Insane

Remove all ads!

I'm a bit confused about that part of 'rescuing' animals 'from good homes, zoos etc.' You make it sound like PETA just storms in and takes animals from people who could very well provide for them. I've been under the impression that they take animals that are either given to them by the owners who feel they can't/don't want to keep them, or from people who treat their animals poorly. If they can't find any takers for the rescued animals, nobody can be *forced* to take them in. And since there aren't enough people willing to take in the animals, the real reason for the euthanizing is the lack of facilities. There's not enough room to keep all the animals in indefinetely.

 

No, that's the SPCA, which is a great group. PETA is only a little above urban terrorism. They will raid anywhere that has concentrations of animals, just as long as they think they can get away with it. They pay little attention to the conditions the animals are already in, frequently get caught, and are usually let off on a warning because 'they're just protecting the animals'. On a few occasions, they have even injured and killed people in order to get the animals out. Almost all of them are either let loose on the spot, killing most of them and causing massive damage to the area, or taken to local PETA headquarters. If the animals get there, the PETA members decide which they are willing to/capable of taking care of, and euthanize the rest.

 

Fixed: Aparently Peta thinks its better for them to be dead than to live under improper human supervision.

Of course, what they consider "improper" can sometimes be pretty . Also, why do you assume that she's a part of PETA rather than the SPCA?

 

I would love to see these twits storming my house... Pity them, I would splatter their brain and give it to my cats.

 

You're well 'ard

 

SPCA, PETA...I must confess I don't really know the names. From what I've seen, yes, there are some pretty kooky groups out there; where I'm from some group went and set some minks loose in the wild, and the critters adjusted a bit too well to the ecosystem they didn't originally belong in. They did some serious damage. I didn't know PETA was one of those.

However the wacky groups seem to be a vocal minority. Sensible animal rights groups get a bad name because of what the extremists do.

 

At least around here, the SPCA advocates proper care and treatment of animals. When I got married and the house we were about to move into did not allow pets, I took my wife's 3 cats to the SPCA. They did what they could to find homes for the beasts, and I'm sure that at least 2 of them did find homes. Nothing wrong with that. The SPCA cooperates with law enforcement and health authorities in dealing with people who have 500 cats in a one bedroom house or people who go around putting elastic bands around other people's pet's necks to slowly kill the beast. Nothing wrong with that either.

PETA, on the other hand, are nothing more than terrorists. They do not work with law enforcement agencies or health authorities. The destroy the legal property of other people (throwing blood on fur coats), break and enter scientific institutions carrying out legal activities, and hinder people legally engaged in hunting or fishing. They are nothing more than criminals who believe that they are above the law, and I am not exaggerating when I say they all should be locked away for life -- holding deep convictions does not exonerate criminal behaviour or provide a license to disregard the law.

 

The only good thing I can say about PETA is that they have never used suicide bombings (to my knowledge).
Felinoid:
Why did we assume who was PETA? The woman in the article? I don't know if she was or not, the PETA issue was just a related side-topic. Was it off-topic?

 

Oh. With the abrupt right turn the topic took, I guess I just assumed. And with the topic being animal rights "insanity" (right?), I think it's on topic enough.