Peta's website: petsmartcruelty.com I know its truthful but

[sophistacavy]

Then this ad at the bottom of the page said theres a website called petakillsanimals.com and you can go there to check their euthanasia record.

In my opinion, this is absurd. I mean, the videos and photos are indeed awful, but aren't they the truth? I realise that when many people see something horrible, they tend to put up a block automatically because they don't want to believe that the gruesome thing they just saw is real. I'm still a believer in PETA, but I simply can't help being really bothered by that website. I've heard of similar websites before. I mean, learning how animals are "made into food"(just to put it kindly for sensitive people on here like vegetarians, l.o.l. I'm trying to find a phrase thats friendly all around) and watching the videos on peta's website is pretty dang awful, but, it is how it is. Obviously, animals are "made into food", thats a truth, a fact. So, it would be logical to say that peta's petsmartcruelty multimedia collection is also real, right?

I'm so confused!!!

 

[Susan9608]

?

What are you asking?

Rather, what is it you are confused about?

 

[PrayerWarrior]

I didn't understand your post either.

 

[Cagney]

I think they are confused about the fact that they maybe thought so highly of PETA, but since reading the information on petakills.com they are questioning the integrity of PETA.

Just a guess though.

 

[sophistacavy]

Oh sorry, I was wondering which site was more truthful, the one that claims peta kills animals to make the videos, or the petsmartcruelty website w/ petsmart-specific videos.

 

[sophistacavy]

I tried telling friends and educators at my institute of learning AND people at Sylvan about petsmartcruelty dot com, but nobody took me seriously or believed me. Would I get in trouble at my institute of learning if I handed out flyers I would make (w/PETA's permission, 1st) about PetSmart's evil deeds, and urging them to go to that website to learn more? I mean, its better then handing them out at petsmart, b/c then I think I'd be kicked out.
Where would the best place (and most legal) be to hand out these flyers, or at least to make a "take one- free" stack w/ the location's permission.

I don't want to start a riot, but I want to start raising awareness. Has anyone else been insulted before when you try to tell someone about this, and they scoff at you? I dunno, maybe its just me, but hopefully not.

Thanks!

 

[Cagney]

Oh sorry, I was wondering which site was more truthful, the one that claims peta kills animals to make the videos, or the petsmartcruelty website w/ petsmart-specific videos.

Both sites are truthful. PETA has manufactered video to support their beliefs. PETA does euthanize many adoptable pets each year.

Petsmart does support mills and does not take care of the pets that they sell there.

Both sites are based on truth. I would read through them both and come to your own personal decisions and not let either site tell you what to think or believe.

 

[Cagney]

As for handing out flyers in any business you would probably need to ask the owner of that business if you could do so.

 

[Henle15]

I think the main difference here is that PETA euthanizes animals just like any other "kill" shelter does. The problem with PETA high euthanizing is that most of them are dog/cats that "no-kill" shelters didn't have room for.

I think all "kill" shelters are what you call open admission which basically means that they will take any animal that is brought to them. "no-kill" shelters are selective and turn people away...then send them to a "kill" shelter. SO who is the one that is really responsible for the euthanizing? To me its the irresponsible pet owners

The petsmart video is true and they have no excuse whatsoever treating those animals the way they do.

I run a "no-kill" rescue, but yet work at a "kill" shelter. I understand why they euthanize animals and that is something not many people understand. If you are an open admission shelter...you can't be a no-kill shelter because you would run out of room within minutes.

People try to place blame on the shelters that euthanize but yet want them to take in every animal that is brought to them...it simply cannot happen that way.

The only reason PETA gets such a bad rap is that they sometimes take things too far and over the top. They are too extreme for most people...but most of there stuff is right on, nobody wants to accept that fact and look away when they know PETA has some good points.

 

[Cagney]

Unfortunately I do understand kill shelters. I'm an odd one out for understanding it, and don't agree with some no kill shelters. That is the ones that do not foster out the pets. The ones that keep them in a cage type of situation with minimal socialization times. Sadly there is a no kill shelter like that near me and there are many dogs that are so institutionalized because they've been there for over 3 years. Honestly I'm not sure they could ever be rehabed and returned to a home life.


So I understand that the PETA shelter is a kill shelter. What I don't understand is the PETA employees that were euthanizing pets in the van they picked them up in and dumping them in a grocery store dumpster on the way back to the shelter. This isn't propaganda. It's a readable court case in the federal court system. Sadly the people responsible for that only got charged with a littering charge.

Yes PETA has many points that are correct. They unfortunately for me go aobut them in such an extreme mannor, and target many tactics towards small children that I couldn't ever support them.

Plus some of their beliefs, such that no pet should be spayed, neutered or kept in anyway as a pet is downright dangerous for the animals we've chosen to domesticate over time. Then again not all PETA members feel this way.

It's like anything. There are good parts and bad parts to everything. You must decide where you stand based on your own feelings and beliefs, and not let others influence you for things you don't feel are right.

So if you believe strongly that the petsmart video is correct, and I'm sure for the most part it actually is. And you feel that by placing flyers would get others to see the truth and it would make a difference. Then by all means contact the business owners and see if you can't leave the flyers at their place of business. People can either choose to pick one up or not, and they can choose to believe it or not, and they can choose to do something about it or not. I see no harm in it.

 

[frashy]

Well, a lot of it is too, that people do not understand, and end up seeing it as PETA having the nerve to sit back and video tape it all, and end up blaming PETA and accusing them of being the sick cruel ones. The people come oblivious to the fact who the real bad-guy is, and instead, throw their attention and blame on the guy who did nothing but video tape, rather than the people actually guilty of the cruelty and WHY it exists in the first place. They don't seem to know or care why the guy was video recording in the first place, they just jump to blaming the video recorder.

People who are sickened by that, would simply also not believe it if they did not see it with their own eyes, and would demand to see any evidence. What people don't understand is that those videos not only show cruel truths of petstores, but the little control a basic employee actually has when it comes to help making the conditions less cruel. They see the cruelty, yet manage to get mad at the video recorder for them.


What else these people fail to realize is in the court of law, you NEED evidence such as these videos. For any kind of justice, you NEED to see the truth. Alot of us need to SEE the truth to actually believe it. It's up to you whether you are going to do something about it or not.

 

[Susan9608]

Plus some of their beliefs, such that no pet should be spayed, neutered or kept in anyway as a pet is downright dangerous for the animals we've chosen to domesticate over time.

Do you have any documentation that PETA, as an organization, believes that no pet should be spayed or neutered? Because they have always vigorously claimed otherwise.

See these links: http://www.helpinganimals.com/Factsheet/files/FactsheetDisplay.asp?ID=134
http://www.helpinganimals.com/res_lawspayord.asp
http://www.askcarla.com/answers.asp?QuestionandanswerID=223

And I"d also like to see some actual documentation supporting the claim that PETA, as an organization, doesn't believe that domesticated animals should be kept as companion animals.

The only dangerous thing I see are these unsupported claims about the beliefs of the *entire* organizations. Sure individuals within an orgnanization might have particular and peculiar beliefs, but that's true of any organization, any where you go. You can't categorize any organization on the beliefs of any few members.

 

[Cagney]

The only dangerous thing I see are these unsupported claims about the beliefs of the *entire* organizations. Sure individuals within an orgnanization might have particular and peculiar beliefs, but that's true of any organization, any where you go. You can't categorize any organization on the beliefs of any few members.

This would be why I said SOME of their beliefs are total animal liberation. And not ALL PETA members feel this way.

So no way did I say an "entire" organization. But there are the members who do feel this way and often it's their tactics and others that the group does support that makes it difficult for them to have my support. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, do your research and do what you feel is right.

 

[Susan9608]

There is a big difference in saying some *members* of an organization hold a certain belief and saying the organization itself believes certain things. Your previous post makes it seem like PETA, as an organization, is against altering animals and keeping non human animals as pets. Those philosophies are NOT the organization's party line, and it does an extreme disservice to PETA to give the impression that they are.

For PETA's official position on spaying/neutering and companion animals, please everyone, contact PETA yourselves.

 

[Cagney]

Plus some of their beliefs, such that no pet should be spayed, neutered or kept in anyway as a pet is downright dangerous for the animals we've chosen to domesticate over time. Then again not all PETA members feel this way.

I'm sorry if you got out of a statement that started off with "some of the beliefs" and ended with, "not all members feel this way" led you to believe I was saying all and always.

I fully agree, a person should come to their own conclusions. As I've also stated previously.

 

[PrayerWarrior]

All I know Cagney, is when I read your post, I thought you meant all PETA members felt that way as well. No need to get snippy, Susan has a valid point.

 

[Cagney]

Wasn't trying to be snippy. Said I was sorry if that's what was taken from it. Especially since I had also said not all PETA memebers felt or believed this way. Directly afterwards.

But there are PETA members who do feel that even keeping a pet is wrong. Or changing their so called natural wants. Many do not. But yes some do.

 

[Susan9608]

Plus some of their beliefs, such that no pet should be spayed, neutered or kept in anyway as a pet is downright dangerous for the animals we've chosen to domesticate over time.

This was your statement - which looks like a blanket statement about the beliefs about the organization of PETA, not just the particular beliefs of a few members.

Tacking on this follow up statement,

Then again not all PETA members feel this way.

isn't the same as saying the organization as a whole doesn't endorse those philosophies.

It is a serious disservice to PETA to continue the idea that they support ideas such as being against spaying/neutering, when the organization as a whole does nothing but advocate the altering of all companion animals.

I think this is a very important point and distinction because it is ideas like this - the false impression that PETA is against altering animals and against companion animals - that make people not want to support PETA. Any further discussion about those philosophies belong to PETA and/or it's members should be accompanied by some legitimate (non-propaganda) documentation.

 

[Susan9608]

But yes some do.

I want some verification from you that shows where PETA, as an organization, endorses not altering companion animals or not keeping companion animals. If you can't provide this kind of documentation - proof - then you are not referring to PETA as an organization and are instead referring to individual animal rights activists and need to refer to them as such, instead of referring to them under the blanket of "PETA members."

As I stated before, doing so does an extreme disservice to PETA because you unfairly attribute philosophies to them to which they do NOT ascribe and turn off potential supporters.

 

[Cagney]

People will read what they want to read. I've said i'm sorry if you understood it wrong. Not sure what else to say.

You may support PETA, I do not. We each have that right. I support your right to be able to support PETA. Your choice. If it bothers you that I do not support them there's nothing I can do about it.