man caught stuffing a beheaded swan into a backpack apologises

by Guest Mon Jun 02, 2014 6:39 pm

A Turkish man caught stuffing a beheaded swan into a backpack has apologised and said he did not know what type of bird it was - but that it had 'tasted nice'.

Hasan Fidan was arrested after an angler saw him bundle the dead bird into his bag at Bennett's Lake in Hildenbough, Kent, and handed a photograph of him doing so to police.

The 46-year-old has now been fined £110 by magistrates and ordered to pay a further £85 in costs and a £20 victim surcharge after he admitted killing the swan on March 18 this year.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2646337/Im-sorry-I-didnt-know-type-bird-It-tasted-nice-Turkish-man-caught-stuffing-beheaded-swan-backpack-apologises.html#ixzz33VLBnQGA

The bastards were caught doing that to the swans and geese in our town pond in Ennis. I just wonder how many birds they've already killed before this one was caught.

by Tommy Monk Mon Jun 02, 2014 7:10 pm

Should be deported too.

by Guest Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:38 pm

yet another case of how immigrants are allowed to flout our laws with minimum penalties

3.2. Article 12 of the Habitats Directive contains a range of prohibitions seeking to protect certain species (European Protected Species). Prohibitions under Article 12(1) include deliberate capture or killing, deliberate disturbance, deliberately taking or destroying the eggs of such an animal, and the deterioration or destruction of a breeding site or resting place of such an animal. Regulation 41 of the Habitats Regulations is where the Article 12 provisions have been transposed into national law. Regulation 41 makes it a criminal offence to carry out the specified activities the penalties for which are either a maximum fine of £5000 or a maximum term of imprisonment of six months or both.

by Guest Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:45 pm

Flout, is a strong word, I think we should ban anyone who gets pleasure from killing animals and make it law.

So one immigrant does this as I am sure indigenous have done this, though it seems the laws have not changed much over time, people were once executed for trying to feed their families by killing deer in forests owned by nobles.

by Ben Reilly Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:47 pm

When in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

by Guest Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:57 pm

Didge wrote:Flout, is a strong word, I think we should ban anyone who gets pleasure from killing animals and make it law.

So one immigrant does this as I am sure indigenous have done this, though it seems the laws have not changed much over time, people were once executed for trying to feed their families by killing deer in forests owned by nobles.

Well didge ...according to YOU, your parents and everyone else in the past managed to feed, house and look after their families on FAR less than what "benefit" is....so why is it OK for this foreign shit bag to do it.... its not only swans its a range of protected wildlife, and wildlife that for good reason is only their for the taking IN SEASON....

I dont give a fuck about your barmy sentimentalist views on hunting.....BUT those who hunt are restricted in what they can and cannot hunt...and swans are deffo on the list of DONT HUNT...

IF nicko or I were caught shooting swan we would be hammered in court for it, no doubt about it AND we would lose our licences...probably permanently....and quite rightly so

so why does this scumbag get a paltry sentence....

Oh of course its because he's "foreign " and the courts are scared of being "wacist"...being all too well aware that shit heads on the progressive side will be only too willing to kick of about a "proper" sentence...

ignorance is NO DEFENCE, it is by extension NOT a mitigating factor either...you come here ...you follow our LAWS...from day 1...NO excuses....

by Guest Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:01 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:When in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

so you think wildlife crime is a "nothing crime" eh. that foreigners should be free to weak havoc on our wildlife AS WELL....and they are doing...many village ponds have been emptied of fish by "hungry" eastern europeans....who think nothing of destroying public amenities, many have also had every duck wiped out by the same "grateful immigrants"

many shoots get their birds stolen to feed the same...and deer poaching is skyrocketing.....

whats being done....sod all...unless the perp is "white OR black british" anything else gets a tickle on the wrist....

by Guest Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:02 pm

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:Flout, is a strong word, I think we should ban anyone who gets pleasure from killing animals and make it law.

So one immigrant does this as I am sure indigenous have done this, though it seems the laws have not changed much over time, people were once executed for trying to feed their families by killing deer in forests owned by nobles.

Well didge ...according to YOU, your parents and everyone else in the past managed to feed, house and look after their families on FAR less than what "benefit" is....so why is it OK for this foreign shit bag to do it.... its not only swans its a range of protected wildlife, and wildlife that for good reason is only their for the taking IN SEASON....

