[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]PaddyM wrote:
[quote]USMCpoolee wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]jre67t wrote:
There just dogs[/quote]
Where just dogs?
[/quote]
Over their. [/quote]
Over ware?[/quote]
Oven ware?[/quote]
Maybe they where just killed four theyre hare
[quote]critietaeta wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]PaddyM wrote:
[quote]USMCpoolee wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]jre67t wrote:
There just dogs[/quote]
Where just dogs?
[/quote]
Over their. [/quote]
Over ware?[/quote]
Oven ware?[/quote]
Maybe they where just killed four theyre hare[/quote]
LOL
^ literally
Story is legit, it has been all over the local news.
Way overblown, I would prefer to see them shot than neglected.
Death by bullet = humane.
[quote]John S. wrote:
[quote]Mr. Walkway wrote:
did someone at least eat them?[/quote]
I wonder what dog tastes like?[/quote]
Tough game-y second rate beef.
[quote]PaddyM wrote:
[quote]USMCpoolee wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]jre67t wrote:
There just dogs[/quote]
Where just dogs?
[/quote]
Over their. [/quote]
Over ware?[/quote]
Over hear.
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
Story is legit, it has been all over the local news.
Way overblown, I would prefer to see them shot than neglected.
Death by bullet = humane. [/quote]
Except that apparently the guy doing the job was too fucking stupid to ensure it was done right. As the article describes him fucking up several times.
"About 20 minutes after he shot a dog named Nora, he noticed that she was crawling around a mass grave he had dug for the animals. "
Seriously, how do you fuck that up? It’s deplorable enough without putting the job on Timmy-the-retarded-dog-keeper’s shoulders.
[quote]Ghost22 wrote:
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
Story is legit, it has been all over the local news.
Way overblown, I would prefer to see them shot than neglected.
Death by bullet = humane. [/quote]
Except that apparently the guy doing the job was too fucking stupid to ensure it was done right. As the article describes him fucking up several times.
"About 20 minutes after he shot a dog named Nora, he noticed that she was crawling around a mass grave he had dug for the animals. "
Seriously, how do you fuck that up? It’s deplorable enough without putting the job on Timmy-the-retarded-dog-keeper’s shoulders. [/quote]
I heard similar accounts on the news , in fact, on the news they said that he shot it and one of it’s eye balls were hanging out of it’s head while it ran around. I call bullshit. Why? Because he is claiming compo… In the news he was quoted as saying that it “destroyed my soul”. Obviously a story like that (hanging eyeball) is going to give his claim some more credence. Like someone said above- it is suspect that someone who could shot 20 dogs in the first place would be “traumatized” afterwards.
I’m sure if they would have made an announcement to give them away, a lot of people would have came and took them as they are already trained. At any rate, they could have euthanized them instead of a bullet to the head or slitting their throat while they were tied up.
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
Story is legit, it has been all over the local news.
Way overblown, I would prefer to see them shot than neglected.
Death by bullet = humane. [/quote]
You know I have to agree with you on this. Take a sled dog that’s never been socialized or trained to do anything other than run, has always been kenneled or chained up with the rest of the pack and you’ve got some serious work to do in order to make it a pet.
But, there are ways to put an animal down and ways not to. It should be quick and clean. Even if the story is exaggerated, I’m sorry trying to put down 70 dogs with a shotgun? Not the right tool for the job.
And on the whole “if you eat meat you can’t complain about animal cruelty” crowd, well that’s a load of shit. While I’ll concede unless the animal is in your care from birth to butchering, you can’t know if the animal was treated fairly and killed as humanely as possible, there are options out there and a lot of people are going that route. And as hypocritical as it may sound, I do not view all animals equal and all lives as equal. Why? Well, a dog has personality. Personality goes a long way.
[quote]blackhand wrote:
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
Story is legit, it has been all over the local news.
Way overblown, I would prefer to see them shot than neglected.
