Animal cruelty-- are animal rights activists overstepping their bounds?

Once upon a time, way back when, a small group of people got together and agreed that animals should not be beaten, neglected or abused in anyway. Now, here is the problem with the evolution of any belief. Over time, the idea is expanded upon, redefined and ultimately distorted. One persons passion becomes anothers obsession.

One person can make a difference. Spay and neuter your pets and within a decade, the unwanted/unloved pet population will be under control and 6 out of 10 pets who find themselves in shelters will not be euthanized because there are just not enough homes. Teach people to be pet parents instead of pet owners. Insist on cosmetics and personal care products that were not tested on animals if that bothers you. Extreme measures are not always productive and can be counter-productive. The end justifies the means is a load of horse-poo. My dogs, if released.... would be dead in a week. THEY would be responsible for the DEATHS of all of the animals they say should be released to live in the wild.

Most of those animal rights groups overstep their boundaries.. Most of them are vigilante freaks..

"People are trying to say that all animals-- even the domestic ones that can't live for a day away from a human-- should be let "loose".

How could this possibly be a good thing.. If an animal can't live away from people.. and survive. Why would it be a good idea to let it run loose?? So that it gets out and is unable to find food and end up dead? Dead is better than being cared for by a person?? I don't think so..

There's two different schools of thinking you need to be aware of.

There's animal rights activists and animal welfare advocates..

http://www.animalwelfarecouncil.com/html/aw/rights...

There's a link with some explanation.

I work actively in rescue and absolutely abhor the actions of many animal rights activists. I love my steak, but, I think it should be raised more humanely. That's the goal of animal welfarists, they aren't for the most part, against eating meat, they just want it raised under less cruel conditions.

I also see no reason in doing some necessary medical testing so long as it is done as humanely as possible and only when absolutely necessary.

If you're completely against lab testing, you shouldn't be able to use modern medicine as most of it has been derived by testing on animals.

Compared to the population, you're talking about a FEW people.

I would assume that you're talking about PETA. They are one of the extremist groups. In their "perfect" world, we would not "use" animals for any purpose, whether it be food, labor, entertainment, or zoos. They probably feel the same way about pets.

Whenever you're talking about extremists, you're going to get people who take things too far. Instead of educating others, they act like lunatics, which is a turn-off even for nature-loving, tree-hugging vegetarians.

Infallible? Hardly. I recently discovered that one chapter of PETA "rescued" many animals from shelters, only to euthanize most of them.

Radicals don't get respect from law makers, especially when they break laws to get their point across.

Clearly some things must be done to address, and prevent animal cruelty. We must work to conserve the earth and it's wildlife, and do whatever possible to reverse the damage being done to our planet.

Animals should not be our playthings, or suffer for our amusement. Personally I think the circus' and other traveling animal "shows" should be outlawed. I don't think that individuals should be allowed to own and breed wild animals, either.

In regard to eliminating pets and other domesticated animals, it's not going to happen - not in our lifetimes.

Freedom of speech is just that. People can say whatever they want. You don't have to agree with it.

It almost seems like animal rights activists are more concerned with getting on camera than they are with the well-being of animals.

...and if there are any sincere ones within the ranks, the things they do are more anti-government than they are in helping animals.

Instead of participating in naked marchings and picketing and dumping paint on someone with a fur coat, a real act of care towards animals would be to purchase a firearm, camp out on game reserves, and confront any poachers that trespass onto those reserves...

...but I've never heard of any activists doing that, because that actually protects animals, AND it's actually dangerous.

if all animals were let loose most would kill each other in a short period of time...

some groups go to far and dont even think about what they are saying.. they feel that they have to go far to get their point across but sadly if you go too far -most people stop listening...

i agree.

i feel bad fpr the abused animals and such

i love ALL animals and would help even a worm that was crossing a road. but yes im a meat eater

and PETA is going way to far and they do nothing to help animals.

Um yah like pouring blood on people's fur and bombing laborotorys sounds a little bit stepping over bounderies. But fur and labrotorys that test animals are wrong.

Like any organized program to do good, there are always those that have to take everything to an outer limit. Its a power play to some one. Really not much different the vegan religion that yuppie, people are subscribing to.

I agree very strongly! Organizations like peta, for example, deposite dead animals in dumps. They stand for nothing more than the all mighty dollar.