why is it illegal to put your own pet down?

[waggy]

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: bctbct
Cats spend their life in fear of water, anyone who would think of dunking them in it until they are dead is an idiot.

thats a myth and not true.

i have seen plenty of cats that love water.

100% of the cats I owned were scared to death of water, guess yours were the myth.

no it is myth.

not all cats are scared of water. THAT iS fact. look up the turkish van. its a cat that actually loves water.

many kittens will play with running water. granted as they grow older they do not as often.

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: bctbct
Cats spend their life in fear of water, anyone who would think of dunking them in it until they are dead is an idiot.

thats a myth and not true.

i have seen plenty of cats that love water.

100% of the cats I owned were scared to death of water, guess yours were the myth.

so what did they drink for their entire lives?

 

[MegaVovaN]

Dude, note the "100 % of cats I owned"
he isn't saying that ALL cats fear water, just the ones he owned (and how do we know how many he owned? he could have owned 2 cats and both were scared of water, and that would enable him to say "100% of cats I pwned")

cats drink water but very carefully. Most don't dive in and take a gulp of water - they lick it carefully.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: MegaVovaN
Dude, note the "100 % of cats I owned"
he isn't saying that ALL cats fear water, just the ones he owned (and how do we know how many he owned? he could have owned 2 cats and both were scared of water, and that would enable him to say "100% of cats I pwned")

cats drink water but very carefully. Most don't dive in and take a gulp of water - they lick it carefully.

yes later he changed it to he owned. before he did not.

but it does not change the fact that it is a myth. not all cats are afriad of water.

 

[bctbct]

Ok I guess I need to clarify for the anal retentive people around here.

I have owned 4 cats, none would be in favor of me dunking them into a bucket of water. They all drank water though.

Some cats would enjoy playing with water on their terms, doubt you could find one that wants to be drowned.

 

[Pepsei]

Originally posted by: moshquerade
how about putting it in the freezer? it worked for Sprinkles.

i think sprinkles was still alive at the time. ....

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Pepsei

Originally posted by: moshquerade
how about putting it in the freezer? it worked for Sprinkles.

i think sprinkles was still alive at the time. ....

it was also a fucking tv show.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: bctbct
Ok I guess I need to clarify for the anal retentive people around here.

I have owned 4 cats, none would be in favor of me dunking them into a bucket of water. They all drank water though.

Some cats would enjoy playing with water on their terms, doubt you could find one that wants to be drowned.

it's a moot point. Whether your cat does a freaking swan dive and the backstroke for laps in your pool. Holding them under the water is a whole new experience that would get DO NOT WANT!

Most cats reactions to being IN water.

 

[DrPizza]

The cat was in pain and suffering. I doubt it was a decision they made lightly, especially since they called several places inquiring about having it done.

Was it cruel? Sure, probably. But, really not *that* cruel. In fact, it might have been less cruel than letting the cat suffer the rest of the day. If it were up to me, I would dismiss the charges.

 

[Ruptga]

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: Number1

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
My personal method is using a gun. However, if a gun isn't available, I slit its throat. Cruelty? perhaps.. but it doesn't last long..

The throat method, you did this to cats or dogs?

I saw a pig get its throat slit when I was a kid. It was absolutely horible with blood everywhere and the pig squeeling untill it died.

When I was a teenager, Dad decided that the family dog had to go. It was decided that I would shoot the poor thing.
I shot the dog once with a .22, but the bullet did not kill it, it just took its nose right off. Then the dog freed itself from the leach and ran to the woods. Unfortunatly, I only had one bullet with me. We had to drive home, get the 12 gage shot gun and come back to finish the job. That was the first time I saw my Dad cry.
That was the last time I ever shot or killed a pet.

Sunday morning we foud our 4 years old cat dead in the laundry room. We have no idea what killed it. I just took the body to the dump Monday.

You can't down the shooting method just because you didn't take take time to aim or restrain your dog.

Errr, yeah what he said. A dog's nose is pretty far removed from its brain, you just need to get over the squeamishness enough to take a good shot, not one of those close your eyes and jerk the trigger type things. Come to think of it, now I have to wonder, would there be blood spray from 0 range? Anyway, I've finished off a deer from one yard away and didn't get crap all over me, if you can't hit a three inch target from one yard you have no business owning a gun.

