'man' feeds kitten to his pet snake

Status
Not open for further replies.
bhavv said:
Possibly? So if he had used a rat instead he would be being chased down for a potential 20k fine and 6 months imprisonment with everyone and their mothers complaining about how evil and wrong it is?
Click to expand...
Jesus! It's like you are purposely not reading what we are writing! I believe agencies would be concerned yes, but there probably wouldn't be as much of an outrage.

It is actually boggling my mind the amount of people saying 'wooo animal eats animal big deal'. So many of you saying that people are idiots for taking those clarkeson comments the wrong way... What hypocrisy! Look at the. Context.

Here is 'the point' for all of those who keep missing it:
Lightnix said:
Oh come on, he paraded the cat around in a Christmas hat. He was trying to shock and entertain people. He used suffering for that purpose. He caused unnecessary suffering to an animal for the sake of his own amusement. He might as well have stuck the thing in a blender for all it matters.

It is the intent that matters here - he did not place that cat in with that snake as a matter of necessity, he did it for his own gratification. You can try to undermine that point with vacuous nonsense about "first world problems", but it is you who has the skewed sense of morality if you think that animal cruelty for the sake of amusement is acceptable.

Here are some examples to demonstrate:

Right: "My snake needs to be fed and it only eats live food so I'll feed it some live food."

Wrong: "I'm going to post some videos on the internet of my snake eating the cutest animal I can find because I think that'd be kind of funny"
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Nitefly said:
Jesus! It's like you are purposely not reading what we are writing! I believe agencies would be concerned yes, but there probably wouldn't be as much of an outrage.

It is actually boggling my mind the amount of people saying 'wooo animal eats animal big deal'. So many of you saying that people are idiots for taking those clarkeson comments the wrong way... What hypocrisy!

Here is 'the point' for all of those who keep missing it:
Click to expand...

Nitefly, this place is bloody frustrating sometimes. There are a select few that pop up with their deliberately polarised opinions to spark some reaction, which they do. However, they are misquoting or deliberately ignoring the simple facts and going for the 'irrational' animal lovers. They are simply trolling. Ignore them TBH. I've said my bit, and I'll refrain from posting more. It's now up to the people that are arguing on purpose to realise that they're only saying what they say to troll the cute furry animal lovers, which to be frank, is also a waste of bloody time. It's like two arguing children, going on about why a Megadrive is better than a SNES. If like some of them they managed to get man of honour status by simply arguing the toss without accepting the facts, then I think I'm going to gun for it as it sounds easier to achieve than I expected.

The sooner they realise the middle ground the better. You don't have to be polarised for the sake of it, and often it's not the best position to be in.
 
Last edited:
danza said:
Nitefly, this place is bloody frustrating sometimes. There are a select few that pop up with their deliberately polarised opinions to spark some reaction, which they do. However, they are misquoting or deliberately ignoring the simple facts and going for the 'irrational' animal lovers. They are simply trolling. Ignore them TBH. I've said my bit, and I'll refrain from posting more. It's now up to the people that are arguing on purpose to realise that they're only saying what they say to troll the cute furry animal lovers, which to be frank, is also a waste of bloody time. It's like two arguing children, going on about why a Megadrive is better than a SNES. If like some of them they managed to get man of honour status by simply arguing the toss without accepting the facts, then I think I'm going to gun for it as it sounds easier to achieve than I expected.

The sooner they realise the middle ground the better. You don't have to be polarised for the sake of it, and often it's not the best position to be in.
Click to expand...
I think you're right.
 
tbh most animals that owners 'claim' need live food shouldn't be kept as pets anyway!
They should be left in the wild where they belong instead of a small tank/cage which imho is far more cruel!
 
CmJared said:
Loads of youtube vids of snake owners getting off to their pets devouring fluffy animals. Snake owners disgust me they aren't right in the head.
Click to expand...

Are there also videos of a cat getting drowned in a bath or kittens being killed in a vacuum bag with a hoover?
 
danza said:
The person whom you see in the python video looks quite a lot like the person in the vacuum pack video (from what we can see of them)
Click to expand...


The guy/gal in the drowning cat in bath video looks very similar in the video's containing the vacuum and python killing videos.
 
danza said:
Nitefly, this place is bloody frustrating sometimes. There are a select few that pop up with their deliberately polarised opinions to spark some reaction, which they do. However, they are misquoting or deliberately ignoring the simple facts and going for the 'irrational' animal lovers. They are simply trolling. Ignore them TBH. I've said my bit, and I'll refrain from posting more. It's now up to the people that are arguing on purpose to realise that they're only saying what they say to troll the cute furry animal lovers, which to be frank, is also a waste of bloody time. It's like two arguing children, going on about why a Megadrive is better than a SNES. If like some of them they managed to get man of honour status by simply arguing the toss without accepting the facts, then I think I'm going to gun for it as it sounds easier to achieve than I expected.

The sooner they realise the middle ground the better. You don't have to be polarised for the sake of it, and often it's not the best position to be in.
Click to expand...

I find that 'sensible' posts usually get lost in the noise in these kinds of threads. Ah well, I've been around here for long enough not to be surprised by it.
 
C.R.A.Z.Y said:
tbh most animals that owners 'claim' need live food shouldn't be kept as pets anyway!
They should be left in the wild where they belong instead of a small tank/cage which imho is far more cruel!
Click to expand...

These days, most are bred in captivity. Also, the majority of reptiles in the wild do not have a large territory, same goes for inverts.

As for the live feeding, the bloke's got issues. A snake would generally not come across a kitten in the wild and it certainly wouldn't have a live kitten "presented" to it in any normal situation. Cats and dogs aren't really a suitable nutrient source for a snake either.

We have readily available, purpose bred feeder animals. They are not expensive. Feeding a snake a live cat is uneccesary to say the least.
 
Glaucus said:
Pointless yes, already said that. But it isn't how it should work and i can register my displeasure at such stupid laws.
Click to expand...

So would you object to say eating human meat - supposing we imported human meat from overseas say? Its still an animal - whats the difference between that and another animal?


Main point, which you seem to be deliberately ignoring, was that it was unnecessary, of little benefit to the snake and subjected the kitten to unnecessary suffering. Snakes don't need live rats/mice (dead ones are fine) but at least in that instance they're getting the nutrients they require. A kitten doesn't generally feature in the diet of a snake...
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
So would you object to say eating human meat - supposing we imported human meat from overseas say? Its still an animal - whats the difference between that and another animal?
.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Oh look yet another person housing this stupid argument. Why do you do it. You know the answer. Your point isn't an argument. It's not remotely similar. It's just stupid. If you want to debate at least be sensiable.
 
Glaucus said:
:rolleyes:

Oh look yet another person housing this stupid argument. Why do you do it. You know the answer. Your point isn't an argument. It's not remotely similar. It's just stupid. If you want to debate at least be sensiable.
Click to expand...

Its as stupid as repeatedly asking why a rat but not a kitten?

Yet you don't appear to have an answer....

As for 'if you want to debate'... you appear to be trolling, ignoring posts of others and generally not engaging in a debate...
 
dowie said:
Its as stupid as repeatedly asking why a rat not a kitten?

Yet you don't appear to have an answer....
Click to expand...

I have an answer. You lot don't.
What is the difference?
Why are there such strict rules on cats and dogs and not on other animals?
It's certainly not becuase such animals have greater pain receptors or are considered sentient.

Humans needs lots of laws to function as a society. That includes murder, so no it's not the same. It's a throw away stupid argument. Well it's not even an argument it's just stupid.

As for the last bit LOL have you read the thread, have you seen the 10s if not more replies. Engaging with people and replying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom