuals that suffered that particular fate fr their crime. Only when we reach the Victorians do more enlightened punishment come to the fore. Social improvements had many unforeseen implications.

[Ideation 8,216]

But what is the 'need' here? And why refer to the 'ignorant masses'.

.

 

IIRC It was by way of response to the nature of the reply. But It was some time back and I can't be bothered to search back for the specific post.

 

Another question might be, if someone never knows something has been taken, and said something is naturally replaced, is it still theft? Does theft require a victim, or indeed a victim that is aware.

 

What the eye doesn't see and all that. Technically the act is the prima facie evidence. Whether it needs or has a witness other than the portraiture of the sad act is not a point I am qualified to discuss.

 

We all know that the laws surrounding 'poaching' were largely a means to societal control, rather a means of punishing someone for a crime that caused serious detriment or harm to an individual or society.

 

The laws surrounding poaching go back as far as the 11th century and their function and effect are manned and varied. I'm sure some bright and budding law student could write an whole doctoral thesis on the subject. I think having your hand cut of or ending up on some transportation hulk was considered pretty serious punishment by the individuals that suffered that particular fate fr their crime. Only when we reach the Victorians do more enlightened punishment come to the fore. Social improvements had many unforeseen implications.

 

 

I meant, what is your need to 'prove' that poaching is a 'crime'.

 

R.E. your last point, whilst the punishment may well have been serious, it was meted out for a crime that was in all reality, not very serious at all. It was a means of keeping folk 'in their place'. Rather than punishing them for a crime that did any real damage.

[foxdropper 17,092]

What a f*****g NOB.Until the c**ts gone ,i post no more .

[scothunter 12,609]

This guy is the most arrogant person i have ever come across on here, he really does seem to think we are all far inferior in the intelligence department than him, based purely upon the fact that we hold a differing opinion on certain topics. But how pathetic is it that a grown man must come on an internet forum, and attempt to slate the intellect of others in order to make himself feel superior and intelligent. You must be an incredibly lonely man Greek Phil, and i don't buy for one moment that you are anywhere near as intelligent as you are attempting to appear. . . . if you were, you would be able to see what an irritating human being you are.

he

can slate my intellect all he likes,but if he was standing next to me,id rap the nut in him.

 

 

and then clean up the blood coz your a neat freak!! :laugh:

 

:laugh:

[Guest john5]

i wonder how many thieving poaching lumps of sh1te use this forum ?

put piano wires across gateways