Bork Bork!
 FAQ  •  Search  •  Memberlist  •  Usergroups   •  Register  •  Profile  •  Log in to check your private messages  •  Log in
 Smugglers Hid Heroin in Puppies' Bellies View next topic
View previous topic
Post new topicReply to topic
Author Message
PhillyJeep
Tech House Member


Joined: 21 Jan 2004
Posts: 354
Location: Wilmington, DE

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:18 am Reply with quoteBack to top

I can't even fathom how someone could be this heartless and evil.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050105/od_nm/crime_colombia_dc

_________________
"Just because a dog is a good barker does not make
him a good dog.
Just because a man is a good
talker does not make him a good man."

- Lao Tzu
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's websiteAIM AddressYahoo MessengerICQ Number
Steveness
His Royal Whiteness


Joined: 05 May 2003
Posts: 1581
Location: Slower Lower... Maryland?

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2005 12:32 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

PhillyJeep wrote:
I can't even fathom how someone could be this heartless and evil.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050105/od_nm/crime_colombia_dc


Seriously. You can get so much more in a full-grown dog.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Uty
Tang Soo Techie


Joined: 03 May 2003
Posts: 9583
Location: On a never ending quest to save my girlfriend

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2005 1:58 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

I feel anyone with an "outcry/angst" reaction to this article is a complete and total hypocrit unless they're also vegan. Here's the basic logic.

Surgically implanting a bag of drugs in a puppy is wrong! The puppy is uncomfortable with this bag inside it, and could die if it burts.

Drinking cow-milk is a-ok! The cow is in a state of constant torture due to hormone injections biochemically decieves the animal into thinking she is pregnant 24/7. But I like milk, and the cow isn't very cute, so its ok.

Again - hypocricy. If you're going to decry systematic cruelty to animals for profit then stop using all products made from animals.

_________________
Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF
All my base
Are belong to you
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailAIM Address
bjciii
Discount Oral Pleasure


Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 2071
Location: N39� 44' 66.952" / W75� 34' 58.562"

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2005 2:37 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

But puppies are cute and cuddly and all that stuff. Cows are just big steaks with legs.

_________________
"The way I see it, there's so much love and beauty in the world, and someone has to balance that shit out." -- Davan
http://www.SomethingPositive.net/ (10/09/2004)
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's websiteAIM AddressYahoo MessengerMSN Messenger
Stealthr4v3r
Mother Superior


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 3113
Location: West Chester, PA

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2005 2:38 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

*yawn* what? you mean to tell me that people use double standards?! holy shit, what is next? Objectification of women? Racial discrimination?
View user's profileSend private messageAIM Address
Stoker
I is illiterate


Joined: 21 Nov 2003
Posts: 176
Location: Newark, DE

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2005 3:05 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Image

_________________
Evil is only live spelled backwards
And we all want to do that, don't we?
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's websiteAIM AddressYahoo MessengerMSN MessengerICQ Number
Uty
Tang Soo Techie


Joined: 03 May 2003
Posts: 9583
Location: On a never ending quest to save my girlfriend

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2005 3:21 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

*Makes 3 suxx vs. diff 8, Self-Control, and refrains from comment*

_________________
Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF
All my base
Are belong to you
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailAIM Address
Kerrie
Forum Queen


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 103
Location: Greenbelt, MD, Home of Democracy

PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2005 5:27 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Uty wrote:
Drinking cow-milk is a-ok! The cow is in a state of constant torture due to hormone injections biochemically decieves the animal into thinking she is pregnant 24/7. But I like milk, and the cow isn't very cute, so its ok.


Ok, so to clarify... is the cow in torture because she's "pregnant" or as a side effect of the hormonal injections? Because birth control biochemically decieves the female human animal into thinking she is pregnant 24/7 (or at least for every 3 weeks out of 4), and I would hardly count that as torture. Furthermore, if pregnancy => torture.... well, the conclusion is left as an exercise for the reader.

Although to be fair, you're wrong anyway; the hormones would convince the cows they were constantly postpartum.

_________________
"I'm the Puppymaster. I control the puppies."
--Jhonen Vasquez
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's websiteAIM Address
Uty
Tang Soo Techie


Joined: 03 May 2003
Posts: 9583
Location: On a never ending quest to save my girlfriend

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2005 9:21 am Reply with quoteBack to top

The cow is injected with hormones that fools her biochemistry into thinking that she is pregnant so she produces more milk. 24/7. I'm not saying pregnancy is torture but damn imagine an entire lifetime of it. Thats kinda different. Maybe I'm wrong, but hey, there's a shitload of other examples. Ever been to a slaughterhouse? Or the places where they make sure makeup is safe for human skin by performing some of the most unspeakable acts of cruelty ever imagined? My point is that unless you forsake all products made from animals, you're supporting and endorsing systematic cruelty to animals. If no one bought these products, it would stop. But it all comes down to a matter of convenience, doesn't it?

