should cats be shot for killing birds ???
- Thread starter DRIFT GOD
- 191 comments
- 4,120 views
Danoff
Premium
- 34,109
- Mile High City
Animals' lives are not worthless even though they are worth less then the lives of the self aware. It is not okay to kill animals for no reason. It certainly isn't ok to torture them needlessly.
I think it is unethical to hunt for trophy (not that it should be illegal). I think it is unethical to hurt animals for fun (not that it should be illegal). I do NOT think it is unethical to hunt animals for population control reasons or food. I also do NOT think it is unethical (double negative) to make animals suffer for science.
...there just has to be a good reason for it. Food, understanding, and population control are all good reasons. Personally I don't think that "entertainment" is a good reason.
PS
(Banned)
- 2,883
XVII
What the h*ll? You're aware that humans by nature are vegitarian anyway, right? And that our molars aren't even properly designed to chew meant, right? Or the fact that we have an appendix to digest tough fibres like grass and wheat, right?
Not to mention the fact that about 10% of the population is vegetarian.
[edit]
And approximately 6 million vegetarians in the USA.
- 87,827
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
PS
The human body is biologically omnivorous. You're right, our molars aren't meant to chew meat - but no molars are. We have canines for tearing flesh from bones.
Our appendix has no digestive function at all. We cannot digest chlorophyll.
- 87,827
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
PS
Yes - the function of the appendix and caecum in other animals is used to digest plant fibres, through bacterial action. We don't have the bacteria required and cannot digest plant fibre. The appendix is a "vestigial" organ in that respect, although as a lymphoid mass it does have an immune system function.
Primates are not all obligate vegetarians either.
- 383
Humans are omnivores, about the only food we have a problem digesting (yet, if you believe in evolution) is bread.
- 3,001
My sister has to do a report on the pros and cons of this, as we do live in Wisconsin, for school. She found out that they already allow the people of Minnesota to kill stray cats. There is also one other state in the Midwest, I think it was Iowa, that lets people kill stray cats.
- 1,620
If my Dad finds a cat around his house (way out in the bush, Australia) and it doesn't have a collar and looks feral...
IT GETS THE DROWNING TREATMENT. (in a metal barrel! Whoohoo!)
We really respect the native birds and other endangered/rare species that hang out round my parents place. As cats aren't native to Australia, and if it's not a domestic one, I have NO problem killing it, they're a real problem - wiping out helpless native birds etc. Gassing them with the car exhaust is quite effective also. A shotgun blast to the head, while possibly enjoyable, is a waste of a cartridge. Although we try and make sure the cat doesn't suffer too much. If you see these feral cats, they have NO similarity to domestic, tame cats. If they have a collar, they don't get the gas treatment, and we try and find whose cat it is.
Cats in general simply shouldn't be let run wild on a killing spree. If they do, its silly to blame that particular cat, its just doing what any cat wants to do (kill as many things as possible), but I would enact pretty harsh penalties on the owners, because they're the ones that let the cat kill endangered species, and generally have a bad affect on the environment. If the cat is feral, and there are no owners to get sad, i have no problem with it dieing to save the lives of inumerable other animals. As humans, we're kind of biased for favouring one or two species (and helping it out more often than not) over most others, but do cats really deserve special favour from us in all circumstances? I say no.
IT GETS THE DROWNING TREATMENT. (in a metal barrel! Whoohoo!)
We really respect the native birds and other endangered/rare species that hang out round my parents place. As cats aren't native to Australia, and if it's not a domestic one, I have NO problem killing it, they're a real problem - wiping out helpless native birds etc. Gassing them with the car exhaust is quite effective also. A shotgun blast to the head, while possibly enjoyable, is a waste of a cartridge. Although we try and make sure the cat doesn't suffer too much. If you see these feral cats, they have NO similarity to domestic, tame cats. If they have a collar, they don't get the gas treatment, and we try and find whose cat it is.
Cats in general simply shouldn't be let run wild on a killing spree. If they do, its silly to blame that particular cat, its just doing what any cat wants to do (kill as many things as possible), but I would enact pretty harsh penalties on the owners, because they're the ones that let the cat kill endangered species, and generally have a bad affect on the environment. If the cat is feral, and there are no owners to get sad, i have no problem with it dieing to save the lives of inumerable other animals. As humans, we're kind of biased for favouring one or two species (and helping it out more often than not) over most others, but do cats really deserve special favour from us in all circumstances? I say no.
Similar threads
