RTE Investigates programme on greyhound racing industry

gozunda

Discodog wrote: »

Do you always post so much on a topic that you have no interest in ? * I have been involved in animal welfare for several decades & I have never met an extremist ...You have shown in numerous threads that you have an obsession with mythical animal rights extremists taking over Ireland. ...

So you are telling me what I find interesting now are you? It is a discussion board. That is unless you do not wish to engage in discussion and apply soundbite rhetoric only?

A quick check shows a fairly negative stance from you in relation to working type dogs such as greyhounds going back years. Tbh it looks like it really doesn't matter how good breeders are or what changes are made - it is fairly evident you have no intention of ever altering those hard held opinions.

There are approx 12 Animal Rights groups in this country. All have extreme views.

Heres a nice sentiment from one - branding a machete ...

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=745922418776807&id=212791988756522&set=pb.212791988756522.-2207520000.1459328507.&source=54&refid=13

*Lol. You say I'm claiming they are taking over? This is what you claimed previously btw

Discodog wrote: »

Most of us that have been involved in Animal rescue & welfare hate the term "animal rights". There is a argument that animals should have rights but it has been totally hijacked by a load of extremists. These people do so much harm to animal welfare.

Btw I would agree this lot have nothing to do with animal welfare whatsoever ...

Igotadose

gozunda wrote: »

Better let people versed in legal matters figure out what actually happened in context than screaming assault etc in this instance. Otherwise things like slander/ libel have a nasty tendency of being the next thing people get accused of. Best be safe than sorry imo.

Gardai investigating what went on: https://www.thejournal.ie/shelbourne-park-protest-assault-4733306-Jul2019/

gozunda

Igotadose wrote: »

Gardai investigating what went on: https://www.thejournal.ie/shelbourne-park-protest-assault-4733306-Jul2019/

Yeah investigating a report. As I said best not get involved in speculation s to what went on. From the video footage shown very little is clear tbh.

Muahahaha

Igotadose wrote: »

Neutering doesn't happen . Some try to find homes for puppies and kittens, but some drown them, too. Usually just bag them up and throw them in the ocean, unfortunately.

As to why, great question. In a rural farming community like this one, animals are not treated as pets, basically. A friend and lifelong resident told me once, that it's the 'blow-ins' that treat their animals well, but not the natives.

Thanks for explaining that. I remember back in the 80s you'd often hear of people throwing a bag of puppies or kittens into a river but had thought with modern veterinary that the practice had ceased.

Question is though why really? Surely a farmer who breeds animals for a living knows that his cat or dog is likely to get pregnant if he doesnt neuter? Like is this type of person so tight with money that they would rather kill live animals that spend a few quid on a vet to neuter? Thats the bit I cannot understand, they have vets call to the farm for their animals so why not neuter?

Discodog

Deleted User wrote: »

You’ve never been to the dogs, have you?! Try educating yourself. A race meeting cannot take place without a vet in attendance. Who are you suggesting “killed” the dogs on the spot and what method was used?

Tripe like what you’ve just posted disgusts me. But it does show me that you’ve no idea of the greyhound game other than what antis tell you. Are you really that gullible?

The ignorance never ends. I have been to many meetings & have actually attended with a Vet - a friend of mine who would love to see racing banned. The dogs are killed, by a Vet, usually by barbiturate intravenously. However they are often in agony & have to be assessed before being killed.

You obviously consider the hundreds of deaths as justifiable.

Your attitude opinions & manners echo those of most involved in racing. Nothing will change because you see nothing wrong in killing an animal that you tell us you really care about.

Discodog

gozunda wrote: »

I think you will find that is a parody of some of the crap being loudhailered by the protestors. Afaik It is standard animal extremists lingo for such protests.

So the responsible owners just hurl abuse back :rolleyes:

Extremists here, extremists there - do you sleep with a gun ?

Graces7

Muahahaha wrote: »

Thanks for explaining that. I remember back in the 80s you'd often hear of people throwing a bag of puppies or kittens into a river but had thought with modern veterinary that the practice had ceased.

