I shot the neighborhood K9 this morning... Cautionary PIC inside.

[zinfamous]

Is there something wrong with being anti-peta? They do support and fund domestic terrorism, after all.

for once, I agree with the sociopath.

:thumbsup:

PETA is a terrorist front.

 

[feralkid]

What I mean is killing animals is bad unless it is completely necessary, for example if someone is in immediate danger then kill away. If however a couple of chickens might get eaten because the owner cant be arsed to put up a fense then no don't kill anything.

Pest and nuisance animals get offed...sorry.

If you want to relocate them in your back yard...please, help yourself.

 

[alkemyst]

They dont sound very pro-pet here do they.

http://www.peta.org/about/why-peta/pets.aspx

"This selfish desire to possess animals and receive love from them causes immeasurable suffering, which results from manipulating their breeding, selling or giving them away casually, and depriving them of the opportunity to engage in their natural behavior. They are restricted to human homes, where they must obey commands and can only eat, drink, and even urinate when humans allow them to."

In reality a large portion of their core believes pet ownership to be unethical, and their movement towards reducing the pet population thru spay and neuter is focused on an end goal of no animal ownership. You can deny it all you like, but you will still be wrong.

sigh...that's the blurb from that statement everyone takes out.

this is the part that leads into it:

..We at PETA very much love the animal companions who share our homes, but we believe that it would have been in the animals' best interests if the institution of "pet keeping"—i.e., breeding animals to be kept and regarded as "pets"—never existed. The international pastime of domesticating animals has created an overpopulation crisis; as a result, millions of unwanted animals are destroyed every year as "surplus."

 

[SlowSpyder]

Ecosystems do not include morons who kill animals for sport/ for no good reason.

Animals will kill other animals to defend their territory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x5DdSDNeTk&feature=related

The wolves did not build a fence. The OP did exactly what happens in nature all the time. Do you understand that? In nature, animals will kill other animals even though it has no intention to eat that animal. Animals reason, to the best of their ability, what the best way to handle the situation is and then use the tools at their disposal to carry that decision out. Reasoning can include deciding how much energy to spend and what the best solution might be. The OP didn't do anything out of the ordinary here.

 

[alkemyst]

for once, I agree with the sociopath.

:thumbsup:

PETA is a terrorist front.

I don't agree with PETA...however; that is just crap.

They give to organizations and take just like our democrats and republicans do.

Some of these organizations do stupid things.

PETA is hardly the worse of our nation.

It's a nice scapegoat though.

 

[HAL9000]

Animals will kill other animals to defend their territory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x5DdSDNeTk&feature=related

The wolves did not build a fence. The OP did exactly what happens in nature all the time. Do you understand that? In nature, animals will kill other animals even though it has no intention to eat that animal. Animals reason, to the best of their ability, what the best way to handle the situation is and then use the tools at their disposal to carry that decision out. Reasoning can include deciding how much energy to spend and what the best solution might be. The OP didn't do anything out of the ordinary here.

However Wolves don't have ethics we do, we can't go around acting like animals

This is a shame

 

[alkemyst]

Animals will kill other animals to defend their territory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x5DdSDNeTk&feature=related

The wolves did not build a fence. The OP did exactly what happens in nature all the time. Do you understand that? In nature, animals will kill other animals even though it has no intention to eat that animal. Animals reason, to the best of their ability, what the best way to handle the situation is and then use the tools at their disposal to carry that decision out. Reasoning can include deciding how much energy to spend and what the best solution might be. The OP didn't do anything out of the ordinary here.

You can't base man's reactions/methods to that of animals. It breaks down and makes the person presenting the argument a total idiot quickly.

Man should only resolve to killing the local species outside of food when all other methods fail (trap and release back or in another area, barriers, proper santiation and storage of food sources, etc).

Also hunting as a whole should not be done to any species that reduces them below sustainable numbers to keep their populations proper.

In the end, too many men think it's their god-given right to do whatever the fuck they want though.

 

[Drako]

However Wolves don't have ethics we do, we can't go around acting like animals

This is a shame

Hmm, yes, it's shameful to protect our food supply. How dare we.

You sir, are a class A moron.

 

[zinfamous]

I don't agree with PETA...however; that is just crap.

They give to organizations and take just like our democrats and republicans do.

Some of these organizations do stupid things.

PETA is hardly the worse of our nation.

It's a nice scapegoat though.

this is not the official face of PETA:

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/ci_10084756

but these are the nutters that hang out at their club. This is the kind of shit they talk about. The kind of shit they advocate.

I remember reading some comments form some registered PETA nutjob: "The value of a mouse's life is no less than the value of my son's life."

Fuck those asshats. They should volunteer for all of the cancer research that they do not approve of.