_________________
Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF
All my base
Are belong to you
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailAIM Address
Stealthr4v3r
Mother Superior


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 3113
Location: West Chester, PA

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2005 9:30 am Reply with quoteBack to top

Uty wrote:
The cow is injected with hormones that fools her biochemistry into thinking that she is pregnant so she produces more milk. 24/7. I'm not saying pregnancy is torture but damn imagine an entire lifetime of it. Thats kinda different. Maybe I'm wrong, but hey, there's a shitload of other examples. Ever been to a slaughterhouse? Or the places where they make sure makeup is safe for human skin by performing some of the most unspeakable acts of cruelty ever imagined? My point is that unless you forsake all products made from animals, you're supporting and endorsing systematic cruelty to animals. If no one bought these products, it would stop. But it all comes down to a matter of convenience, doesn't it?



So your point is that you are fine with mutilating puppies.
View user's profileSend private messageAIM Address
MajorKong
Sentient Acronym Storage Facility


Joined: 24 Jul 2003
Posts: 1100
Location: Home Sweet Bunker

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2005 9:45 am Reply with quoteBack to top

During my medic days, I witnessed two young people with broken condoms containing drugs in their gut. Patient 1 died in the State Police cell from cocaine OD. Patient 2 was lucky - she was locked up in the same troop, but the troopers were more aware of the symptoms and called us. Patient 2 was also lucky - they had ingested a load of heroin, but we were able to intervene with Narcan and CPR. Patient 2 survived, but only by the skin of their teeth.

We saw a LOT of overdoses in the early-mid 80s. I found it pretty hard to feel too sorry for them, as they were nearly all self-inflicted (with the exception of one young child who got into mom's methadone in orange juice). But we always did the best we could and most of them survived.

_________________
John Scoggin
Token Old Guy of TechHouse
Army Signal - You can talk about us, but you can't talk without us!
Manuevers without Signal is just camping in the woods.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Uty
Tang Soo Techie


Joined: 03 May 2003
Posts: 9583
Location: On a never ending quest to save my girlfriend

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:05 am Reply with quoteBack to top

Stealthr4v3r wrote:
Uty wrote:
The cow is injected with hormones that fools her biochemistry into thinking that she is pregnant so she produces more milk. 24/7. I'm not saying pregnancy is torture but damn imagine an entire lifetime of it. Thats kinda different. Maybe I'm wrong, but hey, there's a shitload of other examples. Ever been to a slaughterhouse? Or the places where they make sure makeup is safe for human skin by performing some of the most unspeakable acts of cruelty ever imagined? My point is that unless you forsake all products made from animals, you're supporting and endorsing systematic cruelty to animals. If no one bought these products, it would stop. But it all comes down to a matter of convenience, doesn't it?



So your point is that you are fine with mutilating puppies.


Rob, you're smarter than that. I'm saying there's no point in being outraged when far worse is happening so we can look better and eat. Cruelty is a byproduct of our society, all the leftist hippies accepted that long ago while others chose to simply ignore it. (Unless the animal is cute, oh no!)

_________________
Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF
All my base
Are belong to you
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailAIM Address
bjciii
Discount Oral Pleasure


Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 2071
Location: N39� 44' 66.952" / W75� 34' 58.562"

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:39 am Reply with quoteBack to top

Sorry Uty... it's just the way things are. We are getting so programmed that characters abusing women aren't even going to the loathsome end of the spectrum that they once were. If Paul Baggadonuts from the TV show "Generic Mafia Show" smacks his wife around and leaves the house, the audience might say "he shouldn't have done that" but you have Paul kick a cat or a dog in the street and the audience flips out and says "Shoot the fucker."

I can't explain it, but I'm part of the same programming. I know that cows are just dumb creatures who have every right to live, but damnit... I love steak. I know that dogs are loving creatures and have every right to be treated like cows, but damnit... I will fucking destroy anyone who hurts a dog. I wish I could tell you why, but I don't know myself... I just know how I feel about it.