Question is though why really? Surely a farmer who breeds animals for a living knows that his cat or dog is likely to get pregnant if he doesnt neuter? Like is this type of person so tight with money that they would rather kill live animals that spend a few quid on a vet to neuter? Thats the bit I cannot understand, they have vets call to the farm for their animals so why not neuter?

In deep rural cats are almost vermin. and in many irish towns I once organised 6 neutering vouchers for a lady who was feeding a dozen ferals, she begrudged them that cost as they would maybe get killed on the road.. She then refused the vouchers! So yes, tight with money is the way but un a traditio where folk have been dirt poor and with critters that did noit earn their keep finanically

when I lived on a scottish North Isle, I caused astonishmnt when I sold a pedigree siamese kitten for a good price.. " FOR A KITTEN!" was the cry

These were folk who only a generation ago would have ben hard pressed to feed their families so spaying and paying was not possible, I met older folk who remembered the celebrations when a seal or a whale was washed up dead,, not a scrap would be left.

This lady... NB she died a year later...But the scene she encountered was typical of islands and rural areas.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/features/humaninterest/the-cat-woman-of-cape-clear-comes-home-223046.html

a deep seated tradition of not spaying that many groups and people are fighting to amend

Discodog

gozunda wrote: »

So you are telling me what I find interesting now are you? It is a discussion board. That is unless you do not wish to engage in discussion and apply soundbite rhetoric only?

A quick check shows a fairly negative stance from you in relation to working type dogs such as greyhounds going back years. Tbh it looks like it really doesn't matter how good breeders are or what changes are made - it is fairly evident you have no intention of ever altering those hard held opinions.

There are approx 12 Animal Rights groups in this country. All have extreme views.

Heres a nice sentiment from one - branding a machete ...

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=745922418776807&id=212791988756522&set=pb.212791988756522.-2207520000.1459328507.&source=54&refid=13

*Lol. You say I'm claiming they are taking over? This is what you claimed previously btw



Btw I would agree this lot have nothing to do with animal welfare whatsoever ...

Oh hello Mr Stalker. I am glad that you have time to troll through someone's posts.

I will clarify, not that I need to. There are a small number of Animal rights people in Ireland. Most are totally harmless. Groups like Aran use the term animal rights when 90% of their agenda is welfare.

There is a justifiable argument for some animal rights. I don't agree with it but I can understand why it's there given the appalling abuse of animals & especially in Ireland the poor Policing & prosecution.

xckjoo

Muahahaha wrote: »

Thanks for explaining that. I remember back in the 80s you'd often hear of people throwing a bag of puppies or kittens into a river but had thought with modern veterinary that the practice had ceased.

Question is though why really? Surely a farmer who breeds animals for a living knows that his cat or dog is likely to get pregnant if he doesnt neuter? Like is this type of person so tight with money that they would rather kill live animals that spend a few quid on a vet to neuter? Thats the bit I cannot understand, they have vets call to the farm for their animals so why not neuter?

There's numerous reasons people don't neuter their dogs; "free" future puppies, a misguided sense of preserving the dogs masculinity/femininity, general lack of caring, belief in old-wives-tales like they need to have at least 1 batch of puppies to be healthy, etc. It's a complex subject but (IMO) off the topic of this thread so best discussed elsewhere. It is a massive issue but I'm not aware of any state sponsored puppy farms for pet dogs so lets focus on one issue at a time

Discodog

Muahahaha wrote: »

Thanks for explaining that. I remember back in the 80s you'd often hear of people throwing a bag of puppies or kittens into a river but had thought with modern veterinary that the practice had ceased.

Question is though why really? Surely a farmer who breeds animals for a living knows that his cat or dog is likely to get pregnant if he doesnt neuter? Like is this type of person so tight with money that they would rather kill live animals that spend a few quid on a vet to neuter? Thats the bit I cannot understand, they have vets call to the farm for their animals so why not neuter?

