Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Pet Board => Topic started by: Hustle Man on August 22, 2007, 09:51:54 AM
-
Is there a difference between killing dogs or chickens that don't perform in the fight arena (FYI I am against Dog fighting and Cock fighting etc.) or killing a big buck for his antlers or even snatching a fish out of water then throwing it back with a hole in its mouth or body?
True MVick screwed up bad and he should pay his debt but what about those hunters that kill just for trophies or sports where human beings are matched against one another often maiming and even sometimes killing their opp e.g., boxing, ufc, Football, La Crosse and Hockey etc.? Why is MVick's situation any different?
IMHO, boxing and UFC is the human version of Dog fighting and/or Cock fighting; Should these sports be illegal from a "brutality" point of view?
You view on this.
-
I don't see any difference between dog fighting and cock fighting. Both are cruel and barbaric and give the animals no choice but to try and kill each other. I also think bullfighting is cruel and a pussy 'sport'.
Human boxing is different. A person has a CHOICE to do it or not, their are rules in place, and it is not to the death. People are also given proper health care and not executed if they perform poorly.
-
I don't see any difference between dog fighting and cock fighting. Both are cruel and barbaric and give the animals no choice but to try and kill each other. I also think bullfighting is cruel and a pussy 'sport'.
Human boxing is different. A person has a CHOICE to do it or not, their are rules in place, and it is not to the death. People are also given proper health care and not executed if they perform poorly.
Well, my point was the issue of brutality, choice or no! I think its all hypocrisy! Practicing brutality for monetary gains should be illegal whether at the expense of animals or humans, especially the latter!
-
A gutshot deer probably suffers as much as any of the dogs did at Vick's hands. The difference is not in the animal's pain, but in the human's intention. Most people do not intentionally gutshoot deer . . . they want to put an end to the animal quickly, relatively painlessly, and preserve the meat . . . Michael vick knew that what he was doing would inflict needless pain, and it was probably his intention to "punish" the animal . . . his lack of a legitimate purpose reveals his sociopathic inclination.
-
Fishing's just cruel to the fish, any way you slice it . . . that's why some folks throw the thrashing fish in the cooler as quickly as they can . . . I love fishing though . . . thanks for trying to ruin it for me.
-
Well, my point was the issue of brutality, choice or no! I think its all hypocrisy! Practicing brutality for monetary gains should be illegal whether at the expense of animals or humans, especially the latter!
But it is a big difference when a lack of choice to participate is involved, to compare boxing to dog or cockfighting is not an equal comparison IMO.
-
I used to box and kickbox and I've fought full contact martial arts----I did it by choice because I was a stupid redneck hillbilly who didn't care if bones got broken. I did it becuase I wanted to. No one made me and no one killed me if I got the shit kicked out of me. thats the big difference between animal and human fighting.
As far as hunting goes...I grew up hunting. In many cases the only way my family had food was if we shot it (I come from a poor farm family). I was taught one shot, one kill and use every bit of the animal if you are going to kill it. its that simple. To me there is a degree of respect conveyed to the animal----and a humane death. I dont' hunt now to get a trophy. I can go immobilize something at work and take pictures of it, then wake it back up if I want to do that.
Fishing.... I haven't been fishing in years where I actually caught something. I really cant comment on it.
-
But it is a big difference when a lack of choice to participate is involved, to compare boxing to dog or cockfighting is not an equal comparison IMO.
Flower have you ever seen an organized dog or cock fight? I have and I have boxed before (just to stay in shape mainly) but the animal or human athletes (for lack of a better term) have two things in common; both are trained to fight and defeat their opponent and both are given something to fight for e.g., food, money, exaltation... whatever the case may be I think its the same.
These Pit bulls or Bull Terriers (Bull Terriers are ferocious when trained to fight) anyway have to be trained just like humans so my point is just because some guy chooses to be a boxer or some piece of shit; like many here in the states, teaches his dog (whatever the breed) to fight is brutal and wrong! Again my point is Brutality of this nature should be outlawed!
I used to box and kickbox and I've fought full contact martial arts----I did it by choice because I was a stupid redneck hillbilly who didn't care if bones got broken. I did it becuase I wanted to. No one made me Why do it, what was your prize?and no one killed me if I got the shit kicked out of me. It's illegal to kill another human being so I should hope not!-Ok you have been lucky and not all dogs die in the ring either but remember those that have died in the ring, e.g., (Du Ku Kim in 1982) its brutality and it makes money for the topheads and any one who participates is like one of those Dogs in Vick's fighting ring, a pawn. thats the big difference between animal and human fighting. Is Mike Vick going to jail because of the brutality inflicted upon those animals? Or is he going to jail because they didn't have the choice to participate? IMO its the same brutal arena with possibilities of death as the end result. Again I say it's all hypocrisy; some would say, its unfortunate that Du Ku Kim died in the ring but it was his choice, dumbass should have ducked, but you better not make that pit bull fight or you ass will go to jail. I think we have put animal life above human life! BTW I love animals especially dogs I just think its all hypocrisy!
As far as hunting goes...I grew up hunting. In many cases the only way my family had food was if we shot it (I come from a poor farm family). I was taught one shot, one kill and use every bit of the animal if you are going to kill it. its that simple. To me there is a degree of respect conveyed to the animal----and a humane death. I don't have a problem with this, killing for food. I dont' hunt now to get a trophy. You mean you used to trophy hunt? I can go immobilize something at work and take pictures of it, then wake it back up if I want to do that. I don't see the point in this but thats totally different I think IMO
Fishing.... I haven't been fishing in years where I actually caught something. I really cant comment on it. I love to fish but only for food that whole mounting carcases irritatates me
-
I don't see any difference between dog fighting and cock fighting. Both are cruel and barbaric and give the animals no choice but to try and kill each other. I also think bullfighting is cruel and a pussy 'sport'.
i agree both are cruel and barbaric but i think dog fighting takes it to another level because of the place dogs have in our society. not only because many consider their dogs to be a close member of their familiy, but dogs have been of service and worked closely with humans for a long enough time that i think they have earned certain rights.
-
Is Mike Vick going to jail because of the brutality inflicted upon those animals? Or is he going to jail because they didn't have the choice to participate? IMO its the same brutal arena with possibilities of death as the end result. Again I say it's all hypocrisy; some would say, its unfortunate that Du Ku Kim died in the ring but it was his choice, dumbass should have ducked, but you better not make that pit bull fight or you ass will go to jail. I think we have put animal life above human life! BTW I love animals especially dogs I just think its all hypocrisy!
He's going to jail because he broke the law, actually a few laws.
Hypocrisy would be if we took 2 people and put them in a ring and told them to fight or else, but then found a problem with doing that with animals.
I think if you have a problem with boxing or other sports you think are brutal you should try and do something to end them, and not be comparing them to animal brutality.
-
i agree both are cruel and barbaric but i think dog fighting takes it to another level because of the place dogs have in our society. not only because many consider their dogs to be a close member of their familiy, but dogs have been of service and worked closely with humans for a long enough time that i think they have earned certain rights.
I get what you are saying but I don't see it as another level. Both show cruelty, lack of compassion, and a dulled sense of what should be shocking.
-
Flower have you ever seen an organized dog or cock fight? I have and I have boxed before (just to stay in shape mainly) but the animal or human athletes (for lack of a better term) have two things in common; both are trained to fight and defeat their opponent and both are given something to fight for e.g., food, money, exaltation... whatever the case may be I think its the same.
These Pit bulls or Bull Terriers (Bull Terriers are ferocious when trained to fight) anyway have to be trained just like humans so my point is just because some guy chooses to be a boxer or some piece of shit; like many here in the states, teaches his dog (whatever the breed) to fight is brutal and wrong! Again my point is Brutality of this nature should be outlawed!
i dont get why some people want to make these comparisons. personally i find them to be ridiculous. i mean if you support vick just come out and say you support him. boxers and ufc guys train to fight by their own free will while dogs do not have that choice. dogs do not choose to be shot up with drugs, fed gun powder, and be tied down to heavy chains. if a ufc guy loses a fight he is not shot, electorcuted or hung. the brutality that takes place at these dog fights cant be compared.