_________________
"The way I see it, there's so much love and beauty in the world, and someone has to balance that shit out." -- Davan
http://www.SomethingPositive.net/ (10/09/2004)
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's websiteAIM AddressYahoo MessengerMSN Messenger
France
Tech House Member


Joined: 05 May 2003
Posts: 448

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:00 am Reply with quoteBack to top

bjciii wrote:
I will fucking destroy anyone who hurts a dog. I wish I could tell you why, but I don't know myself... I just know how I feel about it.


Thats because a dog has personality, and personality goes a long way...... Wink
View user's profileSend private message
Uty
Tang Soo Techie


Joined: 03 May 2003
Posts: 9583
Location: On a never ending quest to save my girlfriend

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:07 am Reply with quoteBack to top

Well Bill I'm sorry but I think thats hypocritical. I eat meat, I wear leather, and I do not make the effort to ensure everything I buy was not tested on animals. (Although that doesn't always mean something. Its actually legal to say "product not tested on animals" when all the individual ingrediants were tested on animals but the final combination was not.)

Because of this I chose not to be outraged over what happened to these puppies. Now I think the guy who did it is a bad person, but I also need to keep in mind that my own actions support systematic animal abuse.
(And yes, this includes puppies. Rabbits. Gerbils. Cats.) Its not a nice thought, in fact, it makes me feel bad about myself. But to really do something about a problem, one needs to stop contributing. Again, as I don't have the time or energy to put into this (I'm currently tending to almost 10 new years resolutions) I am choosing not to be outraged.

Peta.org wrote:

By purchasing only cruelty-free products, you can help save rabbits, mice, guinea pigs, rats, and other animals.

Hundreds of thousands of these animals are poisoned, blinded, and killed every year in outdated product tests for shampoos, household cleaners, cosmetics, hairspray, and other personal care and household items. Although more than 500 companies have banned all animal tests forever, some corporations still force substances into animals? stomachs and drip chemicals into rabbits? eyes. These tests are not required by law, and they often produce inaccurate or misleading results?even if a product has blinded an animal, it can still be marketed to you.

... (another page

Every year, millions of animals are poisoned and killed in barbaric tests that were crudely developed as long ago as the 1920s to evaluate the toxicity of consumer products and their ingredients. Rats, mice, guinea pigs, rabbits, and other animals are forced to swallow or inhale massive quantities of a test substance or endure the pain of a chemical eating away at their sensitive eyes and skin??even though the results of animal tests are often unreliable or not applicable to humans.


Acute Toxicity Tests
To determine the toxic consequences of a single, short-term exposure to a product or chemical, the substance is administered to animals (usually rodents) in extremely high doses via force-feeding, forced inhalation, and/or absorption through the skin. Animals in the highest dose groups may endure severe abdominal pain, diarrhea, convulsions, seizures, paralysis, and bleeding from the nose, mouth, and genitals before they ultimately die.(1)


Acute toxicity testing began during the World War I era with the now infamous lethal dose 50 percent (LD50) test, which even today, remains the most common form of animal-poisoning study. In this test, groups of animals are force-fed increasing amounts of a substance until 50 percent of them die. Despite its decades of use, the LD50 test and its more contemporary adaptations have never been scientifically validated to confirm that their results are indeed predictive of chemical effects in people. One international study that examined the results of rat and mouse LD50 tests for 50 chemicals found that these tests were able to predict toxicity in humans with only 65 percent accuracy??while a series of human cell-line tests was found to predict toxicity in humans with about 75 percent accuracy.(2)


Eye- and Skin-Irritation/Corrosion Tests
The Draize eye- and skin-irritation/corrosion test dates back to the 1940s.(3) During this test, rabbits are often immobilized in full-body restraints while a substance is dripped or smeared into their eyes or onto their shaved skin. Laboratory technicians then record the damage at specific intervals for hours or days. Rabbits may suffer swollen eyelids, irritated and cloudy eyes, and inflamed skin, and in the case of irreversible corrosive damage, they may endure ulcers, bleeding, bloody scabs, or blindness.