The situation is rapidly improving. The increasing number of vets, dog groomers, specialist foods, internet sites etc show this. I know two families living on the same rural road & next to each other. They were raised in the same village & went to the same schools. One has their dog tied up 24/7 - the other has the dog on the sofa with them.

Unfortunately welfare will always be a problem here due to the total lack of enforcement. The UK population give around six times more, per person, to animal charities than we do. In order to be at the same level as the UK we would need 120 ISPCA Inspector instead of the 5 that we do have.

The fact that people are caring more for their dogs means that more people see a Greyhound as a dog & not unlike their pet. This will increase the objection to killing healthy Greyhounds.

gozunda

Discodog wrote: »

Oh hello Mr Stalker. I am glad that you have time to troll through someone's posts.I will clarify, not that I need to. There are a small number of Animal rights people in Ireland. Most are totally harmless. Groups like Aran use the term animal rights when 90% of their agenda is welfare.
There is a justifiable argument for some animal rights. I don't agree with it but I can understand why it's there given the appalling abuse of animals & especially in Ireland the poor Policing & prosecution.

Why do you have to make every post personal and abusive.

It's a comment you made on a forum here. Where you said extremists were taking over. Are you now seriously trying to deny that to suit your agenda? And no they have no interest whatsoever in welfare as you originally stated. Interesting about turn all the same.

It's already been stated there's are a small number of extremists. Unortunately they seem to be running the show. Now theres a surprise.

Discodog

gozunda wrote: »

Why do you have to make every post personal and abusive e. I mean wtf?

It's a comment you made on a forum here. Where you said extremists were taking over. Are you now seriously trying to deny that to suit your agenda? And no they have no interest whatsoever in welfare as you originally stated. Intersting about turn all the same.

Its already been stated there's are a small number of extremists. Unortunately they seem to be running the show. Now theres a surprise.

That's amusing coming from you. It was always considered unacceptable to troll through & quote someone from a different thread/forum - I even got carded for it once. Plus it usually means that the comment is taken totally out of context & let's face it - it's creepy.

What's extreme about protesting ?

gozunda

Discodog wrote: »

So the responsible owners just hurl abuse back :rolleyes:Extremists here, extremists there - do you sleep with a gun ?

No it was a rather good parody of what those eejits were shouting. And shows the stupidity of such slogans - that the mean fuk all.

Are you seriously saying animal rights extremists don't exist here? Even you discodog say they do. Or are you now denying it? Let me quote the relevant comment again

Discodog wrote: »

Most of us that have been involved in Animal rescue & welfare hate the term "animal rights". There is a argument that animals should have rights but it has been totally hijacked by a load of extremists. These people do so much harm to animal welfare.

Nothing good ever comes of extremism. Such groups will do just about anything to achieve their ends. Yeah there is a need to be careful who they get involved with. But hey if you think they are all flowers and puppies - take a look at the link posted above for some context.

Discodog

gozunda wrote: »

No it was a rather good parody of what those eejits were shouting. And shows the stupidity of such slogans - that the mean fuk all.

Are you seriously saying animal rights extremists don't exist here? Even you discodog say they do. Or are you now denying it? Let me quote that again



Nothing good ever comes of extremism. Such groups will do just about anything to achieve their ends. Yeah there is a need to be careful who they get involved with. But hey if you think they are all flowers and puppies - take a look at the link posted above for some context.

You are obsessed & I will leave you to continue carrying out your investigations into the members of Boards.

gozunda

Discodog wrote: »

That's amusing coming from you. It was always considered unacceptable to troll through & quote someone from a different thread/forum - I even got carded for it once. Plus it usually means that the comment is taken totally out of context & let's face it - it's creepy.What's extreme about protesting ?

If you are going to claim other posters are stalkers and trolls and falsely claim they say things to score points - then you have lost the argument. That type of crap is the hallmark of those who have nothing to contribute to a discussion. Dont like something? - then report it.

Now you've been outed as saying one thing and claiming the other which you posted in a public forum. And now laughingly you are trying to backtrack. So I'll leave you at it.

Put down the shovel, walk away before you fall into the hole you've dug for yourself.

Discodog

gozunda wrote: »

If you are going to claim other posters are stalkers and trolls and falsely claim they say things to score points - then you have lost the argument. That type of crap is the hallmark of those who have nothing to contribute to a discussion. You are totally obsessive and will throw any old crap where you can.

Now you've been outed as saying one thing and claiming the other which you posted in a public forum. And now laughingly you are trying to backtrack. So I'll leave you at it.

Put down the shovel, walk away before you fall into the hole you've dug for yourself.

Looks like you haven't changed

You have been uncivil to numerous posters throughout the duration of that thread. You accused a poster of dog-fighting, asked people if they are members of the 'fluffy brigade', and yes you used a needlessly aggressive and confrontational tone throughout. The yellow card stands.

klaaaz

Apparently according to gozunda, if one protests against the mass slaughter of greyhound dogs for entertainment, one becomes an extremist! Why don't you label them the dissident fringe also? Give them the whole package!!

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

The ignorance never ends. I have been to many meetings & have actually attended with a Vet - a friend of mine who would love to see racing banned. The dogs are killed, by a Vet, usually by barbiturate intravenously. However they are often in agony & have to be assessed before being killed.

You obviously consider the hundreds of deaths as justifiable.

Your attitude opinions & manners echo those of most involved in racing. Nothing will change because you see nothing wrong in killing an animal that you tell us you really care about.

My apologies. I misunderstood your post. When you said that owners wouldn’t pay for veterinary care, I thought that you meant that illegal practices were used to put the injured dog down. Sometimes it’s kindest to put the dog down rather than let it suffer.

gozunda

klaaaz wrote: »

Apparently according to gozunda, if one protests against the mass slaughter of greyhound dogs for entertainment, one becomes an extremist! Why don't you label them the dissident fringe also? Give them the whole package!!

Wrong and incorrect. Hey but theres a surprise more hyperbole from Klaaz. As clearly stated there a small number of extremists. But if you dont believe me - even other posters agree with this. And as they say the whole thing has been "totally hijacked by a load of extremists" . So there you go straight from dogs mouth if you like ...

Discodog

Deleted User wrote: »

My apologies. I misunderstood your post. When you said that owners wouldn’t pay for veterinary care, I thought that you meant that illegal practices were used to put the injured dog down. Sometimes it’s kindest to put the dog down rather than let it suffer.

My friend attends events as they are on the rota. They have documented many examples of where an injured dog could be treated but the owner won't pay. Many injuries, that used to be fatal, are now commonly treated. A broken leg or even an amputation doesn't mean that the dog can't go on to have a healthy life. There's no excuse to kill a dog with such an injury.

klaaaz

gozunda wrote: »

Wrong and incorrect. Hey but theres a surprise more hyperbole from Klaaz. As clearly stated there a small number of extremists. But if you dont believe me - even other posters agree with this. And as they say the whole thing has been "totally hijacked by a load of extremists" . So there you go straight from dogs mouth if you like ...

How many? 2, 12, 22, 222, 2222, 22222, 222222?

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

My friend attends events as they are on the rota. They have documented many examples of where an injured dog could be treated but the owner won't pay. Many injuries, that used to be fatal, are now commonly treated. A broken leg or even an amputation doesn't mean that the dog can't go on to have a healthy life. There's no excuse to kill a dog with such an injury.

The other side of the coin is that an injured greyhound may be sentenced to a lifetime of pain when putting them down would be much kinder.

Discodog

Deleted User wrote: »

The other side of the coin is that an injured greyhound may be sentenced to a lifetime of pain when putting them down would be much kinder.

A vet wouldn't recommend that. For example one Greyhound was bought in with a nasty infected would. There was no way to save the leg but three legged dogs get on just fine. The owner said & I quote "What ****ing use is a three legged Greyhound".

My Vet took in the dog operated & rehomed her. The owner wouldn't pay a cent. She runs faster on three legs than most dogs on four.

klaaaz

Deleted User wrote: »

The other side of the coin is that an injured greyhound may be sentenced to a lifetime of pain when putting them down would be much kinder.

