TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › "Goth" Piercing of Kittens Ruled Illegal
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"Goth" Piercing of Kittens Ruled Illegal - Page 2

post #31 of 57
6/23/11 at 8:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducman69 View Post
There is a big difference between agreeing with something, and signing law to have police show up at their house and throw them in jail for something.
IMO, this is what laws should be for, to protect those that cannot effectively protect themselves. Do I disagree with people who pierce their animals? Hell, yes. Do I think they should face consequences? YES! It is simply giving a voice to someone who doesn't have a voice of their own.

My 8-year-old niece wanted to get her ears pierced and was told that she could, but SHE was responsible for disinfecting her piercings, for taking care of her jewelry, etc. Even at 8 years old, a human can DO that. She made the choice to get her ears pierced, she takes responsibility for caring for her decision.

I don't like to see infants with their ears pierced because I think it's ridiculous and an infant cannot possibly make that decision for themselves. Do I want their parents thrown in jail? No. But that's because there ARE laws where if that infant were left alone in a situation where the piercings could be torn, or if they got infected to the point of danger, the parent will face consequences.
Reply
post #32 of 57
6/23/11 at 9:08am
Wouldn't such abuse as allowing infection and the like be covered under a case-by-case basis law, rather than a blanket law?

For example, what if in five years rather than having to lop off a part of the stray cats ear, a simple small smooth dimple transmitter could be punched onto the cat's ear that can not only be seen visibly (say make it glow brightly under blacklight, or just normal reflective using that sweet 3M reflexite prism stuff) but help geo-locate strays and perhaps even home cats if it appeared fashionable, didn't bother the cat, and was more effective and safer than a reflective collar which can get caught and cause choking? Likewise for that neck stud, what if a new generation of chip comes out that works not only by scanning up close, but from a distance using those barbels as little antenna? The neck one I don't think would hurt them for example. On a case-by-case basis we would say that clearly there is little harm to the animal here and its for their benefit, but under a blanket law, well, tough luck. Keep chopping ears off and putting on collars.
Reply
post #33 of 57
6/23/11 at 10:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducman69 View Post
Wouldn't such abuse as allowing infection and the like be covered under a case-by-case basis law, rather than a blanket law?

For example, what if in five years rather than having to lop off a part of the stray cats ear, a simple small smooth dimple transmitter could be punched onto the cat's ear that can not only be seen visibly (say make it glow brightly under blacklight, or just normal reflective using that sweet 3M reflexite prism stuff) but help geo-locate strays and perhaps even home cats if it appeared fashionable, didn't bother the cat, and was more effective and safer than a reflective collar which can get caught and cause choking? Likewise for that neck stud, what if a new generation of chip comes out that works not only by scanning up close, but from a distance using those barbels as little antenna? The neck one I don't think would hurt them for example. On a case-by-case basis we would say that clearly there is little harm to the animal here and its for their benefit, but under a blanket law, well, tough luck. Keep chopping ears off and putting on collars.
I would think that as new technology became available and affordale the law would need to change with the times and make that exception. Deciding on a case-by-case basis puts animals at unnecessary risk.
Reply
post #34 of 57
6/23/11 at 11:18am
In Texas, right now in 2011, you still have to acknowledge a supreme being before being able to hold public office, homosexual behavior is still a misdemeanor offense, and Dallas county still hasn't repealed the prohibition on alcohol.

Now are these enforced? No, not really, but its just ignored as apparently its too much of a challenge to simply repeal the laws with the changing times.

If there is just one thing I have learned in my lifetime, is that once a law is passed in the United States, it takes an avalanche of public opinion and attention to change it. That is why it is absolutely paramount that things not be written into law unless you can guarantee that at least within your lifetime that it can stand the test of time. Your proposal of creating the law now and then repealing it in seven years for example is from a practical standpoint impossible to execute with our political system.
Reply
post #35 of 57
6/24/11 at 1:43pm
I see what you're saying. And FWIW, adultery is illegal in Colorado... a bill was put up recently to repeal the law (outdated and unenforced) and the bill was shot down.

Like everything else in life, there's no easy answer. Passing a law wouldn't likely deter anyone who is adamant about doing it, but I appreciate when the topic is brought up and discussed to foster awareness. I don't collar my cat either, she's microchipped, indoor-only, and I can't see any way having her wear a collar would outweigh the risks.
Reply
post #36 of 57
6/24/11 at 2:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducman69 View Post
I'd have to know the specifics. Personally, I don't believe that tail docking or ear cropping of Boxers for example is necessarily torture or mutilation.

By the strict definition, of course its mutilation, but so to would be sex organ removal in a literal sense, and both are done by very loving caregivers. My sister's boxer for example doesn't have the ears, but has his tail cropped, and it didn't cause any real harm.

And my little sister had her ears pierced as a child, and then got her belly button at eighteen simply because my parents didn't like it. Mutilation and disfigurement, or just a cultural thing?

