Military Significant Others and Spouse Support - MilitarySOS.com
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: PETA, Guns and killing animals.

  1. Account Closed
    Hatetank's Avatar
    Hatetank is offline
    Account Closed
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,232
    Blog Entries
    6
    #1

    PETA, Guns and killing animals.

    Advertisements
    I have NO idea how I missed this video. My contingent of nerds have failed me.

    Here's a video clip instead of an article:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlQlJ...eature=related

    Wayne LaPierre is the executive VP of the NRA, and many folks think he's a bit of a lunatic.

    This debate can go either way, PETA or firearms. Have fun.
  2. ahimsa
    Viva's Avatar
    Viva is offline
    ahimsa
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    2,763
    #2
    I'm not going to comment on the other guy, I know nothing about him.

    HOWEVER, PETA takes in ANY animals including birds and stuff that no other shelter will take. Remember that "no kill" shelters will not accept animals that need to be euthanized. PETA takes animals that no one else will take, and animals that are not considered pets (like pigeons and such) that other shelters will not take.

    I have looked into these accusations. PETA practices euthanization on sick animals who are suffering and have no hope of recovery. I think that this is a merciful endeavor. But the reason it is so extensive is because they are the shelter of last resort, they take the animals no one else will take.

    BTW, even if you ARE NOT a member of PETA and you have a sick animal whom you cannot afford to euthanize, they will do it for free if you call them. Because they care about the animals suffering. So I don't believe for one second that they have a lust for killing furry creatures. Anyone who says different is slandering them.
    It's Halloween so.... you know, BOO!
  3. Yes, I am a male
    steelrfn's Avatar
    steelrfn is offline
    Yes, I am a male
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    NOB
    Posts
    1,413
    Blog Entries
    1

    #3
    Sometime last year they busted PETA members driving around VA and NC and they were taking animals from nonkill shelters and killing them and leaving them in restaurant dumpsters.
    It's pretty sick.
  4. Account Closed
    Hatetank's Avatar
    Hatetank is offline
    Account Closed
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,232
    Blog Entries
    6
    #4
    Quote Originally Posted by vivalacrap View Post
    I'm not going to comment on the other guy, I know nothing about him.

    HOWEVER, PETA takes in ANY animals including birds and stuff that no other shelter will take. Remember that "no kill" shelters will not accept animals that need to be euthanized. PETA takes animals that no one else will take, and animals that are not considered pets (like pigeons and such) that other shelters will not take.

    I have looked into these accusations. PETA practices euthanization on sick animals who are suffering and have no hope of recovery. I think that this is a merciful endeavor. But the reason it is so extensive is because they are the shelter of last resort, they take the animals no one else will take.

    BTW, even if you ARE NOT a member of PETA and you have a sick animal whom you cannot afford to euthanize, they will do it for free if you call them. Because they care about the animals suffering. So I don't believe for one second that they have a lust for killing furry creatures. Anyone who says different is slandering them.
    I haven't researched LaPierre's numbers, but if they're right, it's a disturbing number. 80 some-odd percent euthanized, while right down the road, 70 some odd percent found homes. Sure, PETA probably got the really sick animals that people couldn't afford to euthanize, then why wasn't that mentioned? Why would this guy (I don't know who he is, either) NOT bring up that 85% of the animals they take in are candidates for euthanizing? That'd be a pretty big selling point, I would think. I'm sure they don't have some blood lust for killing animals, obviously, I just don't see how they can be so militant against it when they do it as well, REGARDLESS of reason.
  5. Account Closed
    Hatetank's Avatar
    Hatetank is offline
    Account Closed
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,232
    Blog Entries
    6
    #5
    Quote Originally Posted by steelrfn View Post
    Sometime last year they busted PETA members driving around VA and NC and they were taking animals from nonkill shelters and killing them and leaving them in restaurant dumpsters.
    It's pretty sick.
    You are gonna have to find that for me. I heard that story but couldn't find anything about it. That would be absolutely debilitating.
  6. ahimsa
    Viva's Avatar
    Viva is offline
    ahimsa
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    2,763
    #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Hatetank View Post
    Sure, PETA probably got the really sick animals that people couldn't afford to euthanize, then why wasn't that mentioned? Why would this guy (I don't know who he is, either) NOT bring up that 85% of the animals they take in are candidates for euthanizing?
    Can't say why he didn't bring it up. I HAVE researched it though and that is what I found to be PETA's position. It is not actually a talking point because PETA doesn't like to give attention to those who are claiming it is an "animal killing organization" because they are funded by the meat lobbyists and such. Why give it more attention than you need to give it?