You do know that dogs can be rehabilitated with care? Many dogs around the world suffer horrible injuries and end up living a wonderful life even if they only have 3 legs or even 2 legs due to the loving expense their owners have for them. Unlike greyhound owners who go for the first option of kill, the lost 500 dogs on dog tracks since 2015 had no option but death due to their owners treating them as a commodity to gamble on instead of as a loving pet.

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

My apologies. I misunderstood your post. When you said that owners wouldn’t pay for veterinary care, I thought that you meant that illegal practices were used to put the injured dog down. Sometimes it’s kindest to put the dog down rather than let it suffer.

The thing is that many dog owners do this and it is common practice and legal. Dogs are put down for many reasons including old age, illness, behavioural issues etc etc. It seems using this is simply another club to bash greyhound owners with - whilst ignoring that dogs are put down by vets all the time for a huge variety of reasons.

That said I fully support where a dog can have a good quality of life. Unfortunately that is not always the case.

Discodog

klaaaz wrote: »

How many? 2, 12, 22, 222, 2222, 22222, 222222?

He's quoting me from years ago. He trolled through my posts. It was in relation to hunting & the alf - real extremists that I totally oppose.

ARAN would be the predominate animal rights organisation in Ireland. Their agenda is animal welfare - they don't plan to stop you having a pet dog.

I spoke to John, years ago, about changing the name. AWAN doesn't look as good & then left it as ARAN. Most of the members & activists/protesters are female & some are retired. They are the most unlikely bunch to become extreme.

The term Anti was coined by the Countryside Alliance in the UK when they opposed the ban on fox hunting. Labour listened to reasoned opinion, not extremists & hunting was banned.

Discodog

gozunda wrote: »

The thing is that many dog owners do this and it is common practice and legal. Dogs are put down for many reasons including old age, illness, behavioural issues etc etc. It seems using this is simply another club to bash greyhound owners with - whilst ignoring that dogs are put down by vets all the time for a huge variety of reasons.

That said I fully support where a fog can have a good quality of life. Unfortunately that is not always the case.

Less & less. As I said before there are increasing ethical concerns over killing a healthy dog. Vets don't like doing it & I know many examples of where they rehomed the dog or gave it to a rescue.

There is discussion as to whether killing a healthy dog is in breach of the Hippocratic oath.

klaaaz

gozunda wrote: »

I think you should direct that question would be best directed our resident expert on these matters.

I quoted from a previous discusion on this issue. And yes they stated that it had been hijacked by extremists and they had no interest in animal welfare.

Only ptobblem - they seem to have done an about face on the matter and it's now all love and cuddles. Go figure eh?

Who? You made the claim so back it up.

Discodog

gozunda wrote: »

I think you should direct that question would be best directed our resident expert on these matters.

I quoted from a previous discusion on this issue. And yes they stated that it had been hijacked by extremists and they had no interest in animal welfare.

Only ptobblem - they seem to have done an about face on the matter and it's now all love and cuddles. Go figure eh?

Here's ARAN's mission statement - hardly extreme

https://www.facebook.com/pg/AnimalRightsActionNetwork/about/?ref=page_internal

gozunda

klaaaz wrote: »

Who? You made the claim so back it up.

I did and I did.

The poster in question already replied - here is the quote in case you missed it

Discodog wrote: »

Most of us that have been involved in Animal rescue & welfare hate the term "animal rights". There is a argument that animals should have rights but it has been totally hijacked by a load of extremists. These people do so much harm to animal welfare.

I sure someone with close links would be able to give you full breakdown. I'm just an ordinary observer so wouldn't be privy to such information.

A quick check shows approx 12 animal rights groups and they all have extreme views.

Heres a nice sentiment from one of them which I posted previously...

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=745922418776807&id=212791988756522&set=pb.212791988756522.-2207520000.1459328507.&source=54&refid=13

https://i.imgflip.com/3694ph.jpg