Animal Cruelty?

"Really, you hate Deer... Why?"
I guess i might hate fluffy bunnies if i knew as many people who had been injured in fluffy bunny-related car accidents, not to mention the damage to the cars. I also don't know anyone, me personally not "know of", who has been fatally or seriously wounded while dove hunting; while i have known a few people who were accidentally shot while deer hunting or by a deer hunter. Surely my attitude is colored by my experiences. I certainly do not oppose deer hunting as an unsafe activity, no more so than driving, and i have hunted deer many times and enjoyed it without being injured in any serious or memorable way. If i were ever rendered unable to hunt deer, i would be glad to buy my nephews some ammo for their deer hunting use.

I'm sure lots of people are injured dodging dogs on the road too, but i see & hear about far too many deer strikes to like deer.

I am not a big fan of non-animated coyotes either, but for different reasons.

edit* I should disclose that since i don't eat much meat, deer don't have much to offer me as a reason to want them around.
 
Last edited:
The comparison to lobsters in the tank would be, if you went into a restaurant that sold fried rabbit, and they had a pen in the lobby with 20 bunnies in there.
And you just picked out your bunny, and the cook took it in the back and chopped its head off, and then fried it up.

Fresh fish is better than frozen, and I bet fresh bunny would taste better than frozen.

How can y'all say that lobsters don't know that they exist? How in the world could you know that. Have you given a lobster an IQ test?
Hell a dog will look in a mirror and think it is another dog.
 
To respond to the OP...

...it does not make you a hypocrite at all.

I am a huge animal rights activist. I donate a large amount of money to the humane society every year and hold multiple benefits for animal causes. Still, I am pro-hunting. What I am not is pro-sport hunting...and I would just as soon punch anyone in the face as speak to them that supports trophy hunting of large game such as bears, lions, etc.

I grew up hunting and I have no issue with killing something you are going to eat or give to someone else to eat. I also understand the usefulness of hunting in regards to population control (although I would rather just see predators reintroduced).

There is also no rules against enjoying the act of hunting while you are engaged in it for proper reasons. If you enjoy taking down a deer that is one thing. Turning dogs loose an adolescent bear is another thing. I always tell guys like that "if you are so insecure that killing a large animal (in a safe manner from a distance) makes you feel like a real man then come see me and see if you can take me down."
 
The rabbit analogy sounds mighty tasty and if this bunny hutch were at a regular affordable restaurant, I would order it at least once. :)

I agree that even dogs have little capacity to reason. Lobsters are just slightly more advanced than spiders biologically speaking.

Brent
 
Animal cruelty is a very blurry line. Under the OP's original post, most of us would consider those acts cruel. Well, all except kickin the dog. I try to do that once a day if I can :D . But the majority of the people who openly fight animal cruelty think that unless you treat any animal better than you treat your kids you are committing animal cruelty. I know of no one who thinks animal cruelty isn't bad. But that subject is GOING TO be an end to trapping, hunting with dogs, etc etc. If the animal rights activist get their way, pets and livestock would be a thing of the past. Is shooting a dog or clubbing a cat a bad thing? To them it is. But in reality, it's no different than putting them down with a syringe. It may even be quicker and better.

The main thing to remember is they are not people. They are a tool, clothing or a food group. Putting the slightest bit of emotion into this subject is a bad thing. Either that or get used to giving up your "meat and potato's" dinner (not by YOUR choice) and instead eating "something green and potato's" every night.

LK
 
The thing that bothers me the most is when someone donates a huge amount to the humane society,but if you mention "feed the children",they don't know what you are talking about.Cruelty is bad,everyone can agree on that,but the definition of cruelty is going to be so far different between different people.To me,cruelty is intentionally beating an animal,or starving one,to someone else,cruelty might be as slight as not letting the dog in when it's 40 degrees outside.
 
HSUS??? You mean the ones that employ felon terrorists? The illegal use of explosives by their employees is enuff to keep me from fallin' for their hype. Not to mention the killing of animals and jumping them in grocery store dumpsters illegally.

They do not have rescue shelters, they do not have a way to help pets. Their agenda is strictly trying to ban all things animal. No pets, no hunting, no meat farming.... humaniacs pure and simple.
I have had run ins with one of their top goons... John JP Goodwin...
Brent
 
The thing that bothers me the most is when someone donates a huge amount to the humane society,but if you mention "feed the children",they don't know what you are talking about.
Click to expand...
Why would those things be mutually exclusive? Also, by your logic if someone donated money to hurricane relief in Mississippi they are bad people for not also donating money to flood relief in Kansas. One right does not equal a wrong.
 
Why would those things be mutually exclusive? Also, by your logic if someone donated money to hurricane relief in Mississippi they are bad people for not also donating money to flood relief in Kansas. One right does not equal a wrong.
Click to expand...

Absolutely ridiculous!I stand by what I say because people are more important than animals,so yes,it absolutely bothers me when someone helps animals more than their fellow man.
 
By that logic the only moral way to donate to anything would be to find all the charities in the world and then only donate to the one that was the most deserving.

If you gave any money to a less-deserving charity before all the needs of the most deserving charity were fulfilled you would be open to criticism by people who point out that you're donating to something that's less important than the most deserving charity out there.

No one would be able to contribute anything at all to help animals until there were absolutely no needy/suffering persons in the entire world...
 
I am a hunter. I've killed a lot of animals. I am also an animal lover and dog owner and cannot stand to see any animal, pet or wild critter mistreated in any way.

To me, real hunters strive to kill quickly and painlessly. People who hurt animals for their own enjoyment (Vick) are simple monsters.
 
Good topic. I got a couple things I'd like to speak on.

Is shooting a dog or clubbing a cat a bad thing? To them it is. But in reality, it's no different than putting them down with a syringe. It may even be quicker and better.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ here in one regard. I am a veterinarian and in the job I keep, I have euthanized countless animals. It is truly humane, and there are a very small percentage of cases where the animal does not expire peacefully. I know that it is much more reliable than clubbing and (in most cases) gunshots, because I see animals that have been subjected to both of these injuries in my line of work. The reaction to euthanasia solution is much more predictable and repeatable. That being said, I am not going to argue that a properly executed gunshot or "clubbing" isn't effective, it's just that it's much easier to properly perform a humane euthanasia via injection. However, last I heard, a gunshot to the head was still a completely accepted form of humane euthanasia for horses and cows, and if it works for them, of course it will work for cats and dogs. Again, it all goes back to the proper application. Now, I am not a proponent of shooting an animal or clubbing it to death when controlled, humane euthanasia is available, but if a person can quickly and humanely dispatch a suffering animal when veterinary care is not available in an acceptable time manner, I am all for it.

The second thing that it brings to mind is that I have not hunted since I became licensed. I have not killed a deer since before I started veterinary school, I don't believe. I fully intend to get back into hunting this fall, and I have wondered how differently it will feel this time out. I know there are people who think I am a hypocrite because I am a veterinarian who hunts (or at least used to and soon will again). I have many arguments for these people. Firstly, and this is not a knock against other hunters, but people should rest more assured that a veterinarian will only take ethical shots and will go the extra mile to track an animal if it is only wounded rather than quickly killed. Also, the anti's don't want to consider it, but what is the alternative for these game animals? They can fall quickly due to my bullet, or they can starve, freeze to death, be killed and eaten by a large cat, bear, wolves, coyotes, or other predators, or they can be hit by a car, semi, bus, or some other motor vehicle. Once all those things are considered, a quick death from a bullet doesn't seem so bad.

Secondly, the people who have accused me of being a hypocrite in my situation, but who are non-hunting meat-eaters themselves, are the ones that really tick me off. Somehow, it is better to them to eat a piece of beef that someone else killed for them, and that came from an animal that was raised for the sole purpose of feeding someone. At least the deer, squirrels, bear, rabbits, and any other game animal have a chance, and at least they get to live until they die, rather than "live" in the concentration camps that are livestock yards. Finally, I don't know why they think it is acceptable for me to euthanize a dog to prevent suffering, yet it's so wrong for me to kill a deer humanely to prevent it suffering by the aforementioned ways of certain, painful death.

I think it's part ignorance, part denial. The ignorance is that they don't understand there is such a thing as a quick, humane kill via gunshot when performed appropriately. The denial is that they never stop to think about what happens to those animals that are not taken humanely, and they don't see the horror in starvation, freezing, falling prey to lower predators, or dying from some infectious disease they catch due to overcrowding. What really kills me is when they cuss about all the #$*@&* deer when they hit one with their car.
 
Killing just for the sake of killing or torturing an animal just does not compute. Since I was old enough to remember, we always had dogs,cats, pets in general. Was raised hunting and was dared by my father to take less than the most ethical shot possible. I`ve had to let some massive bucks walk simply cause they wouldn`t present themselves for a clean shot. Sometimes very hard to do but if you`ve ever lost many nights sleep cause you couldn`t find an 'ill-shot' deer, it makes it easier to let one walk if you don`t get that good shot. Laying at night thinking how that animal is suffering at the hands of what I did, to say the least, is not a comfortable feeling. Living in the country has also taught me that certain animals are raised/ hunted for the table and certain ones are for other purposes. Herding, protecting lifestock or mousing in the barns. Problem is ,the country is also a dumping ground for many unwanted dogs/cats that will eventually pack-up and create havoc for a livestock farmer and wildlife. Not much left to do with these animals but to exterminate them but they, as with anything that has to be exterminated, should be killed as humanely as possible.
 
First off there is no reason to doubt anything about animal cruelty. It is wrong. Just don't blur the lines between hunting and what I do raising beef cows and hogs.

