It is difficult to overstate the sheer callousness revealed by Rupert Lowe’s recent admission that he had his elderly Labrador, Cromwell, shot in the back of the head by his gamekeeper. In a revelation that left fellow MPs stunned, Lowe proudly recounted the moment as though it were a mark of practical wisdom, a display of rustic decisiveness over what he considers the more ‘cruel’ alternative of a veterinary euthanasia. In truth, what Lowe’s actions expose is not courage, but a shocking detachment, an absence of empathy, and a profound misunderstanding of what it means to grant an animal a dignified end.
So #RupertLowe had his Labrador shot by his gamekeeper. A few things…
— funf.studio (@radartabs) June 23, 2025
1. Who has a fucking gamekeeper?
2. Why not go to the vet?
3. Is this why he had his guns removed by police?
4. Animal cruelty is an early indicator of Psychopathic tendencies. pic.twitter.com/mtdNoPIsxc
There is something chilling about the way Lowe narrates the event — almost boastful in tone, masking his evident cowardice by dressing it up as compassion. “So much kinder,” he declared, as though bypassing the vet and opting for the barrel of a gun was an enlightened act of mercy. That he delegated the task to his gamekeeper only underscores his moral evasion. It is not ‘kindness’ to pass the burden of ending a life to someone else because one finds it emotionally unbearable. It is self-serving cowardice dressed in rural romanticism.
Just when you thought @RupertLowe10 couldn’t get any lower, you learn he gave his gamekeeper permission to take his aging dog out and shot it.
— Robert Sproggit 🇪🇺🇮🇪 (@robertsproggit) June 22, 2025
Lowe is fucking vile human. A lowlife piece of scum.
Karma, do your shit
The suggestion that taking Cromwell to the vet would have been ‘cruel’ because the dog could ‘sense something was wrong’ is a breathtakingly flimsy defence. Veterinary professionals are specifically trained to ensure that animals experience the least possible distress at the end of their lives. The image Lowe paints — of dogs trembling in terror at the vet’s office — is a shallow caricature, ignoring the millions of loving pet owners who make that final journey with their animals precisely because they want to ensure it is peaceful, painless, and handled with expertise.
Rupert Lowe was down to his last £30 million so had his dog shot by his gamekeeper to save a vet bill.
— Mark Cockerton (@CockertonMark) June 23, 2025
Pass it on.
Instead, Lowe opted for the grotesque theatre of an execution on his estate. No clinical sedation. No pain management. Just a gunshot to the back of the head — a method that, even if done instantly, carries the possibility of suffering if misjudged. That Lowe sees this as a ‘kinder’ alternative reveals a staggering lack of emotional intelligence and a worrying distance from modern standards of animal welfare.
As I said on LBC Radio with Venessa Feltz this afternoon there can be no justification for Rupert Lowe MP to have his game keeper shoot his pet Labrador. A dog at the end of its life deserves care & compassion and a dignified humane death by lethal injection under the care of a… pic.twitter.com/j67MinMZNT
— dominic dyer (@domdyer70) June 22, 2025
The rural-urban cultural divide cited by some of his colleagues does little to excuse his behaviour. Even in the countryside, compassion is not some alien concept. The notion that this was simply ‘an old money thing to do’ that would have been acceptable a century ago is precisely the point: society has moved on. Our understanding of animal sentience, pain, and the responsibilities we bear towards animals in our care has evolved, but it seems Rupert Lowe has not.
So how does #RupertLowe justify cruelly having his infirm dog shot in the head with a shotgun, whilst also vocally campaigning against the (also) cruel act of non-stun abattoir slaughter? Is it because his gamekeeper isn’t a Muslim (presumably)? pic.twitter.com/ceRZFU9viv
— funf.studio (@radartabs) June 23, 2025
Elizabeth Davenport of Animal Aid rightly called out the glaring gaps in UK legislation that allow such practices to occur in private homes without scrutiny. The Animal Welfare Act 2006, while a step forward, still permits individuals with no formal veterinary training to make life-ending decisions for animals, decisions that can be clouded by ignorance, convenience, or outdated beliefs.
Rupert Lowe’s actions highlight an urgent need for reform. The lack of legal protection for animals in these situations is not a mere technicality; it is a failure of moral responsibility. No animal should be deprived of the right to a humane, professional end-of-life process, regardless of where it lives.
Rupert Lowe moans about Halal every week. He calls it barbaric and wants it banned.
— Zara (@zarahussain999) June 23, 2025
But shooting a 17 year old family dog in head with a rifle isn’t barbaric?
Hypocrisy is sickening #UK #Islam #Muslim #Britain pic.twitter.com/kOiLTXIj9r
That Lowe raised a glass to his fallen companion afterwards is a bitter irony. A dog who had faithfully stood by his side for seventeen years deserved better than a cold, clinical execution in the garden. He deserved the gentle hand of his owner, the familiar scent of comfort, and the presence of those who loved him.
Instead, Cromwell was handed over to a man with a gun.
In the end, it is not just Lowe’s decision that is reprehensible, it is the smugness with which he recounts it. A nation of animal lovers will rightly recoil at such flippant disregard for the deep bond between humans and their pets.
And so they should.
