Political Crossfire Forums

spearsy23 · Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 5632 Location: Fulton, Ks

who was watching?

Wolverine · Joined: 15 Jul 2005 Posts: 11045 Location: Podunk, Colorado

micfranklin wrote: Wolverine wrote: micfranklin wrote: Wolverine wrote: I bet if they sent the dogs to the vet, so the vet could kill them, no one would make a big deal about it.

I'd make a big deal out of it, thats for damn sure. Killing 10,000 dogs is just plain wrong, whether you're a vet or a commie or some random man.
Vets put down animals all the time, whether it be this or that animal shelter not having enough money to feed them, or the Smiths putting down the dog because it growled at Little Jimmy.

But this guy shot them dead. Vets simply gas animals so they go to sleep...right?
Doesn't matter, quickly dead is quickly dead. Actually, shooting them would be a faster death than gasing them.

Quicksurf · Joined: 06 Sep 2005 Posts: 4675

Demonic Spoon wrote: No, I never said you should step down because he's a mod..I agree treating a moderator differently is stupid.

But when you flame a mod, you can be sure a mod is going to notice it.

And what's your point? Who gives a rats ass if we use them as food? We don't need steak; we WANT it. We could just as easily eat vegetables.

So why are dogs worthy of life and not cows?

I think it's unhealthy to not eat meat, and I do think humans need it for a healthy lifestyle...

that being said, eating a dog is no different than eating a cow. Western society views cows differently than some place like India. It really depends on what society you live in to determine what is acceptable to eat.

That being said, I have been raised in a western society, and therefore find it disgusting what this lunatic did.

Demonic Spoon · Joined: 20 Sep 2004 Posts: 6953 Location: Ohio

How is it unhealthy? You can have a very balanced diet without meats...

There is nothing in meat you can't get from other sources.

X-Shocker · Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 167 Location: All around you

Quicksurf wrote:
that being said, eating a dog is no different than eating a cow. Western society views cows differently than some place like India. It really depends on what society you live in to determine what is acceptable to eat.

Well said. Western societies should leave the food of other countries alone. Dogs are not man's best friends. Dogs are food, damn good food, in other countries.

Bolt guns are very humane. I have seen it in action, so don't knock it unless you have seen or use it. It is very quick and goes right to the point that matters: the brain. Yes, the body twitches afterwards, but that is the natural response to a dead brain. There is no pain.

The guy should have been a little smarter and exported the meat to Asia. So finger licking good: doggie soup, doggie stew, doggie bar-b-que, doggie roast, doggie stir-fry, doggie gumble, etc., etc.

John Galt · Joined: 04 May 2004 Posts: 21637 Location: Minnesota

Hyde wrote: John Galt wrote: Had they served their purpose better their owners would not have felt the need to dispose of them. They are just dogs, and they all had quick s. Greyhounds are ugly as well and I don't particularly like them. One of my highschool's mascots was the greyhound. Terribly lanky animal. Bred too much as well... not particularly good dogs. So no one wants them once they have outlived their usefullness. I don't see exactly what the problem is here. We put dogs to everyday. Thousands, everyday. People call that humane. Hell, PETA puts thousands of dogs down.

whats wrong with you. he killed 10,000 perfectly healthy dogs. you are sick.

I am sick? Why? Humans kill millions of perfectly healthy animals each year. Even PETA kills thousands of perfectly healthy animals each year. These animals had outlived their usefullness even if they are healthy.

I do not see how it is "sickening" in anyway to dispose of morally unimportant beings that no longer serve moral beings as they should. in fact, I would say it would be sick to hold morally important beings captive by morally unimportant beings, forcing us to continue their existence that serves no purpose.

Pzatchok · Joined: 15 Nov 2004 Posts: 7642

I truelly dislike Grayhound racing just for this reason.

But what the man did he did humanely.

Hyde · Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 4:40 pm Post subject:

Pzatchok wrote: I truelly dislike Grayhound racing just for this reason.

But what the man did he did humanely.

how exactly? could he not have found homes for these dogs where they could live? why exactly is it humanly to slaughter dogs for no reason but convinence?

Demonic Spoon · Joined: 20 Sep 2004 Posts: 6953 Location: Ohio

Quote:
how exactly? could he not have found homes for these dogs where they could live? why exactly is it humanly to slaughter dogs for no reason but convinence?

The same reason it's humane to slaughter cows or pigs...