 

[HAL9000]

Hmm, yes, it's shameful to protect supply by killing rather than using humane methods. How dare we.

ftfy.

 

[HAL9000]

Animals will kill other animals to defend their territory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x5DdSDNeTk&feature=related

The wolves did not build a fence. The OP did exactly what happens in nature all the time. Do you understand that? In nature, animals will kill other animals even though it has no intention to eat that animal. Animals reason, to the best of their ability, what the best way to handle the situation is and then use the tools at their disposal to carry that decision out. Reasoning can include deciding how much energy to spend and what the best solution might be. The OP didn't do anything out of the ordinary here.

Animals, have no capacity to comprehend reason or ethics or morality, either you don't or you choose to ignore yours.

Human Beings > Animals > Hunters

 

[SlowSpyder]

Animals, have no capacity to comprehend reason or ethics or morality, either you don't or you choose to ignore yours.

Human Beings > Animals > Hunters

I absolutely do have that ability and do not ignore it. I just see absolutely nothing wrong with what the OP did. I mentioned in an earlier reply, I am generally against predator hunting as I believe that is what can be considered killing an animal for no good reason. What the OP did was pest control. I see a plenty good reason for shooting the animal.

Hunters > people who eat meat but don't want to face the reality of where their meat comes from so they have someone else do the killing so they can artifically feel like they stand on some moral pedestal above others.

 

[sportage]

ANother chicken and cat lover, no doubt.
You just wanted a reason be act Sarah Palin pretty?
BTW, in the second life, we come back as coyotes. ENjoy.

 

[Locut0s]

Fuck, agreeing with Alkemyst. What have I come to? D:

 

[SampSon]

A whole bunch of posts from people who probably live in suburbs so tightly packed they could piss in their neighbors bathroom from their driveway. Take the unbridled ignorance and shove it up your soft, street light loving ass as you take the sidewalk to 7-11.

Parts of my family, including me, is still involved in farming, both for ag-to-market and ag-for-livestock. Small animal stock is part of their livelihood, both monetary and dietary. When small predators, pack (coyotes) or not (red fox, raptors), sometimes there is even larger game, enter the property and kill or intend on killing our stock, were going to destroy them first when we have the chance. There is no trap and release, these animals know exactly what they want and will keep coming until they get it. Do I spend hours everyday trapping the same animals, and eventually their offspring, over and over?

No, they get shot. Or trapped then shot. Or poisoned (dangerous around livestock).

My associate has a deer farm. Does some work with raising fawn. Harvests urine, meat, anti-bodies etc. He has a very extensive fencing system for the various stages of deer maturity. This past year he observed a red fox case out his fenced fawn area for a couple weeks. Eventually after a month or so this fox learned that at the top of the fence the link gaps were wide enough that he/she could probably grab a fawn by the neck and drag it through an opening 12' above the ground.

My associate got the pleasure of being alerted to this very thievery by some muffled high pitch yelps. So he rolls over to the fawn pasture at around 1am, and there is the fox, with a fawn in its mouth, about 11' up on the fence and trying as hard as it can to yank that deer through the fence. One .308 later the fox was stopped and the fawn was stuck in the fence.

If these animals want to attempt to take what is mine and I catch them, they are likely not going to have the chance to do it again. I do not feel any sorrow for killing these animals. All of this is done with me never really hunting for sport. I don't enjoy sport hunting. I go out once every few years to get a deer for meat, then realize it's really just a good reason to go to the land, eat drink and smoke while I take days off work.

 

[coreyb]

It's funny how some people here are trying to push the point that animals act like this in the wild therefore it's ok for us to. Aren't we more evolved then the animal kingdom?

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Let's think about this for a moment.

What is our basis of 'ethics' or 'morality' ?

If it is what makes me 'feel' bad, then I can be a PETA idiot and kill humans because killing bugs makes me 'feel' bad.

Good thing that isn't the basis of morality or ethics!

A good, defensible, ethos is necessary before someone can make an argument regarding what is or is not ethical.

I appeal to the deontological argument of Kant's concept of a respect for persons.

Given that there are persons harmed by the continued existence of the wolf (and persons possessions, such as chickens and cats encompass our respect for persons) and no persons are harmed by eliminating the wolf.

It is therefor ethical to shoot the wolf.

The only thing unethical would be the slight emotional harm some jackass on an internet forum would feel knowing about the activity...

But then, as I always say, FUCK'M if they can't take a joke!

 

[Perknose]

I have wondered if it's possible to raise one from a puppy as a pet. They do seem to be somewhat intelligent. I've known you can get wolf mixes.

Unusual, not recommended, but there is at least one (now) famous case.

