Disgusting

[Judas Iscariot]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3119142/Sicko-throws-puppies-to-death.html

What the **** can a person like this contribute to our society!?

I hope she's found asap and let the angry mob loose..

****ing disgusting, horrible, coward of a human!!!

[Woody1985]

At least they weren't cats!

We live in a sick world where these type of things aren't that uncommon. It's just that they're now caught on camera due to mobile devices.

I recall my uncle telling me about a guy who lives round the street from me used to catch pigeons and tie wire around their legs and throw them up in the air to fly away. I'm sure I don't need to tell you what happened but there's always been sickos and always will be.

I think I'm also correct in saying that some dog breeders regularly drown new borns because there are too many of them for the mother to feed and/or for them to sell. I could be wrong but it wouldn't surprise me.

[Teo10]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3119142/Sicko-throws-puppies-to-death.html

What the **** can a person like this contribute to our society!?

I hope she's found asap and let the angry mob loose..

****ing disgusting, horrible, coward of a human!!!

:bitchy: That is ****ing sick! People were getting worked up about the woman dumping a cat in the bin, wait until they read this!

I hope she is found and thrown into that river with concrete blocks at her feet so she realises what is it like for a helpless animal!

[lyonhibs]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3119142/Sicko-throws-puppies-to-death.html

What the **** can a person like this contribute to our society!?

I hope she's found asap and let the angry mob loose..

****ing disgusting, horrible, coward of a human!!!

I don't think we need worry about that, as it appears she was committing this absolutely unspeakable act of cruelty in a Balkan state somewhere.

Quite apart from that, what a incredibly horrid thing to do. What sort of soulless ******* do you have to be to chuck tiny, helpless puppies into a fast flowing river!!?? It's enough to make you greet, through pity for the puppies and rage that such callous folk exist.

[Jack]

Sick and disgusting it is but no worse than mans inhumanity to man all too often.

There is and always has been some really vile humans amongst us.

[(((Fergus)))]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3119142/Sicko-throws-puppies-to-death.html

What the **** can a person like this contribute to our society!?

I hope she's found asap and let the angry mob loose..

****ing disgusting, horrible, coward of a human!!!

Put her in a wheelie bin?

[Judas Iscariot]

Found her already?!... http://www.huliq.com/3257/girl-throwing-puppies-river-tentatively-ided-one-katja-puschnik

Think I'll set up a facebook group to get donations to pay for my journey across Europe to exact similiar treatment upon that disgusting ****er..

[we are hibs]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3119142/Sicko-throws-puppies-to-death.html

What the **** can a person like this contribute to our society!?

I hope she's found asap and let the angry mob loose..

****ing disgusting, horrible, coward of a human!!!

if i where a women i would kick her up and down the river

[Phil D. Rolls]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3119142/Sicko-throws-puppies-to-death.html

What the **** can a person like this contribute to our society!?

I hope she's found asap and let the angry mob loose..

****ing disgusting, horrible, coward of a human!!!

I'm sure with just a wee bit more dehumanising and de-skilling he could get a job as a Sun journalist.

What exactly does publicising sick acts like this contribute to our society?

[--------]

I'm sure with just a wee bit more dehumanising and de-skilling he could get a job as a Sun journalist.

What exactly does publicising sick acts like this contribute to our society?


I didn't play the thing, but I assume that from the heights of its moral indignation the Sun had retrieved the video that had been taken off YouTube, and made it available again?

[Phil D. Rolls]

I didn't play the thing, but I assume that from the heights of its moral indignation the Sun had retrieved the video that had been taken off YouTube, and made it available again?

They are so disgusted they have to remind themselves on a daily basis, lest they get complacent.

[Hainan Hibs]

I'd love to kick complete and utter **** out the woman:agree:.

There I said it:boo hoo:

[Phil D. Rolls]

Surely there must be some muttigating circumstances?

[Phil D. Rolls]

In all seriousness, a horrible thing to do, and sickening for it to be filmed on video. At the same time, I am with a previous poster in agreeing that it pails into insignificance when set aside some of the inhumanity man inflicts on man.

There is a war criminal being interviewed on TV tonight. A man responsible for the deaths of many men women and children. Yet for some reason someone destroying some unwanted puppies raises such anger.

We are a strange bunch, particularly when it comes to the ways we punish people who do wrong.

[MSK]

That has turned my stomach ..

[HibsMax]

I recall a friend of mine (many years ago) talking about his Dad putting puppies in a sack with stones and drowning them. Ugh.

The only slightly positive thing I can say about this is that it's true that there are too many animals, our shelters are already overflowing. Taking unwanted puppies to a shelter only adds to the problem. Of course if animals "have" to be destroyed then I can think of many more humane methods than lobbing into a river to drown.

What makes this especially sick, IMO, is the fact that the person(s) thought it would be a good idea to record it. Um, why? To me, that adds a different twist to the story. I think there's a difference between a person who sneaks into the woods in the middle of the night to get rid of unwanted pets and a person who records the vile act.

[Gatecrasher]

That has turned my stomach ..
Same here

[Sergey]

I'll hold up my hand and admit that my dad and I drowned six kittens that were born in our shed (when I was a child).

The cat was wild and we couldn't get into the shed as said cat was going mental whenever we went near it. I recall shooing it away with a golf club while my father bundled the kittens into a Hessian sack (and into the Forth they went).

Taught me about life and death while at a young age....and I could also get my bike out of the shed :greengrin

[(((Fergus)))]

You see worse on British riverbanks most weekends where people impale worms on a metal hook and throw them, still living, into the water. Some try to justify it by saying that they do it to catch fish for food but many just do it for fun and throw the fish back. They also do it with wee baby flies.

[Ed De Gramo]

thats some sick stuff like. :boo hoo:

[Dinkydoo]

if i where a women i would kick her up and down the river

I'd kick her face in regardless, sick ****.


I recall a friend of mine (many years ago) talking about his Dad putting puppies in a sack with stones and drowning them. Ugh.

The only slightly positive thing I can say about this is that it's true that there are too many animals, our shelters are already overflowing. Taking unwanted puppies to a shelter only adds to the problem. Of course if animals "have" to be destroyed then I can think of many more humane methods than lobbing into a river to drown.

What makes this especially sick, IMO, is the fact that the person(s) thought it would be a good idea to record it. Um, why? To me, that adds a different twist to the story. I think there's a difference between a person who sneaks into the woods in the middle of the night to get rid of unwanted pets and a person who records the vile act.

Why do we need to "destroy" animals in the first place?

Why not release them back into some sort of wilderness and at least give them half a chance of survival since it's us who caused the problem in the first place by domesticating a species.

Should we not take more responsiblity for an overcrowding problem that we've created?

[Phil D. Rolls]

I'd kick her face in regardless, sick ****.



And get a good night's sleep after it no doubt. :rolleyes:

[SRHibs]

And get a good night's sleep after it no doubt. :rolleyes:
And why should he be expected to feel bad about doing such a thing?


I'll hold up my hand and admit that my dad and I drowned six kittens that were born in our shed (when I was a child).

The cat was wild and we couldn't get into the shed as said cat was going mental whenever we went near it. I recall shooing it away with a golf club while my father bundled the kittens into a Hessian sack (and into the Forth they went).

Taught me about life and death while at a young age....and I could also get my bike out of the shed :greengrin

Your Dad is a twisted moron.

[Phil D. Rolls]

And why should he be expected to feel bad about doing such a thing?

I would hope that most men would feel bad about kicking a woman's face in - whatever she is meant to have done.

[Dinkydoo]

And get a good night's sleep after it no doubt. :rolleyes:


Thank you for the moral guilt trip FR but yes, I probably would :wink:


As long as the whole pre-programmed "men can't hit women" thing didn't get the better of me before hand....... : P



Edit: That was weird, I didn't even see your post before writing mines......

[SRHibs]

I would hope that most men would feel bad about kicking a woman's face in - whatever she is meant to have done.
Anyone who can throw a bag full of helpless puppies in a river to drown while showing absolutely no remorse deserves a lot more than a good kicking imo, regardless if they're female or not.

[Sergey]

Anyone who can throw a bag full of helpless puppies in a river to drown while showing absolutely no remorse deserves a lot more than a good kicking imo, regardless if they're female or not.

What about wild kittens?

You obviously think that my father was wrong....but worded it slightly differently.

You seem to have an opinion on the subject.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Anyone who can throw a bag full of helpless puppies in a river to drown while showing absolutely no remorse deserves a lot more than a good kicking imo, regardless if they're female or not.

IMO a lot people on here seem to relish the thought of inflicting violence on others - especially people weaker than them, and I find that disturbing.

[SRHibs]

What about wild kittens?

You obviously think that my father was wrong....but worded it slightly differently.

You seem to have an opinion on the subject.

Your Dad is obviously a complete sicko who clearly doesn't realise and appreciate the worth of life, and how cruel it is to take life away from something for no reason.


IMO a lot people on here seem to relish the thought of inflicting violence on others - especially people weaker than them, and I find that disturbing.


And you really think that's why Dinkydoo posted that, or are you just **** stirring? Jesus ****ing Christ...

[Dinkydoo]

IMO a lot people on here seem to relish the thought of inflicting violence on others - especially people weaker than them, and I find that disturbing.


Think you might want to add a wee pinch of salt before getting so disturbed man.

[Sergey]

Your Dad is obviously a complete sicko who clearly doesn't realise and appreciate the worth of life, and how cruel it is to take life away from something for no reason.

Go save a slug (or a rat). They're probably distant cousins.

[SRHibs]

Go save a slug (or a rat). They're probably distant cousins.
Yes, I'm obviously too touchy when it comes to animals because I find the fact that your Dad cruelly drowned kittens shocking?
I think it's disturbing that you actually seem to think(going by the 'tone' of your initial post anyway) that it was funny in some way.

[Dinkydoo]

Go save a slug (or a rat). They're probably distant cousins.


What an evolutionary masterpiece it would be for a slug to evolve into a cat - insect type thing to mamal :tee hee:

Sorry to lower the tone, I just found that amusing.

[Sergey]

Yes, I'm obviously too touchy when it comes to animals because I find the fact that your Dad cruelly drowned kittens shocking?
I think it's disturbing that you actually seem to think(going by the 'tone' of your initial post anyway) that it was funny in some way.

Who said it was funny? I think you read my post wrong.

Is it acceptable for vets to destroy wild kittens? The fact is, we saved the vet the job (and did the act in a quick and humane way).

Or would you have rather the foxes butcher them, and the crows peck their eyes out?

Neither here nor there to moi. They were wild animals and were basically diseased vermin.

Even the RSPCA would have destroyed them.

Sad?

No!

[Phil D. Rolls]

Think you might want to add a wee pinch of salt before getting so disturbed man.

OK then, it's just that sometimes it's hard to know whether people are serious about these things, or if it's just their way of letting off steam.


Your Dad is obviously a complete sicko who clearly doesn't realise and appreciate the worth of life, and how cruel it is to take life away from something for no reason.




And you really think that's why Dinkydoo posted that, or are you just **** stirring? Jesus ****ing Christ...

I didn't know what Dinkydoo was thinking, even if I knew him personally, I wouldn't be able to say. You have to take these things literally.

[SRHibs]

Who said it was funny? I think you read my post wrong.
Where did I say that you 'said it was funny'? The way you posted, made it seem like you thought it was funny.


Is it acceptable for vets to destroy wild kittens? The fact is, we saved the vet the job (and did the act in a quick and humane way). Since when was drowning them a 'quick and humane way'. Christ, you're deluded.


Or would you have rather the foxes butcher them, and the crows peck their eyes out?In your shed? Although I'm sure the cat was so strong that you weren't able to get it, and the kittens out without causing any harm.:rolleyes:


Neither here nor there to moi. They were wild animals and were basically diseased vermin.

Even the RSPCA would have destroyed them.Oh, that makes it ok then. Sorry.


Sad?

No!:yawn:

[ArabHibee]

Who said it was funny? I think you read my post wrong.

Is it acceptable for vets to destroy wild kittens? The fact is, we saved the vet the job (and did the act in a quick and humane way).

Or would you have rather the foxes butcher them, and the crows peck their eyes out?

Neither here nor there to moi. They were wild animals and were basically diseased vermin.

Even the RSPCA would have destroyed them.

Sad?

No!

I'm really sorry Sergey but there is a massive difference between giving an animal a lethal injection and drowning it. Can you not see that?

[Dinkydoo]

OK then, it's just that sometimes it's hard to know whether people are serious about these things, or if it's just their way of letting off steam.





I didn't know what Dinkydoo was thinking, even if I knew him personally, I wouldn't be able to say. You have to take these things literally.


Nae bawhair FR, I completely understand the whole interpretation thing on message boards - without tone, it can be difficult at times to know whether someone is being deadly serious or just messing around.

[ChooseLife]

Who said it was funny? I think you read my post wrong.

Is it acceptable for vets to destroy wild kittens? The fact is, we saved the vet the job (and did the act in a quick and humane way).

Or would you have rather the foxes butcher them, and the crows peck their eyes out?

Neither here nor there to moi. They were wild animals and were basically diseased vermin.

Even the RSPCA would have destroyed them..

Sad?

No!
Just because it's the norm in your country doesn't mean it's right, they are not vermin, they are kittens, regardless of any disease they may have had, you and your dad should be ashamed, and the fact your trying to defend your actions is even worse, they should have been humanely destroyed by the RSPCA, not thrown into a bag and shoved into the river so you and your dad could make a day of it
:bitchy:

You didn't have the right to "save the vet a job", as for the video this thread was originaly about, lets hope someone 10X her size throws her into the river, that would be sweet.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Amazing, woman throws puppies in a stream - two pages.

Dog rips childs face apart - 7 posts.

Just saying likes.

[Woody1985]

I think there's been a few dog attacks lately. This combined with the cat in the bin story has drawn more attention for that reason. This thread has also digressed into animal cruelty as a whole which has resulted in more posts.

My ex gf bought an aylestone bulldog even though I told her not because I think they're too dangerous and strong but she did anyway. I wasn't happy.

