1. There is no context given for this photo other than the author’s psychobabble about this kid having no innocence left or whatever and he will hurt humans in the future, or something.

   Feral cats kill countless small wildlife, compete with native species and spread parasites and disease to pet cats, livestock and humans. Good riddance to feral pests, pigs, cats, pythons, dogs, goats, all of them.

   Reply ↓

   • What about feral people? People spread more disease to people than all the animals combined. Why don’t you criticise people? I say good riddance to miscreant, idiotic people who like to shoot animals.

     Reply ↓

2. THATS WHAT HAPPEND TO GINGER’S CAT IN BOBS BURGER

   Reply ↓

3. No matter how either side tries to twist it here this is not about hunting and the debate over the ethics of killing wild animals for food or letting someone else do the dirty work and wrap it in plastic. ( I may have given away my own point of view here;) ). This is about a child shooting domestic pets with a rifle and the parent being proud of his little offspring for it.

   Reply ↓

   • You’re absolutely right! How would he feel if someone shot his pet- then posted it on Facebook?! Totally disgusting 🤮

     Reply ↓

4. Firstly, the word “pure” doesn’t appear in any of my posts with respect to wildlife, or in any context whatsoever. And what do you mean by “pure”? Non-GMO? Is that somehow “un-PC” according to the tenets of your ideology?

   As for where you’ve heard this before, you didn’t hear it from me. Neither I nor my family are “purebred” anything–our heritage encompasses Middle-Eastern, west African, western Pacific islander and western European. There are probably more colors in my immediate family than you have in your entire voting district. So please do me the courtesy of not “projecting” your own racial hangups and assumptions on me and mine.

   As for why I’m here, it’s to disagree with Michael Broad, not to put too fine a point on it. I find his arguments unscientific and emotion-driven, and his advocacy irresponsible. That doesn’t make me a “troll”. Now go find your own bridge–I was here first.

   Reply ↓

   • I think you are Jim Stevenson or one of his cohort and you are a troll. And you hate cats and it is that which drives you. You are a bird lover. And obsessed with toxo-talk. You speak of science but your arguments are catastrophically distorted by your hatred of the cat and toxo-talk. If the cat was as bad as you say the federal government would have done something about it but…nada.

     Reply ↓

     • The first two words of your post constitute its primary falsehood. The second is the same tired accusation of being Jim Stevenson (whom I have never met), as if it were impossible for more than one person on the ENTIRE INTERNET to disagree with you.

       Your other simplistic accusation is that I’m a “bird lover”. Actually, I’m a fish, amphibian and reptile lover. And I will not hesitate to compare my scientific acumen against yours any day.

       My arguments are not “catastrophically distorted” by bias. Neither are the peer-reviewed scientific reports which I’ve posted in your forum on more than one occasion. And the telling flaw of your argument is that you have not ONCE explained HOW my arguments are distorted. Disparaging is not refuting.

       As for the Federal government, both my former employers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have published warnings concerning T. gondii-contaminated coastal runoff affecting nearshore marine environments, including the uptake of T. gondii oocysts by filter-feeding marine organisms such as mussels, clams and oysters, making raw consumption unsafe.

       But the true measure of your dishonesty, and your inability to refute me concerning the public health threats constituted by the feral cat scourge, is that just a week ago I posted on the “woman shooting hubby over cat” thread 23 incidences of human cases of cat-vectored murine typhus, which you ASKED me to do, and then you refused to publish them.

       Was that information “boring” as well? Or merely embarrassing because challenged me to provide FACTS, I did so, and you couldn’t REFUTE them?

       Reply ↓

       • Read my recent post about toxo-talk:

         https://pictures-of-cats.org/toxo-talk-studies-on-toxoplasmosis-are-inconclusive.html

         What is boring is your desperate attempts to justify killing cats. I have not got the time or patience to argue more. Time to leave it.

         Reply ↓

     • Michael this is one of the California cat haters. We also have one in Minnesota, Pittsburgh, New Jersey and North Carolina.

