Jump to content
Coral Vue Hydros

Lionfish vs. Frog video


mascencerro

Recommended Posts

neanderthalman

right, I agree. You shouldn't feed your pets to your other pets.

 

He didn't. He bought a dog for the express purpose of feeding it to the snake. Is the concept of a feeder dog impossible? Certainly not conventional, but not impossible. The fact that they are kept as pets does not rule out that they cannot be purchased for feeder animals. Any other feeder animals are also kept as pets, so why can't a dog (or cat) be purchased a feeder animal?

 

Edit - I also thought raccoons were rodents too, but they're a proto-dog. The order is escaping me at the moment. caryons? protocaryons?

Link to comment
  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply
reefman225gal

I never seen a rat,mouse, or rabbit walk a blind man down the street. hmmm. I never seen them pick up the scent of a lost person and track em down. Never seen them in the back of a police car helping the cops out. HMMM Never seen them sniff out drugs or bombs. I just cant figure out why everyone is so PI$$ED off about 'man's best friend' getting fed to a snake. :huh:

Link to comment
neanderthalman

Are you kidding me reefman? Honestly, are you kidding me?

 

Trainability is certainly not a valid benchmark to use when assigning moral value to the life on an animal. You can do better than that.

 

Furthermore, do you think dogs are sniffing for drugs, lost people, or avalanche victims because they care? hah! They do it because they think it is a game. "Play Instinct" is the most important factor when selecting a dog for rescue training.

 

So, are you suggesting that "play instinct" is a worthy benchmark for assigning moral value to the life of an animal? That is shameful.

 

To put it over the top, I have never seen a cat walk a blind man down the street, pick up the scent of a lost person and track them down, help police, or sniffing out drugs and bombs. Yet, you and the rest of "society" would be equally upset if he had instead fed a greased up kitten to the snake.

 

Would anyone like to know the definition of hypocrisy?

Link to comment
reefman225gal
Are you kidding me reefman? Honestly, are you kidding me?

 

Trainability is certainly not a valid benchmark to use when assigning moral value to the life on an animal. You can do better than that.

 

Furthermore, do you think dogs are sniffing for drugs, lost people, or avalanche victims because they care? hah! They do it because they think it is a game. "Play Instinct" is the most important factor when selecting a dog for rescue training.

 

So, are you suggesting that "play instinct" is a worthy benchmark for assigning moral value to the life of an animal? That is shameful.

 

To put it over the top, I have never seen a cat walk a blind man down the street, pick up the scent of a lost person and track them down, help police, or sniffing out drugs and bombs. Yet, you and the rest of "society" would be equally upset if he had instead fed a greased up kitten to the snake

 

Would anyone like to know the definition of hypocrisy?

Yeah, but i think if a dog is able to save a HUMAN life by its training enough said. neanderthalman i think your sloped forehead has made you :wacko:

:P oh yeah go try that fancy argument to the judge that sentenced that idiot maybe you can get him off.

Link to comment
neanderthalman

This isn't a fancy argument. There is no long twisted train of convoluted logic here. No tricks, just the simple question:

 

Is it appropriate to consider the life of one animal as morally valuable, while ignoring the rest?

 

The short answer is no. I've already given you the long answer.

 

Now, perhaps you could come up with a valid argument to support your opinion, rather than simply slinging insults.

Link to comment
reefman225gal
This isn't a fancy argument. There is no long twisted train of convoluted logic here. No tricks, just the simple question:

 

Is it appropriate to consider the life of one animal as morally valuable, while ignoring the rest?

 

The short answer is no. I've already given you the long answer.

 

Now, perhaps you could come up with a valid argument to support your opinion, rather than simply slinging insults.

I did! 'dogs can be trained to save human lives'. Sorry for the insult by the way, So if i had to choose between a rabbit,mouse or rat I value a dog.
Link to comment
I never seen a rat,mouse, or rabbit walk a blind man down the street. hmmm. I never seen them pick up the scent of a lost person and track em down. Never seen them in the back of a police car helping the cops out. HMMM Never seen them sniff out drugs or bombs. I just cant figure out why everyone is so PI$$ED off about 'man's best friend' getting fed to a snake. :huh:

 

Poor old mousey not getting credits for their intense involvements in various medical, psychological and other biological experiments, which benefits mankind so much.

Link to comment
neanderthalman

You're placing moral value entirely on whether or not an animal has "play instinct". Rescue dogs don't give a crap about saving lives - they care about playing the game they play with their handlers. Let's explore why this is fundamentally incorrect in modern society.

