TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Oxford University Wins Injunction Against Animal Right Extremists
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Oxford University Wins Injunction Against Animal Right Extremists

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
Oxford University has won an injunction over "Animal Rights Extremists" who have been protesting outside its biomedical research center. This injunction extends the Universitys "exclusion zone" around the building which the activists cannot protest in.

"Some animal rights extremists opposed to vivisection, have widened the protest by threatening violence against anyone involved with the university."

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/26052006/32...njunction.html

Scroll to the bottom of this article to see who is behind the protests, it won't be any surprise...
post #2 of 19
I hate PeTA. I really do. They lie, threaten, intimidate, vandalize, and act crazy. This does nothing for the animals they try to protect aside from make it less likely that anyone will listen. You never convince anyone to be a vegetarian like that! You explain rationally why you feel the way you do, the impact of the meat industry on America, and then offer to cook for them. If they don't like it, they don't like it. Not by yelling at them. You don't convince a university to stop testing on animals by protesting it. For one thing, it's probably mostly not even students at Oxford who are protesting, so the admins don't care at all, and then they're disrupting the students so they won't ever be on their side.

Free Animal Rights! Stop PeTA!
post #3 of 19
Thread Starter 
I agree in most of what you are saying. I consider myself an animal activist but I would never do any of the above actions. Why is it the term "Animal Activist" is always used interchangeably with "Animal Extremists"? Most people who own pets are animal activists in that they love animals and want their rights protected.

Animal Extremists (PETA) don't actually give a !%*@ about animals.
post #4 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sims2fan
I agree in most of what you are saying. I consider myself an animal activist but I would never do any of the above actions. Why is it the term "Animal Activist" is always used interchangeably with "Animal Extremists"? Most people who own pets are animal activists in that they love animals and want their rights protected.

Animal Extremists (PETA) don't actually give a !%*@ about animals.
That's exactly why I refer to myself as an "Animal Welfare Activist" and avoid the term "Animal Rights" at all costs so I won't get confused with the PeTA's of the world. They do so much harm to their supposed "cause" it's sad.
post #5 of 19
Do any of you know if the claims that PETA's main hq (virginia i think?) animal shelter is actually a kill shelter?

There are several sites out there that seem reputable (professionally designed, content is supported with factual evidence, etc) that claim their main shelter operates at a 70% euthanasia rate, and according to the director "it's cheaper to run a kill shelter than a non-kill".

But I don't want to take that at face value as some of the sites opposing PETA are just as crazy as PETA.

~Julia
post #6 of 19
Thread Starter 
Hi Penn and Teller did a great episode on Peta in one of their shows. You can google it and it will come up if you are interested. I cant put a link up because the show has swearing in it.
post #7 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlutgendorf
Do any of you know if the claims that PETA's main hq (virginia i think?) animal shelter is actually a kill shelter?

There are several sites out there that seem reputable (professionally designed, content is supported with factual evidence, etc) that claim their main shelter operates at a 70% euthanasia rate, and according to the director "it's cheaper to run a kill shelter than a non-kill".

But I don't want to take that at face value as some of the sites opposing PETA are just as crazy as PETA.

~Julia
There have been several cases of problems with PETA. They don't believe that pets should even be allowed. Just let the animals run free.

PETA Employees Face 31 Felony Animal-Cruelty Charges for Killing, Dumping Dogs

And this site documents their hypocrisy. http://www.petakillsanimals.com/
post #8 of 19
Just adding a very graphic and disturbing tag to the site linked below.
I think I'm honestly going to puke.
post #9 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlutgendorf
Do any of you know if the claims that PETA's main hq (virginia i think?) animal shelter is actually a kill shelter?

There are several sites out there that seem reputable (professionally designed, content is supported with factual evidence, etc) that claim their main shelter operates at a 70% euthanasia rate, and according to the director "it's cheaper to run a kill shelter than a non-kill".

But I don't want to take that at face value as some of the sites opposing PETA are just as crazy as PETA.

