The dogs siezed in the Micheal Vick case are going to be euthanized. Those nuts at PETA condone this. But they were screaming there heads off when they were fighting. What happened to everythings "right to live", or do they only have the right to live when we tell them they are socially acceptable.
2007-08-22 16:14:54 · 19 answers · asked by asmith1022_2006 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Like I said before, PETA claims everything has a life to live. These people are most likely against the death penalty, and they believe in "animal rights", and condone harming humans to gain this. But then they encourage killing the very same animals they pretend to save.
2007-08-22 16:23:16 · update #1
So you eliminate an entire type of animal just because they fight each other???
2007-08-22 16:24:48 · update #2
It's like you view dogs as your personal toys, these animals probably were not tortured, I know nothing about dogfighting, but most likely they are natrually aggressive, and probably are not forced to fight each other, though I certainly do not condone the sport, I do despise the hypocrisy of PETA.
2007-08-22 16:28:32 · update #3
They wouldn't have to be rehabilitated just isolated.
2007-08-22 16:29:38 · update #4
dogssrspcl, save your propoganda for someone else. I don't want to listen to your indoctrinized talk about something you have probably never witnessed.
2007-08-22 16:33:02 · update #5
ahhh my foolish friend, im pointing out PETA's hypocrisy, I never mentioned my own views in the question at all, and I was being humble I do know quite a bit about dogfighting. Just not the mechanics, maybe I should have made my self clearer, either way you have no right to call anyone an idiot, especially not knowing me. Thank you and have a nice day.
2007-08-23 12:53:27 · update #6
PETA is an organization that doesn't know how to clearly stand for something.
They think it's horrible to use animals to get things but they think it's perfectly fine to use naked female bodies to promote their agendas.
It's either ok to objectify animals and people or it isn't. They need to get their story straight. Unfortunately it won't happen any time soon.
2007-08-22 16:29:07 · answer #1 · answered by Cerulean 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Your whole message contracticts itself. You tell that guy in your last post to save his propaganda for something he's probably never seen before (or whatever it was you said), but yet you slam PETA for agreeing the dogs in the Vick case have to be euthenized when in your second paragraph (or wherever) you flat out say you know nothing about dog fighting. You're an idiot. PETA is about the ethical treatment of animals at the very least. If you are going to own a pet, treat it right. Dog fighting is horrible and IS torture to any dog involved in the fights. It's not natural because they are not wild dogs, they are domesticated dogs trained to behave destructively and agressively. Those dogs ARE ruined because of their training. They cannot be rehabed or doled out to people, or as you say, to be "isolated" as they will more than likely show agressive behavior towards humans as well at some point in time. And you think isolation for a domestic animal is a better solution? How about we toss idiots like you who preach about things they know nothing about onto a deserted "isolated " island. I'm not preaching for PETA, but certain cases do require certain necessary measures, and the Vick case dogs are sadly one of them.
2007-08-23 11:06:33 · answer #2 · answered by ezra_pandora 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I'm no great fan of PETA, but I agree with them on this. There is a huge, HUGE difference between euthanizing an animal--it's surprisingly humane, painless and gentle--and having an animal be torn at by another one, sometimes the aggressor but often terrified for its life and usually in pain either way, for your enjoyment.
The dogs who have been bred to fight were "ruined." They were TRAINED to violence. They could be a danger--not just "socially unacceptable" but a deadly threat--to anybody who adopted them. While that's tragic, it's something that cannot be changed.
Maybe this example will make other people think twice before breeding or training a dog to fight.
2007-08-22 23:22:31 · answer #3 · answered by Vaughn 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
If you do your research PETA is kind of anti pit bull. They are against dog fighting but they have been helping to try to push breed specific legislation through in many places. There is a lot of info on the Internet regarding their lobbyist rallying to have breed bans which would require any pit bulls living in an area where the Bill is passed to undergo temperament testing and any failing to be put down. Any that happen to pass the testing they want to be spayed or neutered eventually having the breed die out. I will say that I do animal rescue and as far as the dogs in the Vick case go they would be near impossible to rehab.
2007-08-22 23:25:05 · answer #4 · answered by Biddy_Bunny 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You are very stupid. Did your parents have any children that lived? Vick & associates messed those dogs up to the point that they had to be put down. I am not a PETA fan, but this time they were in the right. And what does this have to do with the terrible crimes that Vick commited?
2007-08-23 00:11:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Being euthanized is the only way to save the public from the dogs. They are trained to fight and kill, and cannot be trained to be docile like other dogs. It is best for the dogs to be put down, because most of them are diseased and malnourished anyway, most don't have a high chance of survival and it is better to put them down quietly then to let them suffer a long death. Micheal Vick is a sicko!
2007-08-22 23:53:50 · answer #6 · answered by Senator D*L*P™ 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
they have tried to save animals like this in the past... but 99.999 percent of the time... they are far too dangerous to be adopted or be around any human...
if you've got an idea on what to do with them... I'm sure they are all ears...
as it stands... no one can think of anything... so they must be killed before they hurt anyone else
EDIT: why don't you look into it before you come on here slamming it...
it's not nearly as simple as isolation, rehabilitation or anything else...
this isn't some secret... it's what pretty much all dog experts agree on... I guess you could call that "propaganda"... but then you would pretty much be saying that you think you know better than people who make their living off of this kind of work...
2007-08-22 23:23:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Because the dogs were bred to fight. They're actually ruthless attack machines. I agree with PETA on this, I can't believe I just said that, they do need to be euthanized. At least they won't suffer anymore. And won't be forced to fight so the people who were suppose to love and take care of them can make money. It's a shame, but it is neccesary.
2007-08-22 23:20:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Sometimes an animal's (or a human's for that matter) life has become so bad that death is a better option. These dogs could never have a life beyond being trapped in a cage. They could not be pets and certainly could not be released into the wild. Sadly there's not really any other option. Let's hope they will be in a better place now.
2007-08-22 23:21:14 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Animals that are subject to dog fighting are a danger not only to themselves but to other animals and humans. I do not like to support the euthanization of animals for no reason, but these animals have been treated so wrongly that it is necessary.
2007-08-22 23:21:13 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