 

Yet again, I'll bring up cats.

 

Would you be upset if it were an adorable little kitten that was oiled up and fed to a python? That would most assuredly elicit the same emotional response because we as a society have been trained to become emotionally attached to cats and dogs, and less so to other animals.

 

Lets move to a more obvious case of animal cruelty. Recently I read a story about a rottweiler that had been beaten and mutilated, it's ears cut off, and left bleeding on a balcony by it's owners. The owner was charged, obviously, with animal cruelty, as he should have been. However, I ask you this, if he had instead mutilated a cat, should he have been charged with animal cruelty? Absolutely. The charge of "cruelty to animals" is not specific to any particular animal. It is meant to be applied equally to ALL animals (except laboratory mice, which are exempt for specific reasons). A cat's life is no more or less valuable than a dog's, under the law. Yet, a cat cannot be trained to save a human life.

 

Seems to me that your argument of basing moral value on the ability to save a human life is rather flawed, wouldn't you agree, considering we as a society place the same value on a cat's life as we do on a dog's.

 

EDIT - OMG, don't get me started on PETA morons.......I'd rather gouge my eyes out with a spoon than be considered a PETA supporter.

 

With regards to PETA: Pen & Teller on PETA

 

Great video!

Link to comment
reefman225gal

well, cruelty to any animal is wrong, all im saying I value a dog more since it can possibly save my life. I dont care if the dog gives a hoot about me or not. :P

 

 

EDIT: By the way im allergic to cats will i harm one because of that? NO

Link to comment
neanderthalman

ok, cruelty to any animal is wrong. Glad we have established that.

 

Now, if feeding a dog to a snake is cruelty, then why is feeding a mouse, rat, rabbit, or pig to a snake not cruelty?

Link to comment
reefman225gal
ok, cruelty to any animal is wrong. Glad we have established that.

 

Now, if feeding a dog to a snake is cruelty, then why is feeding a mouse, rat, rabbit, or pig to a snake not cruelty?

Man I dont make the rules. In our society dogs are just a little higher up in the food chain ;) Sucks but thats the way it is :mellow:
Link to comment
neanderthalman

Under the law, they are no different than any other animal. Our laws are (supposed to be) based on what society as a whole believes is right. So, it's not about making rules, but simply that society has decided that we do not treat one animal as more valuable than another.

 

As for higher on the food chain...well...apparently they're not any higher than snakes.

Link to comment
reefman225gal

Apparently there is a difference what society thinks about mice and rats. If that guy had fed his snake a mouse or rat he would not be sitting in jail right now. so, are you saying there is a double standerd at play here when it comes to certain animals?

Link to comment
reefman225gal
YES
agreed !!! Well thats resolved. I guess untill the next debate take care, and once again im sorry for the insult.

 

-Bill Dees

Link to comment

neanderthalman,

you do have good points but you get to understand the case here is not just feeding a snake a dog, it's also how he did it. and he did in in front of young kids. it's the behavior and the intention of that guy more than anything else. the message the judge sends is that this sort of abnormal behavior is not allowed and can't be tolerated. also, it's what potentially he would do next (if he's not being punished for what he has already done) that can be more harmful to the society.

Link to comment
neanderthalman

Fair enough, I never said what this guy did wasn't wrong, but to convict him on charges of animal cruelty is also wrong. FWIW, they were not young kids, they were 15 year old boys - practically young men.

 

The reason these charges are a problem because of the precedent they set. Now that it has been determined in a court of law that feeding an animal to another animal is grounds for an animal cruelty conviction, they can use that for ANY live feedings, of any animal to any other animal - including something as ridiculous as feeding rotifers to fry.

 

Sure, the message that the judge MEANT to send was that live feeding puppies to a python for the express purpose of entertaining 15 year old boys is not acceptable behavour. I agree with that, I find live feedings for entertainment abhorrent. The problem is the precedent he has set does not match the message, nor does the convction match the crime.

 

With good intentions, this judge has created a brand new can of worms, ready to be opened on any number of responsible animal owners, including many members of this forum.

Link to comment
As for [dogs] higher on the food chain...well...apparently they're not any higher than snakes.

 

:haha: PWND

 

But the last brings up a good point: the man did it in front of two pre-teens, obviously solely for their amusement (and his) at the suffering of an animal. Frankly, I think it's wrong to get a predatory animal just to feed it live animals and "get off" on that, but that's my opinion.