       Reply ↓

5. True conservation starts with prevention. Cats do not need to be eradicated but negligent owners need to be the biggest part of the solution.
   I am not an extremist in any form I do however sense the extremism you feel about killing all cats despite programs that reduce feral colonies once bad pet owners are no longer contributing. Using a blunt club at the end of the problem will never solve anything but your personal hatred against cats. There is indeed an excess population of cats and dogs and that is 100% fueled by human neglect. Realistically we need a major reduction in available pets and standards that decrease the chances of abandonment and backyard breeding. I also wish all AC ordinances included cats in clauses about astray animals. I have 4 cats and they are under my control at all times. If one got out I would expect it to be returned or taken to a shelter not shot by a maniac and his kid with a gun. I wouldn’t even gripe about a fine i’d pay it happily to have them back. Too bad that child’s father didn’t get himself neutered before he passed on his archaic beliefs.
   Your attitude about cats is a typical punish the victim while the real criminal carries on without fear of reprisal.

   Reply ↓

   • While I agree with some of what you say, “crime and punishment” simply doesn’t apply to non-human species. Therefore it isn’t relevant to my position with respect to invasive felines. It’s predicated on the reality that controlling the stray and feral cat population via worthless “no-kill” strategies like TNR is a mathematical impossibility. And I can prove it with simple arithmetic.

     On St. Paul Island in the Bering Sea (where I used to work), the Native Tribal Council there destroys every rat they find. Further, they prohibit vessels without rat-guards on their mooring lines from tying up at their docks. This isn’t because they want to “punish” rats, it’s because they want to protect their native seabird rookeries where King Eiders, Puffins and other beautiful species nest. Do you feel they should practice rat-TNR? If not, why not?

     Tell me, do you regard the campaign to eradicate invasive Burmese pythons from Florida a matter of cruelty and “punishment”? They are either abandoned/escaped “pets” or the descendants of same. They are every bit as much “victims” as you say cats are, according to your argument. Should they be “managed” via TNR rather than killed? If not, why not? I’ll await your reply.

     Reply ↓

     • “Rat TNR” is a distortion of the concept of TNR. TNR exists because cats are pets. They are human companions. Feral cats are a result of irresponsible cat ownership. The fault of humans. Because of these two factors humans have an obligation to treat feral cats huamely, hence TNR. The same obligation does no exist in relation to rats for obvious reasons. Your argument exposes your dire bias which always distorts your arguments.

       You have had your say. I have been decent enough to allow you to comment. It must now end. Go an hound someone else with your toxo-talk drivel.

       Reply ↓

       • A deleterious invasive species being a “pet” is irrelevant to its environmental or public health impact. All the Burmese pythons now infesting the Everglades were once “pets” or are the descendants of same. EVERY argument the TNR charlatans use to defend their ecologically destructive outdoor cat-hoarding “hobby” applies as much to pythons as it does to cats:

         “They didn’t ask to be here. Irresponsible people are at fault! Therefore it’s our RESPONSIBILITY to treat them humanely!”
         “It’s the circle of life when they kill something!” (Of course they never say that when the prey item is a cat).
         “Pythons have lived outdoors for thousands of years!”
         “They should be allowed to live out their lives without being killed! It’s CRUEL!”
         “If you kill them others will just move in–it’s the vacuum effect!”
         “They only take down weak and sick wildlife!”
         “Well-fed pythons won’t hunt!” (This is actually true of pythons–it’s NOT true for cats).
         “Other predators do more damage to wildlife!” Also true with respect to pythons–because of their “ectothermic” metabolisms, they require only 10% of the amount of food required by a mammalian predator of equal mass. And they don’t kill on reflex like cats do.

         Now what are the “obvious reasons” the same obligations don’t exist for rats? Because they’re disease vectors? Cats carry an order of magnitude more dangerous diseases than do rats, and share most of the worst diseases WITH rats–examples plague and typhus. On the other hand, rats seldom get rabies and NEVER transmit it. Cats account for 13,000 human rabies exposures annually, and have done so for the last 28 years.