Ironically I was telling my mates about the nippy little ******* in the pub and phoned her to check the breed again but I'd just got a new phone and hadn't hung it up properly and she heard me taking the piss out of the little ****. That caused a small arguement that turned into a bigger one and we split up. :faf:

There's a boy I know that's got a full breed american pitbull (the banned ones) and he used to give it steroids. This thing is a killing machine. He has punture wounds on his legs and arms from when its attacked him numerous times in the past.

[marinello59]

Just because it's the norm in your country doesn't mean it's right, they are not vermin, they are kittens, regardless of any disease they may have had, you and your dad should be ashamed, and the fact your trying to defend your actions is even worse, they should have been humanely destroyed by the RSPCA, not thrown into a bag and shoved into the river so you and your dad could make a day of it
:bitchy:

You didn't have the right to "save the vet a job", as for the video this thread was originaly about, lets hope someone 10X her size throws her into the river, that would be sweet.

The UK?:confused:

I am of a slightly older vintage than Sergey and to my parents generation drowning kittens/puppies as a means of disposal was not seen with the same revulsion as it is now. You really can't impose the moral norms of today retrospectively. It's the way it was.

[ChooseLife]

The UK?:confused:

I am of a slightly older vintage than Sergey and to my parents generation drowning kittens/puppies as a means of disposal was not seen with the same revulsion as it is now. You really can't impose the moral norms of today retrospectively. It's the way it was.
I always thought Sergey was from Russia :doh:

Maybe things were a little bit different back then but the way the story was told, I could almost hear a riverside melody playing in the background as him and papa chucked the defenceless creatures into the Forth, it's not the right thing to do IMO.

[ChooseLife]

Amazing, woman throws puppies in a stream - two pages.

Dog rips childs face apart - 7 posts.

Just saying likes.

Let's hope said woman gets her face ripped off by said dog.:thumbsup: Seems a match made in heaven.

[Bishop Hibee]

As has been said previously, it was seen as humane to drown unwanted puppies and kittens in the past. Still goes on in the countryside where people have a closer relationship to the land and tend to have a working relationship with their animals.

I personally find the amount of money UK people spend on their pets while millions around the world starve more obscene than drowning a few unwanted puppies.

Just my opinion 'likesay'.

[New Corrie]

As has been said previously, it was seen as humane to drown unwanted puppies and kittens in the past. Still goes on in the countryside where people have a closer relationship to the land and tend to have a working relationship with their animals.

I personally find the amount of money UK people spend on their pets while millions around the world starve more obscene than drowning a few unwanted puppies.

Just my opinion 'likesay'.

Obscene!!!! What do you think of the half a Billion pounds the Catholic Church has paid to victims of child abuse. No surprise that you should post this. You can turn a blind eye to drowning innocent animals and defend the "turning of blind eyes" to wanton child molestation. You are very very sick.

Anyone who drowns pets should suffer the same fate IMO, and believe me, peoples pets will always be, by a million miles further up the pecking order than sickos like you, again IMO of course,

disgusting people.

[marinello59]

Obscene!!!! What do you think of the half a Billion pounds the Catholic Church has paid to victims of child abuse. No surprise that you should post this. You can turn a blind eye to drowning innocent animals and defend the "turning of blind eyes" to wanton child molestation. You are very very sick.

Anyone who drowns pets should suffer the same fate IMO, and believe me, peoples pets will always be, by a million miles further up the pecking order than sickos like you, again IMO of course,

disgusting people.

Can't you resist any opportunity to express your rabid, bigoted anti-Catholic views? Give it a rest. The thread was about animal cruelty.

[Judas Iscariot]

Anyone who drowns pets should suffer the same fate IMO, and believe me, peoples pets will always be, by a million miles further up the pecking order than sickos like you, again IMO of course,

disgusting people.

That's all you needed to say..

[shamo9]

Most people are capable of such a thing under certain circumstances. Hence why it attracts a herd of angry people; who then attempt to hunt her down with the intention of repeating the atrocity, all under the pretence of misguided revenge. As if once wasn't enough!

[Phil D. Rolls]

Most people are capable of such a thing under certain circumstances. Hence why it attracts a herd of angry people; who then attempt to hunt her down with the intention of repeating the atrocity, all under the pretence of misguided revenge. As if once wasn't enough!

We're getting into similar territory to the Bulger killers debate now. Somebody posted before that if we take an eye for an eye, everybody ends up blind.

[Bishop Hibee]

Obscene!!!! What do you think of the half a Billion pounds the Catholic Church has paid to victims of child abuse. No surprise that you should post this. You can turn a blind eye to drowning innocent animals and defend the "turning of blind eyes" to wanton child molestation. You are very very sick.