I don't think any reasonable person regardless of being a hunter or not likes to see animal cruelty. However be careful how you define it because those that define it broadly include hunters and farmers.

I have enjoyed hunting and even the thrill of the kill. I have never enjoyed dispatching a farm animal even though it is done on a regular basis. It is just part of what I do but I have never found pleasure in it. That is the difference in hunting where your intent is to kill a game animal and then killing a farm animal getting beef and pork ready for the market.
 
Lobster

Quote: "I can't stand to see those lobsters, sitting confined in that tank and looking at the people who are going to eat them, sometimes for weeks.
That is torture.

If it doesn't bother you, then fine, go buy a big fresh lobster for dinner tonight."

Lobsters are not very intelligent, if at all. They're on the same level as bugs. Tasty bugs, but bugs just the same.
 
would just as soon punch anyone in the face as speak to them that supports trophy hunting of large game such as bears, lions, etc
Click to expand...

hunting in regards to population control (although I would rather just see predators reintroduced).
Click to expand...

PBP, now your crossing lines of why do you hold a few animals lives over those of humans? Not hunting lions, I'm sure there are many folks in Cali that would be glad several Mt lions aren't there to attack their kids. Reintroduction of predators? Nah, we are to much of a society that like to expand and live right next to nature, but have a cow when nature crosses those lines. With hunting bears, they are already comming into neighborhoods and tearing stuff up.

If you really want a cause to persue, or get so viloent over, prevent the over expansion into to nature. Every new 400+ acre subdivison, house, and city is taking up land and homes that used to house critters. Bears and large cats have a vast ranging territories. With humans taking their homes, they have no choice but to become a nuisance. Then folks like you go up in arms and punch people in the face when we are capable of doing something about it. And have to fix the problem that the un-humane society, other animal rights activist, and society creates.

If the OP is looking for hipocracy...that is it.
 
I agree that cruelty is very wrong and it makes me blood boil to see cases of it. Either human or animal, its just wrong. Any person who willfully inflicts harm against a weaker subject is just plain ol' sick in my book. Two drunks in a bar beating the hell out of each other is one thing, but take a man who beats his animals, wife or children and that is a whole different story.

Hunting is completely different. Not only is a properly executed shot humane as far as the particular animal being shot is concerned, the taking of game in itself is humane. As cities and farm land and logging have squeezed the natural ranges of game animals, it has put double the pressure on their natural predators. We tend to reduce the population of big predators more as we find them a threat to livestock and our pets and our selves. This population reduction results in an overpopulation of deer and other game. The ONLY humane way to keep that population in check is hunting. I remember a few years ago in Florida and Virgina there was an over population of deer, so the state wildlife management decided the best way to reduce the population was to poison the animals in large numbers. This absolutely burned my hide! I know for a fact there are large numbers of hunters in both states that would have been happy to apply for additional tags, and removed those animals for FREE! Not to mention a bullet through the heart or head is much much more humane than an animal dying of poison.
 
Farmland,

I was not directing anything towards farmers. Most of my little rant was directed at people who think it's fine to eat their steak that they never had to lift a finger to get, yet think that I am a hypocritical barbarian because I like a little venison here and there. Oddly, I have never had to have this conversation about fishing. Anyway, I didn't mean to offend, and I think that anything I said that could be misconstrued as offensive was directed more at the huge feedlots. A few head of cattle out in the back field is totally different, and I hope to have a couple myself one day soon.
 
I do agree with ninjatoth. Animals are not humans, and our laws are blurring those lines. While animal cruelty is wrong, is it as wrong as abusing a child? Of course not. I remember the story of the gradeschooler stepping on a mouse and killing it. It was a felony. Torturing animals is definitely wrong, but Ihave a problem with cops tracking down someone who shot a cat and throwing him in jail. To me it is hypocritical that Vick is looked at like pond scum for wrongly killing dogs while there are other convicted murderers and rapists playing in the NFL.

I guess my point is being cruel to animals is wrong, but should it be a felony? Some posters said that those sick kids who lit a cat on fire should be set on fire themselves. Their actions were sick and wrong and make my stomach turn, but come on guys, we can't equate animals with people!
 
I guess my point is being cruel to animals is wrong, but should it be a felony? Some posters said that those sick kids who lit a cat on fire should be set on fire themselves. Their actions were sick and wrong and make my stomach turn, but come on guys, we can't equate animals with people!
Click to expand...
People are animals...just a little smarter. Nothing more nothing less. Of course it is wrong to abuse a child, but that does not lessen the fact that it is wrong to abuse an animal. That is weak and backwards logic. That is like saying it is not so bad to break an innocent strangers arm because it is much worse to break their leg.

And as for the person that referred to animals as tools...tools do not have feeling or emotions. Animals do. In fact, that statement would make many people say that anyone who would actually say it is more of a "tool" than any animal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top