IMO, such laws are designed to protect animals from clear intentional harm, and I'm not so sure an ear piercing counts... heck, for strays we chop off part of the ear.
There is a HUGE difference between having a tail docked using surgical procedures and causing constant pain until your tail DIES AND FALLS OFF.

And like was mentioned, cats hate things on them, and would never let the piercings alone, so they would be a constant source of pain for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducman69 View Post
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/...31_468x286.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/...53_468x395.jpg

That shows better what they are talking about. The scruff piercing, I don't see how that would bother a cat. Its a very loose piece of skin.

The ear piercings I think would be tolerated if they weren't so enormously heavy. If they were tiny diamond ones, since the kitten is so young I think it'd get used to it and it wouldn't be horrific mutilation. As it is, I can understand why people were so upset.
The scruff piercing would constantly make them feel like they are being scruffed and/or bitten.
Reply
post #37 of 57
6/24/11 at 2:45pm
Also, piercing a child's ears is completely different. It is not something that the child is going to never get used to. It is something that that is very common in women, and honestly, when the child grows up, they will be glad that it was done for them.
Reply
post #38 of 57
6/24/11 at 3:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minka View Post
Also, piercing a child's ears is completely different. It is not something that the child is going to never get used to. It is something that that is very common in women, and honestly, when the child grows up, they will be glad that it was done for them.
Not every woman wants pierced ears and would be "glad that it was done for them". I would have been annoyed if my mother had had mine pierced when I was too young to want it done. I don't think parents should pierce their baby's ears.
Reply
post #39 of 57
6/24/11 at 3:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minka View Post
There is a HUGE difference between having a tail docked using surgical procedures and causing constant pain until your tail DIES AND FALLS OFF.
I'm not sure what's so "surgical" about lopping a puppy's tail off with a large pair of nail clippers (this is the most common method), and banding IS also a very common method of docking. Does it cause puppies less "constant pain until their tail dies and falls off"? Just curious.
Reply
post #40 of 57
6/24/11 at 4:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minka View Post
The scruff piercing would constantly make them feel like they are being scruffed and/or bitten.
This is very unlikely. We know from first hand accounts from humans with various earrings, brow, belly, and tongue studs that they are not noticed after some time. Tagged wildlife also tend to ignore the tag after a while, which is a similar skin piercing.

This is because sensor receptors in our skin habituate whenever a stimulus goes on for an extended period of time without change. If you study human anatomy, you can see its due to the very nature of how receptor cells work, where they simply lose potential.

If you don't have piercings of your own, you may find how you can become accustomed to a smell in a room to where the air smells neutral. Leave the room for a while and return though, and the smell is quite obvious. Likewise, when you first put your bra on you feel it quite noticeably, but later in the day you don't even really feel it on your body. So it is unlikely a kitten would notice the neck stud after a short while, anymore than a nose ring would constantly make a person's nose itchy.

Again, you won't see me giving my cats any piercings, but I try to be realistic about what constitutes torture and mutilation.
Reply
post #41 of 57
6/24/11 at 4:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minka View Post
Also, piercing a child's ears is completely different. It is not something that the child is going to never get used to. It is something that that is very common in women, and honestly, when the child grows up, they will be glad that it was done for them.
I'm 51 and never had my ears pierced. Everyone is different.
Reply
post #42 of 57
6/24/11 at 4:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducman69 View Post
Your proposal of creating the law now and then repealing it in seven years for example is from a practical standpoint impossible to execute with our political system.
Well, that could be true, so why not draft the law to exclude safety apparatus?
Reply
post #43 of 57
6/24/11 at 4:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducman69 View Post
Likewise, when you first put your bra on you feel it quite noticeably, but later in the day you don't even really feel it on your body.
Are you kidding me??? It's clear you never wore a bra! When I walk into the house, it's the first thing that comes off.
Reply
post #44 of 57
6/24/11 at 5:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockcat View Post
Are you kidding me??? It's clear you never wore a bra! When I walk into the house, it's the first thing that comes off.
Haha, yes! Bras (especially underwires) are basically torture devices---if we put them on children or animals we'd be arrested. . .and rightfully so.
Reply
post #45 of 57
6/24/11 at 5:54pm
Well, I'm only an A-cup or thereabouts, so I've always gone braless.

You know what I mean though.
Reply
post #46 of 57
6/24/11 at 5:59pm
This is so weird. Why do that on kittens.