 

[SinfulWeeper]

Originally posted by: michaelsslave
maybe because drowning is such a horrible way to go. at least shoot it so it doesnt suffer long

No, drowning yields much less suffering than a shooting can. In fact shootings can result in multiple shots that should be fatal only to have the animal/person still be alive on counltess occasions even after refiring.
The difference is when you drown you know your about to go. When you do it is near painless and very quick. An animal most certainly knows when it is going to drown, but wont know it's going to be shot.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: SinfulWeeper

Originally posted by: michaelsslave
maybe because drowning is such a horrible way to go. at least shoot it so it doesnt suffer long

No, drowning yields much less suffering than a shooting can. In fact shootings can result in multiple shots that should be fatal only to have the animal/person still be alive on counltess occasions even after refiring.
The difference is when you drown you know your about to go. When you do it is near painless and very quick. An animal most certainly knows when it is going to drown, but wont know it's going to be shot.

WTF are you talking about? Sure drowning is better than a botched shooting, but how many people that know how to use a firearm with deadly force and have an animal point blank are going to need to refire many times.

Now getting shot wheter animal or person in hunting/assault situations often does leave an animal/person alive or maimed...but that is not the case here.

Getting buried alive is probably better than a botched drowning.

Unfortunately getting to the point in a drowning when you know you are going to die is a pretty long tramatic road.

Either way neither qualify for humane methods today.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: ADDAvenger

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: Number1

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
My personal method is using a gun. However, if a gun isn't available, I slit its throat. Cruelty? perhaps.. but it doesn't last long..

The throat method, you did this to cats or dogs?

I saw a pig get its throat slit when I was a kid. It was absolutely horible with blood everywhere and the pig squeeling untill it died.

When I was a teenager, Dad decided that the family dog had to go. It was decided that I would shoot the poor thing.
I shot the dog once with a .22, but the bullet did not kill it, it just took its nose right off. Then the dog freed itself from the leach and ran to the woods. Unfortunatly, I only had one bullet with me. We had to drive home, get the 12 gage shot gun and come back to finish the job. That was the first time I saw my Dad cry.
That was the last time I ever shot or killed a pet.

Sunday morning we foud our 4 years old cat dead in the laundry room. We have no idea what killed it. I just took the body to the dump Monday.

You can't down the shooting method just because you didn't take take time to aim or restrain your dog.

Errr, yeah what he said. A dog's nose is pretty far removed from its brain, you just need to get over the squeamishness enough to take a good shot, not one of those close your eyes and jerk the trigger type things. Come to think of it, now I have to wonder, would there be blood spray from 0 range? Anyway, I've finished off a deer from one yard away and didn't get crap all over me, if you can't hit a three inch target from one yard you have no business owning a gun.

Above is the reason why first you aren't supposed to discharge a firearm in most towns. Shooting range or not most have really no idea about using a gun and the potential to harm others.

I don't know why so many decide on using .22's for this whether LR or not. The bullet is small enough without much of a force to do the damage you want it to. Things get shot in the head enough times with a .22 and live just fine to let me know it's not a great option.

Now even a freaking cannon has a ton of room for error due to EMOTIONS. It's easy to plink, but shooting a living creature esp. a pet it a whole different matter. Most don't have the nerves for it, most will say they could do it no problem.

Fact is even restrained a dog/cat is still going to be a moving target. Tying it completely up only gets it's adrenaline going...exactly what you don't want.

Like I have said, if anyone has doubts call their authorities. Start with the police if needed and they can direct you. There are many laws that control the euthanasia methods that have nothing to do with the pet. Then there are laws that don't directly deal with killing a pet, but rather humane treatment.

There is no debating some people would have skills to perform a great euthanasia at home, there are FAR more people that think they can, but cannot.

 

[TipsyMcStagger]

Amazing how a human can make this decision for their animal, take it over to the vet and have it dispatched, but that same human couldn't decide they are old and want to die and get a doctor to dispatch them - kevorkian style

 

[Zorro]

Originally posted by: Citrix
There is a interesting case going on right now about a High School teacher and her boyfriend who put their own 12 year old cat down by drowning it in a bucket. The reason they say they did it was because it was a sunday morning, the cat was in bad pain from cancer and the animal hospitals they called wanted more money to put the cat down than they could afford.

so they got home depot bucket filled it with water and drowned the cat. well the teachers 15 year old boy told a friend, who told a friend and somebody at the humane society heard the story and reported it to the police. the couple was arrested for animal cruelty.

my question is, when did it become against the law to put down your own animal when its needed and why is it illegal? or is it illegal at all? there is a lot of gray area on this, i mean is there a law that says "all animals must be put down by a vet"?

Damn what a way to go send them overe here. I will rip out there toe nails and lett he owners bleed to death.