Death by bullet = humane. [/quote]
You know I have to agree with you on this. Take a sled dog that’s never been socialized or trained to do anything other than run, has always been kenneled or chained up with the rest of the pack and you’ve got some serious work to do in order to make it a pet.
But, there are ways to put an animal down and ways not to. It should be quick and clean. Even if the story is exaggerated, I’m sorry trying to put down 70 dogs with a shotgun? Not the right tool for the job.
And on the whole “if you eat meat you can’t complain about animal cruelty” crowd, well that’s a load of shit. While I’ll concede unless the animal is in your care from birth to butchering, you can’t know if the animal was treated fairly and killed as humanely as possible, there are options out there and a lot of people are going that route. And as hypocritical as it may sound, I do not view all animals equal and all lives as equal. Why? Well, a dog has personality. Personality goes a long way.[/quote]
No it doesn’t.
[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
[quote]blackhand wrote:
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
Story is legit, it has been all over the local news.
Way overblown, I would prefer to see them shot than neglected.
Death by bullet = humane. [/quote]
You know I have to agree with you on this. Take a sled dog that’s never been socialized or trained to do anything other than run, has always been kenneled or chained up with the rest of the pack and you’ve got some serious work to do in order to make it a pet.
But, there are ways to put an animal down and ways not to. It should be quick and clean. Even if the story is exaggerated, I’m sorry trying to put down 70 dogs with a shotgun? Not the right tool for the job.
And on the whole “if you eat meat you can’t complain about animal cruelty” crowd, well that’s a load of shit. While I’ll concede unless the animal is in your care from birth to butchering, you can’t know if the animal was treated fairly and killed as humanely as possible, there are options out there and a lot of people are going that route. And as hypocritical as it may sound, I do not view all animals equal and all lives as equal. Why? Well, a dog has personality. Personality goes a long way.[/quote]
No it doesn’t.
[/quote]
^^^Commence epic argument
I got my popcorn!
Wear does it go?
[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
[quote]blackhand wrote:
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
Story is legit, it has been all over the local news.
Way overblown, I would prefer to see them shot than neglected.
Death by bullet = humane. [/quote]
You know I have to agree with you on this. Take a sled dog that’s never been socialized or trained to do anything other than run, has always been kenneled or chained up with the rest of the pack and you’ve got some serious work to do in order to make it a pet.
But, there are ways to put an animal down and ways not to. It should be quick and clean. Even if the story is exaggerated, I’m sorry trying to put down 70 dogs with a shotgun? Not the right tool for the job.
And on the whole “if you eat meat you can’t complain about animal cruelty” crowd, well that’s a load of shit. While I’ll concede unless the animal is in your care from birth to butchering, you can’t know if the animal was treated fairly and killed as humanely as possible, there are options out there and a lot of people are going that route. And as hypocritical as it may sound, I do not view all animals equal and all lives as equal. Why? Well, a dog has personality. Personality goes a long way.[/quote]
No it doesn’t.
[/quote]
Damn. Attempt to lighten mood through Pulp Fiction reference = fail.
Working under the presumption the dogs needed to be destroyed . . .
Is it necessary to destroy the animal in a way which causes more stress and pain than medical interventions?
Not to anthropomorphosize animals, but dogs experience and express emotion. Can it even be considered moral to put an animal down in such a way? I ask, because I can’t see how.
[quote]Vash wrote:
Working under the presumption the dogs needed to be destroyed . . .
Is it necessary to destroy the animal in a way which causes more stress and pain than medical interventions?
Not to anthropomorphosize animals, but dogs experience and express emotion. Can it even be considered moral to put an animal down in such a way? I ask, because I can’t see how.[/quote]
All animals experience emotions.
You can’t tell me that lab rats and mice don’t. You can’t tell me that pigs don’t.
It is besides the point.
[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
[quote]Vash wrote:
Working under the presumption the dogs needed to be destroyed . . .
Is it necessary to destroy the animal in a way which causes more stress and pain than medical interventions?
Not to anthropomorphosize animals, but dogs experience and express emotion. Can it even be considered moral to put an animal down in such a way? I ask, because I can’t see how.[/quote]
All animals experience emotions.
You can’t tell me that lab rats and mice don’t. You can’t tell me that pigs don’t.
It is besides the point.[/quote]
How do you feel about euthanizing unimportant and useless artists?
What about the ones with actual emotions?
lol
[quote]Eli B wrote:
vegetarian?
no?
shut up[/quote]
This guy is an idiot.
He was also over in another thread giving computer advice based purely on hearsay.
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
[quote]Ghost22 wrote:
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
Story is legit, it has been all over the local news.
Way overblown, I would prefer to see them shot than neglected.
Death by bullet = humane. [/quote]
Except that apparently the guy doing the job was too fucking stupid to ensure it was done right. As the article describes him fucking up several times.
"About 20 minutes after he shot a dog named Nora, he noticed that she was crawling around a mass grave he had dug for the animals. "
Seriously, how do you fuck that up? It’s deplorable enough without putting the job on Timmy-the-retarded-dog-keeper’s shoulders. [/quote]
I heard similar accounts on the news , in fact, on the news they said that he shot it and one of it’s eye balls were hanging out of it’s head while it ran around. I call bullshit. Why? Because he is claiming compo… In the news he was quoted as saying that it “destroyed my soul”. Obviously a story like that (hanging eyeball) is going to give his claim some more credence. Like someone said above- it is suspect that someone who could shot 20 dogs in the first place would be “traumatized” afterwards. [/quote]
Exactly. That’s why I made the earlier remark about the alternative not worth thinking about. If he was so emotionally destroyed by having to put the dogs out of their misery, then he had the moral choice to walk away.
I don’t believe the type of person who’d be affected to the degree that the worker claims, would make it through the botched killing of one dog let alone over 70 of them and cry about how traumatized they are by the experience, and then have the nerve to ask for compensation afterwards.
Shouldn’t this guy be facing animal cruelty charges? Especially after implicating himself in an attempt to get a pay out?
[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
[quote]Vash wrote:
Working under the presumption the dogs needed to be destroyed . . .
Is it necessary to destroy the animal in a way which causes more stress and pain than medical interventions?
Not to anthropomorphosize animals, but dogs experience and express emotion. Can it even be considered moral to put an animal down in such a way? I ask, because I can’t see how.[/quote]
All animals experience emotions.
You can’t tell me that lab rats and mice don’t. You can’t tell me that pigs don’t.
It is besides the point.[/quote]
No it isn’t. I hadn’t given it much thought until I read the article, but regardless of what your feelings are of animals - like whether they are in possession of a personality or not, or whether it’s immoral to eat one - all of those debates come a distant second to whether we have a responsibility to refrain from inflicting mindless, needless and prolonged suffering on a large number of animals, especially when it’s done to create a cover story to help a compensation claim for “emotional distress”.
Some here would argue that the human being in question possessed traits that elevated him above the animals he killed. Shame that whatever redeeming qualities he had were eclipsed by the ones that placed him lower than the dogs he killed.
What is “beside the point” are your own personal feelings on whether we as humans are entitled to dispatch an animal by any means we see fit… what very much is the point is how we forget how the way we choose to use or abuse that “entitlement” shows just how many cnts walk the Earth…that’s a disservice to cts: they are useful and bring forth life.
If his account is true, the guy is a cold-blooded SOB. If he made it up, he isn’t much better -arguably worse, because he said it deliberately to milk a few extra bucks from his “emotional distress” suit.
Moral of the story: we are defined by our actions.
If this guy’s story is believed by the courts, and he’s rewarded instead of getting the jail time he so richly deserves, then the end of the world is most definitely “nigh”. And maybe that isn’t such a bad thing considering the alternative…
He would have come over more likeable if he’d pushed the sled dogs over a cliff and claimed off the insurance.