    The first rule of lobbying is to frame the debate the way YOU want it to be framed. They tell advocates over and over to stay positive and not to repeat negative talking points. I'm guessing the reason he didn't address it is because he had been coached not to focus on the oppositions negative talking points.

    That'd be a pretty big selling point, I would think. I'm sure they don't have some blood lust for killing animals, obviously, I just don't see how they can be so militant against it when they do it as well, REGARDLESS of reason.
    Really? You don't see being against killing in certain cases and not in others? Because the difference between euthanasia and murder are vastly different in my view. Killing something out of mercy, and killing for sport are different. They just are.

    What you are saying that if you pull the plug on your brain dead grandma that is the same as stabbing her with a knife when she is perfectly healthy. Do you believe that the two are comparable?
    It's Halloween so.... you know, BOO!
  7. Account Closed
    Hatetank's Avatar
    Hatetank is offline
    Account Closed
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,232
    Blog Entries
    6
    #7
    Quote Originally Posted by vivalacrap View Post
    Can't say why he didn't bring it up. I HAVE researched it though and that is what I found to be PETA's position. It is not actually a talking point because PETA doesn't like to give attention to those who are claiming it is an "animal killing organization" because they are funded by the meat lobbyists and such. Why give it more attention than you need to give it?

    The first rule of lobbying is to frame the debate the way YOU want it to be framed. They tell advocates over and over to stay positive and not to repeat negative talking points. I'm guessing the reason he didn't address it is because he had been coached not to focus on the oppositions negative talking points.



    Really? You don't see being against killing in certain cases and not in others? Because the difference between euthanasia and murder are vastly different in my view. Killing something out of mercy, and killing for sport are different. They just are.

    What you are saying that if you pull the plug on your brain dead grandma that is the same as stabbing her with a knife when she is perfectly healthy. Do you believe that the two are comparable?
    I meant, in PETA's defense, if the 85% euthanized were sickly and medical care was not feasible and euthanization was their LAST option, then THAT was the selling point he should have made. He may have after the video cut off, but that's only because I know I would have done it. Or they just simply didn't have the proof to support the claim, so the best bet was to go along with it. I see a VAST difference between euthanization and murder.

    I thought the sliver of that debate was interesting because it showed three VERY different viewpoints, (including the guy asking the question, who genuinely seemed like he just wanted an answer to the confusion) and the pro/con of it. I guess I liked the fact that it was a DEBATE more than a screaming match, which is what I'm accustomed to hearing from both of those groups. Hell, two seconds before and two seconds after, it could have been. Oh well, I'm old
  8. ahimsa
    Viva's Avatar
    Viva is offline
    ahimsa
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    2,763
    #8
    I'm old too. But I know that being involved in activist groups is hard and sometimes even if you support the cause you forget the talking points and obviously don't have all the evidence available. I just went to a lobbying class today to train on activism and that crap is harder than it looks because, well, you can teach me all sorts of things, but put me on the spot and I am crap, LOL!

    I know that I have heard that argument before and googled it and found that answer. It made sense to me, and I know that it is true that if you call them with any type of sick/injured animal they will provide euthanasia services.

    I think the crux of the debate is really that they aren't anti-killing in all circumstances. Just in the ones that are unnecessary. I pretty much feel the same about humans so it makes sense to me
    It's Halloween so.... you know, BOO!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •