And today, joining the underground .....

[Cap'n Grumpy]

I'm still gutted about the tiger.2_CS86523119.jpg

Different times.

I've never been a fan of people who shoot animals for fun, and would definitely be on the tiger's side, but you cannae judge people of yesteryear by today's standards.

I suspect even the Duke had changed his mind on matters like that in the intervening years.

[Cap'n Grumpy]

I'm the very epitome of candour

Is that true?

[big mervyn]

Apparently the Beeb has been inundated with complaints about yesterday's coverage including one from Simon McCoy.

Just added my tuppence worth. You'd have got more balanced reporting in N Korea yesterday.

[Dave]

I'm still gutted about the tiger.2_CS86523119.jpg

Different times.

I've never been a fan of people who shoot animals for fun, and would definitely be on the tiger's side, but you cannae judge people of yesteryear by today's standards.

I suspect even the Duke had changed his mind on matters like that in the intervening years.

I'm sure you have endless excuses. He was severely criticised at the time that's why he stopped hunting big game. In my view only an absolute psychopath would consider shooting such a glorious animal baited into position.

[solidarity]

Interesting set of pictures on the front of the various newspapers this morning. Divided about 50/50 between the younger man in uniform and the older man in the bowler hat. For some reason, the Sun (I think) had a picture of the man doffing his bowler... taken from behind. Weird.

[big mervyn]

He still shot plenty of other stuff for kicks as do the rest of 'em. Sick hypocritical f*cks. Meghan was the first one to put her foot down about that sort of stuff. 'arry's got rescue chickens now.

[Snipe Watson]

I'm a partial royalist and I think the coverage has been OTT.
Agree with the birthday boy. It was a different era.
Endangered species has only become a thing in the last 30 years or so.
I'd rather see a guy seeing the light and trying to make a difference. Doesn't make him hypocritical or sick. I makes him someone who is willing to be educated and change.
Blood sports make me wretch these days, but as a young man I would have hunted anything that was available to be hunted.
When my information changes, so does my opinion.

Megan is a self obsessed piece of work. She uses and cancels out everyone and everything that isn't useful to her. She'll do the same with our 'arry.

[Dave]

Slavery was grand too. Different era.

[Snipe Watson]

Slavery was grand too. Different era.

Wise up Dave, why not throw in the Holocaust for good measure. Hardly comparing apples with apples.

[Dave]

Slavery was grand too. Different era.

Wise up Dave, why not throw in the Holocaust for good measure. Hardly comparing apples with apples.

Same logic. You can use the 'different era' excuse about a lot of things. If someone wants to kill a tiger for fun then there is something deeply troubling about their character. Whatever the era. Fullstop. Stop trying to excuse it.

[Cap'n Grumpy]

In my view only an absolute psychopath would consider shooting such a glorious animal baited into position.

I agree entirely, but what I do not agree with was comparing people of the past by today's standards.

Very few people, if any, cared if some rich people shot big animals for fun but that has changed in the past 40+ years (ish), as has society.

Your opinion whether you care to admit it or not, like mine has been conditioned by all that we have learned in recent times about conservation, species extinction etc.

[Cap'n Grumpy]

Slavery was grand too. Different era.

Slavery was not grand - nor was shooting animals for fun. I have no hesitation in stating that straight up. What I do find hard to do is condemn people for conforming to the attitudes and norms of society for the period in which they lived.

Slavery existed since the beginning of human times - it was not started by a few Europeans sending Africans to Europe and the Americas. Actually, the ones most guilty of that were other Africans selling slaves to the Europeans for transportation, but we're getting off topic here.

As I say, slavery has existed for millennia, but it took until a few hundred years ago for most to change their minds on the morality of that.It took years of re-educating to get to where we are now. Of course some took longer to get there than others - that was often because they stood to lose money by its abolition. Indeed there are still some cultures that don't see too much wrong with slavery.

None of that makes slavery right, but we have the benefit of hindsight and modern ethics to come to that decision. Others in centuries past did not have that and merely conformed to the accepted norm of the time. Does that make it right? No, of course not, but should we condemn them for conforming to accepted practices? I don't think so.

[Cap'n Grumpy]

'arry's got rescue chickens now.

For laying or roasting?

[Jackie Brown]

Slavery was grand too. Different era.

Wise up Dave, why not throw in the Holocaust for good measure. Hardly comparing apples with apples.

I don't think the Holocaust was ever grand.

[Dave]

Slavery was grand too. Different era.

Slavery was not grand - nor was shooting animals for fun. I have no hesitation in stating that straight up. What I do find hard to do is condemn people for conforming to the attitudes and norms of society for the period in which they lived.

Slavery existed since the beginning of human times - it was not started by a few Europeans sending Africans to Europe and the Americas. Actually, the ones most guilty of that were other Africans selling slaves to the Europeans for transportation, but we're getting off topic here.

As I say, slavery has existed for millennia, but it took until a few hundred years ago for most to change their minds on the morality of that.It took years of re-educating to get to where we are now. Of course some took longer to get there than others - that was often because they stood to lose money by its abolition. Indeed there are still some cultures that don't see too much wrong with slavery.

None of that makes slavery right, but we have the benefit of hindsight and modern ethics to come to that decision. Others in centuries past did not have that and merely conformed to the accepted norm of the time. Does that make it right? No, of course not, but should we condemn them for conforming to accepted practices? I don't think so.

So we can't condemn the slave traders? OK. That's your opinion. You're very entitled to it.

Happy birthday