The scoring of eye and skin damage in the Draize test is highly subjective, and therefore, different laboratories?and even different tests within the same laboratory?often yield different results. In addition, rabbits? eyes are anatomically and physiologically different from and tend to have stronger reactions to chemicals than humans? eyes. One study found that the Draize test ?grossly overpredicted the effects that could be seen in the human eye,? and another concluded that the test ?does not reflect the eye irritation hazard for man.?(4) In contrast, a clinical skin patch test conducted on human volunteers has been shown to produce skin-irritation data that are ?inherently superior to that given by a surrogate model, such as the rabbit.?(5)


Cancer Tests
Even though a number of highly sensitive non-animal tests for detecting chemical-induced genetic mutations have been available and in widespread use for decades, government regulations continue to require companies to poison animals to see whether they develop cancer. A standard animal test called the ?rodent cancer bioassay? subjects mice and rats to a lifetime of chemical exposure and is carried out on all new and reformulated pesticides, food additives, and drugs.(6) A single cancer bioassay costs an average of $3 million.(7) The scientific community admits that these tests have a false positive rate of more than 70 percent.(Cool One Pfizer researcher wrote, ?[W]e should face the fact that the behemoth of the rodent bioassay is identifying hundreds of chemicals as ?carcinogens? that do not contribute at all to human cancer.?(9)


Product Tests
No law requires that cosmetics and household products be tested on animals. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ?urges cosmetic manufacturers to conduct whatever tests are appropriate to establish that their cosmetics are safe? but ?does not specifically mandate animal testing for cosmetic safety.?(10) Likewise, household products regulated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) do not have to be tested on animals. A summary of the CPSC?s animal-testing policy, as published in the Federal Register, states that ?it is important to keep in mind that neither the FHSA [Federal Hazardous Substances Act] nor the Commission?s regulations require any firm to perform animal tests. The statute and its implementing regulations only require that a product be labeled to reflect the hazards associated with that product.?(11)


Tests That Are Required by Law
In contrast, lawn fertilizers, weed killers, and household cleaners that make ?germ killing? or ?antibacterial? claims on their labels are regulated as pesticides by the Environmental Protection Agency.(12) By law, every pesticide must undergo dozens of separate animal tests before it can be marketed, which spells suffering and death for many animals.(13) The FDA has similar testing requirements for drugs as well as chemicals that are used as additives or preservatives in processed foods.(14,15)


Alternatives to Animal Tests
Today, hundreds of cosmetics and household-products companies have turned their backs on animal testing and begun taking advantage of the many sophisticated non-animal test methods available today, which range from cell and tissue cultures to computerized ?structure-activity relationship? models. For example, EPISKIN? and EpiDerm?, multi-layered skin models made up of cultures of human skin cells, have been scientifically validated and accepted around the world as total replacements for rabbit skin corrosion studies.(16) Similarly, the cell-based ?3T3 Neutral Red Uptake Phototoxicity Test? has become a widely accepted alternative to the use of guinea pigs and mice to assess sunlight-induced skin irritation.(17) PETA is urging U.S. regulatory agencies to accept these and other valid non-animal test methods as part of its ?Give the Animals 5? campaign (visit StopAnimalTests.com for more information).


Where validated non-animal replacements are not yet available or fully validated, PETA lobbies companies and the government to provide the necessary funding for research and development and works closely with organizations that specialize in test-method validation, such as the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods and the Institute for In Vitro Sciences to bring new non-animal test methods into the mainstream.


Compassion in Action
Caring consumers who boycott animal-tested products play a vital role in pushing companies and government agencies to adopt more relevant and humane non-animal test methods. Spurred by public outrage, the European Union has voted to outlaw cosmetics testing on animals as well as the sale of animal-tested cosmetics by 2013.(1Cool To help consumers identify products that are cruelty-free, PETA?s Caring Consumer Project (CaringConsumer.com) clarifies non-animal testing terminology and procedures, compiles information on the testing policies of companies, and publishes a list of companies that have signed our statement of assurance to confirm that they do not conduct or commission animal tests of their products, ingredients, or formulations. Shoppers can support this project by purchasing products that comply with PETA?s cruelty-free company standard, boycotting those that don?t, and asking local stores to carry cruelty-free items.


Everyone seeking to stop animal tests should also urge government regulatory agencies to accept non-animal test methods immediately. Visit StopAnimalTests.com to view current action alerts and learn more about how you can help put an end to product testing on animals.



If I was willing to make all this effort (like a real hippie) then I would certainly be outraged by what the smugglers did to the puppies. But the fact of the matter is corporations are doing worse right now and most Americans endorse it. That makes them even worse than hippies, because when hippies get pissed off about some kind of social cause, they get off their asses and do something about it.

_________________
Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF
All my base
Are belong to you
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailAIM Address
Display posts from previous:      
Post new topicReply to topic


 Jump to:   



View next topic
View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group :: FI Theme :: All times are GMT - 5 Hours