Charlie:

A couple of vids:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HroXAM-_WRg&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIEifRz3554

 

[HAL9000]

Let's think about this for a moment.

What is our basis of 'ethics' or 'morality' ?

If it is what makes me 'feel' bad, then I can be a PETA idiot and kill humans because killing bugs makes me 'feel' bad.

Good thing that isn't the basis of morality or ethics!

A good, defensible, ethos is necessary before someone can make an argument regarding what is or is not ethical.

I appeal to the deontological argument of Kant's concept of a respect for persons.

Given that there are persons harmed by the continued existence of the wolf (and persons possessions, such as chickens and cats encompass our respect for persons) and no persons are harmed by eliminating the wolf.

It is therefor ethical to shoot the wolf.

The only thing unethical would be the slight emotional harm some jackass on an internet forum would feel knowing about the activity...

But then, as I always say, FUCK'M if they can't take a joke!

A good question, and yes I would say that Kant is probably where I derive a lot of my ethics and my sense of morality from, particularly Utilitarianism, as well as Benthams extension of the hedonic calculus and using that I see nothing that legitimises killing in this instance.

IMO Human Life > Animal Life > Possesions.

The choice here to some would be

2 x Chickens + 1 Cat > 1 Coyote, which makes sense however the choice isn't between the animals, it's between killing or doing something humane, i.e. a fence and in that instance the calulation would be

Effort vs Killing. It's a no brainer.

Hunters who enjoy what they do need some psychiatric help.

 

[SP33Demon]

I have fired. A couple of Glocks, a Desert Eagle, a .357 Magnum (revolver of some sort) An M16, A WWII Thompson, an AK47, and MP5 and a few .22 Rifles all good fun. Probably more, but I can't remember it was a while ago.

Wild animals I've encountered I would include some bears in canada! It was awesome.

Electric fence, well built. If it keeps us out it will work for them.

I hereby nominate this as OOTY (Ownage of the Year) thread for 2011. Reposting that everyone build an electric fence vs 5 minutes to shoot a pest with a $0.25 bullet is rich. The moron hasn't even posted about the time/cost it would take to maintain such a fence including:

1) Vegetation control via mechanical methods (time) or pesticides (costly)
2) Frost heaving of posts (prevented by using a costly hydraulic post pounder to the right depth)
3) Post insulation + bracing + extra barbed wire. Posts have to be 5-9m apart to be effective, do the math for over 1 acre perimeter. 263/9 = at least 29 posts per acre
4) Constant testing to ensure proper voltage
5) Wind erosion which can render the bottom line ineffective
6) Rodent burrows which have to be treated with a sterilant. They can render the bottom line ineffective.

Or shoot it for $0.25.

 

[Drako]

And so it begins - the animals shall get their revenge

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_belarus_fox;_ylt=Anaio1QYos_5VVn.0OJI1nJzfNdF

 

[dmcowen674]

Nice shot man, that one looks A LOT better than the last one I shot.

To all the animal lovers, this one had a bad case of mange. If you want to love on one then give me a call. I'll trap one and leave it on your front porch so you can snuggle with it.

You certainly put this one out of it's misery.

The OP's kill was healthy.

 

[Josh123]

Unusual, not recommended, but there is at least one (now) famous case.

Charlie:

A couple of vids:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HroXAM-_WRg&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIEifRz3554

My mom got me her book for Christmas a year or two ago but I still haven't managed to read it all. Her situation is very different, she lives in Wyoming I believe and is basically in the middle of no where.

Having a coyote as a pet wouldn't fly anywhere in a populated location. Her being in a isolated enviroment allows Charlie to survive and not get into trouble.

I do admit though that coyotes are great looking animals when healthy but that doesn't change the fact that they can cause a lot of trouble.

 

[HAL9000]

It's funny how some people here are trying to push the point that animals act like this in the wild therefore it's ok for us to. Aren't we more evolved then the animal kingdom?

This.

 

[William Gaatjes]

My next door neighbor had complained he was missing two of his chickens and a cat recently... I believe I took care of the problem this morning. Actually there were two, but I took out the closer one...

I noticed the black and white mentality again among different camps.

If these lethal animals are threats or carrying diseases, you have no choice. Safety of the people first. It is just nature where one species(humans) tries to protect it self from the other species(coyote). A good clean instant kill is indeed the way. Brain activity must not continue after the entry of the bullet. If you can do that, do what you have to do. I am a proponent of gun restriction. But hunters to keep diseased or dangerous animals under control and to protect citizens are just as important as soldiers or police officers(sometimes the same person).


But hunting for fun is imo something that does not belong to civilized humans. Hunting for fun is similar as letting a declawed and defanged bear fight hunting dogs as is found in eastern Europe. It shows the lack of humanity.