This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Animal rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofanimal rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Animal rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Animal rightsTemplate:WikiProject Animal rightsAnimal rights
Having read the HSA website, I wonder if we shouldn't add the Anarchy (or arguably Fascism) headerbox to this article? It seems the group exists for the prime purpose of denying the liberty of their fellow citizens. Are they planning on breaking into private homes to disable rat traps, and wipe up surface spray? Rats, mice, fleas, mosquitos and cockroaches are animals too! Hell, virii and bacterium are also living things, let's broaden the scope of the article to include the ultimate ramifications of protecting all living things on the basis that they are living things.203.129.60.6914:33, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I more or less agree. If they have problems with hunting in the U.S. then they should be writing letters and protesting in cities (which would in turn be countered with more letters from people like me). Trespassing and vandalizes hunts is unAmerican, anti-government, illegal, and I know that if I tried it my neighbors would likely shoot me. This article almost tries to put them on the same level as anti-war civil disobedience. I disagree, peace is something we can all appreciate a desire for, and in the case of Vietnam is was a sort of last cry of the people. This seems more like people that have gone off the charts. If the can't stand killing animals, why not go interfere with slaughter houses. Btw, I hope they walked to wherever they are disrupting hunts because otherwise they are killing the rain forest. Don't get my wrong, they are entitled to their opinion, and would shouldn't daemonize them in the article, but they are criminals none the less. We don't want anyone to go search them out after reading this with intention of joining based on a positive article found here. That would be encouraging criminal behavior. --67.209.66.126 (talk)19:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They are not criminals, they are protesters. If anything, the pro-hunt people are the criminals because they frequently conduct illegal hunts. For example in jurisdictions where fox hnting is banned, they claim that the dogs were following fake scent trails and then "got the scent of a real fox".2001:BB6:282E:E158:E081:3048:5611:EC32 (talk)21:25, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a section regarding violence within the HSA.I hope it is not subject to vandalism or removal as I believe it is relevant to the article, but I do think it could do with renaming to something less controversial.HamishDS (talk)23:11, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to add to this section examples of violence perpetrated against hunt saboteurs, which have also been documentedNatelley19 (talk)21:19, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I thought I'd start by saying welcome to Wikipedia, please feel free to edit this article how you deem fit, though I ought to warn you of the (nearly weekly) vandalism of this page by both sides. Fox hunting is a very controversial issue, and it is key to keep this article neutral yet informative. Since I last logged an unregistered user has blanked the violence section (again) but a subsection within that may be helpful for violence towards/from HSA activists.HamishDS (talk)
I realize this may be a contentious topic (albeit notformally designated as such) to people in the UK, but anyway this article seems to be very incomplete and not entirely NPOV. In particular, the controversies section is especially problematic.