 

Also, to Duncan and the rest who followed about mice and rats saving our lives via animal-testing. THANK YOU, at least it shows they're good for something and not "useless vermin"! That said, I have kept cats, dogs, snakes, herps of all kinds, and mice and rats. My favorite rat was Jeremy, a very large Dumbo rat bought as a young'n to be a friend to Aisha, my piebald blue rat who was tearing out her own fur and bloodying her skin, and with no mange, fleas, or other medical causes, it was obvious that it was emotional/psychological. Sure enough, she stopped once she got her boyfriend, Jeremy, and he was such a good father. After Aisha died from uterine cancer (bleeding from the cervix, she died within two days of that), he lived with his offspring in a rat-hippie-commune. Finally all the rats were given away, fed to my snakes, fed to other snakes, sent to my mother's school as class pets, and so on, and I was left with just Jeremy. Such a sweet rat, he was a great friend. Very loving. He was always sweet to Aisha, to his babies, and even to his fully-matured male offpsring. (Normally rats can be aggressive toward their mates and offpsring, especially mature males, and especially in close quarters.)

 

Finally it was just him, and he was a good buddy. Once I bought a live feeder mouse for my ball python, Charlie, who refused to eat occasionally, including this time. I couldn't leave the mouse in with him, as it might start gnawing on him and releasing rank-smelling urine and feces everywhere, and despite knowing that rats will kill and eat mice, in fact quite aggressively, I tried nevertheless to put the mouse in Jeremy's cage. I planned to watch carefully, ready to snatch the mouse before it could be injured. But the events that followed were not what I expected. It was difficult to understand what was really going on: Jeremy was obviously interested in the mouse, but just kept following it around the cage, trying to smell it, but of course the tiny rodent feared for its life and ran as fast as it could. Finally he just jumped on it and held it down. By now I had the lid off and was ready to grab, except he didn't immediately attack the mouse, and that's what stopped me. I still watched nervously, afraid he was trying to get a full nasal sample before deciding whether it was a thread or food or neither. But he just smelled the moues, in fact very thoroughly, smelling its back, its face, its ears, its feet, its belly, his nostrils wiggling as he attempted to gather all the scent information that he could. Then he let it go, but kept following it around to smell it some more. He finally stopped following it so adamantly, but let it slow down and relax. Every time it would stop in a corner to sleep, he would sneak over quietly and sleep right up next to it. At some point it would wake up and move to the next corner, and at some point Jeremy would move to that corner to continue the spooning. The mouse turned out to be pregnant (from the store, they never separated by gender, only isolating heavily pregnant females), and it was obvious within a few days of putting it in there. I worried about the babies, as they, surely, would become little rat-snacks. But I was shocked to come home and find the mother nursing a large litter of neonates, and Jeremy nearby just watching. Eventually she allowed him to come near enough to lie with the babies, and he'd often sleep with them, all piled up on or against his robust belly. As they got older and their eyes opened and their mobility skills began developing, they would crawl all over him, nuzzling his ears and climbing his tail. He'd just snuggle them and give them hearty cleaning licks, but his tongue was so large in comparison to the babies that he would sometimes knock them right over. He'd just keep licking them, cleaning their ears and noses and bottoms. As they got older (they're mature in about a month), they began using him as a full-on playhouse, and would fight his ears and tail and feet as worthy opponents, and despite having babies with full-on teeth dangling from his oversized ears, he would just half-close his eyes and let them do it. What saint, that rat. When they were mature, I brought most of them back to the pet store, along with the story of their sweet foster-father, an enormous brown rat with white feet and belly and a white stripe across one eye. He was the sweetest animal, taking care of babies like they were his own, or even his own species. For an animal that's "stupid" (and doesn't even have nipples, lol), he was able to progress past his instinct to kill the mouse, a threat to his territory and an animal certainly not outside his natural prey items, even to kill babies (male rats and mice will even kill their own babies). I put another feeder mouse in there, again one that the snake refused, and he did eat one baby--an obviously stillborn one, 30% smaller than the others and a strange gray-pink (no blood flowing). The others he left alone and raised as before. Maybe it doesn't seem like much to someone who thinks that rats are disease-carrying, defecate-wherever-they-please, mindless sewer-inhabitants, but to me it was so incredibly heartwarming. Eventually, when he was about five years old, it was obvious that he had suffered from a stroke: his back legs were wobbly, and he'd fall sometimes, and he had some odd mannerisms developing. He also started losing his fur, and his normally hearty appetite was fading. I knew I had no choice. I took him to the vet to be euthanized--yes, with a needle and quick-acting drugs, just like for a pet cat or dog--because I didn't want him to suffer any more. I made him some oatmeal as his last meal--one of his favorite foods--and was so heartbroken to have to do it. It cost me $25 (which my mother, feeling so bad for him and for me, insisted upon paying for) to do it, and all my friends thought I was crazy. My mother was the only one who understood; she had always feared rats and mice, had the typical attitude of "yuck, diseased trash animal that would attack you in the basement", until she met Jeremy and learned how intelligent and loving and down-to-earth a rat--a rat!--could really be. To this day she loves rats, all because of sweet Jeremy.