-
Flower have you ever seen an organized dog or cock fight? I have and I have boxed before (just to stay in shape mainly) but the animal or human athletes (for lack of a better term) have two things in common; both are trained to fight and defeat their opponent and both are given something to fight for e.g., food, money, exaltation... whatever the case may be I think its the same.
These Pit bulls or Bull Terriers (Bull Terriers are ferocious when trained to fight) anyway have to be trained just like humans so my point is just because some guy chooses to be a boxer or some piece of shit; like many here in the states, teaches his dog (whatever the breed) to fight is brutal and wrong! Again my point is Brutality of this nature should be outlawed!
The dogs are given NOTHING for fighting except that maybe they will live another day! And they have no choice!!! And retirement is death!
Dogfighting is already illegal, if you want human boxing/fighting banned then start doing something about it.
I personally don't care for boxing and the like, but at least the participants can decide to do it and when to stop.
-
Man is the most sadistic animal on the earth,also the most wasteful and destructive, better to take it out on willing participants (ourselves) than others.
-
i dont get why some people want to make these comparisons. personally i find them to be ridiculous. That's your perogativei mean if you support vick just come out and say you support him. I don't support Michael Vick, I commented on that earlier.boxers and ufc guys train to fight by their own free will while dogs do not have that choice. dogs do not choose to be shot up with drugs, fed gun powder, and be tied down to heavy chains. if a ufc guy loses a fight he is not shot, electorcuted or hung. the brutality that takes place at these dog fights cant be compared.
-
Dude, please answer some other way. Its virtually impossible to address what you are posting (ie respond) the way you are doing it.
-
The dogs are given NOTHING for fighting except that maybe they will live another day! And they have no choice!!! And retirement is death!
Dogfighting is already illegal, if you want human boxing/fighting banned then start doing something about it.
I personally don't care for boxing and the like, but at least the participants can decide to do it and when to stop.
Yeah, i boxed/kickboxed/did the martial arts thing because I could. I had people who told me I couldnt, so I set out to prove them wrong. I wouldn't say I "Like to fight" but I'm not going to back down if you put me in a corner. Thats the same basic reason I'm a powerlifter today.....to see what I can do. Will I ever squat 1000? Who knows, but you can damned sure bet I'm going to try until I can't try anymore. I never won any appreciable money and I never won any medals or prizes doing the boxing/kickboxing/martial arts stuff. I did beat the shit out of a few people and I got the shit beat out of me a few times. In retrospect, nearly 20 years later, I probably wouldn't do it. Back then, I was a stupid kid.
-
Man is the most sadistic animal on the earth,also the most wasteful and destructive, better to take it out on willing participants (ourselves) than others.
I agree with this.
-
A gutshot deer probably suffers as much as any of the dogs did at Vick's hands. The difference is not in the animal's pain, but in the human's intention. Most people do not intentionally gutshoot deer . . . they want to put an end to the animal quickly, relatively painlessly, and preserve the meat . . . Michael vick knew that what he was doing would inflict pain, and it was probably his intention to "punish" the animal . . . revealing his sociopathic inclination.
Those who compares hunting to animal fights are uninformed at best, and in worst case scenario, candidates for Dumb MF of the year.
-
Those who compares hunting to animal fights are uninformed at best, and in worst case scenario, candidates for Dumb MF of the year.
No need to insult any here, this is just a discussion! If you don't agree fine but why disrespect someone else's opinion or comment.
Man is the most sadistic animal on the earth,also the most wasteful and destructive, better to take it out on willing participants (ourselves) than others.
I agree with you as well Flower.
-
Dude, please answer some other way. Its virtually impossible to address what you are posting (ie respond) the way you are doing it.
sorry I was trying to answer JMT1's specific comments.
My main purpose was to point various types of brutality where humans are put in the same arena as animals or vice versa and I also added where do we draw the line on brutality? What is brutality and what is not brutality morally is my question?
I DO NOT support Michael Vick in any shape way or form in this situation although I thought he was exciting to watch on the gridiron. As I commented earlier he should pay his debt to society just as any other felon would have to because they broke the law (unregulated gambling and mistreatment of animals).
If gambling was not involved would that have change the importance of this particular case?
I know we can only speculate but look at the past, when has this been such a widely publicized issue? The media has spent more time on this than abused and missng children we see sex offenders get off everyday because of legal technicalities and kills or rape again but kill an animal and your ass is grass its all BULLSHITT!
Here in the states on one of the nature channels (discovery channnel I think) they have shows about dog fighting task forces and thats all they do is track down dog fighting rings but those cases never make the big national news networks. If dog fighting was such a big deal why did they wait until a celeb athlete was accused? This is why I say it's hypocrosy I have a hard time thinking its all about the dogs or what they go through in these gruesome situations (again which I despise). I think MONEY is the bigger issue here (Not race at all) Vick broke the one law you don't break in America and that is DO NOT MAKE MONEY that the government can't tax and or regulate. We could go down many rabbit holes on this issue of whats brutal and whats not based on choices i.e., (religion, abortion, animal euthanizations ect.)
-
Man is the most sadistic animal on the earth,also the most wasteful and destructive, better to take it out on willing participants (ourselves) than others.
Don't compare humans to animals.
And I disagree.
It's better if humans torture animals than if they torture other humans.
It's definitely sad if animals are tortured, but it's still better than if humans get hurt and traumatized.
-
Is there a difference between killing dogs or chickens that don't perform in the fight arena (FYI I am against Dog fighting and Cock fighting etc.) or killing a big buck for his antlers or even snatching a fish out of water then throwing it back with a hole in its mouth or body?
True MVick screwed up bad and he should pay his debt but what about those hunters that kill just for trophies or sports where human beings are matched against one another often maiming and even sometimes killing their opp e.g., boxing, ufc, Football, La Crosse and Hockey etc.? Why is MVick's situation any different?
IMHO, boxing and UFC is the human version of Dog fighting and/or Cock fighting; Should these sports be illegal from a "brutality" point of view?
You view on this.
Don't think you could force humans to fight to the death, torture and kill kids who where not mean enough to fight, all while running an illgal gambling ring and only get 18 months in jail for it.
Btw ufc fighting is not till the death. Pretty sure no ones guts are torn out in a ufc fight. I have yet to see a ufc combatant or boxer have his face torn off and continue to fight. Happens all the time in dog fighting rings.
-
Don't compare humans to animals.
And I disagree.
It's better if humans torture animals than if they torture other humans.
It's definitely sad if animals are tortured, but it's still better than if humans get hurt and traumatized.
Maybe you should pay attention better.
This is about comparing dog fighting to boxing. Boxers have a choice to fight or not.
And look at what I wrote:
better to take it out on willing participants (ourselves) than others
Sometimes I think the only reason you post on this board is to start stuff.
-
Don't compare humans to animals.
Humans ARE an animal.
But you are right, animals are better than humans in some cases, so no comparison.
It's definitely sad if animals are tortured, but it's still better than if humans get hurt and traumatized.
I strongly disagree. Neither is right, and I won't find one more acceptable than the other.
-
What is brutality and what is not brutality morally is my question?
bru·tal·i·ty (br-tl-t)
n. pl. bru·tal·i·ties
1. The state or quality of being ruthless, cruel, harsh, or unrelenting.
2. A ruthless, cruel, harsh, or unrelenting act.
I don't think boxing is a "state of being cruel" or unrelenting, or a ruthless act.
I know we can only speculate but look at the past, when has this been such a widely publicized issue? The media has spent more time on this than abused and missng children we see sex offenders get off everyday because of legal technicalities and kills or rape again but kill an animal and your ass is grass its all BULLSHITT!
It is because he is a public person. If a public person was accused of child molestation it would get the same or more amount of coverage. Just like stars who get a DUI, it makes news, but if a 'regular' person gets one it may make the local paper.
Here in the states on one of the nature channels (discovery channnel I think) they have shows about dog fighting task forces and thats all they do is track down dog fighting rings but those cases never make the big national news networks. If dog fighting was such a big deal why did they wait until a celeb athlete was accused? This is why I say it's hypocrosy I have a hard time thinking its all about the dogs or what they go through in these gruesome situations (again which I despise). I think MONEY is the bigger issue here (Not race at all) Vick broke the one law you don't break in America and that is DO NOT MAKE MONEY that the government can't tax and or regulate. We could go down many rabbit holes on this issue of whats brutal and whats not based on choices i.e., (religion, abortion, animal euthanizations ect.)
Again, he is a known person. It won't make national news that a dog fighting operation was busted unless someone well known was involved. Just like every murder doesn't make national news, or every child molestor, or DUI. There wouldn't be enough hours in the day to broadcast all the news on every horrendous act that happened that day.
Dog fighting is more "brutal" than human fighting sports for other reasons besides the participants not having a choice and their treatment and fate.
Dog fighters are known to take peoples pets and use them to train their dogs. They will take smaller dogs to get them started, then maybe find bigger dogs that will supposedly boost up the dog because it took down a bigger dog. I don't believe in boxing they go and find small people and have them beat up, and then find overweight bigger people and have them pound the shit out of them so they can feel pumped up.
You are comparing apples to oranges.
-
bru·tal·i·ty (br-tl-t)
n. pl. bru·tal·i·ties
1. The state or quality of being ruthless, cruel, harsh, or unrelenting.
2. A ruthless, cruel, harsh, or unrelenting act.
I don't think boxing is a "state of being cruel" or unrelenting, or a ruthless act.
It is because he is a public person. If a public person was accused of child molestation it would get the same or more amount of coverage. Just like stars who get a DUI, it makes news, but if a 'regular' person gets one it may make the local paper.
Again, he is a known person. It won't make national news that a dog fighting operation was busted unless someone well known was involved. Just like every murder doesn't make national news, or every child molestor, or DUI. There wouldn't be enough hours in the day to broadcast all the news on every horrendous act that happened that day.
Dog fighting is more "brutal" than human fighting sports for other reasons besides the participants not having a choice and their treatment and fate.
Dog fighters are known to take peoples pets and use them to train their dogs. They will take smaller dogs to get them started, then maybe find bigger dogs that will supposedly boost up the dog because it took down a bigger dog. I don't believe in boxing they go and find small people and have them beat up, and then find overweight bigger people and have them pound the shit out of them so they can feel pumped up.
You are comparing apples to oranges.
I don't think so but I respect your view point here, thanks Flower!
-
Don't think you could force humans to fight to the death, torture and kill kids who where not mean enough to fight, all while running an illgal gambling ring and only get 18 months in jail for it.
Btw ufc fighting is not till the death. Pretty sure no ones guts are torn out in a ufc fight. I have yet to see a ufc combatant or boxer have his face torn off and continue to fight. Happens all the time in dog fighting rings.
I agree with your comments as you have stated them but this is my view as stated in earlier on in this thread, "IMHO, boxing and UFC is the human version of Dog fighting and/or Cock fighting; Should these sports be illegal from a "brutality" point of view?"
-
I don't think so but I respect your view point here, thanks Flower!
so dog fighting aside, do you wish that all human fighting sports be banned?
-
Well, IMO it's in our human nature to destroy everything in our path including ourselves. Pitting each other in mortal combat for sport or for life goes back to the start of time. Humans have put man vs man, man vs beast, & beast vs beast to pleasure our appetite for blood & destruction.
Until the day something comes in & takes us off the top of the food chain..this will never change. Debating why people do this is pointless. People try to come off as 'civilized' but in the same breath will squash a spider because it's scary looking.
I don't condone what Vick did & his penalty should fit the crime because there's been laws in place that say we shouldn't do this. In some parts of the world...this is still normal part of 'culture'.
I can't say what people should do...or can't do morally.....we can only hold ourselves in contempt in the end. I just don't like people telling me what I can or can't do....or if what they are doing is in direct impact on me & affects my life.
-
I can't say what people should do...or can't do morally.....we can only hold ourselves in contempt in the end. I just don't like people telling me what I can or can't do....or if what they are doing is in direct impact on me & affects my life.
So are you saying that while you find dog fighting wrong, you think it should be up to each person to decided to do it or not and we should have that right?
-
I'm not the moral police....& telling people their business is not my responsibility either.
There's laws in place.....we can comply....or face consequences if we break laws. Pretty simple.
-
Humans ARE an animal.
But you are right, animals are better than humans in some cases, so no comparison.
I strongly disagree. Neither is right, and I won't find one more acceptable than the other.
I find it very strange, and a bit disturbing, to be honest, that you do not make any distinction between torture of humans and animals.
I also would like to know what you mean when you state that animals are better than humans in some cases?
-
I'm not the moral police....& telling people their business is not my responsibility either.
There's laws in place.....we can comply....or face consequences if we break laws. Pretty simple.
I don't understand what you are saying? You say you don't want people telling you what you can or can't do, then answer my post with "there are laws in place"?
-
I find it very strange, and a bit disturbing, to be honest, that you do not make any distinction between torture of humans and animals.
Why should I? It is strange that I find torture unacceptable for everyone and everything?
Sorry I find them both wrong. Wrong is wrong.
-
I don't understand what you are saying? You say you don't want people telling you what you can or can't do, then answer my post with "there are laws in place"?
at the moment...it makes sense to me...but..I have to admit my blood/sugar may be a little off.
I'll check back in a few & re-read what I wrote
;)
-
I find it very strange, and a bit disturbing, to be honest, that you do not make any distinction between torture of humans and animals.
I also would like to know what you mean when you state that animals are better than humans in some cases?
I think the way flower is saying it is the same thing I think----humans are the cruelest, most unreasonable species on this planet. And part of that cruelty comes from the fact that we try to hide behind this bullshit moral facade. People also have this superiority complex where they have to put themselves on this pedestal where they are the "top" when in reality as far as a species goes, humans are incredibly weak. If you don't believe me, take the average city dweller and put them out in the deep woods and see if they survive. Many won't. Humans are in the position they are in the world because they destroy and dominate as a pack.
As far as torture of animals and humans..... how is it really different? There is a sick mind involved if its a puppy or a baby. They both should be reported/dealt with as far as I'm concerned.
-
so dog fighting aside, do you wish that all human fighting sports be banned?
All BS aside Flower, not only no but HELL NO I love'em all well, except female boxing I guess I am narrow minded when it comes to women beat the hell out of each other! I know I know I am being a chauvanistic hypocrite but I just hate it! But with that said, I am an athlete myself (well what's left of me lol) I love the competition and all that goes with getting prepared mentally and physically for the event. I actual think boxers (which I did in the military) and the UFC/Martial arts competitors are arguably the best conditioned athletes overall (ofc not to take away from BB and fig competitors) it takes a special kind to participate in those type of contact sports.
I still disagree with you, that humans are animals. ;D
-
All BS aside Flower, not only no but HELL NO I love'em all
Then what was the purpose of your question? :-\
Humans are animals, that is a fact. We are what, one iota DNA away from apes? ::)
-
I find it very strange, and a bit disturbing, to be honest, that you do not make any distinction between torture of humans and animals.
I'll 2nd that Hedge. Killing/ Torturing a human is in another league from animals.... THere is no comparison.
Excuse me, I'm going to throw a Beef Steak on the Grill. I like them medium-rare. Someone else killed and processed it for me, I'm not sure how the animal died or suffered - but it did.
I have killed and processed many animals in my youth. I grew up thinking it was natural. I still think so.
I don't take the time and trouble to go kill and process my own Deer, Ducks, Rabbits, Squirrels, Pheasants... anymore. But I do know how the food I eat got in the plastic wrapped container.
Elevate pets (Certain Pets) to human status, and you have a slippery slope to a bad conclusion.
That's why the law considers animals PROPERTY.
-
We are talking brutality here. Let's keep it straight. Cruel, ruthless, unrelenting behavior.
Nice try though. :)
-
We are talking brutality here. Let's keep it straight. Cruel, ruthless, unrelenting behavior.
Nice try though. :)
Looking back when I was younger I did some pretty "brutal" things in the ring. Why? Because its what I had to do to win. My old roommate was/is a far better boxer than I was. He took some time away from the ring and in his return fight he broke several of the guys ribs and ruptured his liver. At the time we all laughed about it and called it "a good fight". Why? because we could. no one made any of us fight. We were stupid males in our early 20's
No matter how you put it, with human monitored animal combat---be it rattlesnakes, pitbulls, cats, cocks, horses or anything else, there is a degree of humans "making" the animals fight. Thats the biggest issue there. Take two roosters on free range are they going to fight? probably. but they won't have razors strapped to their legs and the loser will have a way to escape. this doesn't happen with human organized fights. Rarely do "free range" subordinates get killed or even seriously maimed---it happens, but not near as often as if there is human involvement.
-
Then what was the purpose of your question? :-\
Humans are animals, that is a fact. We are what, one iota DNA away from apes? ::)
I asked the question because wanted to know how people felt about brutal sports legal or not (boxing UFC dog fighting etc.) and if some saw the same brutal similiarities that I see. But that is why I said "where do we draw the line on brutality".
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=737567328566379082
Long video but very informative
-
I asked the question because wanted to know how people felt about brutal sports legal or not (boxing UFC dog fighting etc.) and if some saw the same brutal similiarities that I see. But that is why I said "where do we draw the line on brutality".
I see similarities, but the most glaring and IMO the point that separates the 2, is the fact that in one 'sport' the contestants don't have a choice.
-
I see similarities, but the most glaring and IMO the point that separates the 2, is the fact that in one 'sport' the contestants don't have a choice.
THE dogs have the choice not to fight. Then they lose and will prolly be killed. Dog dont know that.
THe Winners got bred, and that's the breed stock of all todays pitts. Remember that.
Pitts Love to roll around another dog. They are not "Forced". It would be impossible to "Force" them to fight.
Encourage prolly, "Force" no.
Anthropomorphizing animals and elevating them to the status of higher conscious humanbeings is flawed logic and our society's laws recognize that.
-
THE dogs have the choice not to fight. Then they lose and will prolly be killed. Dog dont know that.
THe Winners got bred, and that's the breed stock of all todays pitts. Remember that.
Pitts Love to roll around another dog. They are not "Forced". It would be impossible to "Force" them to fight.
Encourage prolly, "Force" no.
Anthropomorphizing animals and elevating them to the status of higher conscious humanbeings is flawed logic and our society's laws recognize that.
Oh bullshit. You don't think the fact that they are in a pit has anything to do with it? If they were out in the open one could chose to run away. How do they do that in a pit? They don't so they fight back.
-
your boyfriends a geek
hi
-
Oh bullshit. You don't think the fact that they are in a pit has anything to do with it? If they were out in the open one could chose to run away. How do they do that in a pit? They don't so they fight back.
Pitt Bulls don't need much (any) encouragement to fight. Click on the link and learn about the history of Pitt Bulls. Past and present.
You are talking w/ no base of knowledge.
Our legal system totally rejects your personal opinion that (Certain) animals are equal to humans.
No human society ever has, or could, or will function under that premise.
Time for a cheeseburger...
-
THE dogs have the choice not to fight. Then they lose and will prolly be killed. Dog dont know that.
THe Winners got bred, and that's the breed stock of all todays pitts. Remember that.
Pitts Love to roll around another dog. They are not "Forced". It would be impossible to "Force" them to fight.
Encourage prolly, "Force" no.
so you think pits enjoy getting in with another dog and ripping each other apart? just because a dog may have some animal agression by nature doesnt mean they want or choose to fight. the scum who do this exploit certain characteristics of the breed in order to turn them into fighting dogs. the pitbull wants to please his owner more than anything and if that means fighting another dog thats what will happen. any grand champion fighting pitbull would have turned out to be a extemely friendly family dog if he had gone to the right owner. my dog is purple ribbon apbt who has been going to dog parks since she was a pup. she has been jumped on, rolled around with, on one occassion even bit on the nose by another dog. not once has she ever tried to fight.
-
Pitt Bulls don't need much (any) encouragement to fight. Click on the link and learn about the history of Pitt Bulls. Past and present.
You are talking w/ no base of knowledge.
Our legal system totally rejects your personal opinion that (Certain) animals are equal to humans.
No human society ever has, or could, or will function under that premise.
Time for a cheeseburger...
I'm calling bullshit on this one. Just out of curiousity, how many fighting---and I mean real fighting dogs have you really had contact with. I'm not talking about someone who has a big pit he claims is a badass, I'm talking about hardcore proven dogs. It really, really seems from your posts that the numbers are 0.
Yes pits have a history of fighting that cannot be denied, but they also have a long history as devoted family pets. Conditioning in the pit was so they fought as they were trained to od. We've had this argument before, they are not the viscious mindless killers you seem to think they are. They are a dog, doing what they, as a dog have been trained to do. Yes, you cannot deny the history of bull baiting, fighting, but you can neither deny the history of the breed as companions for presidents, companions for children---even blind and deaf children. The versitility of the breed goes far beyond the fighting pit.
If they were the "machines' that you have them as, why was it when I worked with animal control we dealt with case after case after case where family pets were stolen and forced into a pit only to get mauled--and for the most part were killed. Those dogs did not fight anything like the dogs that had been trained to fight. they got killed. You would think if they were the mindless killers you are portraying them to be that would never have happened.
I've got a "game bred" female and a female puppy. I just introduced a 100+ lb intact male dogo to my house within the last month. has there been a dog fight? No, not one. Why? because the female is trained appropriately and the dogo is getting trained appropriately. They are dogs, not machines.
-
so you think pits enjoy getting in with another dog and ripping each other apart? just because a dog may have some animal agression by nature doesnt mean they want or choose to fight. the scum who do this exploit certain characteristics of the breed in order to turn them into fighting dogs. the pitbull wants to please his owner more than anything and if that means fighting another dog thats what will happen. any grand champion fighting pitbull would have turned out to be a extemely friendly family dog if he had gone to the right owner. my dog is purple ribbon apbt who has been going to dog parks since she was a pup. she has been jumped on, rolled around with, on one occassion even bit on the nose by another dog. not once has she ever tried to fight.
I agree with this post, especially whats in bold.
-
your boyfriends a geek
hi
comic relief
-
comic relief
you don't have the video of the cats do you? That'd be a good one to insert about right now.
-
I'm calling bullshit on this one. Just out of curiousity, how many fighting---and I mean real fighting dogs have you really had contact with. I'm not talking about someone who has a big pit he claims is a badass, I'm talking about hardcore proven dogs. It really, really seems from your posts that the numbers are 0.
Yes pits have a history of fighting that cannot be denied, but they also have a long history as devoted family pets. Conditioning in the pit was so they fought as they were trained to od. We've had this argument before, they are not the viscious mindless killers you seem to think they are. They are a dog, doing what they, as a dog have been trained to do. Yes, you cannot deny the history of bull baiting, fighting, but you can neither deny the history of the breed as companions for presidents, companions for children---even blind and deaf children. The versitility of the breed goes far beyond the fighting pit.
If they were the "machines' that you have them as, why was it when I worked with animal control we dealt with case after case after case where family pets were stolen and forced into a pit only to get mauled--and for the most part were killed. Those dogs did not fight anything like the dogs that had been trained to fight. they got killed. You would think if they were the mindless killers you are portraying them to be that would never have happened.
I've got a "game bred" female and a female puppy. I just introduced a 100+ lb intact male dogo to my house within the last month. has there been a dog fight? No, not one. Why? because the female is trained appropriately and the dogo is getting trained appropriately. They are dogs, not machines.
YOur putting words in my mouth.
You have such an emotional investment in this breed that you refuse to open your eyes that the fact of the
extraordinary problems with them. Sounds like you've seen plenty to me.
Not 1 in 100 of your customers will train or work with their animals to the degree you will. Fact is most "pitt" owners in the USA are irresponsible -The Animal is behind a fence that cant contain the animal in a large city.
Accident waiting to happen.
Go walk thru any large city (except the ones w/ breed laws) and you'll see plenty.
Every one of these mauling has 1 thing in common.... "He NEVER acted like that before..." :'(
Well, Boo Hoo it's a little too late then, isn't it?
Its Ok, the ortho surgeons and Lawyers and judges will figure it out.
Dont sweat it Animals are on equal par a human beings...
I got to go, Time for some Pork-chops...
Maybee anyone who eats meat should be required to kill a animal for the privilege, or be force to go vegetarian.
Let them eat their hypocrisy.
-
Our legal system totally rejects your personal opinion that (Certain) animals are equal to humans.
No human society ever has, or could, or will function under that premise.
Are you an idiot?
Please stick to the point and don't mingle other issues into it.
Torture for the sake of torture is wrong. No matter what the "animal" is.
You can lower yourself and find one acceptable, but I will not.
If you think your comments are shocking, they are not, I eat meat, so you having a cheeseburger is no big deal. I had a hamburger at lunch. Grow up.
You are entitled to your opinions, but have an intelligent discussion and maybe people will actually take you seriously.
If not you will probably get banned again for trolling. :)
-
Dont sweat it Animals are on equal par a human beings...
I got to go, Time for some Pork-chops...
Maybee anyone who eats meat should be required to kill a animal for the privilege, or be force to go vegetarian.
Let them eat their hypocrisy.
It is not hypocrisy, there are laws that even food animals are not supposed to be treated cruelly or tortured.
Last warning.
-
It's illegal to kill another human being so I should hope not!-Ok you have been lucky and not all dogs die in the ring either but remember those that have died in the ring, e.g., (Du Ku Kim in 1982) its brutality and it makes money for the topheads and any one who participates is like one of those Dogs in Vick's fighting ring, a pawn. thats the big difference between animal and human fighting. Is Mike Vick going to jail because of the brutality inflicted upon those animals? Or is he going to jail because they didn't have the choice to participate? IMO its the same brutal arena with possibilities of death as the end result. Again I say it's all hypocrisy; some would say, its unfortunate that Du Ku Kim died in the ring but it was his choice, dumbass should have ducked, but you better not make that pit bull fight or you ass will go to jail. I think we have put animal life above human life! BTW I love animals especially dogs I just think its all hypocrisy
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1.Hustle mans reply to Vet is some of the only logical thinking here..
2.His compare of Boom Boom Mancini vs Du Ku kim is SPOT ON...
There is violence, deaths and lots of money at stake...
Ok, What if Dogs were fought but rules were in place to prevent deaths? Even have a Veterinarian there.
(Vet Fill them in on DVM Swinford. I assume Dog fighting was not a crime in his day?)
Would that be any different than humans fighting?
We fight people very violently ; injure and sometimes kill them, But dont you dare do it to a DOG!
A couple here seem to think animal life is as valuable as human life. Which animals, who decides?
There is NO society/ culture on the planet w/ its laws and values predicated on such nonsense as animals equal to humans.
It would cease to function.
-
Interesting question.
For those of you who think humans and animals are equal:
Would it be ok if the dogs were stopped before any serious harm were done?
Ie, if the dogs were supervised under rules similar to UFC?
-
Would it be ok if the dogs were stopped before any serious harm were done?
Ie, if the dogs were supervised under rules similar to UFC?
interesting point there zack
-
Interesting question.
For those of you who think humans and animals are equal:
Would it be ok if the dogs were stopped before any serious harm were done?
Ie, if the dogs were supervised under rules similar to UFC?
Swinford was a Vet who developed the "Swinford bandogge". 1/2 Pitt 1/2 Mastiffe. It was bred to be the ultimate home defense K9, but Swinford would only use Pitt tested stock. I believe he attended fights and
gave attention to the animals. He was in close contact w/ well know Dog fighters before it was a crime.
His Most famous Dog was Named Bantu. His fights are well recorded.
Breeding stock from some of these lines is very valuable.
http://americanpitdog.com/_wsn/page2.html
-
some of these comments are just absurd. it makes me wonder if some people actually know what takes place at a dog fight. stop making any comparisons to boxing, ufc, ect. because it is ridiculous.
-
some of these comments are just absurd. it makes me wonder if some people actually know what takes place at a dog fight. stop making any comparisons to boxing, ufc, ect. because it is ridiculous.
Click the Links and learn what Dog Fighting is and was about.
So, YOU HAVE BEEN TO A DOG FIGHT? IS THAT NOT A FELONY?
You act like you Know so much.....
Don't just say something is ridiculous. Please use logic. I put a very precise comparison of fighting dogs and humans.
I and others inquired if YOUR KIND thinks it would be OK if animals were fought to the same standards a human fighters. THAT IS the gist of this thread...
State your thoughts with well reasoned logic. If you are capable.
-
Click the Links and learn what Dog Fighting is and was about.
So, YOU HAVE BEEN TO A DOG FIGHT? IS THAT NOT A FELONY?
You act like you Know so much.....
Don't just say something is ridiculous. Please use logic. I put a very precise comparison of fighting dogs and humans.
I and others inquired if YOUR KIND thinks it would be OK if animals were fought to the same standards a human fighters. THAT IS the gist of this thread...
State your thoughts with well reasoned logic. If you are capable.
no i have not been to a dog fight but i am very familiar with what takes place not only at the fight but what goes into training them to fight.
i have already stated in this thread why the comparison of dog fighting to boxing, ufc is ridiculous.
i do not think its ok to fight dogs under any circumstances. the bottom line is still that the dog has no choice, no free will. you can try to come up with any rules or regulations you want but it does not change that fact. dog fighting of any kind can only be brutal and inhumane.
-
no i have not been to a dog fight but i am very familiar with what takes place not only at the fight but what goes into training them to fight.
i have already stated in this thread why the comparison of dog fighting to boxing, ufc is ridiculous.
i do not think its ok to fight dogs under any circumstances. the bottom line is still that the dog has no choice, no free will. you can try to come up with any rules or regulations you want but it does not change that fact. dog fighting of any kind can only be brutal and inhumane.
The dog can, and some do, chose not to fight. They Kill those Dogs. But the Dogs dont know that.
Winners were bred. THAT is still the Genetic make up of All True Pitts.
So, youve never been to a fight but you know all about it.... ::)
Thats called talking out your ass in my parts.
Read up Dumbass.
http://www.classicpitbulls.com/museum.htm
-
I guess no one watched the video I posted on page 2?
-
The dog can, and some do, chose not to fight. They Kill those Dogs. But the Dogs dont know that.
Winners were bred. THAT is still the Genetic make up of All True Pitts.
So, youve never been to a fight but you know all about it.... ::)
Thats called talking out your ass in my parts.
Read up Dumbass.
http://www.classicpitbulls.com/museum.htm
so since i have never and would never attend a pitbull fight i cant know all about it? ::)
i am a advocate for the true apbt so i make it my business to know such things. i am very familiar with the history of the breed and all other issues regarding pitbulls.
i do find it comical that you call me a dumbass yet you continue to misspell pitbull in every one of your posts.
-
Interesting question.
For those of you who think humans and animals are equal:
Would it be ok if the dogs were stopped before any serious harm were done?
Ie, if the dogs were supervised under rules similar to UFC?
You REALLY don't listen do you? The comments were made that no living being should be tortured or purposely treated cruelly. I think animals and humans ARE equal in that regard. Is that really that difficult to understand? I have only said that 3-4 times now? I don't think anyone has stated that they are a vegetarian so obviously human needs are considered above animals. It is not a need to torture or treat something cruel just to do it. I think it lowers the human race to say "you need to be sadistic? that's not right but go do it on an animal if you have to". It is wrong, and if we really do have the higher thinking that we claim we do, we would see that it is wrong in many many ways. Can you grasp that?
And no it would not be ok. What is serious harm? Considering their means of fighting is teeth how could you have a fight without serious harm? Plus you are talking animals here, why purposely train animals to fight? Why try and make them animal aggressive? Doesn't sound safe for the public. Since humans are supposed to have a higher learning sense ::), we are not concerned if a boxer or UFC fighter is on the street.
-
You REALLY don't listen do you? The comments were made that no living being should be tortured or purposely treated cruelly. I think animals and humans ARE equal in that regard. Is that really that difficult to understand? I have only said that 3-4 times now?
Can you grasp that?
And no it would not be ok. What is serious harm?
Can YOU Grasp THIS - Animals and Humans are not equals. The fact we kill and eat Animals ought to make that clear to even the simplest mind.
Killing and/ or Tortureing a Human is a much worse thing. Grasp That.
If Killing every one of these dogs saved even a few kids faces, it would be a Great trade.
At least the Dog Fighters have the sense to chain and contain their animals, unlike every Dumbass Dog Owner that says.....
" Oh, He never showed any agression before, I NEVER THOUGHT he'd do THAT" - After a Mauling!
Thats No different than saying - " I didnt think the gun was loaded".
Key Point - They both Didnt think!
These dogs were bred to fight for centuries. Its deep in their make up. Suggesting they are MADE that way by the owner is stupid. Why dont they fight Labs and Great Danes and Collies then?
Boxing, Muay Thai, UFC, Pro wresting, Even Pro Football are very violent and extract a heavy toll on the human combatants. No we dont kill the Human Losers today, But those days are in our past too.
Homicide is way different than killing a animal.
-
Can YOU Grasp THIS - Animals and Humans are not equals. The fact we kill and eat Animals ought to make that clear to even the simplest mind.
Killing and/ or Tortureing a Human is a much worse thing. Grasp That.
No, both show a disregard for life and compassion.
You can lower yourself and say torturing one living thing over another is better, but I will not. If man is the higher species then we should be able to grasp that. Once you say torture and cruelty is fine, you have lowered yourself beneath animals.
Tell me, what has man done for the Earth? Has man contributed anything? What is man's purpose? I see no purpose for man. Man destroys and wastes everything he comes in contact with. Man is at the top of the food chain, but even that is not needed on Earth. Animals like sharks and lions that are at the top in the animal food chain have a purpose, they eat the old and sick and cull numbers of animals keeping a balance so everything may go on. Man has to breed animals to survive so we don't even have the purpose of keeping a balance in nature. Man has caused extinction of many animals either by over hunting, destroying habitats, or by introducing non native species that then kill off the native species. How much scrambling has man done to try and fix it's mistakes? Man wages war on each other over anything. You don't see animals going to war on each other to the point that they have destroyed their homelands and are barely surviving.
Seems like man has done a lot with it's ability for higher thinking. ::)
Man is expendable on this planet, animals are not, I think that puts one higher than the other. :)
-
And btw Trab, nice quoting and leaving out a key point in my quote.
You REALLY don't listen do you? The comments were made that no living being should be tortured or purposely treated cruelly. I think animals and humans ARE equal in that regard. Is that really that difficult to understand? I have only said that 3-4 times now? I don't think anyone has stated that they are a vegetarian so obviously human needs are considered above animals.
Can YOU Grasp THIS - Animals and Humans are not equals. The fact we kill and eat Animals ought to make that clear to even the simplest mind.
::)
-
Tell me, what has man done for the Earth? Has man contributed anything? What is man's purpose? I see no purpose for man. Man destroys and wastes everything he comes in contact with. Man is at the top of the food chain, but even that is not needed on Earth. Animals like sharks and lions that are at the top in the animal food chain have a purpose, they eat the old and sick and cull numbers of animals keeping a balance so everything may go on. Man has to breed animals to survive so we don't even have the purpose of keeping a balance in nature. Man has caused extinction of many animals either by over hunting, destroying habitats, or by introducing non native species that then kill off the native species. How much scrambling has man done to try and fix it's mistakes? Man wages war on each other over anything. You don't see animals going to war on each other to the point that they have destroyed their homelands and are barely surviving.
Seems like man has done a lot with it's ability for higher thinking. ::)
Man is expendable on this planet, animals are not, I think that puts one higher than the other. :)
Flower this series of questions and comments are worthy of their own thread I just don't with forum they should go on but you have made some thought provoking points worthy of discussion. Especially the "I see no purpose for man" comment, I feel your passion but I really would like to know exactly what you mean here and what does this say about what you think about yourself! But I think this should be discussed on or in another board and thread. What do you think shall we go for it?
-
Flower this series of questions and comments are worthy of their own thread I just don't with forum they should go on but you have made some thought provoking points worthy of discussion. Especially the "I see no purpose for man" comment, I feel your passion but I really would like to know exactly what you mean here and what does this say about what you think about yourself! But I think this should be discussed on or in another board and thread. What do you think shall we go for it?
I thought about putting that on the General Board but wanted it to be read in this thread. I will copy it and start a thread on the General Board. It would be interesting to read other peoples comments.
In my "I see no purpose in man" comment I mean that man shouldn't really hold itself that much higher than other animals on this planet. If you look at having a purpose on this planet, man has none. We have abused our higher status IMO. We have done nothing to deserver a higher status except to be made with higher brain and thinking capabilities which don't seem to have been put to good use in a lot of cases.
Man may have had a purpose way back when, the Indians are a good example of man LIVING with the world and all it's inhabitants, and not just LIVING OFF the world. Man is a parasite basically.
When I read about the horrors man inflicts upon man, along with cruelty to other creatures, part of me is disgusted to be called a human. I don't fear animals in this world, I fear the people in this world. And when I think that I could have a crime committed against me by a person, against the thought of having an animal attack me, which one is more horrible from a humanity point? The one done by the thinking, feeling, higher creature, or the lower animal?
-
Man may have had a purpose way back when, the Indians are a good example of man LIVING with the world and all it's inhabitants, and not just LIVING OFF the world.
Indians?
Perhaps you're referring to native Americans.
In that case, I'd like to see you back up the statement about them living with the world.
If that was the case back then, why aren't they doing it anymore, I wonder?
It's been shown again and again to be a myth.
-
Indians?
Perhaps you're referring to native Americans.
In that case, I'd like to see you back up the statement about them living with the world.
If that was the case back then, why aren't they doing it anymore, I wonder?
It's been shown again and again to be a myth.
they plundered the Earth? Yes, Native Americans would be the PC term. Seems if I remember my history correctly they were killed off or had to adjust to "the white mans" way of living.
Can you name one purpose for man?
-
they plundered the Earth? Yes, Native Americans would be the PC term. Seems if I remember my history correctly they were killed off or had to adjust to "the white mans" way of living.
Can you name one purpose for man?
Damn, I can't believe I am doing this again but Iagree with you! I live in Maryland and the Native Americans here have been thoroughly educated on what happened between their ancestors and those that deceived them for selfish gain. Shame!
-
Indians?
Perhaps you're referring to native Americans.
In that case, I'd like to see you back up the statement about them living with the world.
If that was the case back then, why aren't they doing it anymore, I wonder?
It's been shown again and again to be a myth.
The FACT is they Killed as much game as possible, whenever possible. They has to, Their weapons were crude.
Theres evidence of mass stampeding of Buffalo and Mammoth off cliffs by the earliest Americans.
THey killed as many as they could.
Its a TOTAL MYTH that they "Lived in Harmony with the land". "Killing only what they could eat at the moment".
-
The FACT is they Killed as much game as possible, whenever possible. They has to, Their weapons were crude.
Theres evidence of mass stampeding of Buffalo and Mammoth off cliffs by the earliest Americans.
THey killed as many as they could.
Its a TOTAL MYTH that they "Lived in Harmony with the land". "Killing only what they could eat at the moment".
I will concede that whether it is true or not. That just means man has always been a parasite. ;D
-
The FACT is they Killed as much game as possible, whenever possible. They has to, Their weapons were crude.
Theres evidence of mass stampeding of Buffalo and Mammoth off cliffs by the earliest Americans.
THey killed as many as they could.
Its a TOTAL MYTH that they "Lived in Harmony with the land". "Killing only what they could eat at the moment".
No...your facts are little off....
They killed only what they could use, store, & live off from day to day. You're talking about a very rare circumstance where a stampede's off a cliff was the ony 'weapon' they could come up with or had at the moment. Early Native Americans used that as a last resort as it wasted more than they could utilize. If you want to talk about Buffalo's..they followed the herd & it came apart of their tribe. They would follow the herd as they free roamed & killed what was required for eating, clothes, tools, etc... Native Americans more on the East Coast were more dependent on hunting parties. They had more assets to fishing...but in most tribes....that was left of to the women & children.
I have a small amount of Native American in my gene pool like most people do. My great grandmother & grandfather were 1/2 Native American. Not that means anything...but it was always passed on when we hunted it was only for what we could utilize & anything other than that...was deemed wrong, unnecessary, & the start of a destruction of the food chain. Remember....back then they had no source of keeping meat cold. Meat can be made into 'jerky' but still doesn't have an undated shelf life.
-
No...your facts are little off....
They killed only what they could use, store, & live off from day to day. You're talking about a very rare circumstance where a stampede's off a cliff was the ony 'weapon' they could come up with or had at the moment. Early Native Americans used that as a last resort as it wasted more than they could utilize. If you want to talk about Buffalo's..they followed the herd & it came apart of their tribe. They would follow the herd as they free roamed & killed what was required for eating, clothes, tools, etc... Native Americans more on the East Coast were more dependent on hunting parties. They had more assets to fishing...but in most tribes....that was left of to the women & children.
I have a small amount of Native American in my gene pool like most people do. My great grandmother & grandfather were 1/2 Native American. Not that means anything...but it was always passed on when we hunted it was only for what we could utilize & anything other than that...was deemed wrong, unnecessary, & the start of a destruction of the food chain. Remember....back then they had no source of keeping meat cold. Meat can be made into 'jerky' but still doesn't have an undated shelf life.
The FACT IS THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO KNOW FOR SURE - ARE DEAD!!
Historical evidence does not support your PC Fantasy. In Fact it points in the other direction.
KILLING, Saving and storing as much as possible for lean times - AS YOU POINT OUT!
-
Show me evidence otherwise.....
looks like your fantasy is something only you believe (and only evidence around) to support your lavish claims
-
as much as it irks me to say it, trab's right, Indians did use the stampede method to kill more buffalo than they needed.
one of the biggest reasons they didn't have as much of an impact on the environment was that there were relatively few of them.
also, over the millenia, they had developed a way to live w nature that was more accommodating than the colonials' we're going to turn this land into jolly old england method.
-
You're looking at how many tribes lived off buffalo or were dependent on them?
Then take that same percentage.....& look who had used the stampede method.
As I said....small percent.
You guys look at all Native Americans being in teepees & hunting Buffalo
::)
-
We are deviating off the 'man is a parasite' topic!!
trab, since you are saying man has always been a selfish wasteful bastard, why is man any better than an animal?
Because our brain is higher developed? That's it? If so what good has man done with this higher level?
Why does Earth even need the animal man?
(there is a thread on the General board if anyone wishes to post there using your opposable thumb) :)
-
NOTE TO FLOWER - I DONT READ YOUR POSTS.
-
NOTE TO FLOWER - I DONT READ YOUR POSTS.
that's one way to avoid answering questions you can't!!
;D
I get the feeling that you do read them, why else make this post? :D
-
We are deviating off the 'man is a parasite' topic!!
trab, since you are saying man has always been a selfish wasteful bastard, why is man any better than an animal?
Because our brain is higher developed? That's it? If so what good has man done with this higher level?
Why does Earth even need the animal man?
(there is a thread on the General board if anyone wishes to post there using your opposable thumb) :)
one of the things I like about the "human is superior" argument is that the general parameters used---ie the measure of the animals intelligence is designed around human parameters. that alone gives a bias to humans as being the "superior" animal and it gives a bias to the very few capable of communicating in human means--such as gorillas and chimps signing or dolphins keying or african greys talking (all groups of animals without a doubt that the average educated individual will say are "intelligent") It also seriously cracks me up. When I did my degree in education (I have a BSed in Science Ed) in the early 1990's there was this huge push to evaluate students "based on their abilities" meaning give evaluations to maximize the abilities of the individual student. Yet humans hypocritically turn around and rarely attempt to evaluate animals in a nonhuman way.
I think its one of mankinds great flaws.
-
The FACT is they Killed as much game as possible, whenever possible. They has to, Their weapons were crude.
Theres evidence of mass stampeding of Buffalo and Mammoth off cliffs by the earliest Americans.
THey killed as many as they could.
Its a TOTAL MYTH that they "Lived in Harmony with the land". "Killing only what they could eat at the moment".
LOL. I asked the two American Indians I work with about this over lunch (one is penobscot, the other is Cherokee). They both said you needed to brush up on your history, you dont' know what the hell you are talking about. ;D
-
LOL. I asked the two American Indians I work with about this over lunch (one is penobscot, the other is Cherokee). They both said you needed to brush up on your history, you dont' know what the hell you are talking about. ;D
Enough PC knee bending to the "Native Americans" or Whatever they want to be called these days.
Were they around back then? They must be getting up in age?
You tell me if a hunter gatherer has the chance to kill 10 ducks he thinks "Oh, Me can onwee eat three now..".?
-
LOL. I asked the two American Indians I work with about this over lunch (one is penobscot, the other is Cherokee). They both said you needed to brush up on your history, you dont' know what the hell you are talking about. ;D
I did read that indians used to take their dogs...tie a heavy chain to them....& trained them to kill Buffalo's
;D
-
LOL. I asked the two American Indians I work with about this over lunch (one is penobscot, the other is Cherokee). They both said you needed to brush up on your history, you dont' know what the hell you are talking about. ;D
not a lot of buffalo east of the Appalachians, were there? ;D
nice try though. ROFL.
edit: Perhaps I should spell it out. Penobscot and cherokee both hail from east of the appalachians. although the cherokee have been pushed west lately . . .
-
not a lot of buffalo east of the Appalachians, were there? ;D
nice try though. ROFL.
edit: Perhaps I should spell it out. Penobscot and cherokee both hail from east of the appalachians. although the cherokee have been pushed west lately . . .
Shit, you caught me. :D :P
Its sort of like the many cliffs in Kansas. :P
I dont' live in the Appalachains---well, not techinically although I guess you could call it the "foothills". The Penobscot I work with is transplanted from the far Northeast. The Cherokee is a native to this state, but not this immediate area.
-
Is there a difference between killing dogs or chickens that don't perform in the fight arena (FYI I am against Dog fighting and Cock fighting etc.) or killing a big buck for his antlers or even snatching a fish out of water then throwing it back with a hole in its mouth or body?
True MVick screwed up bad and he should pay his debt but what about those hunters that kill just for trophies or sports where human beings are matched against one another often maiming and even sometimes killing their opp e.g., boxing, ufc, Football, La Crosse and Hockey etc.? Why is MVick's situation any different?
IMHO, boxing and UFC is the human version of Dog fighting and/or Cock fighting; Should these sports be illegal from a "brutality" point of view?
You view on this.
I've avoided this thread because I knew there would be some fruitcake defending Vick.............
Vick is not going to jail for brutality, he's going to jail for killing animals, running a dogfighting org., betting, taking bets, and funding the ILLEGAL operation.
Now if you can't see a difference between two guys willingly beating each other up for money and two dogs being bred to kill (rape stand to breed) then you're an idiot.
Really, I read some of your posts in this thread and I realized I don't have a high opinion of you.
-
I've avoided this thread because I knew there would be some fruitcake defending Vick.............
Vick is not going to jail for brutality, he's going to jail for killing animals, running a dogfighting org., betting, taking bets, and funding the ILLEGAL operation.
Now if you can't see a difference between two guys willingly beating each other up for money and two dogs being bred to kill (rape stand to breed) then you're an idiot.
Really, I read some of your posts in this thread and I realized I don't have a high opinion of you.
Nice to meet you too Chaos!
It is unfortunate that you feel this way about me because of a few questions asked. It is apparent that you have not fully comprehended this thread or my post!
Let me set straight once and for all; I do not support Vick in this instance or the brutality that exists in the (so called) sports of Dog fighting, Dog Racing, Cock fighting, Bull fighting, Beta fish fighting, Preying Mantis Fighting, Trophy Hunting etc!
Sorry you could not handle this discussion without resorting to insults.
I asked a question others replied with their opinions about the QUESTION only few insulted me (you were one), why I don't know; you don't even know me?
I have a few questions for you CHAOS;
1) What upsets you the most here about this thread; is it the questions I asked and comments I made?
2) Which is morally apprehensible to you; the killing dogs part or is it the gambling or both?
3) If no dogs were killed but gambling took place, would this sport be ok?
4) At what point did dog fighting start to get under your skin?
5) If this were two Beta fish with bets being made on who would win, would you be this pissed at me for asking the same question? Remember, Betas don't have to be trained to fight.
6) Please tell me, why are you pissed at me again?
-
OMG Chaos I had a look at your Avatar! Listen you don't have to respond lol! Take care of yourself mate!
-
Nice to meet you too Chaos!
It is unfortunate that you feel this way about me because of a few questions asked. It is apparent that you have not fully comprehended this thread or my post!
Let me set straight once and for all; I do not support Vick in this instance or the brutality that exists in the (so called) sports of Dog fighting, Dog Racing, Cock fighting, Bull fighting, Beta fish fighting, Preying Mantis Fighting, Trophy Hunting etc!
Sorry you could not handle this discussion without resorting to insults.
I asked a question others replied with their opinions about the QUESTION only few insulted me (you were one), why I don't know; you don't even know me?
I have a few questions for you CHAOS;
1) What upsets you the most here about this thread; is it the questions I asked and comments I made? the comments you made, comparing boxing, ufc, nartial arts to dog fighting is asinine.
2) Which is morally apprehensible to you; the killing dogs part or is it the gambling or both? Fighting dogs for the enjoyment of people is disgusting, these dogs are born and bred for this, unlike people that choose to fight, gambling in itself doesn't bother me at all, the dogfighting does
3) If no dogs were killed but gambling took place, would this sport be ok? No this "sport" would not be OK, it has been deemed illegal and it should be, this isn't like two guys hitting each other with a ref to stop the fight when one cannot compete any further or gives up
4) At what point did dog fighting start to get under your skin?
5) If this were two Beta fish with bets being made on who would win, would you be this pissed at me for asking the same question? Remember, Betas don't have to be trained to fight. no they don't have to be trained but they do have to be put in the same tank, and fully knowing the results would make you an asshole for doing that.
6) Please tell me, why are you pissed at me again?never said I was pissed at you, I don't think your comparisons are legitimate, you cannot compare people with animals. The biggest difference, and I've already read several posts telling you this and you keep ignoring them, PEOPLE HAVE A CHOICE AND CHOSE TO TRAIN AND BE DISCIPLINED TO FIGHT, THESE DOGS DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THE LOSER AT A UFC FIGHT ISN'T HUNG BY HIS NECK AND BEATEN TO DEATH FOR LOSING.
any more questions, Mr hustle?
-
It is unfortunate that you feel this way about me because of a few questions asked. It is apparent that you have not fully comprehended this thread or my post!
1) What upsets you the most here about this thread; is it the questions I asked and comments I made?
2) Which is morally apprehensible to you; the killing dogs part or is it the gambling or both?
3) If no dogs were killed but gambling took place, would this sport be ok?
4) At what point did dog fighting start to get under your skin?
5) If this were two Beta fish with bets being made on who would win, would you be this pissed at me for asking the same question? Remember, Betas don't have to be trained to fight.
6) Please tell me, why are you pissed at me again?
because you started this thread by comparing sports such as boxing and ufc with dog fighting. you said in your opinion those sports were human versions of dog fighting.
i wondering if you have actually ever seen what goes on at a dog fight? or how these dog are treated to make them fight?
this video may be helpfull...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=737567328566379082
-
because you started this thread by comparing sports such as boxing and ufc with dog fighting. you said in your opinion those sports were human versions of dog fighting.
i wondering if you have actually ever seen what goes on at a dog fight? or how these dog are treated to make them fight? Yes, I have! I am originally form Detroit, Mich which is notorious for underground networks e.g., dog fighting gambling rings. I grew up seeing this kind of shit taking place everyday and it wasn't just pitbulls either, they used german shephards, boxers etc., dogs you would not even think would fight so I know the horrors of this brutal sport.
I thought I made it clear when I said this; "Let me set the record straight once and for all; I do not support Vick in this instance or the brutality that exists in the (so called) sports of Dog fighting, Dog Racing, Cock fighting, Bull fighting, Beta fish fighting, Preying Mantis Fighting, Trophy Hunting etc!" Let me also add that gladiator type matches also took place; bare fist fights for money in my old neighborhood but especially in other countries where there are no rules.
I have been around the world many times and I think I am entitled to an opinion on what I think is brutal or not! So you see I am not uneducated about these type of goings on, the reason for the post was to see what others thought about these so called sports and if they see the same similiarities that I see. It seems to me in many cases here the only reason some got upset with me was because I made a semblance to brutal human sports; sports they have chosen to participate in, and to one which is illegal that involves animals.
this video may be helpfull...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=737567328566379082
I have already posted this video, see pages 2 & 3. Hope this helps you!
-
I have already posted this video, see pages 2 & 3. Hope this helps you!
ok then, so you do know all about underground dog fighting networks yet you still referred to boxing and ufc as the human version of dog fighting. ::)
thanks
-
ok then, so you do know all about underground dog fighting networks yet you still referred to boxing and ufc as the human version of dog fighting. ::)
thanks
Yes I did and will continue to see them as similiar and brutal sports! I think any sporting event that pits two individual opponents (Human or Animal) against each other (willingly or not for entertainment) is brutality. Again please read what I said about Du Ku Kim, he died in the boxing ring do you not consider that brutality.
&mode=related&search=
-
Yes I did and will continue to see them as similiar and brutal sports! I think any sporting event that pits two individual opponents (Human or Animal) against each other (willingly or not for entertainment) is brutality. Again please read what I said about Du Ku Kim, he died in the boxing ring do you not consider that brutality.
&mode=related&search=
1. once again dogs have no free will. they do not have a choice to fight or not to fight.
2. boxing and ufc are closely regulated and monitored sports while dog fighting is cruel, vicious, inhumane. dogs are thrown in this pit with the intention of fighting till the death or atleast untill one of the dogs is so badly injured he cannot continue. in which case that dog is brutaly killed anyways. there are no standing 8 counts, corner men, cut men, doctors. a dog can not tap out or throw in the towel when they cant continue.
3. ufc fighters and boxers are not electocuted, drown, hung, shot, ect for losing a fight. yes there have been boxers who have died after a fight but this is a very rare occurrence. a baseball coach recently died after taking a line drive to the head, do you want to call baseball as brutal as dog fighting? these boxers know what they are getting into when they step into the ring and they may come away with a cracked rib or broken nose. if they cant deal with those chances they can always say no mas and walk away.
bottom line is calling the sports of boxing and ufc, human forms of dog fighting is just complete nonsense. maybe one day if dog fighting becomes an olympic sport you can compare them. until that time comes there is absolutely no comparison.
-
1. once again dogs have no free will. they do not have a choice to fight or not to fight.
2. boxing and ufc are closely regulated and monitored sports while dog fighting is cruel, vicious, inhumane. dogs are thrown in this pit with the intention of fighting till the death or atleast untill one of the dogs is so badly injured he cannot continue. in which case that dog is brutaly killed anyways. there are no standing 8 counts, corner men, cut men, doctors. a dog can not tap out or throw in the towel when they cant continue.
3. ufc fighters and boxers are not electocuted, drown, hung, shot, ect for losing a fight. yes there have been boxers who have died after a fight but this is a very rare occurrence. a baseball coach recently died after taking a line drive to the head, do you want to call baseball as brutal as dog fighting? these boxers know what they are getting into when they step into the ring and they may come away with a cracked rib or broken nose. if they cant deal with those chances they can always say no mas and walk away.
bottom line is calling the sports of boxing and ufc, human forms of dog fighting is just complete nonsense. maybe one day if dog fighting becomes an olympic sport you can compare them. until that time comes there is absolutely no comparison.
Opinions are like what again? Thanks for your post they helped a lot!
-
1. once again dogs have no free will. they do not have a choice to fight or not to fight.
2. boxing and ufc are closely regulated and monitored sports while dog fighting is cruel, vicious, inhumane. dogs are thrown in this pit with the intention of fighting till the death or atleast untill one of the dogs is so badly injured he cannot continue. in which case that dog is brutaly killed anyways. there are no standing 8 counts, corner men, cut men, doctors. a dog can not tap out or throw in the towel when they cant continue.
3. ufc fighters and boxers are not electocuted, drown, hung, shot, ect for losing a fight. yes there have been boxers who have died after a fight but this is a very rare occurrence. a baseball coach recently died after taking a line drive to the head, do you want to call baseball as brutal as dog fighting? these boxers know what they are getting into when they step into the ring and they may come away with a cracked rib or broken nose. if they cant deal with those chances they can always say no mas and walk away.
bottom line is calling the sports of boxing and ufc, human forms of dog fighting is just complete nonsense. maybe one day if dog fighting becomes an olympic sport you can compare them. until that time comes there is absolutely no comparison.
so many pages wasted trying to explain to this idiot the difference between people and animals fighting ::)
now I believe this poofster is just trying to keep stirring up shit..........just let it go man
-
so many pages wasted trying to explain to this idiot the difference between people and animals fighting ::)
now I believe this poofster is just trying to keep stirring up shit..........just let it go man
I agree