I dont give a fuck about your barmy sentimentalist views on hunting.....BUT those who hunt are restricted in what they can and cannot hunt...and swans are deffo on the list of DONT HUNT...

IF nicko or I were caught shooting swan we would be hammered in court for it, no doubt about it AND we would lose our licences...probably permanently....and quite rightly so

so why does this scumbag get a paltry sentence....

Oh of course its because he's "foreign " and the courts are scared of being "wacist"...being all too well aware that shit heads on the progressive side will be only too willing to kick of about a "proper" sentence...

ignorance is NO DEFENCE, it is by extension NOT a mitigating factor either...you come here ...you follow our LAWS...from day 1...NO excuses....

So basically people cannot live off the land due to people making views on who can and who cannot which clearly has not seen any change over time, thus those with the guns, who advocate hunting ensure they can continue to kill animals with impunity, but somebody trying to feed themselves is seen as heinous crime.
A person trying to feed himself, which he clearly was, it is not a serious crime, even more so when he did not know it was illegal. Not everyone has the victor hunting guide to what they find pleasure with in shooting

Go figure and how utterly absurd an argument from you again

Night

by Guest Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:24 pm

Didge wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

Well didge ...according to YOU, your parents and everyone else in the past managed to feed, house and look after their families on FAR less than what "benefit" is....so why is it OK for this foreign shit bag to do it.... its not only swans its a range of protected wildlife, and wildlife that for good reason is only their for the taking IN SEASON....

I dont give a fuck about your barmy sentimentalist views on hunting.....BUT those who hunt are restricted in what they can and cannot hunt...and swans are deffo on the list of DONT HUNT...

IF nicko or I were caught shooting swan we would be hammered in court for it, no doubt about it AND we would lose our licences...probably permanently....and quite rightly so

so why does this scumbag get a paltry sentence....

Oh of course its because he's "foreign " and the courts are scared of being "wacist"...being all too well aware that shit heads on the progressive side will be only too willing to kick of about a "proper" sentence...

ignorance is NO DEFENCE, it is by extension NOT a mitigating factor either...you come here ...you follow our LAWS...from day 1...NO excuses....

So basically people cannot live off the land due to people making views on who can and who cannot which clearly has not seen any change over time, thus those with the guns, who advocate hunting ensure they can continue to kill animals with impunity, but somebody trying to feed themselves is seen as heinous crime.
A person trying to feed himself, which he clearly was, it is not a serious crime, even more so when he did not know it was illegal. Not everyone has the victor hunting guide to what they find pleasure with in shooting

Go figure and how utterly absurd an argument from you again

Night

TWO FACE TWAT ALERT

once again that moron has porved his two faced ness

i'll explain....in many past arguments about the plight of those on benefits, facing hard times...didge thehypocrite has repeatedly blamed the poor for their own plight, telling us all how much the "realy" have and spouting rubbish about how poor he was as a kid and how his parents managed even though they had far less....

NOW

If this turk is here LEGALLY he will either be working OR on benefits...

If that is the case why, according to didges claims, can he not "manage"?

if he's not doing either then do we assume he is here illegally....and if so...why is he still here?

THEN he flies in the face of law...IGNORANCE IS NOT A DEFENCE or a "mitigating factor"

moreover as to those shoots that get "raided" by these scumbags....

I belong to a small syndicate

we each pay £600 per year
we buy the birds in as poults
we pay to feed them for several months
we pay to make the release pens
we do all the feeding and watering
we maintain the environment

I'd say THAT give us the right to them ....
AND we are legally doing what is our RIGHT to do....

now according to didge's thinking...its perfectly ok for some foreign scumbag to hold you at knife point and rob you..Provided he's "hungry" and pretends he doesnt realise its against the law...

YOur argument is not only worse than absurd...it shows what a stinking "brit hating" turd you really are...

you have in that one paragraph totally turned everything you have ever said before upside down.

exposing your self as nothing but a hypocrite and a troll...arguing whichever way suits you ...just for the argument...

you have no principles.....

the refered to crime is
theft
an offence under the wild life and countryside act
an offence under the The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended)

and...had he not been caught in the act ...some wanker of a "concerned passer by" would have blamed either the fishermen OR a "shooter" for it and raised hell...its happened before...
doubtless didge would be of that ilk...

by eddie Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:50 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:When in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

Yeah. Poor swan.

by Guest Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:56 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Should be deported too.

