It’s been a really bad few days for the grouse shooters (8)

The poll on whether grouse shooting should be banned (Banned remember! Not better regulated – the whole nine yards of banning) in the Yorkshire Post (the Yorkshire Post – not the Islington Post) is neatly poised at close to 50:50 after more than 10,000 votes.  In fact, not banning it was a smidgeon (second use of that lovely word on this blog today) ahead the last time I looked before I started cutting the grass.

But can you imagine that in a Yorkshire paper, over the weekend of the Inglorious Twelfth, people would be equally divided between grouse shooting continuing and being consigned to history? It wouldn’t have been true a few years ago but it is now – and that’s because people, like the readers of this blog, have stood up and been counted.

If your favourite so-called sport divided public opinion equally on whether it should be tolerated or banned you’d feel a bit uncomfortable I guess.

It’s not been a good few days for grouse shooters at all – Bad days (1), Bad days (2), Bad days (3), Bad days (4), Bad days (5), Bad days (6), Bad days (7).

 

[registration_form]

7 Replies to “It’s been a really bad few days for the grouse shooters (8)”

  1. Not saying it’s faked either way – but that poll is incredibly easy to fiddle – well actually it is a little faked but I voted five times for each to even things up 🙂

    Don’t cry foul – was just experimenting to see how easy it was. You do need to know a smidgeon about modern web browsers

    1. Giles, I think you are missing the point here. No-one thought it was going to be a robust statistical exercise in the first place. Perhaps instead of irrelevant boasting about your ‘smidgeon’ of knowledge about modern web browsers you might decide where you are going to cast your next five votes.

  2. Hey Mark, I’m beginning to feel a little stirring of hope, well done to everyone who has helped this Inglorious 12th become such bad day for the shooters and all those that kill to sustain driven grouse shooting.

  3. Ironic that from the network tab all the dodgy votes I did have this site as the referrer

  4. Should’ve burnt your grass Mark, apparently it is very good for the wildlife.

    1. Sue and Chris – made me furrow my brow (a bit slow there) and then put a big grin on my face. Thanks.

  5. I see it as a way the local newspaper can sit on the fence and not loose any moor ( pun intended ) readers.

Comments are closed.