 

I know I've told this story a few times here on NR. I'll just never get over my love for Jeremy, such a sweet animal who always tried his best to be loving.

 

Rats aren't the vermin you think they are, either. I CAN'T feed live anymore; I just feel so badly for the prey animals, be it nature or not, and so I always go f/t. Carbon dioxide gas = safe, quick-acting, humane way to euthanize prey animals. They just fall asleep after a minute or two, then die in their sleep. Frankly, I have a hard time even feeding f/t to my snakes. Occasionally I've even thought of giving them up for this reason. But it's nature. Luckily mice are easily kept happy with even the simplest of requirements. They're sure as hell kept better in the breeding racks of commercial "rodent popsicle" dealers than the animals in factory farms. I can tell you that without any doubt in my mind.

Link to comment
Fair enough, I never said what this guy did wasn't wrong, but to convict him on charges of animal cruelty is also wrong. FWIW, they were not young kids, they were 15 year old boys - practically young men.

 

like i said, i don't believe it's entirely just animal cruelty although that's the law used to convict him to jail. i think the whole point behine this is much more than animal cruelty. 15 years old? would you think seeing something like what he did in front of a 15 years "young men" is ok? this is subjective, so if you do think it's ok then it's alright with me :) i won't, however, never ever want me 15 years old kid (not that i have one. lol) to see something like that.

 

The reason these charges are a problem because of the precedent they set. Now that it has been determined in a court of law that feeding an animal to another animal is grounds for an animal cruelty conviction, they can use that for ANY live feedings, of any animal to any other animal - including something as ridiculous as feeding rotifers to fry.

 

i agree. setting a precedent for something like that could be dangerous and you made your point clear. however, if this precendent will ever be set, this is a good case for it. this guy's desire and intention to kill things so cruelly is a potental problem for many more dead animals to come. i couldn't imagine what he would do next if the judge simply fine him a few hundreds dollars and call it done. would he go out and kill more dogs, cats, and in front of even youngs kids? is that guy crazy that after killing animal that he starts to kill people to feed his snake?

 

Sure, the message that the judge MEANT to send was that live feeding puppies to a python for the express purpose of entertaining 15 year old boys is not acceptable behavour. I agree with that, I find live feedings for entertainment abhorrent. The problem is the precedent he has set does not match the message, nor does the convction match the crime.

 

i do not agree with that. i think the jail time is well deserved not because he killed a dog or feed a live animal to another live animal but because the way he did and his intention to show-off in front of the kids.

 

With good intentions, this judge has created a brand new can of worms, ready to be opened on any number of responsible animal owners, including many members of this forum.

 

maybe but this case is not a heavy attack on feeding live animal, it's an attack on this single crazy guy.

Link to comment
Fair enough, I never said what this guy did wasn't wrong, but to convict him on charges of animal cruelty is also wrong. FWIW, they were not young kids, they were 15 year old boys - practically young men.

 

The reason these charges are a problem because of the precedent they set. Now that it has been determined in a court of law that feeding an animal to another animal is grounds for an animal cruelty conviction, they can use that for ANY live feedings, of any animal to any other animal - including something as ridiculous as feeding rotifers to fry.

 

Sure, the message that the judge MEANT to send was that live feeding puppies to a python for the express purpose of entertaining 15 year old boys is not acceptable behavour. I agree with that, I find live feedings for entertainment abhorrent. The problem is the precedent he has set does not match the message, nor does the convction match the crime.

 

With good intentions, this judge has created a brand new can of worms, ready to be opened on any number of responsible animal owners, including many members of this forum.

 

 

Sounds like the charge would have been better served had it been "contributing to the delinquency of a minor".

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recommended Discussions


×
×
  • Create New...