Animals had better odds with Michael Vick than with PETA

View Comments (13)

• PETA kills 95% of the animals it takes. What makes you think they are adoptable?

  Oh but, I forgot. The Center for Consumer Freedom says they were all adoptable. And who could possible question their integrity, since they represent the very industry that we all know is devoted to giving their animals long happy lives.

  The above was sarcasm for those who need to be told. Anyone who believes the CCCF has got to be very gullible IMO. They are a front group for an industry that brutalizes and violently kills billions every year for profit, and they are complaining about PETA painlessly killing unwanted pets?

  I mean think it through! Clearly killing animals is harming PETA's image among the very bunny huggers and kitty lovers who usually support them, so why would they do it unless they thought it necessary? You think they are masochists?

  PETA does not have a shelter. They refer adoptables to shelters. So what is left for PETA to deal with are those poor suffering creatures that so many shelters are refusing to accept. (Not all of course. Some shelters still have an open door policy, but they are the ones that still have to kill.)

• Well, she clearly sucked as a spin doctor. I hate it when people presume utter stupidity in their audience, especially when it effects the welfare of lives outside of their own. I'd rather she become an animal rights advocate...they get a lot more done in the best interest of the animals than extremists do. (If she could learn how to not suck at it it and actually bring about positive effect, that is!)

• Until very recently, Lianne Turner worked for PETA as a spin doctor. She's an animal rights extremist.

• Thanks for pointing that out. I don't trust groups like CCF, so I focused on the State of Virginia documents, link found on the CCF site: http://www.petakillsanimals.com/downloads/PetaKillsAnimals.pdf

  I'll have to study this closer, but at a glance, it appears that either PETA likes to "empty out" at the end of the year (the forms have a column for status as of Dec 31) or they just have a very quick turnaround *all the time*. I must say, the number of "euthanasias" is terribly high. (I don't consider it "euthanasia" unless an animal or person is suffering from a terminal illness and euthanasia is performed for the benefit of the patient - in the veterinary/animal world the term is used to ease the conscience of humans, plain and simple...the accurate term is "put to death").

  While I appreciate commenter Lianne's compassion and attempts at defending PETA, using phrases like, "...unwanted and suffering animals whom PETA has been forced to euthanize because their guardians requested it, or because no good homes exist for them" is bullshit. If an organization like PETA (is supposed to be) puts animals to death using a justification of "forced to...because their guardians requested it", that is wrong on every level.

  I don't know if Lianne is representing PETA here, but if so, she should post a follow-up to repair the mess of her comment. I work with no-kill shelters and there is a prominent shelter in my area that provides food for plenty of animals whose owners don't have the money, has spay/neuter clinics, etc., etc., etc. And guess what? They don't kill any animals! They euthanize only the animals who cannot be saved through medical treatment (the lengths they'll go to in order to save an animal and give it a chance for a good life are extraordinary).

  In fact, just about all of the examples Lianna cited in her comment do *nothing* to answer for or compensate for any self-proclaimed animal rights organization (let alone an animal-caring organization) who puts to death that staggering percentage of animals that come into it's "care". No amount of basic care (which is what she's describing - nothing fancy provided) makes up for putting an animal to death out of convenience. Period.

  If PETA is killing this many animals - without those animals having serious, untreatable disease processes (i.e., it's genuine euthanasia), then they are, at best, scum and should be called out and formally investigated for their actions. I strongly disagree with PETA's guerrilla tactics - because they harm many animals in the process. I do very much appreciate the widespread attention they've brought to the awareness of animal welfare, including the cruelty of buying/wearing fur, the importance of spay/neuter, etc., however.

  Gee, maybe if they published their own reprehensible put-to-death numbers it would cause the public to spay and neuter more and save many more lives.... Just saying.....

  (I do want to emphasize that I disagree with your posting of your ambivalence towards animals and your cat-hating, not because it's your opinion but because it's unnecessary, thoughtless, and provokes people with proclivities towards animal cruelty. Posting it in the context of a post about PETA, which already gets people on both sides fired up, is in bad judgment, IMO.)

• If what you claim is true, that is a serious situation and should be investigated. However, you don't provide links to these studies or any real sources or information to back up your claims.

  Furthermore, you are clearly at least a cat-hater, if not an animal-hater in general (or at the very least, ambivalent towards animals). One look at the one link you did provide, about the office cat whom you all dislike or hate, is proof of that. So why would any animal lover take your claims seriously?

  Sounds like you hate PETA because you don't like their animal-rights stance. So be honest about it, don't try to claim they're killing animals as though they're some death-camp for cats and dogs when you couldn't really care less yourself, and you provide no sources to back up your claims. You have no credibility and just come off as an animal-rights-hating jerk.

  • Check the link at the bottom of the story.

• ETA kills all those animals then uses COMPASSION in their stupid protests and ads

• The 101 dalmations would get more mercy from cruela deville

• I don't know about dogs or cats, but let me say for the record that animals taste pretty damned good. Screw PETA.. They kill all of these animals, and don't even allow humans to eat them. Disgusting.

  There are starving people in Africa that PETA kill by not sending them the meat of the animals that they murder.

  PETA - Animal murderers. Human murders.

• Lianne, let's see some documentation to back up your claim. I call bullshit. If you had proof you'd have published it already.

  • Check out the link:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9ijLulwUTY

    You think these people care about your pets? Heartless bastards

• It’s disingenuous, to say the least, for the deceitfully-named Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) to complain about the number of unwanted and suffering animals whom PETA has been forced to euthanize because their guardians requested it, or because no good homes exist for them.

  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. CCF promotes meat-eating and defends corporations that send billions of cows, chickens, pigs, and other animals to terrifying, gruesome, and painful deaths in slaughterhouses.

  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. Most of the animals we took in and euthanized could hardly be called "pets," as they had spent their lives on heavy chains, for instance. They were unsocialized, never having been inside a building of any kind or known a pat on the head. Others were indeed someone's, but they were aged, sick, injured, dying, too aggressive to place, and the like, and PETA offered them a release from suffering, with no charge to their owners or custodians.

  Those figures 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. We also actively decrease the number of animals who end up in animal shelters only to be euthanized for lack of good homes by using star power to promote spaying and neutering in ads across the country.
  On a national level, PETA is focusing on the root of the problem through our Animal Birth Control (ABC) campaign. The ABC campaign targets breeders, pet stores, and cat- and dog-breeding mills and in an active way through protests, PSAs, celebrity support, and investigations and puts the blame for the overpopulation crisis squarely where it belongs—with those who breed animals or allow their animals to breed. As long as animals are bred, homeless dogs and cats in animal shelters will die because there simply aren't enough good homes for them all.

  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.

  • you are full of it you kill socialized animals too its all about your bottom line witch seems to me to be pretty thin over 99 precent murdered you dont allow people to take animals from your holocaust death camp in virginia youd rather kill them than see them go to loving homes