Anyone who drowns pets should suffer the same fate IMO, and believe me, peoples pets will always be, by a million miles further up the pecking order than sickos like you, again IMO of course,

disgusting people.

You know NOTHING about me so calling me a sicko is beyond laughable. NOWHERE did I say I agreed with the drowning of animals. I merely made the point that those who have a working relationship with animals see things very differently to "townies".

As far the child abuse comments, NOTHING to do with this thread.

Are you always this filled with rage? How sad.

[New Corrie]

You know NOTHING about me so calling me a sicko is beyond laughable. NOWHERE did I say I agreed with the drowning of animals. I merely made the point that those who have a working relationship with animals see things very differently to "townies".

As far the child abuse comments, NOTHING to do with this thread.

Are you always this filled with rage? How sad.


Yes I am when it involves cruelty to children and animals, they tend to place their trust in big people (like us) and it then gets abused by certain parties. You are right, I know nothing about you, apart from the fact that on one hand you defend an establishment with a histoty of hideous atrocities towards chilkdren , then bizzarrly(sp) suggest that we should priotise human welfare over animal welfare. very confused:confused:

[shamo9]

We're getting into similar territory to the Bulger killers debate now. Somebody posted before that if we take an eye for an eye, everybody ends up blind.


True. You lose the right to get outraged by acts of violence when you're quite content to stand aside and see it dished out in return.


For all we know the girl in the video was retaliating against a dog who killed her kid by preceding to kill the dog's puppies. Sound stupid? Yeah, because it is.

[AgentDaleCooper]

rather than go on the rant that i'm tempted to go on that would only get me more wound up, i'll just say that i hope she dies a grizzly death involving lots of pain and some kind of realisation of what a compassionless waste of flesh she is.

to me, this is every bit as bad as tossing a bucket full of newborn babies into a river. the intense distress and suffering caused would be totally comparable, and it makes me sick that suck foul acts aren't punished to the same degree. a life sentence with no parole is the least she deserves (and the most, because i don't believe in the death penalty, though i've no idea what i would do if i saw someone committing such a horrific crime against innocent life).

[AgentDaleCooper]

We're getting into similar territory to the Bulger killers debate now. Somebody posted before that if we take an eye for an eye, everybody ends up blind.

this is very true - however, it's the idea that doing this to other animals isn't as bad as to humans that i think is just farcical.

[Dinkydoo]

True. You lose the right to get outraged by acts of violence when you're quite content to stand aside and see it dished out in return.


For all we know the girl in the video was retaliating against a dog who killed her kid by preceding to kill the dog's puppies. Sound stupid? Yeah, because it is.

It's all part of human nature to feel angry and the need for some sort of justice which would put the accused through a comparable amount of suffering, after either experiencing or hearing of a terrible act of cruelty.

Whilst many people have basically said that they wouldn't give a flying one if she diede in a similar way, I bet that nobody on here has actually marched down to her house and attempted to drag her into the cannal......

Since you seem fond of using hypotheticals (which IMO, in cases like this is never a good way to form conclusions): say, you had a relative that just so happend to be killed in the 9/11 attack (please say you haven't :boo hoo:). Would you forfeit your right to be outraged by simply wishing a similar fate on the terrorist organisation behind it..............after all the grief you'd have been through, sound stupid? Yeah, because it is.

[lapsedhibee]

rather than go on the rant that i'm tempted to go on that would only get me more wound up, i'll just say that i hope she dies a grizzly death involving lots of pain and some kind of realisation of what a compassionless waste of flesh she is.

to me, this is every bit as bad as tossing a bucket full of newborn babies into a river. the intense distress and suffering caused would be totally comparable, and it makes me sick that suck foul acts aren't punished to the same degree. a life sentence with no parole is the least she deserves (and the most, because i don't believe in the death penalty, though i've no idea what i would do if i saw someone committing such a horrific crime against innocent life).

No offence or nuffin, but I don't entirely get this. Have you never swatted a fly? If so, why has a fly got any less right to a life than a young dog? What does "innocent" mean here? Can flies, dogs etc be guilty? Under what moral codes? :confused:

[AgentDaleCooper]

No offence or nuffin, but I don't entirely get this. Have you never swatted a fly? If so, why has a fly got any less right to a life than a young dog? What does "innocent" mean here? Can flies, dogs etc be guilty? Under what moral codes? :confused:

it's not so much the right to life as the right not to suffer.

perhaps innocent was the wrong word, maybe helpless and vulnerable...?

[HibsMax]

Why do we need to "destroy" animals in the first place?

Why not release them back into some sort of wilderness and at least give them half a chance of survival since it's us who caused the problem in the first place by domesticating a species.

Should we not take more responsiblity for an overcrowding problem that we've created?
I appreciate the sentiment and I agree with what you are saying principle but it's a little too idealistic I'm afraid.

We need to destroy animals in the first place because of a couple of factors:
1. domesticated animals - we breed too many of them
2. wild animals - we are out of control and spreading into other animals habitats at an alarming rate (building, deforestisation, etc.).

I think it's unrealistic to take all the animals currently in shelters and release them into the wild. Many of them *will* die without proper care. Who is going to care for them? Is it better to let a puppy fend for itself, perhaps taking days to die, than drowning it in a river? I'm not supporting this horrible behaviour but it's a question that needs to be answered.

There are organisations out there that do exactly what you say (for wild animals) but when it comes to domestic animals, there's little we can do. Why? That's easy. Money, money, money. It is a problem caused by humans. The only way we can rectify the problem is by breeding less animals but that's not going to happen. We can't even stop ourselves from breeding and that's putting a strain on things just on its own.

[HibsMax]

Amazing, woman throws puppies in a stream - two pages.

Dog rips childs face apart - 7 posts.

Just saying likes.

I am not sure how to best put this into words without sounding like an idiot but I will try anyway. I tend to think of animal cruelty as worse than human cruelty. As far as I'm concerned we're humans and, as a species, we can do whatever we want to one another (I am not condoning cruelty to children or anyone else by the way). We are the so-called "rulers" of this planet. We're the most intelligent species alive (so we think). But there's no need to extend the suffering to other species. That said, cruelty does exist in the animal kingdom so it's not uniquely human to be cruel. What is (almost) unique about our own brand of cruelty is that it's usually not related to our own survival so you could say that it is needless cruelty.

[Bishop Hibee]

[/B]


Yes I am when it involves cruelty to children and animals, they tend to place their trust in big people (like us) and it then gets abused by certain parties. You are right, I know nothing about you, apart from the fact that on one hand you defend an establishment with a histoty of hideous atrocities towards chilkdren , then bizzarrly(sp) suggest that we should priotise human welfare over animal welfare. very confused:confused:

Last comments I will make on this thread.

0.4% of Roman Catholic Priests have been accused, not convicted, of child sex abuse in the UK. That is 0.4% too many and great strides have been taken over the past 15-20 years in creating and implementing policies that protect children and vulnerable adults in the catholic church from any abuse.

I also agree that anyone carrying out cruelty against animals which is against the law of the land should feel the full force of the law.

You may hate the catholic church, that's your choice, but I don't think anyone on this board appreciates personal abuse.

[Dinkydoo]

I appreciate the sentiment and I agree with what you are saying principle but it's a little too idealistic I'm afraid.

We need to destroy animals in the first place because of a couple of factors:
1. domesticated animals - we breed too many of them
2. wild animals - we are out of control and spreading into other animals habitats at an alarming rate (building, deforestisation, etc.).

I think it's unrealistic to take all the animals currently in shelters and release them into the wild. Many of them *will* die without proper care. Who is going to care for them? Is it better to let a puppy fend for itself, perhaps taking days to die, than drowning it in a river? I'm not supporting this horrible behaviour but it's a question that needs to be answered.

There are organisations out there that do exactly what you say (for wild animals) but when it comes to domestic animals, there's little we can do. Why? That's easy. Money, money, money. It is a problem caused by humans. The only way we can rectify the problem is by breeding less animals but that's not going to happen. We can't even stop ourselves from breeding and that's putting a strain on things just on its own.

Bits in bold;

1) Surely the domestication issue is our responsibility though. The fact that we've created the problem in the first place is bad enough without resorting to "destroying" animals as a solution. We should at least try to find an alternative to simply getting rid of the problem through killing.

2) I agree, we shouldn't be trying to release all of the animals currently in shelters into the wild. It's not really feasible in terms of ecosystem maintenance and would probably cause all sorts of other problems. My initial question was, why do we need to destroy them?

3) Many olf them will probably die, not will (which is what I suspect you meant by using the asterix). It's a question of probability, I.E: ask those lottery customers who purchased dud tickets how they felt after realising they can't win - it doesn't matter how probable the "win" was in the first place, when you remove that probability you remove the chance, which in almost every circumstance is unfair.

My conclusion; No, it's never fair to take the chance or choice out of the individuals hands when it comes to life or death (outwith extreme circumstances)
be it human or animal. It';s a bit like saying, "Well, the cancer was going to kill him anyway, but this leathal injection in his sleep does it quickly without much pain".


At the end of the day, I believe that there may not (and probably isn't) an afterlife, so a few days, weeks, months of a pretty crap existence is better than none - and certainly better than removing that individuals choice in the matter.