Beaten first then deported

by Guest Mon Jun 02, 2014 10:06 pm

well gotta disagree their smelly...beatings are not prescribed within law...(tempting though it is)

lets stick to due process shall we...after all the law IS the law, and should apply equally to all men....

he should have had a massive fine and OR his 6 months in clink...and then deported....and forever denied reentry...

by Guest Mon Jun 02, 2014 10:22 pm

A curry chef appeared in court yesterday accused of killing a wild swan for food.
Mohammed Miah, 29, pounced on the bird and was later found with blood and feathers on his hands, and the swan in a bin bag nearby, Bedford magistrates heard.
The case will put to the test the ancient law that all 30,000 wild swans in Britain belong to the reigning monarch.
The alleged offence happened on May 10 on the banks of the Great Ouse, Bedford.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1279704/Chef-court-killing-swan--does-Queen-birds.html#ixzz33WFZQcsh

A man who claimed he killed a swan because he was hungry on the second day of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan has been jailed for two months.
However, Shamshu Miah, 52, from Llandudno was released because of the time he has already spent in custody.

He admitted intentionally killing a wild bird at Llandudno boating pool and possessing a kitchen knife in public.

District judge Andrew Shaw sitting at the town's magistrates court said it was a "cruel and reprehensible act".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_west/6174344.stm

by Tommy Monk Mon Jun 02, 2014 10:34 pm

I agree victor, I'm sure smelly was just joking.....
Although if this swan was the same one that sphinx and her local people were keeping an eye on, I'm sure that a beating would be the least of this foreigners worries.....!!!

by Guest Mon Jun 02, 2014 10:36 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:I agree victor, I'm sure smelly was just joking.....
Although if this swan was the same one that sphinx and her local people were keeping an eye on, I'm sure that a beating would be the least of this foreigners worries.....!!!

Now thats true......

by Tommy Monk Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:19 pm

victorisnotamused wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:I agree victor, I'm sure smelly was just joking.....
Although if this swan was the same one that sphinx and her local people were keeping an eye on, I'm sure that a beating would be the least of this foreigners worries.....!!!
Now thats true......

Would a 'beating' then be any more understandable/acceptable/justified then it that instance....?

by veya_victaous Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:30 pm

Do you educate immigrants that they are not allowed to do that? i mean in some places it would be considered fair game 'living off the land' so to speak.

I know we put is a bit of effort to educate foreigners about restrictions, safety gear and the licenses they need etc for hunting/fishing activities

by Guest Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:34 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:
Now thats true......

Would a 'beating' then be any more understandable/acceptable/justified then it that instance....?

I think It would be understandable...people can loose their rag over such things....
acceptable not really
justified, depends on what meaning you apply to justified....certainly the good folk of "humpington upon the rock" would say it was justified, and feel morally certain it was so.
the law however would take a different view...and as I say, the Law is the Law, whether you agree with it or not.

by Guest Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:38 pm

veya_victaous wrote:Do you educate immigrants that they are not allowed to do that? i mean in some places it would be considered fair game 'living off the land' so to speak.

I know we put is a bit of effort to educate foreigners about restrictions, safety gear and the licenses they need etc for hunting/fishing activities

If you are going to live in another country you should take the time to a) learn what their laws are

and b~) given the absolute certainty that doing so comprehensively is impossible for a foreigner, ASK first if your proposed actions are legal...
and c) DO NOT assume that what you are about to do is legal, particularly when no-one else in the indiginous population appears to be doing it

rather simple really...

by Tommy Monk Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:09 am

Again, I agree entirely victor.

With both posts.

When in a foreign land, you always err on the side of caution.

Sorry I did not know is no excuse, but used by many in an attempt to escape punishment.

by veya_victaous Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:42 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:Do you educate immigrants that they are not allowed to do that? i mean in some places it would be considered fair game 'living off the land' so to speak.

I know we put is a bit of effort to educate foreigners about restrictions, safety gear and the licenses they need etc for hunting/fishing activities

If you are going to live in another country you should take the time to a) learn what their laws are

and b~) given the absolute certainty that doing so comprehensively is impossible for a foreigner, ASK first if your proposed actions are legal...
and c) DO NOT assume that what you are about to do is legal, particularly when no-one else in the indiginous population appears to be doing it

rather simple really...

You make it sound like everyone is sensible Rolling Eyes

some of them are as xenophobic as you guys and believe that what their culture does is the 'normal' and everyone else is weird. Wink

be a good host and make an effort to educate on appropriate behaviour, assuming everyone 'will just know' is asking for trouble. maybe we are a little be more caring here... plus it is easy to end up dead if you pull the wrong thing out of the water

man caught stuffing a beheaded swan into a backpack apologises Blue-Ringed_Octopus_front

man caught stuffing a beheaded swan into a backpack apologises Blue-Ringed_Octopus_front

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:46 am

perhaps we should have a few of those...for "guests" to pull out of the water.....

as for anything else...he damn well knew it was illegal....

there are enough cases of "wildlife crime" being prosecuted over the course of a year...
and if they aint sensible ...why do we want em here anyway

and if they are that xenophobic we deffo dont want em.....

so...home he should go...

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:47 am

why should we spend much needed money "educating" those that the great majority dont want anyway.....

by scrat Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:51 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:Flout, is a strong word, I think we should ban anyone who gets pleasure from killing animals and make it law.

So one immigrant does this as I am sure indigenous have done this, though it seems the laws have not changed much over time, people were once executed for trying to feed their families by killing deer in forests owned by nobles.

Well didge ...according to YOU, your parents and everyone else in the past managed to feed, house and look after their families on FAR less than what "benefit" is....so why is it OK for this foreign shit bag to do it.... its not only swans its a range of protected wildlife, and wildlife that for good reason is only their for the taking IN SEASON....

I dont give a fuck about your barmy sentimentalist views on hunting.....BUT those who hunt are restricted in what they can and cannot hunt...and swans are deffo on the list of DONT HUNT...

IF nicko or I were caught shooting swan we would be hammered in court for it, no doubt about it AND we would lose our licences...probably permanently....and quite rightly so

so why does this scumbag get a paltry sentence....

Oh of course its because he's "foreign " and the courts are scared of being "wacist"...being all too well aware that shit heads on the progressive side will be only too willing to kick of about a "proper" sentence...

ignorance is NO DEFENCE, it is by extension NOT a mitigating factor either...you come here ...you follow our LAWS...from day 1...NO excuses....

If Penfold was found in possession of a gun, I'd shoot the person who gave it to him.

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:57 am

scrat wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

Well didge ...according to YOU, your parents and everyone else in the past managed to feed, house and look after their families on FAR less than what "benefit" is....so why is it OK for this foreign shit bag to do it.... its not only swans its a range of protected wildlife, and wildlife that for good reason is only their for the taking IN SEASON....

I dont give a fuck about your barmy sentimentalist views on hunting.....BUT those who hunt are restricted in what they can and cannot hunt...and swans are deffo on the list of DONT HUNT...

IF nicko or I were caught shooting swan we would be hammered in court for it, no doubt about it AND we would lose our licences...probably permanently....and quite rightly so

so why does this scumbag get a paltry sentence....

Oh of course its because he's "foreign " and the courts are scared of being "wacist"...being all too well aware that shit heads on the progressive side will be only too willing to kick of about a "proper" sentence...

ignorance is NO DEFENCE, it is by extension NOT a mitigating factor either...you come here ...you follow our LAWS...from day 1...NO excuses....

If Penfold was found in possession of a gun, I'd shoot the person who gave it to him.

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:03 am

Victor, you do hunt yourself,..yes,yes...not Swans I know...

But it sounds to me like it really bothers you the fact mainly that he is a foreigner?..

It's definitely not nice what he done, but you kill living animals too...yes I know..ones you are allowed to shoot...

But it comes down to the same thing....killing a living creature.

by veya_victaous Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:31 am

victorisnotamused wrote:why should we spend much needed money "educating" those that the great majority dont want anyway.....

well it actually creates jobs for Englishmen to teach them Wink

AND Cause otherwise you're selfish twats that have inflicted the scenario you are against of a lot of other peoples... that now happen to be better off Rolling Eyes

And because you don't really get a choice, I don't know why you guys keep saying that like it means something Razz

it is a make believe notion, only the STRONGEST can have and you are not the strongest any more Suspect

Accept your place

by Ben Reilly Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:01 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:When in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

so you think wildlife crime is a "nothing crime" eh. that foreigners should be free to weak havoc on our wildlife AS WELL....and they are doing...many village ponds have been emptied of fish by "hungry" eastern europeans....who think nothing of destroying public amenities, many have also had every duck wiped out by the same "grateful immigrants"

many shoots get their birds stolen to feed the same...and deer poaching is skyrocketing.....

whats being done....sod all...unless the perp is "white OR black british" anything else gets a tickle on the wrist....

RRROOOOOWWWWWRRRRRR ANGERRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:19 am

victorisnotamused wrote:perhaps we should have a few of those...for "guests" to pull out of the water.....

as for anything else...he damn well knew it was illegal....

there are enough cases of "wildlife crime" being prosecuted over the course of a year...
and if they aint sensible ...why do we want em here anyway

and if they are that xenophobic we deffo dont want em.....

so...home he should go...

agree

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:15 am

FFS
The man was a curry chef! He has access to bloody food.
Ben you may not take crimes against wildlife seriously but you know we brits love our animals.

As for Didge, rarely has there been such a beautiful example of hoist by your own petard.

Victor, you can explain, but you cant make them understand.

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:16 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:

So basically people cannot live off the land due to people making views on who can and who cannot which clearly has not seen any change over time, thus those with the guns, who advocate hunting ensure they can continue to kill animals with impunity, but somebody trying to feed themselves is seen as heinous crime.
A person trying to feed himself, which he clearly was, it is not a serious crime, even more so when he did not know it was illegal. Not everyone has the victor hunting guide to what they find pleasure with in shooting

Go figure and how utterly absurd an argument from you again

Night

TWO FACE TWAT ALERT
Completely wound up ha ha

once again that moron has porved his two faced ness
Near to bursting a blood vessel it seems ::D::

i'll explain....in many past arguments about the plight of those on benefits, facing hard times...didge thehypocrite has repeatedly blamed the poor for their own plight, telling us all how much the "realy" have and spouting rubbish about how poor he was as a kid and how his parents managed even though they had far less....
Oh my attack my family again because the reality is I did grow up with levels of poverty, though this has no bearing on the debate as seen
NOW

If this turk is here LEGALLY he will either be working OR on benefits...

If that is the case why, according to didges claims, can he not "manage"?
He is unemployed, that does not mean he did not come here employed and lose later his job when he has been here since 2006 and stated he had no food. Ih he was illegal my wound up grumpy grandad, it would have stated this in the Mail and it did not

if he's not doing either then do we assume he is here illegally....and if so...why is he still here?
He could have been here as stated and lost his job, how is that so difficult for your teeeny tiny brain to work out, it would not mean he is here illegally, and you think the Mail would have left something like that out?
Behave, you are embarrassing yourself now because I so easily wound you up

THEN he flies in the face of law...IGNORANCE IS NOT A DEFENCE or a "mitigating factor"
As seen you are assuming bullshit

moreover as to those shoots that get "raided" by these scumbags....
Way off topic now, which is getting funnier

I belong to a small syndicate
Of harpies?

we each pay £600 per year
we buy the birds in as poults
we pay to feed them for several months
we pay to make the release pens
we do all the feeding and watering
we maintain the environment

I'd say THAT give us the right to them ....
AND we are legally doing what is our RIGHT to do....
So you basically buy birds to kill them, how nice indeed, bet you feel such a many killing something so much smaller than you, who's only defense against you is shitting its pants with speed

now according to didge's thinking...its perfectly ok for some foreign scumbag to hold you at knife point and rob you..Provided he's "hungry" and pretends he doesnt realise its against the law...
Never claimed that once, now that is funny and you just made that up, as never stated that once

YOur argument is not only worse than absurd...it shows what a stinking "brit hating" turd you really are...

you have in that one paragraph totally turned everything you have ever said before upside down.

exposing your self as nothing but a hypocrite and a troll...arguing whichever way suits you ...just for the argument...

you have no principles.....

the refered to crime is
theft
an offence under the wild life and countryside act
an offence under the The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended)

and...had he not been caught in the act ...some wanker of a "concerned passer by" would have blamed either the fishermen OR a "shooter" for it and raised hell...its happened before...
doubtless didge would be of that ilk...

Actually what I am showing is how a country perceives to think it owns all wildlife an how nobody and nobody has been able to have rights to fend for themselves off the land with animals, which is the point and I fail to see what is so much of a horror, if a man truly is hungry and kills a swan to eat, so what, big deal, at least he is not robbing stores or holding people up at knife point. He thought he was going something legal, which if you think about it, why is it illegal to feed yourself?

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:18 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

so you think wildlife crime is a "nothing crime" eh. that foreigners should be free to weak havoc on our wildlife AS WELL....and they are doing...many village ponds have been emptied of fish by "hungry" eastern europeans....who think nothing of destroying public amenities, many have also had every duck wiped out by the same "grateful immigrants"

many shoots get their birds stolen to feed the same...and deer poaching is skyrocketing.....

whats being done....sod all...unless the perp is "white OR black british" anything else gets a tickle on the wrist....

RRROOOOOWWWWWRRRRRR ANGERRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It really does sum up Victor and how people get so pathetically angry over little, how they are in his case so selfish they cannot live next to other humans if they are born onto another piece of land, they wish to live their lives by fear and I find that quite sad really, what a way to live your life

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:36 am

Didge wrote:Flout, is a strong word, I think we should ban anyone who gets pleasure from killing animals and make it law.

So one immigrant does this as I am sure indigenous have done this, though it seems the laws have not changed much over time, people were once executed for trying to feed their families by killing deer in forests owned by nobles.

Oh here we go - it's only one immigrant... only one that got caught this time. As I said, here in Ennis we have a large pond in town full of geese and swans; the kids love them, but in the past couple of years they've been disappearing - it's only when cctv was put in that you could see the culprits killing them. They didn't look Irish (and don't prattle on Didge about what Irish look like ffs). A couple of Romanian gypsy types were caught once. Sickening. They should get an arse-full of buckshot at least.

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:42 am

Tesstacious wrote:
Didge wrote:Flout, is a strong word, I think we should ban anyone who gets pleasure from killing animals and make it law.

So one immigrant does this as I am sure indigenous have done this, though it seems the laws have not changed much over time, people were once executed for trying to feed their families by killing deer in forests owned by nobles.
Oh here we go - it's only one immigrant... only one that got caught this time. As I said, here in Ennis we have a large pond in town full of geese and swans; the kids love them, but in the past couple of years they've been disappearing - it's only when cctv was put in that you could see the culprits killing them. They didn't look Irish (and don't prattle on Didge about what Irish look like ffs). A couple of Romanian gypsy types were caught once. Sickening. They should get an arse-full of buckshot at least.

Could not understand a word of that rant

Again why is it that these Swans belong to the Queen?

Why is it wrong if a person is hungry to not live off the land, until their situation changes?

Would you prefer he eats wildlife or rob people for their money to eat?

by eddie Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:50 am

Didge wrote:
Tesstacious wrote:
Oh here we go - it's only one immigrant... only one that got caught this time. As I said, here in Ennis we have a large pond in town full of geese and swans; the kids love them, but in the past couple of years they've been disappearing - it's only when cctv was put in that you could see the culprits killing them. They didn't look Irish (and don't prattle on Didge about what Irish look like ffs). A couple of Romanian gypsy types were caught once. Sickening. They should get an arse-full of buckshot at least.

Could not understand a word of that rant

Again why is it that these Swans belong to the Queen?

Why is it wrong if a person is hungry to not live off the land, until their situation changes?

Would you prefer he eats wildlife or rob people for their money to eat?

The trouble with that logic is this:

Everyone would be going around taking wildlife and keeping them for pets etc for their kids and claiming they were only 'hungry' if caught..... Or situations very similar, you catch my drift.

No didge, it's not right to let someone off for killing a swan or any wildlife bird or animal, that's not legal to kill.
It's as simple as that.

If people are that hungry - there are bins, begging, drop centres and also pigeons!

And yea, it's not right in this day and age for people to be that hungry but there are other solutions.

Also, how different would this thread be if it was a bunch of horrible unruly kids going round torturing swans???

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:58 am

eddie wrote:
Didge wrote:

Could not understand a word of that rant

Again why is it that these Swans belong to the Queen?

Why is it wrong if a person is hungry to not live off the land, until their situation changes?

Would you prefer he eats wildlife or rob people for their money to eat?

The trouble with that logic is this:

Everyone would be going around taking wildlife and keeping them for pets etc for their kids and claiming they were only 'hungry' if caught..... Or situations very similar, you catch my drift.

No didge, it's not right to let someone off for killing a swan or any wildlife bird or animal, that's not legal to kill.
It's as simple as that.

If people are that hungry - there are bins, begging, drop centres and also pigeons!

And yea, it's not right in this day and age for people to be that hungry but there are other solutions.

Also, how different would this thread be if it was a bunch of horrible unruly kids going round torturing swans???

Eh, that is absurd, you are saying it is okay to now eat pigeons and not swans, what on earth is the difference it that Eddie?

They are both wild birds, one it is claimed for no other reason is the property of the crown, which I find absurd. Mutes swans have been bred for centuries to eat as well.

So again, would you prefer a person to eat and kill something wild than hold up people to rob them to have money to eat?

He did kill this to eat, not torture, but eat, it was found in his fridge

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:20 am

Didge wrote:
Tesstacious wrote:
Oh here we go - it's only one immigrant... only one that got caught this time. As I said, here in Ennis we have a large pond in town full of geese and swans; the kids love them, but in the past couple of years they've been disappearing - it's only when cctv was put in that you could see the culprits killing them. They didn't look Irish (and don't prattle on Didge about what Irish look like ffs). A couple of Romanian gypsy types were caught once. Sickening. They should get an arse-full of buckshot at least.

Could not understand a word of that rant

Again why is it that these Swans belong to the Queen?

Why is it wrong if a person is hungry to not live off the land, until their situation changes?

Would you prefer he eats wildlife or rob people for their money to eat?

I can't help your lack of IQ. And wtf has the Queen to do with my post? I was taklling about swans (and geese) on a pond in Ireland! So you think it's okay to kill any passing wildlife - why stop there? Cats, dogs, I suppose everything's fair game so long as it's any of your precious enrichment brigade doing the killing. This is NOT a third world country - yet. They're not fucking starving you prick. We don't need scum going round killing animals and whatever else they do back in their own shitholes.

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:29 am

Tesstacious wrote:
Didge wrote:

Could not understand a word of that rant

Again why is it that these Swans belong to the Queen?

Why is it wrong if a person is hungry to not live off the land, until their situation changes?

Would you prefer he eats wildlife or rob people for their money to eat?
I can't help your lack of IQ. And wtf has the Queen to do with my post? I was taklling about swans (and geese) on a pond in Ireland! So you think it's okay to kill any passing wildlife - why stop there? Cats, dogs, I suppose everything's fair game so long as it's any of your precious enrichment brigade doing the killing. This is NOT a third world country - yet. They're not fucking starving you prick. We don't need scum going round killing animals and whatever else they do back in their own shitholes.

IQ, that is funny coming from you

So basically anyone that eats meat by culpability from those who kill animals to feed us are scum to you then?

These are Muted swans, property of the Queen, bred originally to eat.
The fact is when people have been starving they have eaten dogs and cats, they are like any other animals edible, what only puts people off is attachment from having such animals as pets actually denying them their real freedom of being wold, because we have domesticated them to satisfy the human selfish need of companionship.
How do you know they are not starving?

Again you failed to answer a very simple question, again I am not endorsing this to become a common act, or even promoting that people should do this, my point is would you rather that if a person is hungry, they kill an animal from the wild, than rob someone at knife point to get money to buy food

All I am saying is this is not a heinous crime, if the point being is to feed and survive, which I guess is so above your pay grade and why you fail to understand

by Raggamuffin Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:50 am

One simply can't go around killing swans, it's just not British.

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:53 am

Raggamuffin wrote:One simply can't go around killing swans, it's just not British.

Odd as they were bred to eat here as a delicacy since the 12 century, so I guess it is very much British to eat swans.

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:54 am

Tesstacious wrote:
Didge wrote:

Could not understand a word of that rant

Again why is it that these Swans belong to the Queen?

Why is it wrong if a person is hungry to not live off the land, until their situation changes?

Would you prefer he eats wildlife or rob people for their money to eat?
I can't help your lack of IQ. And wtf has the Queen to do with my post? I was taklling about swans (and geese) on a pond in Ireland! So you think it's okay to kill any passing wildlife - why stop there? Cats, dogs, I suppose everything's fair game so long as it's any of your precious enrichment brigade doing the killing. This is NOT a third world country - yet. They're not fucking starving you prick. We don't need scum going round killing animals and whatever else they do back in their own shitholes.

+1

by Raggamuffin Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:55 am

Didge wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:One simply can't go around killing swans, it's just not British.

Odd as they were bred to eat here as a delicacy since the 12 century, so I guess it is very much British to eat swans.

Well clearly it is not. Anyone who is British should know that Swans are protected, and that the sight of swans on a river is a lovely thing. We simply can't have people going around destroying them - whether those people are British or not.

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:56 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Didge wrote:

Odd as they were bred to eat here as a delicacy since the 12 century, so I guess it is very much British to eat swans.

Well clearly it is not. Anyone who is British should know that Swans are protected, and that the sight of swans on a river is a lovely thing. We simply can't have people going around destroying them - whether those people are British or not.

Oh my, that is funny, they are protected these muted swans as property of the Queen, who for centuries have been eating them as they have been bred to eat.

It is very much a British thing of the elite of society that has made eating them acceptable

by Raggamuffin Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:57 am

Didge wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Well clearly it is not. Anyone who is British should know that Swans are protected, and that the sight of swans on a river is a lovely thing. We simply can't have people going around destroying them - whether those people are British or not.

Oh my, that is funny, they are protected these muted swans as property of the Queen, who for centuries have been eating them as they have been bred to eat.

It is very much a British thing of the elite of society that has made eating them acceptable

It is not acceptable for random Turkish men to go around killing swans.

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:00 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Didge wrote:

Oh my, that is funny, they are protected these muted swans as property of the Queen, who for centuries have been eating them as they have been bred to eat.

It is very much a British thing of the elite of society that has made eating them acceptable

It is not acceptable for random Turkish men to go around killing swans.

If he is hungry, would you prefer him to kill a swan, or attack and beat up someone to rob them of their money?

Again nobody is saying it is right, what I am showing is that it is not a heinous crime to kill an animal bred originally to eat, when somebody is starving, something you would understand if you followed the thread.

So for eample are you placing the value of the swan over the human starving to death?

by Raggamuffin Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:01 am

Didge wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

It is not acceptable for random Turkish men to go around killing swans.

If he is hungry, would you prefer him to kill a swan, or attack and beat up someone to rob them of their money?

Again nobody is saying it is right, what I am showing is that it is not a heinous crime to kill an animal bred originally to eat, when somebody is starving, something you would understand if you followed the thread.

So for eample are you placing the value of the swan over the human starving to death?

You think those are the two choices? Now I know you're trolling - again.

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:02 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Didge wrote:

If he is hungry, would you prefer him to kill a swan, or attack and beat up someone to rob them of their money?

Again nobody is saying it is right, what I am showing is that it is not a heinous crime to kill an animal bred originally to eat, when somebody is starving, something you would understand if you followed the thread.

So for eample are you placing the value of the swan over the human starving to death?

You think those are the two choices? Now I know you're trolling - again.

Epic fail, please move along and allow the intelligent people to debate on this

Thank you

by Raggamuffin Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:03 am

Didge, you're back on ignore. Nobody could put up with your stupidity for long.

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:04 am

Raggamuffin wrote:Didge, you're back on ignore. Nobody could put up with your stupidity for long.

Bye then, and as always you run away

by Guest Tue Jun 03, 2014 11:22 am

victorisnotamused wrote:well gotta disagree their smelly...beatings are not prescribed within law...(tempting though it is)

lets stick to due process shall we...after all the law IS the law, and should apply equally to all men....

he should have had a massive fine and OR his 6 months in clink...and then deported....and forever denied reentry...

Yes

6 months in the slammer where he will be beaten before being deported

by Sponsored content