PETA Does It Again

[Calvin]

Mod Note:

Thread's merged.

 

[Babyblue]

Would you adopt a pet with FIV? I wouldn't.

PETA is already known as, not to have an adoption shelter.
It has already been stated. So basically you are either speaking of an adoption shelter, Or a place that just kills with out the chance of being adopted.

Adoption shelter will put down a sick animal and have no qualms about telling the public.

Unlike PETA... They will tell you they are saving this animal because it has rights!!! But turn around and do the same thing they are speaking against! Killing the animals, being cruel! being so unfair to animal rights!!

Kind of hypocritical to me.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

*sigh :roll:*

 

[~SG~]

PETA kill 95% of all adoptable pets under their care! << that is a lot.

Other possibility, perhaps the one that Peta kills adoptable pets:

* Show aggressive or unsociable behavior.
* Physical examination determines that the animal is physically unsuitable for adoption.
* Have been attack-trained or have a history of biting humans/animals.

 

[VamPyroX]

PETA kill 95% of all adoptable pets under their care! << that is a lot.

Other possibility, perhaps the one that Peta kills adoptable pets:

* Show aggressive or unsociable behavior.
* Physical examination determines that the animal is physically unsuitable for adoption.
* Have been attack-trained or have a history of biting humans/animals.

If they had those problems, they aren't adoptable.

The article says 95% of adoptable pets. That means... 2,223 pets under their care were adoptable, but they killed 2,216 of them.

 

[jasin]

Ingrid Newkirk salary is $1,000,000 every year.

 

[naisho]

Two PETAs in one

PETA killed pets, group alleges | KansasCity.com Prime Buzz

Updated: Peta responds, more statistics, and it looks like you were right on the dot Vamp.. IMO they're trying to reason with the evidence against them, but I think its nothing more a feeble attempt at redeeming themselves.
Instead of correcting or providing actual figures which would make them look better, they challenge the original numbers with alternative comebacks, "BS flag" attempts, deter with different discussions and what have you's.

The source of the information posted is the deceitfully-named Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF). CCF is a front group for Philip Morris, Outback Steakhouse, KFC, cattle ranchers, and other animal exploiters who kill millions of animals every year, not out of compassion, but out of greed (see BermanExposed.org and ConsumerDeception.com).

Most of the animals we took in and euthanized were not adoptable, and in fact, were taken in precisely because they were unadoptable. They could hardly be called "pets," as they had spent their lives on heavy chains or isolated pens, for instance. They were severely unsocialized, having gone mad from confinement or made aggressive.

Others were indeed someone's companions, but they were aged, sick, injured, or dying, and PETA offered them a release from suffering, with no charge to their owners or custodians. We offer our services to many impoverished residents who often can’t afford to provide for their animals even a dignified exit.

PETA handled far more animals than 2,124 in 2008. In fact, we took in more than 10,000 dogs and cats, spaying and neutering all of them at low to no cost. We gave them shots, fixed their wounds and treated their illnesses, and returned them to the community.

The figures you cite also do not include the hundreds upon hundreds of dogs and cats whose suffering PETA works to alleviate by providing them with free food when their owners are poor, clean water buckets, sturdy dog houses, straw for winter, and more, or the hundreds of adoptable dogs and cats we will not take in but refer to walk-in animal shelters and adoption centers.

Since 2001, PETA's low- to no-cost spay-and-neuter mobile clinics, SNIP and ABC, have sterilized more than 50,000 animals, preventing hundreds of thousands of animals from being born, neglected, abandoned, abused, or euthanized when no one wanted them.

As long as animals are still be purposely bred and people aren't spaying and neutering their companions, open-admission animal shelters and organizations like PETA must do society's dirty work.

Euthanasia is not a solution to overpopulation but rather a tragic necessity given the present crisis. PETA is proud to be a "shelter of last resort," where animals who have no place to go or who are unwanted or suffering are welcomed with love and open arms.

On the second article.. PETA is complaining about shooting dogs in a videogame.. somewhat related. Is this the next "lawful" Jack Thompson? I thought that lawyer went down like karma came for him.
Rolling my eyes. Another classic case of "You're incorrect, I'm never wrong."

The Escapist : News : PETA Responds to World at War Dog Killing Controversy

It was inevitable: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has climbed aboard the bandwagon of opposition to dog-shooting in Call of Duty: World at War and has even offered its "Developing Empathy for Animals" seminar to Activision Blizzard absolutely free.

It was reported last week that a group of Massachusetts high school students had taken offense at Activision's Call of Duty: World at War FPS, specifically a sequence in which players shoot and kill a number of German attack dogs, and had put together a petition protesting the slaughter which they hoped to eventually send to the publisher. With attention drawn to the admittedly minor furor by numerous gaming sites, it was only a matter of time before PETA weighed in on the matter.

It took three days but the notorious animal rights group has indeed involved itself, issuing a statement condemning the game. "Not since we were pitted against Nazi attack dogs when we first escaped from Castle Wolfenstein 17 years ago have we seen such barbaric treatment of dogs in video games as we did in Call of Duty: World at War," the group wrote on its website.

"During the course of the game, you are forced to shoot attack dogs and you can actually unlock a 'reward' that allows you to unleash a pack of attack dogs on enemies," the blog post continued. "In a post-Michael Vick world, you'd think that Activision Blizzard, which publishes the popular game, would take abusing dogs for entertainment purposes more seriously."

The group has offered to treat Activision employees to its "Developing Empathy for Animals" seminar at no charge and has also sent a pack of Nintendogs to the Activision offices. "With a little Nintendogs influence, perhaps the next Call of Duty game will have you unlock achievements for petting the dogs you encounter and going on walks or playing Frisbee with them," the group said. And after that you can invite the SS Panzer Division Totenkopf out for lunch and maybe see if they'd like to join your book club.

Activision responded to PETA's calls for kinder, gentler Nazi attack dogs in a statement sent to GamePolitics. "In order to create believable, real-world scenes and heighten the game playing experience, Call of Duty: World at War depicts the ruthless and gritty combat of World War II," it said. "Dogs are included in the game for authenticity since they were used extensively by German, Japanese, U.S. and Soviet troops during the war. Activision in no way endorses or condones cruelty to animals, and we don't believe the game will encourage cruelty in any way."