*I do agree with most of what your saying, I just like to challenge the reasoning behind this thinking to help find a more positive outcome* :greengrin

[HibsMax]

[/B]


Yes I am when it involves cruelty to children and animals, they tend to place their trust in big people (like us) and it then gets abused by certain parties. You are right, I know nothing about you, apart from the fact that on one hand you defend an establishment with a histoty of hideous atrocities towards chilkdren , then bizzarrly(sp) suggest that we should priotise human welfare over animal welfare. very confused:confused:

Your comments seem a little out of place, don't you think? What has one person's belief system got to do with their opinion on animal cruelty? We're human, not robots, and as such we have different opinions. I'm sure 99.9% of all practicing Catholics are appalled by the abuse that you refer to above but that doesn't mean they're going to give up their beliefs. Yes, the church has their bad apples and yes they handled the situation badly but it's not like they're NAMBLA.

The point is, you're taking one argument and trying to bend it to fit your own agenda and if that's not what your intention is then you need to reword your posts.

You're confused by the "obvious" hypocrisy being displayed by BH but there are far more obvious examples. How about people who hunt? Just because a person is a hunter doesn't mean they tolerate cruelty to animals. Yet they kill them. That seems to make far less sense than your argument but I'm sure you will find that most hunters have no desire to hurt, injure or maim an animal. At least that's what I have learned from my experience.

[Woody1985]

Your comments seem a little out of place, don't you think? What has one person's belief system got to do with their opinion on animal cruelty? We're human, not robots, and as such we have different opinions. I'm sure 99.9% of all practicing Catholics are appalled by the abuse that you refer to above but that doesn't mean they're going to give up their beliefs. Yes, the church has their bad apples and yes they handled the situation badly but it's not like they're NAMBLA.

The point is, you're taking one argument and trying to bend it to fit your own agenda and if that's not what your intention is then you need to reword your posts.

You're confused by the "obvious" hypocrisy being displayed by BH but there are far more obvious examples. How about people who hunt? Just because a person is a hunter doesn't mean they tolerate cruelty to animals. Yet they kill them. That seems to make far less sense than your argument but I'm sure you will find that most hunters have no desire to hurt, injure or maim an animal. At least that's what I have learned from my experience.

But only 99.6% of priests. :greengrin

[HibsMax]

Bits in bold;

1) Surely the domestication issue is our responsibility though. The fact that we've created the problem in the first place is bad enough without resorting to "destroying" animals as a solution. We should at least try to find an alternative to simply getting rid of the problem through killing.

2) I agree, we shouldn't be trying to release all of the animals currently in shelters into the wild. It's not really feasible in terms of ecosystem maintenance and would probably cause all sorts of other problems. My initial question was, why do we need to destroy them?

3) Many olf them will probably die, not will (which is what I suspect you meant by using the asterix). It's a question of probability, I.E: ask those lottery customers who purchased dud tickets how they felt after realising they can't win - it doesn't matter how probable the "win" was in the first place, when you remove that probability you remove the chance, which in almost every circumstance is unfair.

My conclusion; No, it's never fair to take the chance or choice out of the individuals hands when it comes to life or death (outwith extreme circumstances)
be it human or animal. It';s a bit like saying, "Well, the cancer was going to kill him anyway, but this leathal injection in his sleep does it quickly without much pain".


At the end of the day, I believe that there may not (and probably isn't) an afterlife, so a few days, weeks, months of a pretty crap existence is better than none - and certainly better than removing that individuals choice in the matter.


*I do agree with most of what your saying, I just like to challenge the reasoning behind this thinking to help find a more positive outcome* :greengrin

I like to challenge and push buttons, too. :wink:.

1. In principle I agree with you, it IS our problem. We made it and it's ours to fix. But it's not going to happen any time soon. Money and greed have already seen to that. Shelters are a great example of the problem. People generally want cute kittens and puppies, not adult cats and dogs. So what happens is that people address the demand and increase the supply and that increases the populations, more animals are discarded (if not killed) and they end up in shelters where they wait to be adopted or die. Thank whomever you believe in that there are no-kill shelters out there.

2. That's a good question and I would argue that we don't *need* to destroy them, but destroyed they will be unless they can all find homes. I am speaking realistically here, not philosophically. In a perfect world there would be no need to kill any of them because they wouldn't exist in the first place.

3. Actually I meant that many of them WILL die. I understand your probability point but I was meaning the current example i.e., puppies, or any other animal that is too young to take care of itself. If you were to release adult cats and dogs, that would be a different story, but a litter of kittens / puppies - very little chance of survival on their own.


I actually think that a person with stage-4 cancer should be allowed to slip off quietly in their sleep if that's their decision. But that's the key word.....decision.

I don't agree with your "brief, crap existence is better than none" comment but then I'm hardly qualified to say having not yet seen what comes next. I'm not religious but I simply don't know what happens when I pop my clogs. I ask too many questions to be able to say, "that's it, it's all over, there's nothing left". As far as HibsMax is concerned, when I die I believe he dies but that doesn't mean I don't live on. I am not saying THIS will happen or THAT will happen, I'm saying I don't know what will happen and quite frankly, I don't think anyone else does either.