         Is it because they’re a threat to our food supply? So are cats and their diseases. That’s why the USDA prohibits their presence in and around food-processing facilities.

         Is it because they too destroy native wildlife? The IUCN has identified cats, rats and hogs as the three worst invasive species in terms of endangered animal extinctions.

         Now, since it’s highly doubtful you’ll answer my question honestly, I’ll do it for you: the reason you and your ilk deem cats worthy of special treatment vis-a-vis other invasive species is because they’re “cute”. Sorry, this highly emotional and subjective criterion is simply NOT a rational basis for making decisions with respect to public health and well-being or environmental stewardship.

         Reply ↓

         • It is nothing to do with cute. It is to do with science and common sense and the fact that there are 80 million domestic cats. You can’t compare domestic cats with pet pythons and rats. For you ‘environmental stewardship’ is shooting cats. It’s just cruel.

           https://pictures-of-cats.org/toxo-talk-studies-on-toxoplasmosis-are-inconclusive.html

           Reply ↓

     • We are not discussing rats, snakes or wild pigs or any other species.

       Reply ↓

       • Your point? Both species have been spread outside their natural ranges by humans. Both species have, and are being, kept as pets. Established populations of both have proved to be extremely deleterious ecologically–cats and rats representing two of the worst invasive species per the IUCN (and pretty much all biologists). Pythons are proving to be ecologically harmful in the Florida Everglades, but cats and rats represent GLOBAL ecological threats. And as mentioned above, cats carry an order of magnitude more diseases dangerous to humans than do rats (pythons have introduced an invasive ectoparasite harmful to native Florida reptiles, but they’re not found to have introduced any disease dangerous to humans). Again, if the only criterion whereby you deem cats worthy of special treatment as opposed to other highly destructive invasive species is that you find them “cute” or emotionally appealing, I must reply this cannot be taken seriously as a criterion for environmental or public health stewardship.

         Reply ↓

         • How many pet rats are there in the US compared to cats?! Really you are clutching at straws. If you arguments were sound federal and state governments would have taken major steps to deal with T. gondii infections in humans but nada. CDC say it is asymptomatic. No real action. The government agrees with me. You try all manner of means to justify shooting and exterminating free-roaming cats but come up short all the time. The bottom line is you enjoy shooting animals.

           Reply ↓

6. That boy, and those like him, are NOT shooters. A shooter does like using firearms, but has been educated and properly trained and almost always uses paper or electronic targets when aiming and firing down range. Other targets can be water jugs, melons, etc. But never live animals or people. The only exception are the military and their snipers, but that is something totally different.

   Neither is he a real hunter because real hunters kill for only two reasons: food and self-defense.

   This boy, and those like him, are more likely to fit in the terrorist category because they enjoy killing to make a statement. This group includes murderers because they kill for thrills also.

   It is sad that there are sick and twisted people, especially ones who reproduce more sick and twisted people.

   Reply ↓

   • Cat-feeders, TNR practitioners and other “no-kill” rescue fanatics fit the terrorist profile far more than those who shoot invasive felines. They deliberately proliferate and perpetuate invasive disease-vectors by subsidizing them with food and transporting them illegally between communities, thus subjecting said communities to deleterious and potentially fatal zoonotic disease. Thus they are bio-terrorists.

     Thanks to their unconscionable practices, the infectious agents of Toxoplasma gondii now occur in our environment at densities of three to 434 per square foot, and they persist–and remain infectious–for up to 4.5 years. They are contaminating our food chain and water supplies. The oocysts aerosolize, so don’t bother with the “undercooked meat” excuse–recent research has found that accidental ingestion and/or inhalation of oocysts directly from the environment is now the primary means of infection. About one-fifth of our population is infected. No matter how an individual was infected, the oocyst responsible originated in the feces of an unconfined cat.

     Thanks to these cat-loving bio-terrorists, one out of every three African-American children living in low income communities are infected with toxocariasis, which causes blindness and/or developmental disabilities.

     Thanks to “humane colony caretakers”, cat-vectored rabies now accounts for one-third of all human exposures annually. That’s about 13,000 human exposures each and every year for the last 28 years, which not-so-coincidentally is how long TNR and other worthless “no-kill” programs have been widely practiced in the US. Each exposure requires administration of PEP inoculation at a cost of $6,000-$26,000 (USD). Once symptoms develop, it’s too late.

     Feral cat extremists may work more slowly than those who throw bombs or crash airplanes, but they harm far more people and they are no less terrorists.

     Finally, you said:

     “The only exception are the military and their snipers, but that is something totally different.” Really? Yet another example of valuing animal lives over humans’. One such military sniper, Chris Kyle, was a state-sponsored serial killer who murdered children from rooftops, and said it was “fun”. Apparently you consider him a “hero”. As someone with Iraqi relatives, I don’t.

     Reply ↓

     • Your first paragraph indicates that you need a brain transplant. You have been badly indoctrinated by your father into believing that the outside cat is a time bomb of cataclysmic proportions which will wipe out mankind on the planet. Really. More BS. I think you need to see a psychiatrist. So what are the symptoms of the 60 million Americans who are infected with toxoplasmosis. Are they on their death beds?

       I can’t be bothered to go on.

       Reply ↓

       • And yet again, when all you can do is resort to personal attacks, all you demonstrate to ANY rational reader is your inability to refute, or even intelligently challenge, my arguments.

         And you know the symptoms of toxoplasmosis as well as I do, or you should. And what you conveniently overlook is that healthy immune systems suppress toxoplasmosis symptoms. But that doesn’t excuse deliberately proliferating its vectors in our communities and contaminating our environment, water supplies and food chain with its INFECTIOUS AGENTS. You and your ilk haven’t the right. And the other fact you conveniently overlook is that EVERYONE’S immune system degrades with age, and T. gondii’s infectious agents will still be present and active in neural, ocular, cardiac, muscle and lung tissues. Your “symptoms” argument is no more and no less than you presuming that outdoor feeders and cat-hoarders have the RIGHT to determine how long their neighbors will retain their eyesight (CDC states toxoplasmosis is the leading cause of pathogenic blindness), remain free from dementia, or indeed how long they will LIVE, all because some selfish neighbor (or neighbors) can’t get enough of cats and want to inundate the rest of us with them and their diseases whether we like it or not.

         Reply ↓

         • Did you read my page about toxoplasmosis studies?

           https://pictures-of-cats.org/toxo-talk-studies-on-toxoplasmosis-are-inconclusive.html

           The trouble is we will never find agreement. If the CDC thinks T. gonddi infections are so bad why aren’t they doing something big about it. Read the linked page.

           Reply ↓

           • CDC has identified toxoplasmosis as one of the worst neglected diseases. As for the studies to which you refer in your extremely biased link, they only refer to the correlation between mental illness and toxoplasmosis infection. They don’t refer to blindness, sever birth defects, chronic miscarriages, or fatal food-borne illnesses, and die-offs among Australian marsupials, marine mammals and numerous insular bird species, all of for which toxoplasmosis has been well-established as the cause.

             And AGAIN, you and your ilk simply don’t have the RIGHT to infect your neighbors with a pathogen, no matter how ‘benign’ you perceive it to be, simply because you get “good feelings” inundating them with your disease-ridden “community” vermin.

             Reply ↓

             • Whatever you say CDC accept that it is asymptomatic. So stop shooting cats. Also I endorse and promote cat containment. My cat lives in a cat contained garden and my house. So don’t say “you and your ilk simply don’t have the RIGHT to infect your neighbors with a pathogen…” because I don’t.

               You don’t have the right to shoot cats. It is almost certainly illegal in the state where you live to shoot a cats.

               Reply ↓

               • Actually, it’s not. TNR is illegal in my state (Alaska). Per Alaska Administrative Code Chapt. 5.92.029, it’s illegal to maintain domesticated animals unconfined or to release them into the wild. AND, it’s legal to shoot such animals in self-defense, in defense of property, or if seen harassing or harming wildlife.

                 Unconfined domesticated cats are, by definition, harassing and harming wildlife. The mere PRESENCE of a cat causes brooding birds to abandon their nests, which means that they almost certainly will not be able to breed again that year due to the shortness of our summers.

                 Here’s a pamphlet from the US Coast Guard (you were, if you remember, asking about Federal government positions concerning toxoplasmosis), which demonstrates how self-defense qualifies as well with respect to unconfined invasive felines per AA5.92.029 (and Anchorage Municipal Ordinance Title 17):

                 https://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1389/pdf/circ1389.pdf

                 Here’s an editorial by an Alaskan friend and colleague (appeared in the same paper which publishes my own editorials). Who knows? Those of your followers not already infected with toxoplasmosis might even learn something?

                 https://www.adn.com/opinions/2017/06/21/do-feral-cats-have-special-needs-or-is-their-plight-all-in-our-heads/

                 Reply ↓

                 • “AND, it’s legal to shoot such animals in self-defense, in defense of property, or if seen harassing or harming wildlife.”

                   This does not mean free rein to take pot shots at cats which is your wish. Nearly all states, perhaps all states, make it illegal to shot feral cats. It has to be like this because you can’t tell the difference between feral and domestic at a distance. And if you shoot someone’s cat you have committed a clear crime (actually the same goes for feral cats but the police don’t enforce the law). And feral cats are not classified as ‘invasive species’ nor are they classified as ‘pests’ or ‘vermin’ in any legislation.

                   A lot of people hate cats and write bad stuff about feral cats. It doesn’t mean they are correct. I could not read the last linked article because it was barred to me.

                   DON’T RESPOND TO THIS. IT WON’T BE PUBLISHED. GO AWAY AND PESTER SOMEONE ELSE.

                   Reply ↓

     • “Thanks to “humane colony caretakers”, cat-vectored rabies now accounts for one-third of all human exposures annually. That’s about 13,000 human exposures each and every year for the last 28 years, which not-so-coincidentally is how long TNR and other worthless “no-kill” programs have been…”

       You seriously claim that Colony Caretakers are ultimately responsible for one third of all human rabies exposure?

       Is that globally or just in the USA?

       Prove it.

       You can’t prove it because it only happens in that deranged train wreck that resides in your head.

       For someone who is pathologically obsessed with harming cats, causing distress to those who love them, illegally murdering pets, strays , ferals, intentionally causing psychological distress & harming those who work hard for the welfare of one species…. …for you to claim you give even one teeny fart about the species homo sapiens is one big irony.

       Reply ↓

       • The statistic is for the US. Ask, and ye shall receive:

         https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/681002-zoonotic-diseases-associated-with-free-roaming.html

         And the worst case of human rabies exposure in US HISTORY was in Concord, NH in 1994. Source: a rabid raccoon attracted to kibble left out for a TNR colony infected four kittens in said colony. The caretakers then foisted them on a local pet store during an “adoption event”. All four kittens died. 665 people had to be treated with PEP at a cost of $2 million to that town.

         Do you want more examples? I can post numerous links to reports of cat-vectored rabies exposures from just the last two years or so–enough to where it’ll take hours to do so.

         And I care more for my own species than do you–clearly. In particular, my children and (five) grandchildren, three of whom live in the US and two who live in Australia. I’ll understand if you don’t get this. People who only have cats for “companionship” instead of families never do.

         To conclude: one of the primary differences between you and I is that, when challenged, I provide data. All you can come up with are tantrums.

         Reply ↓

         • Don’t insult this lady. She does not do tantrums. I would ask you to go and rant on another website. You are selective in your supporting documentation.

           Reply ↓

           • Really? After she referred to me as a “psychological train-wreck”? Aren’t you a little “selective” in enforcing your own rules?

             But I’m not selective in providing supporting documentation–I tend to produce to most easily available, because when I post large numbers of reports which cast an unfavorable light on your “idols”, you won’t print them. Agree not to censor the reports I post, and I’ll provide more. I won’t hold my breath.

             Reply ↓

             • I have said that the discussion is closed. You have made your point and I have been decent enough to let you – a fervent and indoctrinated cat hater – have plenty of space to vent your thoughts.

               Reply ↓

   • “Neither is he a real hunter because real hunters kill for only two reasons: food and self-defense”

     This statement alone shows that you are insanely ignorant about what hunting is and your stereotyped Disney opinions should be disregarded.

     Reply ↓

     • Sarah, please tell us why people hunt nowadays. Is it for the pleasure of killing of an animal? What is it that they enjoy about it?

       Reply ↓

7. Aaah well, just another junior adult permanently shaped for a life destroying any living being they fancy, for shits & giggles AND getting praise for it.

   I wouldn’t have afforded this cruel child the respect of anonymity. But this isn’t my website & there are laws supposedly ‘protecting’ children from dangers online.

   I can only go so far in according this child the convenient benefit of being an ‘innocent’
   victim of terrible parenting.

   At the age of ten he is able to discern right from wrong, kindness from cruelty, food from non food etc. His environment has dictated that he will ignore those truths that he knows for himself. This boy is a product of parental abuse.

   This child, whether killing for fun is, in his mind, the best thing ever, or it’s just one of the few ways of getting positive attention/affection from his father, the boy he was born has now gone. That loving, sociable, non violent little soul has deliberately turned into an antisocial serial killer of any living beings that he sets his gun sights on.

   Another potentially good human ruined. Another truly beautiful feline life destroyed.

   Not every child hunter stops at killing animals.

   Reply ↓

   • Jane I was going to reproduce the picture ‘as is’ but Elisa convinced me to blur it. I was in 2 minds. It is unblurred on Facebook. My argument was why should I anonymise the blighter?

     Reply ↓

     • It’s a really tricky issue Michael isn’t it? It’s of prime importance for this site to stay online, advocating for, educating about & celebrating cats. So, for that reason, I think it is the only choice you can make.

       These days, one just cannot tell where or when the next hysterical mob of online trolls will crop up. Sadly too, it’s not possible to predict how far these internet thugs will go, especially where that trigger item for all manner of insanity – a “child” is involved.

       You must stay safe too Michael.

       Reply ↓

8. All I can say looking at this child is future prison inmate. Good job parental units. not.

   Reply ↓

9. Totally abhorrent for children to take pleasure in killing animals, whether for sport or other reasons. Karma has a way of evening the score, just not as quickly as we would hope for. 😱😠

   Reply ↓

10. Now THIS is my kind of “pictures of cats!” WTG, sonny!

    Reply ↓

    • I presume that you are one of those evil sport hunters who takes pleasure in causing pain to animals.

      Reply ↓

      • You presume wrong. I’m neither evil nor a sports-hunter. In my youth I, my father and brothers and my father hunted and fished for food. I still fish, but seldom hunt nowadays, and never for “sport”.

        I take no pleasure in the pain of any living thing. I am a biologist and conservationist who understands Felis catus is a deleterious invasive species which must be removed permanently and lethally from our environment for the sake of ecological balance, biodiversity and public health. They have no place in any natural assemblage of animals or balanced ecological system anywhere in the world.

        Your “cat extremism” has moved you to declare that you value cat lives over humans’, as have several of your sycophants on your page. I call that evil, as bad as the Nazis or ISIL.

        Reply ↓

        • You are full of BS. I don’t value cats over humans. I am not a cat extremists. I try to be a decent person who believes that we should respect animals as we are no better than them and neither are we superior to them. I agree with PETA basically. The invasive species tag is misleading. As there are 80 million cats as pets in the US giving pleasure to people you can’t tag them invasive. Look up the term. Finally hunting for meat is what they did in the 19th century. You are disguising sport hunting for pleasure with hunting for food and your father taught you. I can imagine what he is like. Now doubt he believes animals are there to serve humans and they don’t feel pain or have emotions. And you laughably say you are a conservationist! All the killers say this. It is a joke.

          Reply ↓

          • If you agree with PETA you are an extremist. They demand humans all practice veganism “for the sake of the animals”. The reality is the majority of our own species is starving and have to eat what it can get. Only a tiny minority of humanity is comfortable enough to restrict its diet according to its own delusions.

            Example: I once found the shell of a critically endangered hawksbill turtle on a beach in Baja California. The folks who killed and butchered it for food weren’t “evil”, and they didn’t do it for “sport”. They did it because they were hungry. They probably didn’t know the turtle was endangered, nor were they in a position to worry about it if they did. The extinction they faced was of themselves and their children, from starvation.

            Another example: I know Native Alaskans which live in regions were there ARE no stores, and where the growing season isn’t long enough for farming. They hunt and fish as their ancestors did. Sometimes they take moose and bears for food. Is that “sport”? Would you prefer they STARVE rather than harm the cute little animals? Or round them up on reservations to miserably subsist off government-issued rations? If your answer is “yes”, don’t bother to deny that you value animal lives over humans’ anymore. Besides, you’ve already admitted your indefensible “priorities” in the article about the woman who shot her husband over a cat.

            But let’s test your logic: if I raise my own goats and chickens for meat, am I doing it for “sport”? How about if I grow my own vegetables? Is that a “sport” as well? I have raised, slaughtered and butchered my own meat, and grown my own vegetables for my family’s table most of my adult life. And I have supplemented our diets with wild fowl and fresh-caught fish. How is this a sport, but raising goats, chickens, quail and tilapia to be killed and eaten NOT a sport? Would you prefer the term “hobby”? That term also applies to “sports” hunters, and the two terms are used interchangeably.

            Did it ever occur to you that some of us don’t wish to pollute ourselves or our children with the hormones and chemicals found in commercially raised meat-animals? We don’t find commercial and processed foods particularly healthy and try to obtain our own whenever we can?

            PS: do you agree with PETA’s stance on TNR? Perhaps you should have researched that one.

            Reply ↓

            • 1. One has to be on the extreme side to make the point because there are individuals like you who simply can’t see the cruelty in shooting animals when you don’t need to.

              2. “the majority of our own species is starving” this is BS in the US. And there are very few places indeed where this statement applies.

              3. If those Baja California people were genuinely starving that’s okay but 99.9% of shooters in the US are not starving. They shoot at animals because it is fun. That’s evil in my book and bloody ignorant.

              4. I support the woman who shot her husband but this does mean I prioritise animals over people. Really, you imagination is running riot.

              5, If you raise goats for meat then I would expect you to kill them humanely without pain. Shooting cats at a distance is not killing without pain. There is a difference between humane killing and shooting at animals. Why don’t you understand that. I guess you don’t understand the concept of pain in animals.

              6. Raising livestock for food is obviously not a sport. I have no idea what you are getting at. You are mixed up.

              7. I am not criticising people who kill livestock humanely for food although personally I don’t like it. The article is about a boy who has enjoyed shooting a cat and that is both almost certainly illegal, cruel and immoral.

              That’s the end of the conversation because I am bored.

              Reply ↓

              • “…because I am bored.”

                Allow me to translate: “I can’t refute you, won’t admit it, and this is my excuse.”

                Reply ↓

                • No I genuinely bored with reading your drivel.

                  Reply ↓

                  • Forgive the typo. Was supposed to read “haven’t”.

                    Reply ↓

                  • Riiiight. That’s why you refused to publish my post wherein I listed 23 incidences of cat-vectored murine typhus outbreaks in the US, which you yourself challenged me to do. Do you attribute that to “boredom”? Embarrassment, rather…

                    Reply ↓

                    • The discussion is over. Please stop. I will not publish anymore comments on this subject.

        • Oh Honey, the only one I see here valuing one life over another is you. It also seems you like your living organisms to be “pure”. Hmmmm, now where have I heard that before? Finally, why are you here? To lecture? Spread propaganda? I’m sorry to be the one to break it to you, but you’re a troll.

          Reply ↓

          • Thanks Mary.

            Reply ↓

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>