Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Am I a heartless, animal hating monster for this...
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="mugsy" data-source="post: 2843767" data-attributes="member: 18914"><p>The municipal animal shelter in Bristow, OK has announced that they inend to use gunfire as a means of euthanizing animals in those cases where an animal has otherwise met all criteria for euthanization. This has caused some controvery, spawning a change.org campaign and a FB propaganda war.</p><p></p><p>My wife and I support a couple of animal rescue/rehab groups and one of those groups has made a strong call, in the name of the organization, for all supporters to oppose the shelter's move. Here is where my question comes:</p><p>- I have repeatedly asked for a clear explanation of why they oppose this method of euthanization IF they don't oppose all euthanization (since in that case it is obvious).</p><p>- I have gotten vague replies about ", "barbaric", "backward ass", "cruel", etc but little more. </p><p>- When I ask for specifically what makes gunfire worse than say lethal injection, I have only heard one good answer - namely that a botched shot could lead to a suffering animal - which to me suggests taking risk mitigation steps not banning.</p><p>- Mostly though I have been told I am "backwards", "part of the problem", that I must hate animals, etc.</p><p></p><p>It seems to me that most of these people are using their adrenal glands not their frontal lobes to reason out this issue but I am still open to good arguments, all I seem to have gotten so far is highly emotional hyperbole and insults.</p><p></p><p>So...am I a cruel, animal hating monster? Am I well meaning but badly misguided dupe of the gun lobby?</p><p>Is there a good argument that simply isn't being presented? (Let's hear it - sincerely) </p><p>Or is this one of those issues where people don't want to think becuase it is too laden with feelings/emotions so I am expecting too much?</p><p></p><p>I now submit to have your wisdom wash over me...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mugsy, post: 2843767, member: 18914"] The municipal animal shelter in Bristow, OK has announced that they inend to use gunfire as a means of euthanizing animals in those cases where an animal has otherwise met all criteria for euthanization. This has caused some controvery, spawning a change.org campaign and a FB propaganda war. My wife and I support a couple of animal rescue/rehab groups and one of those groups has made a strong call, in the name of the organization, for all supporters to oppose the shelter's move. Here is where my question comes: - I have repeatedly asked for a clear explanation of why they oppose this method of euthanization IF they don't oppose all euthanization (since in that case it is obvious). - I have gotten vague replies about ", "barbaric", "backward ass", "cruel", etc but little more. - When I ask for specifically what makes gunfire worse than say lethal injection, I have only heard one good answer - namely that a botched shot could lead to a suffering animal - which to me suggests taking risk mitigation steps not banning. - Mostly though I have been told I am "backwards", "part of the problem", that I must hate animals, etc. It seems to me that most of these people are using their adrenal glands not their frontal lobes to reason out this issue but I am still open to good arguments, all I seem to have gotten so far is highly emotional hyperbole and insults. So...am I a cruel, animal hating monster? Am I well meaning but badly misguided dupe of the gun lobby? Is there a good argument that simply isn't being presented? (Let's hear it - sincerely) Or is this one of those issues where people don't want to think becuase it is too laden with feelings/emotions so I am expecting too much? I now submit to have your wisdom wash over me... [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Am I a heartless, animal hating monster for this...
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom