![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
O tempora, o mores.
Jan. 6th, 2006 10:10 amShamelessly yanked from The First Post.
The League Against Cruel Sports recently embarked on a fund-raising drive. It wants money to buy video cameras to film people hunting. In 2003 the League had a deficit of more than £230,000 so little wonder it is desperate to raise funds. It sent out begging letters imploring people to send cheques to a freepost address. The thought that people would send money to the League but be worried about the cost of postage for their cheques was baffling.
But the hunters spotted a perhaps fatal chink. The postage of any letters sent to the freepost address must be paid by the League. Not entirely surprising then that the Pros - gleeful in the knowledge that the League will have to pay - have sent them van-loads of telephone directories, back copies of Horse & Hound and tons of unwanted junk mail. And the League will have to cough up. Patrick O'Brien, a Royal Mail spokesman, says: "We grant freepost licences for a minimum period of a month and we expect people to pay as per the agreement. It doesn't matter whether they don't want the mail, they have agreed to pay us for its delivery." The League says that the unwanted post is being "held at depots around the country" and adds: "We can't put a number on it but anyone with a brain will realise it is a lot. We are not commenting on specifics but we have a strategy to deal with it." Will the welter bankrupt the League? If it doesn't, it might like to consider the following. When it goes out videoing hunts is it entirely sure that it is acting within the law? There are legal complications with videoing children, so what happens when all the child members of a hunt are at the front of the field when hunting the fox? Is the League itself then breaking the law? There are reports that this tactic has already been tried by hunts in Dorset, the Peak District and Wiltshire.
The League Against Cruel Sports recently embarked on a fund-raising drive. It wants money to buy video cameras to film people hunting. In 2003 the League had a deficit of more than £230,000 so little wonder it is desperate to raise funds. It sent out begging letters imploring people to send cheques to a freepost address. The thought that people would send money to the League but be worried about the cost of postage for their cheques was baffling.
But the hunters spotted a perhaps fatal chink. The postage of any letters sent to the freepost address must be paid by the League. Not entirely surprising then that the Pros - gleeful in the knowledge that the League will have to pay - have sent them van-loads of telephone directories, back copies of Horse & Hound and tons of unwanted junk mail. And the League will have to cough up. Patrick O'Brien, a Royal Mail spokesman, says: "We grant freepost licences for a minimum period of a month and we expect people to pay as per the agreement. It doesn't matter whether they don't want the mail, they have agreed to pay us for its delivery." The League says that the unwanted post is being "held at depots around the country" and adds: "We can't put a number on it but anyone with a brain will realise it is a lot. We are not commenting on specifics but we have a strategy to deal with it." Will the welter bankrupt the League? If it doesn't, it might like to consider the following. When it goes out videoing hunts is it entirely sure that it is acting within the law? There are legal complications with videoing children, so what happens when all the child members of a hunt are at the front of the field when hunting the fox? Is the League itself then breaking the law? There are reports that this tactic has already been tried by hunts in Dorset, the Peak District and Wiltshire.