~Julia



Some of those photo's in that link do not prove those animals were maliciously killed and those charge sheets suggest that the Peta representative misled the people from tho homing centre.
How do we know they weren't supposed to take them to a lab for experiments and they were put to sleep to save them from a fate like that?
Seriously why would someone intent on killing animals for the hell of it have loads of munchies and treats in the back of the van and why didn't they just beat them to death instead of injecting them.

There are a lot of people out there that are intent on undermining the animal welfare activists and the only way they can achieve to undermine their credibility is to turn the people who support them against them.
post #10 of 19
These are the numbers from the Virgina Dept of Agriculture and Consumer Services for PETA in 2004 and 2005. Their adoption rate vs their euthanasia rate are not good. I also included the statewide rates for all Humane Societies (PETA was classified as one by VA) and the VA statewide rates.

PETA
2004
Cats Adopted 262 12.3%
Euthanized 1875 87.7%

2005
Cats Adopted 76 4.1%
Euthanized 1765 95.9%

Humane Societies
2004
Cats Adopted 15458 39.4%
Euthanized 23780 60.6%

2005
Cats Adopted 16734 40.2%
Euthanized 24881 59.8%

Statewide:
2004
Cats Adopted 28320 33.0%
Euthanized 57380 67.0%

2005
Cats Adopted 30669 31.4%
Euthanized 67144 68.6%
post #11 of 19
"There are a lot of people out there that are intent on undermining the animal welfare activists and the only way they can achieve to undermine their credibility is to turn the people who support them against them."

And PeTA is a main cause of it. They aren't real animal activists the way people who run no-kill shelters or TNR programs and such are, but they use extreme, immoral measures that turn everyone else against the people who actually are trying to help. I am not about to support an organization like that, even though I do support the cause of the actual animals. I'm sure there are people who are members of it who don't act like lunatics and don't vandalize, etc, but the organization as a whole infuriates me. They do more harm than good...as the statistics posted sort of, well, prove.

And maybe the pictures don't show anything cruel (though, they sure do to me!) but I think it's ridiculous to give them the benefit of the doubt after the smear campaigns they've gone on with far less evidence of anything aside from animals who had been sedated for who knows what reason, possibly a legitimate one.

Like the site says, if they weren't doing it, they'd be protesting it. And do you know what you have to do to get a felony animal abuse charge in North Carolina? It has to be bad. And this was.
post #12 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zissou'sMom
"There are a lot of people out there that are intent on undermining the animal welfare activists and the only way they can achieve to undermine their credibility is to turn the people who support them against them."

And PeTA is a main cause of it. They aren't real animal activists the way people who run no-kill shelters or TNR programs and such are, but they use extreme, immoral measures that turn everyone else against the people who actually are trying to help. I am not about to support an organization like that, even though I do support the cause of the actual animals. I'm sure there are people who are members of it who don't act like lunatics and don't vandalize, etc, but the organization as a whole infuriates me. They do more harm than good...as the statistics posted sort of, well, prove.

And maybe the pictures don't show anything cruel (though, they sure do to me!) but I think it's ridiculous to give them the benefit of the doubt after the smear campaigns they've gone on with far less evidence of anything aside from animals who had been sedated for who knows what reason, possibly a legitimate one.

Like the site says, if they weren't doing it, they'd be protesting it. And do you know what you have to do to get a felony animal abuse charge in North Carolina? It has to be bad. And this was.
I do not doubt for one minute that there are some 'bad eggs' in Peta that do immoral and abhorrent acts,Just as there are in any organisation.
It is up to the organisation to weed out these people and yes i agree with you they do a hell of a lot more harm than good.If there were more decent people with the RIGHT attitude to animal activism WILLING to get involved,then they would not be so desperate to have those kinds of fanatics anywhere near their organisation.

You say its ridiculous to give them the benefit of the doubt after the smear campaigns they have gone on, with far less evidence and yet you are prepared to accept those pictures on face value, Maybe i'm wrong but .....I thought in america a person was innocent until proven guilty?

I do know through my personal experience of an ongoing animal abuse/welfare issue here in the uk(can't go into right now),That even with a lot of evidence it will be very difficult to prove abuse of those animals as they were put to sleep and that as far as i know is the recognised humane way to kill an animal,I'm not saying thay were right ,all i'm saying is how can it be animal abuse when they were humanely pts.
The R.S.P.C.A. over here put puppies to sleep regularly in the back of their vans,it was even broadcast on the B.B.C.

anyway thats my tuppence worth
post #13 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by furryferals
I do not doubt for one minute that there are some 'bad eggs' in Peta that do immoral and abhorrent acts,Just as there are in any organisation.
Do some research on Ingrid Newkirk who is the head of PETA. She endorses groups like ELF and ALF who are eco-terrorists groups. They run "shelters" but they think it is a better use of their money to euthanize and spend the money on their more extreme measures. Why bother with the shelter? It is alright for PETA members to use Insulin (which was discovered through animal testing and still contains animal products) because their lives are more important for their cause. Newkirk sees no problems with personal threats against scientists and their families if PETA disagrees with their research.

This is their leader.
post #14 of 19
Thats interesting
Yeah i'll do that....Thanks
post #15 of 19
"You say its ridiculous to give them the benefit of the doubt after the smear campaigns they have gone on, with far less evidence and yet you are prepared to accept those pictures on face value, Maybe i'm wrong but .....I thought in america a person was innocent until proven guilty?"

Yes, and they WERE proven guilty in a trial, in court. Of felonious animal cruelty. And lying to an animal hospital worker to obtain the animals they killed. I am not accepting the pictures on face value, I'm going by every experience I've had with PeTA members, which have been plenty. I've met some who think declawing is better for the cat, some who feed their cats vegan diets and wonder why they're blind, some who attacked me for having a pet, one who tried to release animals from a zoo.
PeTA was innocent until proven guilty in my personal opinion because I used to agree with them and then I realized what they actually do and actually stand for.
post #16 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zissou'sMom

Yes, and they WERE proven guilty in a trial, in court.
Well if thats the case then they deserve everything they get to the fullest extent of the law and some....

The link i followed didn't mention the fact that they were convicted.....just that they had been indicted.

post #17 of 19
First, there is a big difference between Animal RIGHTS (PETA, ALF) and Animal WELFARE (Ally Cat Allies, Best Friends Network) Activists. The AR people believe that NO animal should be used for ANYTHING - that includes medical testing, livestock/food source, and keeping them as pets. Animal Welfare activists work toward a much more attainable and practical (for both humans and animals) goal of treating all animals humanely through all parts of their lives, and yes sometimes their deaths too. I know it's just semantics, but as an Animal Welfare Activist, I do not want to be put in the same lump as the eco-terrorists that profess to be fighting for Animal Rights.

Did you know that PETA's official stance on ferals is to trap and kill them all? Ironic, since their stance on all animals in general is for them to revert to their "natural" wild state with no human interference. But for cats who, through the fault of humans, have done just that PETA says that it is inhumane to allow them to live, even with a caretaker and TNR.
post #18 of 19
I shudder to think how many well meaning people donate money to Peta thinking it helps animals, when they are euthanizing so many. There should be more mainstream media articles reporting the truth.
post #19 of 19
I am a researcher. Lately I have been disturbed by how many research projects we outsource overseas. The USDA is currently outsourcing a lot of research overseas, going as far as Southeast Asia.

I don't know about you, but I am not comfortable with people outsourcing sensitive animal research overseas. First of all it is making us losing a tremendous amount of talent. Second of all the people overseas might "accidentially" discover a way to make a biological weapon and not let the U.S. government know.

I believe that people should be friendlier with animal research in the First World. I know it can be horrible and morally reprehensible There had been one class I failed because I could not force myself to look at chimeric mouse embryos.

However, any animal researches conducted in the U.S. and U.K. are inherently more humane than animal research conducted in China (where there are rumors of the government harvesting human organs from prisoners and selling them on the black market for research).

I would like people to keep animal research in the First World as much as possible and make the environment friendly enough to the point we don't have to outsource such research projects.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Oxford University Wins Injunction Against Animal Right Extremists