As for the puppies having there tails dock and ears cropped, I Don't think it looks natural on the dog, unless it was born that way.
Reply
post #47 of 57
6/24/11 at 8:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willowy View Post
Not every woman wants pierced ears and would be "glad that it was done for them". I would have been annoyed if my mother had had mine pierced when I was too young to want it done. I don't think parents should pierce their baby's ears.
I don't know ANYONE who would say 'Dang, I wish my mom wouldn't have pierced my ears.' Do you??
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willowy View Post
I'm not sure what's so "surgical" about lopping a puppy's tail off with a large pair of nail clippers (this is the most common method), and banding IS also a very common method of docking. Does it cause puppies less "constant pain until their tail dies and falls off"? Just curious.
Just because it is 'common method' to do it to dogs doesn't mean it's okay..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockcat View Post
I'm 51 and never had my ears pierced. Everyone is different.
Oh, I know many women who didn't have it done when they were younger, but that doesn't mean that if you Had had it done, that you would hate it.
Reply
post #48 of 57
6/24/11 at 8:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minka View Post
I don't know ANYONE who would say 'Dang, I wish my mom wouldn't have pierced my ears.' Do you??
I do know some people who wish their parents had not pierced their ears when they were babies, yes. That's the sort of thing most people would like to decide for themselves, I think. I even wish I hadn't had my ears pierced, and it was definitely my decision (I was 11). I wouldn't choose to do so now.

Quote:
Just because it is 'common method' to do it to dogs doesn't mean it's okay...
Oh, OK. I thought you were saying that docking a puppy's tail (no matter what method is used, including using nail clippers or banding) is fine, but banding a kitten isn't.
Reply
post #49 of 57
6/24/11 at 9:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willowy View Post
I do know some people who wish their parents had not pierced their ears when they were babies, yes. That's the sort of thing most people would like to decide for themselves, I think. I even wish I hadn't had my ears pierced, and it was definitely my decision (I was 11). I wouldn't choose to do so now.
Why would you wish you hadn't had it done? It's not like it has any ill effects, and you can't even tell whether someone has or hasn't unless you are Right up in their face. It doesn't affect you in any way..
Reply
post #50 of 57
6/24/11 at 9:16pm
Basically, because it can't be undone. I even stopped wearing earrings for over a year and the holes still didn't close up. And the holes are quite obvious, even without earrings. My grandpa had his ear pierced when he was a young sailor and he only wore an earring for a couple of years, and even when he died you could still see the hole (60-something years later). And they itch. . .but I don't know if that's because of the piercings or because my earlobes are just itchy, LOL.
Reply
post #51 of 57
6/24/11 at 9:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willowy View Post
Basically, because it can't be undone. I even stopped wearing earrings for over a year and the holes still didn't close up. And the holes are quite obvious, even without earrings. My grandpa had his ear pierced when he was a young sailor and he only wore an earring for a couple of years, and even when he died you could still see the hole (60-something years later). And they itch. . .but I don't know if that's because of the piercings or because my earlobes are just itchy, LOL.
Sure it can. You pierce the hole larger, and then dont put an earring in it.
And your lobes are just itchy...
Reply
post #52 of 57
6/24/11 at 9:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minka View Post
Why would you wish you hadn't had it done? It's not like it has any ill effects, and you can't even tell whether someone has or hasn't unless you are Right up in their face. It doesn't affect you in any way..
This statement is ridiculous......... body piercings or markings that are/were inflicted unwillingly on another as a child or as an adult in many cultures are markings of discrimination, segregation, mutilation.........
I guess "unless you are Right up in their face" you wouldn't have a clue........So for this very reason, why in the world would someone pierce, crop, dock, an animal/pet? Because they are more concerned about them being " Right up in their face" of someone else.................
Reply
post #53 of 57
6/24/11 at 9:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheylink View Post
This statement is ridiculous......... body piercings or markings that are/were inflicted unwillingly on another as a child or as an adult in many cultures are markings of discrimination, segregation, mutilation.........
I guess "unless you are Right up in their face" you wouldn't have a clue........So for this very reason, why in the world would someone pierce, crop, dock, an animal/pet? Because they are more concerned about them being " Right up in their face" of someone else.................
But we aren't talking about other cultures so that is a completely moot point......
I think you are very lost..
Reply
post #54 of 57
6/24/11 at 10:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minka View Post
But we aren't talking about other cultures so that is a completely moot point......
I think you are very lost..
I'm not lost at all.....Topic being if the piercing and or mutilation of a cat or dog is acceptable.......In my opinion this is another culture and people should not have the right who they dock and crop, or pierce......
Reply
post #55 of 57
6/25/11 at 12:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheylink View Post
I'm not lost at all.....Topic being if the piercing and or mutilation of a cat or dog is acceptable.......In my opinion this is another culture and people should not have the right who they dock and crop, or pierce......
So then you are lost. If you weren't you'd realize I was talking about piercings in People, not animals. And that I don't agree with docking, cropping, or piercing animals.
Reply
post #56 of 57
6/26/11 at 1:18am
Reply
post #57 of 57
6/26/11 at 8:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minka View Post
I don't know ANYONE who would say 'Dang, I wish my mom wouldn't have pierced my ears.'
Now you do.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › "Goth" Piercing of Kittens Ruled Illegal