Hyde · Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 11:40 pm Post subject:

ic Spoon wrote: Quote:
how exactly? could he not have found homes for these dogs where they could live? why exactly is it humanly to slaughter dogs for no reason but convinence?

The same reason it's humane to slaughter cows or pigs...

you seem to be missing a point. humans eat meat. so we kill cows for the meat. he killed those dogs just because it was more convienint for him to kill them then to find them a home.

John Galt · Joined: 04 May 2004 Posts: 21637 Location: Minnesota

Hyde wrote: ic Spoon wrote: Quote:
how exactly? could he not have found homes for these dogs where they could live? why exactly is it humanly to slaughter dogs for no reason but convinence?

The same reason it's humane to slaughter cows or pigs...

you seem to be missing a point. humans eat meat. so we kill cows for the meat. he killed those dogs just because it was more convienint for him to kill them then to find them a home.

Well no he killed them because he was paid to do it. The people who paid him killed them because it wasmore convient/cost effiecent to dispose of the animals than to keep them alive.

Hyde · Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 11:57 pm Post subject:

John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: ic Spoon wrote: Quote:
how exactly? could he not have found homes for these dogs where they could live? why exactly is it humanly to slaughter dogs for no reason but convinence?

The same reason it's humane to slaughter cows or pigs...

you seem to be missing a point. humans eat meat. so we kill cows for the meat. he killed those dogs just because it was more convienint for him to kill them then to find them a home.

Well no he killed them because he was paid to do it. The people who paid him killed them because it wasmore convient/cost effiecent to dispose of the animals than to keep them alive.

SEND THEM TO THE FREAKIN SPCA!!! THAT DOESNT EVEN COST MONEY! i

John Galt · Joined: 04 May 2004 Posts: 21637 Location: Minnesota

Hyde wrote: John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: ic Spoon wrote: Quote:
how exactly? could he not have found homes for these dogs where they could live? why exactly is it humanly to slaughter dogs for no reason but convinence?

The same reason it's humane to slaughter cows or pigs...

you seem to be missing a point. humans eat meat. so we kill cows for the meat. he killed those dogs just because it was more convienint for him to kill them then to find them a home.

Well no he killed them because he was paid to do it. The people who paid him killed them because it wasmore convient/cost effiecent to dispose of the animals than to keep them alive.

SEND THEM TO THE FREAKIN SPCA!!! THAT DOESNT EVEN COST MONEY! i

Do they kill them like PETA does?

thintheherd · Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:32 am Post subject:

John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: ic Spoon wrote: Quote:
how exactly? could he not have found homes for these dogs where they could live? why exactly is it humanly to slaughter dogs for no reason but convinence?

The same reason it's humane to slaughter cows or pigs...

you seem to be missing a point. humans eat meat. so we kill cows for the meat. he killed those dogs just because it was more convienint for him to kill them then to find them a home.

Well no he killed them because he was paid to do it. The people who paid him killed them because it wasmore convient/cost effiecent to dispose of the animals than to keep them alive.

SEND THEM TO THE FREAKIN SPCA!!! THAT DOESNT EVEN COST MONEY! i

Do they kill them like PETA does?
Or the Humane Society?

Hyde · Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:33 am Post subject:

thintheherd wrote: John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: ic Spoon wrote: Quote:
how exactly? could he not have found homes for these dogs where they could live? why exactly is it humanly to slaughter dogs for no reason but convinence?

The same reason it's humane to slaughter cows or pigs...

you seem to be missing a point. humans eat meat. so we kill cows for the meat. he killed those dogs just because it was more convienint for him to kill them then to find them a home.

Well no he killed them because he was paid to do it. The people who paid him killed them because it wasmore convient/cost effiecent to dispose of the animals than to keep them alive.

SEND THEM TO THE FREAKIN SPCA!!! THAT DOESNT EVEN COST MONEY! i

Do they kill them like PETA does?
Or the Humane Society?
at least they get a chance to live. not just get slaughtered.

thintheherd · Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:42 am Post subject:

Hyde wrote: thintheherd wrote: John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: ic Spoon wrote: Quote:
how exactly? could he not have found homes for these dogs where they could live? why exactly is it humanly to slaughter dogs for no reason but convinence?

The same reason it's humane to slaughter cows or pigs...

you seem to be missing a point. humans eat meat. so we kill cows for the meat. he killed those dogs just because it was more convienint for him to kill them then to find them a home.

Well no he killed them because he was paid to do it. The people who paid him killed them because it wasmore convient/cost effiecent to dispose of the animals than to keep them alive.

SEND THEM TO THE FREAKIN SPCA!!! THAT DOESNT EVEN COST MONEY! i

Do they kill them like PETA does?
Or the Humane Society?
at least they get a chance to live. not just get slaughtered.
Oh sure... In a 2x2 cage, wallowing in their own filth, rarely 'loved', until such time as they are marched to the chamber since the majority are not 'rescued' by the do-gooders you so praise? (you've been to one haven't you?) Now THAT's living!

Reality check- As large a number as 10,000 must seem to the 'animal lover' this is merely a drop in the bucket in terms of how many are deemed unworthy and destroyed. Get over it already, the herd must be thinned after all. :roll:

John Galt · Joined: 04 May 2004 Posts: 21637 Location: Minnesota

Hyde wrote: thintheherd wrote: John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: ic Spoon wrote: Quote:
how exactly? could he not have found homes for these dogs where they could live? why exactly is it humanly to slaughter dogs for no reason but convinence?

The same reason it's humane to slaughter cows or pigs...

you seem to be missing a point. humans eat meat. so we kill cows for the meat. he killed those dogs just because it was more convienint for him to kill them then to find them a home.

Well no he killed them because he was paid to do it. The people who paid him killed them because it wasmore convient/cost effiecent to dispose of the animals than to keep them alive.

SEND THEM TO THE FREAKIN SPCA!!! THAT DOESNT EVEN COST MONEY! i

Do they kill them like PETA does?
Or the Humane Society?
at least they get a chance to live. not just get slaughtered.

They had their chance, and they failed. What more do you want?

Amoral creatures should not hold moral creatures hostage. They are morally irrelevant as to if they live, die or suffer.

Hyde · Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:47 am Post subject:

John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: thintheherd wrote: John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: ic Spoon wrote: Quote:
how exactly? could he not have found homes for these dogs where they could live? why exactly is it humanly to slaughter dogs for no reason but convinence?

The same reason it's humane to slaughter cows or pigs...

you seem to be missing a point. humans eat meat. so we kill cows for the meat. he killed those dogs just because it was more convienint for him to kill them then to find them a home.

Well no he killed them because he was paid to do it. The people who paid him killed them because it wasmore convient/cost effiecent to dispose of the animals than to keep them alive.

SEND THEM TO THE FREAKIN SPCA!!! THAT DOESNT EVEN COST MONEY! i

Do they kill them like PETA does?
Or the Humane Society?
at least they get a chance to live. not just get slaughtered.

They had their chance, and they failed. What more do you want?

Amoral creatures should not hold moral creatures hostage. They are morally irrelevant as to if they live, die or suffer.

they had their chance? how so. they didnt run fast enough so their owners said "i could give them to the spca, but its so much easier to kill them" your arguement makes no sense.

John Galt · Joined: 04 May 2004 Posts: 21637 Location: Minnesota

Hyde wrote: John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: thintheherd wrote: John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: John Galt wrote: Hyde wrote: ic Spoon wrote: Quote:
how exactly? could he not have found homes for these dogs where they could live? why exactly is it humanly to slaughter dogs for no reason but convinence?

The same reason it's humane to slaughter cows or pigs...

you seem to be missing a point. humans eat meat. so we kill cows for the meat. he killed those dogs just because it was more convienint for him to kill them then to find them a home.

Well no he killed them because he was paid to do it. The people who paid him killed them because it wasmore convient/cost effiecent to dispose of the animals than to keep them alive.

SEND THEM TO THE FREAKIN SPCA!!! THAT DOESNT EVEN COST MONEY! i

Do they kill them like PETA does?
Or the Humane Society?
at least they get a chance to live. not just get slaughtered.

They had their chance, and they failed. What more do you want?

Amoral creatures should not hold moral creatures hostage. They are morally irrelevant as to if they live, die or suffer.

they had their chance? how so. they didnt run fast enough so their owners said "i could give them to the spca, but its so much easier to kill them" your arguement makes no sense.

Why not? They outlived their usefulness, I am sure the owners did what they felt was in their best intrests and they disposed of unuseful product.

X-Shocker · Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 167 Location: All around you

Here is the truth:

Giving the dogs to SPCA or USHS or PETA or whatever, will result in a few dogs getting adopted. However, for the vast majority of the dogs, the ones which no-one wants, the inhumane cages will make life unbearable til their bitter ends.

What the guy and the owners did were to ensure humane deaths for the dogs.