To get back on topic a little more, one thing I am sure about is that I don't subscribe to "suffering as entertainment" I occasionally fish which makes me a hypocrite of sorts. I catch and release but I am not dumb enough to think that the fish isn't stressed out and I am not always successful in the "release" phase, some of them die. But I don't seek out ways to be cruel to animals and if / when it happens I certainly don't take any enjoyment from it.

[HibsMax]

But only 99.6% of priests. :greengrin

LOL. I am sure the 0.4% number is low. I assume that's the number that have been caught or owned up. Maybe that's the tip of the iceberg or maybe that really is it. I suspect the number is / was a little higher. I am sure in recent times it's gone down though. Either that or priests are getting sneakier.

[shamo9]

=Dinkydoo;2570868]It's all part of human nature to feel angry and the need for some sort of justice which would put the accused through a comparable amount of suffering, after either experiencing or hearing of a terrible act of cruelty.

Whilst many people have basically said that they wouldn't give a flying one if she diede in a similar way, I bet that nobody on here has actually marched down to her house and attempted to drag her into the cannal......

Since you seem fond of using hypotheticals (which IMO, in cases like this is never a good way to form conclusions): say, you had a relative that just so happend to be killed in the 9/11 attack (please say you haven't :boo hoo:). Would you forfeit your right to be outraged by simply wishing a similar fate on the terrorist organisation behind it..............after all the grief you'd have been through, sound stupid? Yeah, because it is.

I think you're taking a very 'common sense' view with that one, humans don't react the same way to similar stimuli. Take 9/11 as an example; there are victims who have went out of their way to try and forgive while others are getting their infernos ready to burn the Koran.

We're getting way off topic here but I will always side with nurture over nature. Any trends in behaviour are down to differing socialisation. A straightforward example would be the American fetish for guns and the ambivalence over capital punishment. They're not wired any different from us, they're just brough up differently.

"Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man" and all that... take the cases of kids being brought up by dogs as an example.

[Judas Iscariot]

There's arguments for, shall we say, disposing, of animals in certain situations, conditions etc and obviously arguments against..

To get back to the footage in my OP the nature in which the woman seems to take GREAT pleasure in throwing a bucket full of live, whimpering puppies into a river is what has caused the outrage..

[Dinkydoo]

I think you're taking a very 'common sense' view with that one, humans don't react the same way to similar stimuli. Take 9/11 as an example; there are victims who have went out of their way to try and forgive while others are getting their infernos ready to burn the Koran.



I think you missed my point slightly.

Using 9/11 as an example again; I didn't have any sort of personal tie with anyone killed within the twin towers, althoguh at the same time I'm not willing to forgive the ********s that did it and I'm of the opinion that they deserve nothing more than to go through the same pain felt by those who burned to death and thier families grief.

That IMO is a sense of justice and does not therefore forfeit my right to be outraged at other acts of terrorism.

Anyway, your right, we are waaaaaay off topic.

Hibs Max:

I seem to have lost the ability to multi-quote.

I too agree that people for example with stage 4 cancer should be allowed to slip away as painlessly as possible providing that is thier choice.

I also understand your realistic approach and tbh, agree with most of it - but not all - and your accurate evaluation of my previous post, a little too idealistic.

But without ideas like it, improvement is limited imo.

Thread hijack over. :wink:

[HibsMax]

I think you missed my point slightly.

Using 9/11 as an example again; I didn't have any sort of personal tie with anyone killed within the twin towers, althoguh at the same time I'm not willing to forgive the ********s that did it and I'm of the opinion that they deserve nothing more than to go through the same pain felt by those who burned to death and thier families grief.

That IMO is a sense of justice and does not therefore forfeit my right to be outraged at other acts of terrorism.

Anyway, your right, we are waaaaaay off topic.

Hibs Max:

I seem to have lost the ability to multi-quote.

I too agree that people for example with stage 4 cancer should be allowed to slip away as painlessly as possible providing that is thier choice.

I also understand your realistic approach and tbh, agree with most of it - but not all - and your accurate evaluation of my previous post, a little too idealistic.

But without ideas like it, improvement is limited imo.

Thread hijack over. :wink:

Hijack away and post a better picture of your tat. I have a lion rampant on my right shoulder but it's just the lion. I would like to see a larger pic of yours, if you can? :)

[Dinkydoo]

Hijack away and post a better picture of your tat. I have a lion rampant on my right shoulder but it's just the lion. I would like to see a larger pic of yours, if you can? :)

I'll try.

My webcam has a **** 1.3 megapixels. I'll see if my phone will behave itself and sync with my laptop as it has 5 a megapixel camera.

Maybe not today though since I still feel pished from last bnight!

:party::dead: