Breed of Spot, Data's Cat on ST:TNG
Ronn Blankenship
This subject came up awhile back. I just recently found the article I
had read which stated that the breed of the cat that played Spot had
changed during the series. Here's an excerpt from CATS Magazine,
September 1994, Pages 50, 59:
----start of quote----
Breed of The Month by J. Anne Helgren
The Somali
<snip>
The Somali has even earned itself a place in science fiction history by
"boldly going where no
cat has gone before." In numerous episodes of _Star Trek, The Next
Generation (TNG)_, the
android Data's cat, Spot, appeared as a Ruddy Somali and was the first
feline crew member of
the _USS Enterprise_. So it's only fair that this breed receive popular
recognition by cat lovers
everywhere. (During the last three or four seasons, Spot appeared as a
short-haired orange tabby.
Perhaps an unfortunate transporter accident? Or maybe the producers
didn't think cat-loving
_TNG_ watchers would notice the difference.)
<snip>
Since the Somali is still a fairly rare breed, the waiting list can be
long for show quality cats; pet
quality may be easier to obtain. Either is well worth the wait. Just ask
your local breeder to beam
you up a Somali today. Lt. Commander Data can't be wrong. Or can he?
"It wasn't my idea to have a cat," says Brent Spiner, the actor who
plays Data, at a recent Star
Trek convention in Santa Rosa, California. "I would have preferred a
dog." I guess not even
androids are perfect.
----end of quote----
I also saw an item in _Reader's Digest_ (an issue I have not seen in a
long time) which •may• refer to this article--I cannot be sure without
finding the article. In one of the _Reader's Digest_ anecdote columns,
there was a blurb by a writer who had done an article about _ST:TNG_'s
Spot and was telling her father about what she had learned, including
the fact that two different cats had played Spot. At the end of her
story, her father asked, "Is Spot the one with the pointed ears?"
BTW, does anyone know for sure if Spot was supposed to be male or
female? Seems like I've heard "him" or "her" referred to both ways at
different times, though I guess I could be mistaken. Maybe that
transporter accident was worse than they thought...
-- Ronn! :)
Remove "NOSPAM." from address to reply.
Lorenzo L. Love
Ronn Blankenship wrote:
In one episode Spot gave birth to a litter of kittens, so that might limit
it down a little. Of course at the time, Spot had turned into a lizard...
Lorenzo
Seanette Blaylock
<ronn.bla...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
[snip]
>BTW, does anyone know for sure if Spot was supposed to be male or
>female? Seems like I've heard "him" or "her" referred to both ways at
>different times, though I guess I could be mistaken. Maybe that
>transporter accident was worse than they thought...
That's one I've discussed with other TNG fans. Consensus among the
people I've talked to was that Spot apparently had a sex change
somewhere along the way. In Spot's first episode ["Data's Day"], the
cat was repeatedly referred to as "he" [and you would think someone as
intelligent as Data would be able to correctly determine the sex of an
adult cat!], but about two seasons later [in the episode that had
people de-evolving], "he" had a litter of kittens.
Katherine M Stewart
>>female? Seems like I've heard "him" or "her" referred to both ways at
>>different times, though I guess I could be mistaken. Maybe that
>>transporter accident was worse than they thought...
>
>That's one I've discussed with other TNG fans. Consensus among the
>people I've talked to was that Spot apparently had a sex change
>somewhere along the way. In Spot's first episode ["Data's Day"], the
>cat was repeatedly referred to as "he" [and you would think someone as
>intelligent as Data would be able to correctly determine the sex of an
>adult cat!], but about two seasons later [in the episode that had
>people de-evolving], "he" had a litter of kittens.
That is what Trecker's commonly call a YATI (Yet Another Trek
Inconsistancy). Unfortunatly the reason for the change in cat was because of
the unexpected demise of the first cat. A friend of mine named a new kitten
after Spot, but found that the new cat *hated* the name. It was like having
a new cat when she changed his name to Earl!
ROBOT
*WhooOOP-WhooOOP*
I have a copy of DATA's poem "Ode To Spot" in my files somewhere, but,
it's mysteriously missing. Does anybody have it handy? It would be FUN
to post it here for all of our Fellow Feline Lovers! I'll keep
looking....
RO...@humboldt1.com
http://www.humboldt1.com/~robot/
ROBOT's Silly Sektor of CyberSpace
+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+
=K R A F T W E R K=K R A F T W E R K=K R A F T W E R K=
+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+^+
ROBOT
-----------------------------------------------
"Ode To Spot"
By Lt.Cmdr DATA
USS ENTERPRISE NCC-17-1-D
Felis catus is your taxonomic nomenclature.
An endothermic quadruped, carnivorous by nature.
Your visual, olfactory, and auditory senses
contribute to your hunting skills and natural defenses.
I find myself intrigued by your sub-vocal oscillations,
a singular development of cat communications
that obviates your basic hedonistic predilection
for a rhythmic stroking of your fur to demonstrate affection.
A tail is quite essential for your acrobatic talents;
you would not be so agile if you lacked its counterbalance.
And when not being utilized to aid in locomotion,
It often serves to illustrate the state of your emotion.
O Spot, the complex levels of behavior you display
connote a fairly well-developed cognitive array.
And though you are not sentient, Spot, and do not comprehend,
I nonetheless consider you a true and valued friend.
Susie B
seanette.spam...@impulse.net (Seanette Blaylock) wrote:
>On Sat, 11 Jul 1998 00:25:52 -0500, Ronn Blankenship
>
>That's one I've discussed with other TNG fans. Consensus among the
>people I've talked to was that Spot apparently had a sex change
>somewhere along the way. In Spot's first episode ["Data's Day"], the
>cat was repeatedly referred to as "he" [and you would think someone as
>intelligent as Data would be able to correctly determine the sex of an
>adult cat!], but about two seasons later [in the episode that had
>people de-evolving], "he" had a litter of kittens.
What was the name of the episode where Riker flatly refused to ever
catsit again? You know, where Data instructs Worf: "You will feed the
cat, you will pet the cat, you will tell it that it is a good cat..."
and Worf replies "I will feed the cat."
--
Susie B and the Thundering Herd
Rambo, Miss Kitty, Rocky and Tabitha
Join the fight against spam. http://www.cauce.org/
Rupa K. Bose
>
> Felis catus is your taxonomic nomenclature.
> An endothermic quadruped, carnivorous by nature.
With warm cat in lap, I was going to write, exothermic, you mean,
exothermic.
Then the cat moved from my lap to the top of my computer monitor,
draping itself comfortably over the heat-vents.
Rupa
Seanette Blaylock
<kstew...@sprynet.com> wrote:
[snip]
>A friend of mine named a new kitten after Spot, but found that the new cat *hated*
>the name. It was like having a new cat when she changed his name to Earl!
Reminds me of when Felix acquired us. The shelter had been calling him
Soldier. He made it rather plain that that was not *his* name, so
after a few days, I figured out that *his* name was Felix. He took to
that one right away [I named him for the Odd Couple character].
ROBOT
Rupa K. Bose wrote in message <35A932...@pacific.net.sg>...
>ROBOT wrote:
>>
>> Felis catus is your taxonomic nomenclature.
>> An endothermic quadruped, carnivorous by nature.
>
>With warm cat in lap, I was going to write, exothermic, you mean,
exothermic.<
Hey, I didn't write it. I just copy/pasted it from somewhere....
Hm-m-m, yeah, it would be "exo" not "endo", wouldn't it?
Oh my God! That means an Android IS capable of making mistakes. QUICK!
Alert Star Fleet! MAD ANDROID on the LOOSE!
>Then the cat moved from my lap to the top of my computer monitor,
draping itself comfortably over the heat-vents.<
Well, you could say cats give off heat, but, they like to absorb it as
well- as your feline computer cover can verify. :] ROBOSMILEY
*ME.OW*_^.".^_*PuRR*
RO...@gyrogearloose.com
http://www.gyrogearloose.com/robot/ -(HomePage)-
Ronn Blankenship
> On Sat, 11 Jul 1998 00:25:52 -0500, Ronn Blankenship
> <ronn.bla...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> [snip]
> >BTW, does anyone know for sure if Spot was supposed to be male or
> >female? Seems like I've heard "him" or "her" referred to both ways
> at
> >different times, though I guess I could be mistaken. Maybe that
> >transporter accident was worse than they thought...
>
> That's one I've discussed with other TNG fans. Consensus among the
> people I've talked to was that Spot apparently had a sex change
> somewhere along the way. In Spot's first episode ["Data's Day"], the
> cat was repeatedly referred to as "he" [and you would think someone as
>
> intelligent as Data would be able to correctly determine the sex of an
>
> adult cat!], but about two seasons later [in the episode that had
> people de-evolving], "he" had a litter of kittens.
That was exactly what I remembered. However, I wanted to make sure it
was not just my memory going...
Ronn Blankenship
> That is what Trecker's commonly call a YATI (Yet Another Trek
> Inconsistancy). Unfortunatly the reason for the change in cat was
> because of
> the unexpected demise of the first cat. A friend of mine named a new
> kitten
> after Spot, but found that the new cat *hated* the name. It was like
> having
> a new cat when she changed his name to Earl!
The cat I found on the side of the road on (US) Election Day in Nov '92
pretty well •insisted• on being called Spot (I gave him a choice), even
though •he• (no question there) was almost a look-alike for the
Clinton's cat Socks.
However, his reaction to hearing "Ode to Spot" was about as enthusiastic
as Commander Riker's.
(His reaction to Clinton was even less positive.)
And, unfortunately, he, too, suffered an unexpected demise from a
fast-acting liver infection soon after his (estimated) fourth
birthday...
June Knobbe
> BTW, does anyone know for sure if Spot was supposed to be male or
> female? Seems like I've heard "him" or "her" referred to both ways at
> different times, though I guess I could be mistaken. Maybe that
> transporter accident was worse than they thought...
Well, I'm not totally dedicated to ST but I remember one episode where
Spot had kittens.
Regards, June
Spammers need not reply.
If you want to email me,
replace "Spam" with the word "Bell"
in my address. Thanks
June Knobbe
<kstew...@sprynet.com> wrote:
> >people de-evolving], "he" had a litter of kittens.
>
> That is what Trecker's commonly call a YATI (Yet Another Trek
> Inconsistancy). Unfortunatly the reason for the change in cat was because of
> the unexpected demise of the first cat. A friend of mine named a new kitten
> after Spot, but found that the new cat *hated* the name. It was like having
> a new cat when she changed his name to Earl!
I have heard from more than one person that cats do have opinions when
it comes to their name. I had one cat that just loved her name Joann.
I realized they prefer a distinctive name so they can tell you're
talking to them. My cats usually come when I call them so maybe it's
because I try to choose a dinstinctive name. I read in Cat Fancy
somewhere that Cats like the E sound. The like to hear things like
tiki tiki . I don't know how the author decided that but it sticks in
my memory. When they are mad they growl and use an O or an OU sound,
so maybe IE is the opposite sound.
What's the most common name for a cat? I say it's Fluffy. =^..^=
beaniekitty
now. I am pretty sure that not only did the sex change but the breed
changed. He was a Somali in some and I think an orange Tortoise in others.
The tail was definitely different.
Jennifer Lantz
The Ginger Tabby
>That is what Trecker's commonly call a YATI (Yet Another Trek
>Inconsistancy). Unfortunatly the reason for the change in cat was because of
>the unexpected demise of the first cat
Oh how awful! I was very upset to hear this as I was a big fan of
this cat, having met him at a CFA cat show demonstration. He was even
more beautiful in person, so fluffy and huge intelligent eyes. One of
those cats you fall in love with instantly. His name was Liberty.
=====================================================================
Visit our web site! http://www.k-humble.dircon.co.uk/home.htm
Stop by our IRC channels on EFNet - #CraftChat and #GingerTabby
=====================================================================
Ronn Blankenship
> "Katherine M Stewart" <kstew...@sprynet.com> wrote:
> >That is what Trecker's commonly call a YATI (Yet Another Trek
> >Inconsistancy). Unfortunatly the reason for the change in cat was
> because of
> >the unexpected demise of the first cat
>
> Oh how awful! I was very upset to hear this as I was a big fan of
> this cat, having met him at a CFA cat show demonstration. He was even
>
> more beautiful in person, so fluffy and huge intelligent eyes. One of
>
> those cats you fall in love with instantly. His name was Liberty.
I find it interesting that neither the _CATS_ article nor the _RD_ item
mentioned that the original cat passed away and had to be replaced. I
wonder if this info was kept under wraps until after the articles were
published?
Rob Bos
: Well, I'm not totally dedicated to ST but I remember one episode where
: Spot had kittens.
Well... I am dedicated to ST: this is a plot inconsistency, Spot is a male
in the season before the one where she has kittens.
: Regards, June
: Spammers need not reply.
: If you want to email me,
: replace "Spam" with the word "Bell"
: in my address. Thanks
--
Rob Bos, new email rb...@tunafish.demungethis.sandwich.net
Warning: Contents under pressure. Do not puncture, flame, hit, spindle,
fold, mutilate, or, above all else, spork.
Ronn Blankenship
> Well... I am dedicated to ST: this is a plot inconsistency, Spot is a
> male
> in the season before the one where she has kittens.
>
Thanks, Rob. That's what I (and several others) thought. I guess we
can consider it settled now--not only did Spot change from a •Somali• to
a •red tabby•, •he• also changed into a •she•. Must have been •some•
transporter accident...!
> --
> Rob Bos, new email rb...@tunafish.demungethis.sandwich.net
>
> Warning: Contents under pressure. Do not puncture, flame, hit,
> spindle,
> fold, mutilate, or, above all else, spork.
How about •"foon"•?
-- Ronn! :)
whose own 'Spot' never changed gender or markings; unfortunately, just
over two years ago, he did change status from "live" to...
June Knobbe
> June Knobbe (JKn...@SpamSouth.net) wrote:
>
> : Well, I'm not totally dedicated to ST but I remember one episode where
> : Spot had kittens.
>
> Well... I am dedicated to ST: this is a plot inconsistency, Spot is a male
> in the season before the one where she has kittens.
>
>
It's not like this is the only inconsistency with ST. he he.
They're always bending the rules to fit to the script. I get a kick
out of that.
ben...@my-dejanews.com
read that, but I distinctly remember reading it somewhere.
Benpurr
In article <35b63652...@news.bna.bellsouth.net>,
--
Janice Saari
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Ronn Blankenship
I think it must be time to end this thread.
Last night, I dreamed that someone handed me a reddish wig, told me to
pretend to be a girl, and then people started calling me "Spot." It
wasn't until I woke up that I realized what I must have been thinking
about.
If there was anyone out there who doubted my insanity, I guess they have
no doubts any more...
-- Ronn! :)
Ronn Blankenship
By now, I'm sure everyone in the US at least, and probably the world,
has heard about the tragic shooting at the U.S. Capitol Friday
afternoon, in which two police officers were killed, a female tourist
injured, and the suspect himself shot. Since the first news reports I
heard, my thoughts and prayers have been with the victims' families,
with the woman for a complete and speedy recovery, with the family of
the shooter, and, yes, I even hope for the shooter's recovery so (1)
maybe he will someday come to an understanding of what he did and at
least (2) maybe he will be able to tell us just what the $%@! he was
thinking to make him do it. (And, no, this hope for his recovery does
not change the fact that, after a proper trial finds him guilty, I
believe he deserves no less than the death penalty.)
This (Saturday in the US) morning's papers are full of this story, and,
in light of previous news stories and discussions we have had here on
these newsgroups about the link between animal abuse and violent crime
against humans, I found one article from the front page of our local
paper, _The Birmingham [Alabama, USA] News_, very interesting. I quote
from the article entitled "Weston called loner with mental problems"
(how many times have we heard *that* description, hunh?):
-----------------Begin Quote---------------
Weston called loner with mental problems
By J. Scott Orr
Newhouse News Service
Russell E. Weston Jr., the 41-year-old man accused of shooting three
people at the US. Capitol Friday, was a loner with a history of mental
problems who had recently been kicked out of the family home, his father
said in an interview.
Russell E. Weston Sr., reached by phone at his Valmeyer, Ill., home
shortly after the shootings, said he demanded that his son move out of
the house after Rusty, as the younger Weston is known, killed 16 cats
with a .22-caliber weapon.
"We had an incident a couple of days ago and I told him he has 10 days
to get out," Russell Weston Sr. said. "He said his grandmother told him
there are too many cats around here so he killed them. He killed 16 of
them. He shot them down with a .22 gun." He said he last saw Rusty
around midday Thursday.
The younger Weston is unmarried and had not worked for some time, his
father said. He said Rusty was collecting Social Security disability
because of mental problems, which the elder Weston did not specify, and
has lived from time to time on family property in Montana.
Copyright Š 1998 The Birmingham News
------------------End Quote----------------
While even I, a confirmed cat lover, would never suggest that the
killing of 16 cats is a crime equal to or worse than the killing of two
police officers and the wounding of an innocent bystander, not to
mention the assault upon our nation's Capitol, after I read this I had
to wonder if perhaps if the laws against animal abuse had been strong
enough that the younger Weston could have been arrested and either
jailed or held for mental evaluation for killing the cats, rather than
the only consequences of that act being his father evicting him from the
family home, his dangerous state of mind might have been discovered and
six children in Washington might still have their fathers today.
Note: I don't blame the senior Mr. Weston in any way for this tragedy.
I don't know if there was anything else he could do but evict his son.
Also, I don't assign blame to him even though in another article I read
about the shooting, it appears that the younger Weston stole his
father's .38 revolver and this was the type of gun used in the
shooting. I have heard that Mr. & Mrs. Weston issued a public statement
of apology earlier today for the actions of their son, and, as I said
before, I consider them victims, too. The only person I blame is the
shooter.
Well, I just thought it needed to be said. I yield the soapbox.
-- Ronn! :)
dih...@cjnetworks.com
>
> Well, I just thought it needed to be said. I yield the soapbox.
>
> -- Ronn! :)
So essentially you're saying that maybe now someone will finally take
the link between animal abuse and crime seriously? Hopefully, but doubt
it any time soon. Gee, maybe a nice big fat note to Oprah containing
all the stories that have been posted here and elsewhere would spark
some media attention?? (nahhhhhhhh)
--
Diane ~ dih...@cjnetworks.com or kali...@hotmail.com
>^..^< See the cats at www.cjnetworks.com/~dihatsu/
"If you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find
it, you surely will." ~ Abraham Lincoln
Hugo Nebula
<ronn.bla...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>By now, I'm sure everyone in the US at least, and probably the world,
>has heard about the tragic shooting at the U.S. Capitol Friday
<snip>
>Rusty, as the younger Weston is known, killed 16 cats
>with a .22-caliber weapon.
<snip>
> The younger Weston is unmarried and had not worked for some time, his
>father said. He said Rusty was collecting Social Security disability
>because of mental problems, which the elder Weston did not specify, and
>has lived from time to time on family property in Montana.
<snip>
>it appears that the younger Weston stole his
>father's .38 revolver and this was the type of gun used in the
>shooting. I have heard that Mr. & Mrs. Weston issued a public statement
>of apology earlier today for the actions of their son, and, as I said
>before, I consider them victims, too. The only person I blame is the
>shooter.
>
>Well, I just thought it needed to be said. I yield the soapbox.
I don't wish to be seen as anti-American, and this is hardly the forum
to discuss these matters, but as the matter has been raised, please
allow me to express my opinion.
It seems to me that the real problem with this and many of the other
random acts of shooting that get reported in the UK is the free
availability of guns of all descriptions. It seems bizarre that a
household containing a mentally-disturbed individual is allowed to
have at least two guns.
In the UK following the Dunblane shooting (where a paedophile shot
dead a class of 4 and 5 year old children), all guns (except shotguns)
have been banned. All holders of shotguns are required to have a
licence issued and updated by the local police, and if they have any
concerns that you are not using it for legitimate reasons, if they
have any doubts as to your mental state, or if you do not keep the gun
in a steel locked cabinet, then that licence can be withdrawn.
I wonder what it is going to take to get Americans to remove the
"right to bear arms" from your constitution, and institute some
serious gun control!
--
Hugo Nebula
Put Alex before @ to reply.
Helene
feel manly if the don't have their death machines. A more peacefull
America would start with disarming.
Helene, canadian, and lucky to be, for I don't cross armerd people every
day, and our crime rate in Montreal is down...
Christine Hazlett
potential for mayhem among the human population is one to not be taken
lightly. Why aren't these people being put under psychiatric care, I mean
serious psychiatric care, not a few counselor visits? This tendancy towards
violence to animals begins early and everyone reports this form of violence
whenever a serial killer's story is reported or there is a school shooting.
I just find it interested that this country doesn't do more preventative
work against violence, it is talked about so much but it seems that one has
to do something horrible before any action is taken.
Once someone has abused an animal, it shows that their empathy for life is
less than normal and that person should be watched closely by authorities
and treated agressively psychologically.
okay, I am off my soapbox now too!
Christine Hazlett
chri...@ez2.net
Ronn Blankenship wrote in message <6pebo4$o...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>...
>Hi, all--
>
>By now, I'm sure everyone in the US at least, and probably the world,
>has heard about the tragic shooting at the U.S. Capitol Friday
>the house after Rusty, as the younger Weston is known, killed 16 cats
>with a .22-caliber weapon.
> "We had an incident a couple of days ago and I told him he has 10 days
>to get out," Russell Weston Sr. said. "He said his grandmother told him
>there are too many cats around here so he killed them. He killed 16 of
>them. He shot them down with a .22 gun." He said he last saw Rusty
>around midday Thursday.
> The younger Weston is unmarried and had not worked for some time, his
>father said. He said Rusty was collecting Social Security disability
>because of mental problems, which the elder Weston did not specify, and
>has lived from time to time on family property in Montana.
>
>Copyright © 1998 The Birmingham News
>
>------------------End Quote----------------
>
>While even I, a confirmed cat lover, would never suggest that the
>killing of 16 cats is a crime equal to or worse than the killing of two
>police officers and the wounding of an innocent bystander, not to
>mention the assault upon our nation's Capitol, after I read this I had
>to wonder if perhaps if the laws against animal abuse had been strong
>enough that the younger Weston could have been arrested and either
>jailed or held for mental evaluation for killing the cats, rather than
>the only consequences of that act being his father evicting him from the
>family home, his dangerous state of mind might have been discovered and
>six children in Washington might still have their fathers today.
>
>Note: I don't blame the senior Mr. Weston in any way for this tragedy.
>I don't know if there was anything else he could do but evict his son.
>Also, I don't assign blame to him even though in another article I read
>about the shooting, it appears that the younger Weston stole his
>father's .38 revolver and this was the type of gun used in the
>shooting. I have heard that Mr. & Mrs. Weston issued a public statement
>of apology earlier today for the actions of their son, and, as I said
>before, I consider them victims, too. The only person I blame is the
>shooter.
>
>Well, I just thought it needed to be said. I yield the soapbox.
>
>
>-- Ronn! :)
>
>
>
Ronn Blankenship
Well, here's some more evidence of his mental state, from the Sunday
edition of the paper:
-----------------Begin Quote---------------
Weston was committed to Montana's state mental hospital for 53 days in
the fall of 1996 for evaluation and treatment after threatening a Helena
resident, said Andrew Malcolm, a spokesman for Gov. Marc Racicot.
Copyright © 1998 The Birmingham News
------------------End Quote----------------
-- Ronn! :)
Ronn Blankenship
> A more peacefull
> America would start with disarming.
Yup. The same way the Germans celebrated a more peaceful country after
they outlawed individual citizens' ownership of guns in the 1930s.
-- Ronn! :)
Adrian Andrews
The abuser is now serving life in prison for the murder of a 9 year old
girl.
--
Adrian (Owned by Smokey, Snoopy & Rosie)
We are the cats. Resistance is futile.
an...@bigfoot.com
dih...@cjnetworks.com wrote in message
<35BB5D...@cjnetworks.com>...
>Ronn Blankenship wrote:
>>
>> Well, I just thought it needed to be said. I yield the soapbox.
>>
>> -- Ronn! :)
>
Patricia Flyer
issues on declawing and neglect ethics, etc., your post really astounds
me. When people decide to have children, they need to take a little
responsibility even after they are grown if they are unable to care for
themselves. The family has stated that he was diagnosed as a
schizophrenic who refused to take his meds. That spells a timebomb. .
..just waiting to 'go off'. Did they take him to his psyciatrist or ER to
be evaluated after he killed the cats. No, they kicked him out of the
house instead. Tick. . .tick. . .tick. . .Now, it appears they are
trying to blame the system? Not everyone needs to be locked up if they
have mental problems, but, they do usually need to take their meds to
stay in control. One would hope that this man's family would have tried
to get him to take his meds. What did grandma do - suggest he get rid of
excess cats? And dad just happened to have the gun for it. Something
seems wrong with this picture. Where was this man suppose to go? We have
humane societies for unwanted pets. How about unwanted people? The
articles I have read sounded like he had a history of being a public
nusience/threat in the past when he was 'out of control'. But, yet, he
was told to move out of the house. Why weren't the guns hidden better?
Why has all of the responsibility changed from the family to the system?
If he had another more obvious disease like multiple sclerosis, would he
still have been evicted? People with both types of disease are unable to
care for themselves well at times. But, we seem to accept the person
with the obvious deformity as needing help, while ignoring the person
with mental problems. The only comment I have read that has been the
least bit compassionate was made by his sister who acknowledges that she
still loves him. He was a sick man, not neccesarily a bad man. I wonder
if anyone has visited him in the hospital. Or has he been abandoned like
the pets in our local humane societies? Like the dog who is trained to
be an attack dog, but 'goofed up' & bit the wrong person & now lives at
his local shelter until his death.
What is your answer. . . have every working American be taxed another
$1000. or so a year to try to provide the resources to institutionalize
this man & the multitudes of others like him? He had a family
-supposedly all he needed to do was take his meds. That's a lot of
money just to make sure someone takes their meds. Go back to your humane
society & take a look at the animals with notes from their owners 'not
housetrained, barks too much, etc. A dog trainer once said "there are no
stupid dogs, just stupid owners". We institutionalize these unwanted
pets & I gather from your post that this is what you are proposing for
people. It's a lot of work to take care of an animal or person who can
not take care of themselves & some people just put the brunt of the
problem on society.
No, I do not believe lack of a strong animal abuse law led to the death
of the policemen in Washington. I believe the family probably would have
gotton some police response had they called 911. At least a trip to the
county hospital to be evaluated for mental stability. But, we don't
know, as apparantly, after killing 16 cats, they chose to send him out
on the streets instead to find an apartment next to yours or mine?
Patricia Flyer
cats? It wasn't until 2 days later when the policemen were shot that dad
reported that his gun had been 'stolen'.
Scritto
it's not possible to outlaw guns altogether - that all legal sales of guns
must be conducted between and among people who have been certified sane by a
board-approved mental institution ... that means no one on Prozac or
whatever other drugs people take these days are allowed to buy guns ...
How's that? - Michelle
Patricia Flyer wrote:
--
Kevin Traster and Michelle Lee
Pen, Paper & Mouse, Ink.
mailto:scr...@scritto.com
Please be advised that, unless otherwise stated, this message is copyrighted
by Pen, Paper & Mouse, Ink.
To see if your mail is unwanted, please look at
http://scritto.com/mt_killfiled.html
A detailed description of our services and pricing can be found at
http://scritto.com
"Ethinicity is an imaginary concept: Stress is the result of trying to live
up to the standards of that imaginary concept." - Scritto
For information on a free web site, click on http://singaporestrays.com
Ronn Blankenship
> P.S. Why did dad not realize that the son had stolen his gun to shoot
> cats? It wasn't until 2 days later when the policemen were shot that
> dad
> reported that his gun had been 'stolen'.
Actually, according to another article I read, it wasn't until someone
(don't recall right now if it was the police or a reporter) asked the
father if he knew if the son had a .38 handgun, and the father said
something like, "No, but I do," then got up & went into the other room
where he stored the gun, came back and reported "It's not there."
-- Ronn! :)
o...@gci-net.com
wrote:
>Scritto wrote:
>>
>> I would like to propose that if the NRA is so strong a lobby in the US that
>> it's not possible to outlaw guns altogether - that all legal sales of guns
>> must be conducted between and among people who have been certified sane by a
>> board-approved mental institution ... that means no one on Prozac or
>> whatever other drugs people take these days are allowed to buy guns ...
>> How's that? - Michelle
>
>You're off base! Prozac is prescribed mainly for depression. Depression
>is usually caused by a chemical imbalance (or lack of) or situations. A
>person who suffers from depression is not psychotic.
>
>A paranoid~delusional individual "is" psychotic and should not own or
>handle firearms.
>
>You shouldn't be so concerned about "whatever other drugs people take
>these days" but rather "whatever drugs people don't take," who suffer
>from mental problems. The person who shot the cats and two officers, had
>"stopped" taking his medicine.
>
>As far as banning guns -- good luck!
>
>(ken)
Isn't it amazing what simplistic, not to mention ineffective,
solutions people have to very complex problems. Obviously are
preparing to run for Congress or seek other government employment-:)
Neither guns nor drugs are the problem here, but there were behavioral
problems that clearly indicated trouble ahead. Evidently, slaughtering
the cats wasn't considered serious enough by his father to report it,
else someone might have taken notice.
Dogman
16:15:03 -0500, Scritto <scr...@scritto.com> gasps:
>I would like to propose that if the NRA is so strong a lobby in the US that
>it's not possible to outlaw guns altogether - that all legal sales of guns
>must be conducted between and among people who have been certified sane by a
>board-approved mental institution ...
First, Shitto, sane and insane are *legal* terms, not medical ones.
>that means no one on Prozac or whatever other drugs people take
> these days are allowed to buy guns.
That list of "other drugs that people take these days" would go on
forfreakingever.
>How's that?
How's this?
*You* don't get a gun, but *everyone* else does?
Yeah, I really like that idea!
{ :>O
--
Dogman
dog...@i1.net
About Hunting Retrievers
http://www.i1.net/~dogman/fieldtrl.htm
New! Dogman's Book Recommendations
http://www.i1.net/~dogman/books.htm
About The Finest Sour Mash Whisky Under The Sun
http://www.georgedickel.com
"Violence, when there are alternatives, is immoral.
Violence, when there are no alternatives, is survival."
Dogman
"Do unto others as they do unto you."
Dogman
Myranya
a shooting or an animal abuse case (like the Noah's Arc animal
shelter). I am just wondering has any *real* research been done on the
relation animal abuse - criminal activity? Each time there are several
cases being referred to, alot of people who have heard about
something, but has anyone ever collected all these incidents and
*done* something with them?
I would be willing to put some time and effort into collecting
these cases and seeing about getting the word out to the right places,
but I would need alot of help on this. My own experience is limited to
college research papers read only by the course teacher. But if there
is someone out there, maybe a sociologist, a psychiatrist, a
journalist or anyone else who can help getting the information in the
correct format, and into the right places, perhaps we can actually do
something about this. (Law magazines?? Psychiatric magazines?? CNN??
Heck, that's one of the reason I know I can't do it alone, I don't
even know what would be a good place to go with it after I gather it)
If anyone is also willing to put some time into this and knows
enough about the procedures so we don't spend our time on a 'college
research paper' without even a teacher to read it, please reply to
this post and maybe we can get something done.
Myranya
myr...@knoware.nl
My file on flying with cats available at:
http://www.knoware.nl/users/myranya/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Send me spam now and be certain I will *not ever* purchase any
product from your company or do business with you. I will, however,
sent your ISP a nice letter of complaint. Happy spamming.
Ronn Blankenship
> In this NG, in which we have been discussing responsible pet owners &
> issues on declawing and neglect ethics, etc., your post really
> astounds
> me.
Hi, Patricia--
I'm not sure if you are responding here to my post that started this
thread, or someone else's reply, but let me respond anyway...
> When people decide to have children, they need to take a little
> responsibility even after they are grown if they are unable to care
> for
> themselves. The family has stated that he was diagnosed as a
> schizophrenic who refused to take his meds. That spells a timebomb. .
> ..just waiting to 'go off'. Did they take him to his psyciatrist or ER
> to
> be evaluated after he killed the cats. No, they kicked him out of
> the
> house instead.
My point was that if they had taken him to a doctor or even called the
police right after he had shot the cats, they might have taken a report,
but, since animal abuse is in many states a misdemeanor at best, they
could not have locked him up in jail or committed him temporarily (I
think 72 hours is the usual period) for observation. At most, the
police would have filled out a report and issued him a summons to appear
in court, where the main charge would have more than likely have been
"discharging a firearm within 500 feet of an inhabited dwelling" or
something like that. In any case, *he would have been released that
day* and events would likely have gone ahead as they did.
Had shooting the cats been considered a *felony*, though, he might have
been jailed or committed long enough to interrupt the process. Whether
he would have still gone to Washington or whether someone would have
been able to force him to take his medicine and calm him down, we'll
never know, but at least it would have been a possibility. As the laws
are now, he would have had to have at least *threatened to shoot a
human* (homicide or suicide) before he could have been forced to get
treatment.
> Tick. . .tick. . .tick. . .Now, it appears they are
> trying to blame the system? Not everyone needs to be locked up if
> they
> have mental problems, but, they do usually need to take their meds to
> stay in control. One would hope that this man's family would have
> tried
> to get him to take his meds.
From what I've read, they tried. However, the law we have now says that
a person of legal age (and at 41, he certainly qualifies) cannot be
forced to undergo any treatment against his will, unless he has been
ruled incompetent by a judge and/or committed to an institution (even in
the latter case, if he was committed voluntarily, he could probably
leave at any time according to the law.)
> Why has all of the responsibility changed from the family to the
> system?
I don't think it should. However...
> What is your answer. . . have every working American be taxed another
> $1000. or so a year to try to provide the resources to
> institutionalize
> this man & the multitudes of others like him? He had a family
> -supposedly all he needed to do was take his meds.
Agreed. But, when ***he refused to take his meds***, as he did in this
case, what then? Daddy holds him down while Mother sticks a large-size
pill gun in his mouth? Daddy force him to take his pills at the point
of the aforementioned gun? (At 41, he's probably more nearly "in his
prime" and thus stronger than Daddy.) That would have given the *son*
legal cause to have his parents arrested!
> That's a lot of
> money just to make sure someone takes their meds.
I wish I knew the answer. Unfortunately, from what I have heard/read (I
am an planetary scientist, not a psychiatrist), many people with
schizophrenia think they feel normal and that the medicine makes them
feel abnormal, so they quit taking it, which seems to have been true in
this case. OTOH, as you point out, institutionalizing these people to
force them to take their medicine is very expensive. In fact, some
people who are responsible for making such decisions (e.g., politicians)
may think the lives of a few victims may be cheaper than the cost of
institutions, though they would never say so publicly. Then there's the
other extreme where anybody who does not fit some "norm" can be
institutionalized, which can lead to situations like in the former
Soviet Union, where the mental wards were full of people whose only
"illness" was disagreeing politically with the party in charge...
> Go back to your humane
> society & take a look at the animals with notes from their owners 'not
>
> housetrained, barks too much, etc. A dog trainer once said "there are
> no
> stupid dogs, just stupid owners". We institutionalize these unwanted
> pets & I gather from your post that this is what you are proposing for
>
> people.
No. As I said, I wish I had a good answer for what to do with people in
this condition.
There is one difference I might point out between the animals and people
you refer to in the above paragraph: As the dog trainer's statement
suggests, behavioral problems in animals are generally the result of
poor training by their owners, not the result of a chronic organic
illness like schizophrenia that cannot be cured but can be controlled by
medicine. And I certainly do *not* recommend that we do to people
diagnosed with schizophrenia or similar illnesses what we do to animals
diagnosed with an incurable disease.
(BTW, My mentioning in my original post that I think he deserves the
death penalty if convicted is not a contradiction...that would be
_punishment_ for his _crime_, not _euthanasia_ for a _chronic illness_,
even if the current fad is to administer both in the same manner.
He/his lawyers will probably try an "insanity" defense, though IMO the
fact that he knew that he could have lived a normal life with medication
but refused to take it makes him responsible for his actions.)
> It's a lot of work to take care of an animal or person who can
> not take care of themselves & some people just put the brunt of the
> problem on society.
Yes. And then some people do all they can and it's still not enough.
What then?
> No, I do not believe lack of a strong animal abuse law led to the
> death
> of the policemen in Washington. I believe the family probably would
> have
> gotton some police response had they called 911. At least a trip to
> the
> county hospital to be evaluated for mental stability. But, we don't
> know, as apparantly, after killing 16 cats, they chose to send him out
>
> on the streets instead to find an apartment next to yours or mine?
Well, as I've said above, my understanding of the law (in _practice_, at
least) is that he probably would not have been arrested/committed unless
he threatened suicide or homicide. (There _may_ be some jurisdictions
where he would have been held at least overnight and forced to see a
mental health professional...if anyone [e.g., law enforcement or mental
health professional] knows of one or thinks differently, please
enlighten me.)
My main point in posting this and entitling it "Could Tougher ..." was
to get a discussion started, and I seem to have done that, at least!
-- Ronn! :)
Simon Juncal
> I don't wish to be seen as anti-American, and this is hardly the forum
> to discuss these matters, but as the matter has been raised, please
> allow me to express my opinion.
You're right about the topicality but along the same lines...
> It seems to me that the real problem with this and many of the other
> random acts of shooting that get reported in the UK is the free
> availability of guns of all descriptions. It seems bizarre that a
> household containing a mentally-disturbed individual is allowed to
> have at least two guns.
The disturbed individual didn't have the gun, his father did, his
Father knowing his son was a little "off" should have thought the
better of locking his personal firearms away from his son.
Unfortunately for all involved including the courageous law officers
he didn't treat his weapons with the responsibility they demand.
In most states (I can't think of one that doesn't) convicted felons
and mental patients will be refused sale of firearms, after (usually
at least two days) their paperwork goes through. So had the nut
jobber in question not had access to his irresponsible fathers pistol,
48 hours later in DC he would (one would assume) have walked in with
a knife... pipe bomb... or perhaps a non metallic bomb of some
construct, wrapped around his torso, hollywood fashion...
All of which is neither here nor there, He was a nut job... A mental
patient, who apparently had no compunction against shooting 16 Cats
dead as seeming "population control" (or as one might surmise; as
a preface to when the real shooting began) IMHO he would have found
some instrument or means to destroy innocent lives. If not firearms
then fertilizer bombs... It's a well established fact that no matter
HOW MUCH you control weapons; determined zealots/criminals/psychos/
Terrorists etc. will get their hands on something that can cause
destruction. Just look at the IRA if you need an example of this point
(not that they don't have a grievance, but that's besides the point).
> I wonder what it is going to take to get Americans to remove the
> "right to bear arms" from your constitution, and institute some
> serious gun control!
At a guess it would probably take a small civil war... Although
our congress has made some real runs at the constitution, the
safety net enacted by the USA's founding fathers has for the most
part kept "unalienable" and "shall not be infringed" firmly in place,
and for good reason, it may not be perfect, but it works as well
or better then any other governing document on the earth.
We have freedom of the press and there's tabloid TV (and the
politically charged power hungry news media with it's own agenda),
we have freedom of speech, and racist groups use it all the time,
Freedom of assembly gave the striking General Motors machine workers
a victory for the working class (perhaps only a moral one), on the
other hand it's perfectly legal for the KKK to march down the street
in mass (with the proper arrangements) we have freedom of religion,
and inevitably the Guiana death cults, scams, fraud and "guru's"
pop up. We have the right to keep and bare arms, mostly as a hedge
against tyranny (though the popular "PC" opinion on this, is that
this is pure paranoia [if it is indeed paranoia it's well founded,
and incredibly well ingrained, and recommended highly by the greatest
minds this country ever had]) And a few times a year someone goes
postal... even something as tragic as a child taking a gun to school
(great parents there).
All of this is simply to get to one point, there's a price that comes
with having freedom... as Old Ben franklin said "Those who would give
up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve
neither Liberty nor Safety." And that is about as well put, as it will
ever get.
--
______________________________________________
) Simon co List Admin Capi...@his.com )
( Aka Alhazred (
) http://capitals.washington.dc.us/ )
( http://members.tripod.com/~sjuncal/shooter/ (
)_____________________________________________)
Help fight spam check out http://www.cauce.org
Tricia Kirkland
safe?
Tricia Kirkland
home from work after midnight. Alone. 20 miles. I have been broke
down , at 2 in the morning, n the middle of nowhere. With no
phone. I'd be a fool not to have my gun.
Guns do not kill. The people holding the gun does. I personally
have never seen a gun jump up and threaten anyone. Don't you
think if this guy couldn't get a gun, he would have found another
method? Please put the blame where it should be. On the man, not
the gun.
Simon Juncal
>
> P.S. Why did dad not realize that the son had stolen his gun to shoot
> cats? It wasn't until 2 days later when the policemen were shot that dad
> reported that his gun had been 'stolen'.
Excellent stuff both posts, I wish more people held to the ideal that
people need to take responsibility for their own actions or inaction.
Having a medicated mental patient in the house, makes having guns
stored in a locked gun safe or at least with trigger locks; _obvious_
common sense, necessary safety steps. The same applies to a
household with children. Hell you'd have thought the father would be
at least somewhat mindful of the location/status of his firearms
after the feline shootings. One wonders what other things the father
wasn't attentive of through out the development of his son.
Scritto
normal were required for gun purchase, you wouldn't qualify to own a gun? Life
really isn't that hard ... - Michelle
o...@gci-net.com wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jul 1998 17:45:05 -0400, "Ken M." <pobo...@ix.netcom.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Scritto wrote:
> >>
> >> I would like to propose that if the NRA is so strong a lobby in the US that
> >> it's not possible to outlaw guns altogether - that all legal sales of guns
> >> must be conducted between and among people who have been certified sane by a
> >> board-approved mental institution ... that means no one on Prozac or
> >> whatever other drugs people take these days are allowed to buy guns ...
> >> How's that? - Michelle
> >
> >You're off base! Prozac is prescribed mainly for depression. Depression
> >is usually caused by a chemical imbalance (or lack of) or situations. A
> >person who suffers from depression is not psychotic.
> >
> >A paranoid~delusional individual "is" psychotic and should not own or
> >handle firearms.
> >
> >You shouldn't be so concerned about "whatever other drugs people take
> >these days" but rather "whatever drugs people don't take," who suffer
> >from mental problems. The person who shot the cats and two officers, had
> >"stopped" taking his medicine.
> >
> >As far as banning guns -- good luck!
> >
> >(ken)
>
> Isn't it amazing what simplistic, not to mention ineffective,
> solutions people have to very complex problems. Obviously are
> preparing to run for Congress or seek other government employment-:)
> Neither guns nor drugs are the problem here, but there were behavioral
> problems that clearly indicated trouble ahead. Evidently, slaughtering
> the cats wasn't considered serious enough by his father to report it,
> else someone might have taken notice.
--
do...@my-dejanews.com
Tricia Kirkland <t...@cybersouth.com> wrote:
> Guns do not kill. The people holding the gun does.
Actually, its the bullets that kill. I think everyone should
be able to buy as many guns as they want, but no bullets.
That would take care of the problem, and it would be constitutional, too.
Marca
keethie
conferences. Well anyway, it is nice to know that cats interest all
different kinds of people.
--Keith (a nonshooting, nonhunting opponent of violence, who nevertheless
supports the 2nd Amendment as an individual right--just like the other 9
are)
--
--Place pithy quote here--
Patricia Flyer
www.cnn.com/US/9807/26/cap.shooting.cats.ap/index.html
Nancy E.Holmes or R. Nelson Ruffin
in answer to the title question - tougher laws will be just as useless as
current laws - ineffective enforcement is the problem.
Nancy
Simon Gornall
>
> Hugo Nebula wrote:
> > I don't wish to be seen as anti-American, and this is hardly the forum
> > to discuss these matters, but as the matter has been raised, please
> > allow me to express my opinion.
>
> You're right about the topicality but along the same lines...
>
> > It seems to me that the real problem with this and many of the other
> > random acts of shooting that get reported in the UK is the free
Um. That's not the case. It was "easy" to obtain a gun licence in the
Uk, but you still had to "prove" your need for it. Of course, the law
wasn't applied suffucently in the case of Dunblane. My heart goes out
to the victims of this 'clerical error'
I would say however, that it's a damn sight more difficult to get a
gun in the UK (especially now that most of them are illegal) than
it is in the US. Although I agree to an extent that "real" criminals
will always have guns, I think it's still a good thing to reduce their
popularity - I can't remember the last time I went to the US and there
*wasn't* a story on the news (CNN) about a shooting. Often a
child-related case. I think this is very sad. (I'm in the US about
4 times / year, in different places each time. The *trend* is consistent
though the numbers are variable)
<politics>
Is it not **blindingly obvious** that easy access to guns causes more
death by gunshot - Perhaps I'm missing something. Perhaps my lack of
understanding is worth a child's life. Or many childrens lives.
Perhaps.
</politics>
>
> We have freedom of the press and there's tabloid TV (and the
> politically charged power hungry news media with it's own agenda),
> we have freedom of speech, and racist groups use it all the time,
[deletia]
> we have freedom of religion,
> and inevitably the Guiana death cults, scams, fraud and "guru's"
> pop up. We have the right to keep and bare arms, mostly as a hedge
> against tyranny (though the popular "PC" opinion on this, is that
> this is pure paranoia [if it is indeed paranoia it's well founded,
> and incredibly well ingrained, and recommended highly by the greatest
> minds this country ever had]) And a few times a year someone goes
> postal... even something as tragic as a child taking a gun to school
> (great parents there).
>
> All of this is simply to get to one point, there's a price that comes
> with having freedom... as Old Ben franklin said "Those who would give
> up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve
> neither Liberty nor Safety." And that is about as well put, as it will
> ever get.
Bollocks. Sorry. There is the same level of justification for
putting a gun into a child's hands as putting a gun into a certified
insane person's hands.
If you honestly regard childrens' lives as the price you have to pay in
order to gain political freedom, you're warped. I don't believe you are,
(most of your post is soundly argued) and I think what needs to be done
is a change in the public opinion over what is right and proper. Guns'
aren't. Simple as that.
I'd point to the UK as a comparison for this - in many ways I think the
UK is *more* free a society than the US (less restrictions, more open,
less 'big brother', and fewer "weirdo anonymous government agencies")
We have all the advantages you clain above, and we have far lower gun
problems. We also don't have the 'survivalist' element that seems to
be a part of US society (on the outskirts :-). Basically I feel more
secure in the UK, and I've lived all over the world over the last 20
years or so.
Each to their own, I guess, but then my acceptance of other's ideals
and goals is also a very British thing :-)
Simon.
--
Catapultam habeo!
Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam !!
Revision
: I knew this would happen. A discussion about firearms3 in the cat
: conferences. Well anyway, it is nice to know that cats interest all
: different kinds of people.
I was hoping that this thread would die on its own or move to the
appropriate channel, alt.politics.guns (hint hint hint)
All I wanted to say is, My cat likes to hunt, why can't I? But my
cat, Miranda, who seems to spend more time on my computer than I do (more
on this later) wants me to add a few words of her own.
-------
"Humans are so blantantly dense that I cannot find it amusing anymore.
First off you blamed us(cats) for the Black Plague, when it was the fault
of the rat who carried that parasite. Then you go and nearly kill every
cat in Europe. Have you learned anything since then? Apparently not.
Here you go again pointing your silly fingers looking for something to
blame. Once again you've let your fears and superstitions guide your
emotions instead of your reason. I've been lurking on this newsgroup
for a while now and this bit of foolishness and gotten my fur up on end.
You reason that if you could get rid of all the guns it would solve your
problems. How would you go about getting rid of all of them? You'd have to
get your friends to give up their guns, then your neighbors, finally
your _enemies_. Think they'd give up their guns? How about the police
and the military? Better yet other _countries'_ military? Remember,
according to your logic, as long as there is one gun you are in danger.
But back to the original question, how are you going to get everyone to
give up their guns?
You who could not get rid of all the cats in Europe.. You people who
cannot even keep in check nuclear and chemical weapons?
But once again, as back in Europe in the age of the Black Plague, you
humans are looking in the wrong place for the cause of your problems. It
should be as plain as the rats in the street.
In continuance I'd like to talk about another related subject. If you were
to disarm people (I mean taking away their guns not their arms) to keep
them from hunting, defending, and possibly making a menace of themselves..
How is that different from declawing cats (I mean taking away their paw
at the first joint not their claws)?
You see, I am a staunch believer in the Second Amendment and I believe
that cats too have the right to keep and bear arms (in this case, paws).
<stuff deleted>
Miranda,
member of CETH"
-----------
There was some more stuff on that same note, but I've deleted it for the
sake of bandwidth. A LOT more...
Lately I've been having trouble with my cat who seems to be on my computer
more than me. Its not that I mind, I have a local untimed connection at
V90 speeds. Its just that she's been visiting these strange groups on the
web and lately she's been quoteing wierd legal mumbo jumbo. Just yesterday
she demanded canned food to dry and even recited from memory some document
she found. She even threatened me with a First Amendment lawsuit if I
didn't post the above...
Should I be worried?
--
_ __
' ) )
/--' _ , __o _ o ________
/ \_</_\/ <__/_)_<_(_) / / <_
revi...@ripco.com
Ronn Blankenship
> [snip]
> Um. That's not the case. It was "easy" to obtain a gun licence in the
> Uk, but you still had to "prove" your need for it. Of course, the law
> wasn't applied suffucently in the case of Dunblane. My heart goes out
> to the victims of this 'clerical error'
>
> I would say however, that it's a damn sight more difficult to get a
> gun in the UK (especially now that most of them are illegal) than
> it is in the [snip]
> Simon.
>
And then admitted:
> Catapultam habeo!
But is it registered and licensed? Do you carry it concealed? <g>
-- Ronn! :)
Ronn Blankenship
> keethie (kee...@accesscom.com) wrote:
> : I knew this would happen. A discussion about firearms3 in the cat
> : conferences. Well anyway, it is nice to know that cats interest all
> : different kinds of people.
>
> I was hoping that this thread would die on its own or move to the
> appropriate channel, alt.politics.guns (hint hint hint)
This is being discussed here because *animal abuse*, specifically that
of cats, is an appropriate topic for this venue, and because many
experts think that animal abuse is frequently a warning sign of future
violence against humans. The important issue is violence against
animals, not guns.
> [snip]
>
> In continuance I'd like to talk about another related subject. If you
> were
> to disarm people (I mean taking away their guns not their arms) to
> keep
> them from hunting, defending, and possibly making a menace of
> themselves..
> How is that different from declawing cats (I mean taking away their
> paw
> at the first joint not their claws)?
>
> You see, I am a staunch believer in the Second Amendment and I believe
>
> that cats too have the right to keep and bear arms (in this case,
> paws).
>
> <stuff deleted>
>
> Miranda,
> member of CETH"
Agreed, Miranda!
-- Ronn! :)
Chelsea
>
> that cats too have the right to keep and bear arms (in this case,
> paws).
I agree! I think it is cruel and rude, for a cat to be declawed, I have
two declawed kitties, I got them after they had been declawed, and I
can't let them go in their natural envirenment (outside) because they
can't protect themselves. I feel real bad for them, they just stare
outside wishing they could go out. :(
-Chelsea
Christine Hazlett
took the guns away, people with these tendencies would always find somthing
else to inflict damage ie: explosives, knives, their hands, axes, the list
goes on....it isn't the tool that causes the damage it is the human with the
problem....
The cnn post above states that one of the kids involved in a school shooting
stuffed firecrackers into a cat's mouth......They will always find
something....
Ronn Blankenship wrote in message
<35BEDD5F...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>...
>Revision wrote:
>
>> keethie (kee...@accesscom.com) wrote:
>> : I knew this would happen. A discussion about firearms3 in the cat
>> : conferences. Well anyway, it is nice to know that cats interest all
>> : different kinds of people.
>>
>> I was hoping that this thread would die on its own or move to the
>> appropriate channel, alt.politics.guns (hint hint hint)
>
>This is being discussed here because *animal abuse*, specifically that
>of cats, is an appropriate topic for this venue, and because many
>experts think that animal abuse is frequently a warning sign of future
>violence against humans. The important issue is violence against
>animals, not guns.
>
>> [snip]
>>
>> In continuance I'd like to talk about another related subject. If you
>> were
>> to disarm people (I mean taking away their guns not their arms) to
>> keep
>> them from hunting, defending, and possibly making a menace of
>> themselves..
>> How is that different from declawing cats (I mean taking away their
>> paw
>> at the first joint not their claws)?
>>
>> You see, I am a staunch believer in the Second Amendment and I believe
>>
>> that cats too have the right to keep and bear arms (in this case,
>> paws).
>>
Lori Temple
> I agree! I think it is cruel and rude, for a cat to be declawed, I have
> two declawed kitties, I got them after they had been declawed, and I
> can't let them go in their natural envirenment (outside) because they
> can't protect themselves. I feel real bad for them, they just stare
> outside wishing they could go out. :(
> -Chelsea
I have two cats that are simply not allowed out, too dangerous. They
love the outside though so I bought them harnesses and short ropes and take
them out for a while and stay with them. Since they have never been out
any other way they love it. It makes me laugh that they ask to come in to
go to the litter box !
Hang in there
Lori
BTY I agree it is cruel and rude to declaw cats, I've had cats for 23
years and NEVER had one declawed.
TK
Ronn Blankenship
> Revision wrote:
>
> >
> > LETS GET THIS THREAD BACK ON TRACK NOW!!!
> >
> > People who abuse cats and become mass murders.
>
> Let's rewrite that sentence so it makes some sense:
>
> "People who abused animals, as children, are more likely to become
> mass
> murderers."
>
> >
> > By that logic a person can be declaired insane if (s)he ever abuses
> a
> > dumb animal...
>
> Maybe they should be. Why would someone have that desire?
>
And that, folks, is what I wanted to discuss when I started this thread
nearly a week (and uncounted dozens of messages) ago.
If we made animal abuse a felony, would it have the effect of
intervening in the lives of those who abuse animals before they go on to
hurt humans? Or would those tougher laws just be essentially ignored
because of overworked police, a clogged court system, and a lack of
services for the mentally ill between institutionalization and leaving
them completely on their own?
In the months I have been monitoring this and the other cat newsgroups,
there have been a number of accounts of animal abuse posted. Most of
the responses have indicated how disgusted the writer was with these
acts and how they wish that more could be done to prevent animal abuse.
Given that there have been various studies reported in the news about
the link between animal abuse and violence to humans, even before last
week's events, is it possible that tougher animal abuse laws might
protect both animals and humans? Could this argument be presented to
the lawmakers whose reaction to toughening animal abuse laws is "Well,
they're just animals," or "Kids will be kids?"
Just me wondering...
-- Ronn! :)
-- Ronn! :)
Veronica Karlsson
>
> "Humans are so blantantly dense that I cannot find it amusing anymore.
> First off you blamed us(cats) for the Black Plague, when it was the fault
> of the rat who carried that parasite. Then you go and nearly kill every
> cat in Europe. Have you learned anything since then? Apparently not.
>
You got this bit backwards.
Your version:
CAUSE: The Black Death!
EFFECT: People blamed cats and killed them.
The version I've heard (*many* times):
Christian European priests had political and financial interest in
keeping their religion in power. They did this by making people afraid
of the other alternatives. For example, they threatened people with
"hell", they banned the "sinful" saunas where whole families all bathed
together in a pleasant and hygienic way once a week (the Swedish work
for "Saturday" means "the day when we bathe"...), they called thousands
of women "witches" and used that as an excuse to kill them in various
painful ways, etc.
They associated cats with witches (witches are women, women like cats,
cats are independent and can't be "tamed" like dogs can, cats like to be
awake at night, cats eyes "look evil" with their oddly shaped pupils,
etc... - all the stuff we all enjoy reading about in this newsgroup...)
and decided to kill all cats to get rid of this "evil element" ("we
don't want common people to think for themselves, like cats do, do
we?!").
They were quite successful in getting rid of the cats, and as a result
the mice and rats got fewer natural enemies and their number increased.
When people have cats in their houses they genearlly don't have rats and
mice. Remove the cats and the rats will come into the houses, and eat of
your food, etc. It becomes much easier for the plague to spread from
rats to humans...
i.e:
CAUSE: People killed the "evil" cats.
EFFECT: The Black Death!
--
:) Irebavpn Xneyffba \ /_ _ _ _ . _ _ Zl bgure fvt vf n Cbefpur
( r93...@fz.yhgu.fr \/(-| (_)| )|(_(_| uggc://jjj.yhqq.yhgu.fr/~ix/ )
Veronica Karlsson
> I have two cats that are simply not allowed out, too dangerous. They
> love the outside though so I bought them harnesses and short ropes and take
> them out for a while and stay with them. Since they have never been out
> any other way they love it. It makes me laugh that they ask to come in to
> go to the litter box !
Mine is not declawed, she is allowed in and out as much as she wants (as
long as there is a human around to open the door for her... (she's _not_
getting a cat flap!)). She always comes into the house to use her litter
box - except in the summer when it's nice and warm outside and my mother
has prepared all those big lovely sand boxes for her in the garden! ;D
Revision
: Miranda wrote:
: >
: > "Humans are so blantantly dense that I cannot find it amusing anymore.
: > First off you blamed us(cats) for the Black Plague, when it was the fault
: > of the rat who carried that parasite. Then you go and nearly kill every
: > cat in Europe. Have you learned anything since then? Apparently not.
: >
: You got this bit backwards.
: Your version:
: CAUSE: The Black Death!
: EFFECT: People blamed cats and killed them.
: The version I've heard (*many* times):
: Christian European priests had political and financial interest in
: keeping their religion in power. They did this by making people afraid
: of the other alternatives. For example, they threatened people with
: "hell", they banned the "sinful" saunas where whole families all bathed
: together in a pleasant and hygienic way once a week (the Swedish work
: for "Saturday" means "the day when we bathe"...), they called thousands
: of women "witches" and used that as an excuse to kill them in various
: painful ways, etc.
snip
: They were quite successful in getting rid of the cats, and as a result
: the mice and rats got fewer natural enemies and their number increased.
: When people have cats in their houses they genearlly don't have rats and
: mice. Remove the cats and the rats will come into the houses, and eat of
: your food, etc. It becomes much easier for the plague to spread from
: rats to humans...
: i.e:
: CAUSE: People killed the "evil" cats.
: EFFECT: The Black Death!
"Not really.
Read following web page for a biological discription of the bacterium.
The disease was around well before its transferance to people.
http://www.humanities.ccny.cuny.edu/history/plague/biology.htm
Also your cause and effect argument is subject to misinterpretation. The
killing of cats did not cause the Black Plague. (see web site reference)
The bacterium was carried around by the rats, and spread by fleas.
Additionally the problem was compounded by overcrowding and sqaullar among
the poor populous.
Whether or not cats had been killed, the plague would have occured. "
-- Miranda
member of CETH
Tina M Noyes
: "Not really.
: Read following web page for a biological discription of the bacterium.
: The disease was around well before its transferance to people.
: Whether or not cats had been killed, the plague would have occured. "
: -- Miranda
: member of CETH
Well, no. The fact that the cats were killed by the billions (usually
burned along with the "witches"), certainly did contribute to the spread
of the plague. The bacterium did exist before, but the population
explosion among rats, the main host of the infectious agent, allowed
faster spread. There were many other factors involved, such as the
changes in hygiene practices (ie the banning of public baths as the
previous poster saia). The disease would have existed without the mass
slaughter of cats and the poor hygiene, BUT it likely would never have
become a plague as it did.
--
Tina Noyes
http://www.peak.uoguelph.ca/peaksters/tina/
o...@gci-net.com
wrote:
>WebbWeave wrote:
>>
>> Quote:
>> If we made animal abuse a felony, would it have the effect of
>> intervening in the lives of those who abuse animals before they go on to
>> hurt humans?
>>
>> Probably not. There are too many *sorts* of animal abuse, and not all of them
>> are likely to lead to axe murdering. There are some people who are just stupid,
>> or ignorant, who (in my mind) abuse animals. Though very serious for the
>> animal, it probably doesn't indicate anything for society-in-general.
>> Besides, we have *enough* laws, for cryin' out loud.
>> Jane Webb
>> M&M Pie
>
We do have way too many laws, BUT they are not the ones we need. Way
too many infringe personal freedoms and way too few protect those who
cannot protect themselves, including animals. Our elected
"representatives" pass laws not for the common good, but to get
themselves re-elected.
>Whoa, wait a minute. What in the hell do you mean "Besides, we have
>*enough* laws, for cryin' out loud?" I really can't believe you said
>that!
>
>Let me share a few "animal abuse" cases, in my area, in last few years.
>
>* About four years ago in Chevy Chase, Md, police officers pulled over a
>suspicious pick-up truck in the middle of the night. The driver was
>somewhat drunk. A dog was lying in the back of the truck, crying. The
>officers asked the driver what was wrong with the dog and he replied,
>"The owners didn't want him anymore so I hit him (twice) in the head
>with the hammer -- is he still alive?" The dog suffered a fractured
>scull, but recoverd. He was blind after that ordeal.
>
>In Howard County, Md. a few years back, residents of an apartment
>complex found a cat, that had been set on fire, and left to die.
>
>A few months later a passerby found another cat, running, on fire, and
>drove the cat to an animal hospital. It was featured on WJZ television
>in Baltimore.
>
>Two years ago in Alexandria, Virginia, a dog was found, tied to a tree,
>and had been set on fire. They believe it was done to retaliate against
>the dog's owner. The police detective was on TV, pleading for anyone,
>who had information, to call her.
>
>These type of abuse are sick and the offenders should be locked up.
>Jane, we do have alot of laws on the books, but one more won't matter.
>The people who abuse animals and beat them with hammers and set them on
>fire, don't deserve to walk on the same streets and you and I.
>
>What did that dog or those cats do, to deserve that type of abuse and
>pain?
>
>(ken)
TIE Lion
If this was my son, the first thing after 16 killed cats was a psych clinic.
One more cat, and he has a .22 bullet in his head. I am not extremist, and I
am not agressive, but for me, life of *any cat animal* is much more worth
than the whole human society. And I sometimes fell very incomfortable about
not being a feline.
Just don't mind me crazy ;].
Nancy E.Holmes or R. Nelson Ruffin пишет в сообщении
<01bdba84$5a364f40$5ca4...@fmkaffen.ix.netcom.com> ...
TIE Lion
Chelsea пишет в сообщении <35BF1779...@cre8ivewrks.com> ...
>> You see, I am a staunch believer in the Second Amendment and I believe
>
>>
>> that cats too have the right to keep and bear arms (in this case,
>> paws).
regardless of type of animal, be it a human or a cat. If we take that
claws have an efficiency of 1, the gun will be nearly 300-400. By simply
dividing the same we see that chances of human against the cat are pretty
not equal. In this case, we should realise, that human killed a cat must be
punished 300-400 times more than cat killed a human. If a cat killed a
human, he will be immediately killed bi medicine. That means, that murder
with efficiency 1 is considered punished by class 1 execution, and murder of
class 400?
How do we multiply a medical slaughter by 400? I guess, it will be too
sadistic to publish here.
And about declawing, it is one of the most stupid and reasonless things
invented by humanity.
TIE Lion
Tricia Kirkland пишет в сообщении <35BDF62E...@cybersouth.com> ...
>Oh. SO if all of us good people give up our protection we'll be
>safe?
>
Yeah, from ourselves, from good people. The more I read thsi thread, the
more I convinve myself that there's only one way to solve the problem, and
this way directly conflicts with most human right laws, not to consider
crime ones.
However, I doubt that people we're talking about can be called humans, so
the laws should be unapplicable for them. Unfortunately, the laws also state
the definition of a human, and it seems that everyone who has two legs and a
passport considered human.
dharma
realisticly, life in jail, although a bit merciful.
>>The officer told him police think the cats have
> >been killed by someone between the ages of 12 and 18.
Why do they always assume it's a teenager? I don't want to start anything
but-- Why do so many people think all teenagers are raving maniacs with no
morals?
--
~*~~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
"I fear that I'm ordinary, just like everyone."
"I'm not insane! I'm sane in a crazy world!"
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Museum/8535
Ken M. <pobo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<35C228...@ix.netcom.com>...
> o...@gci-net.com wrote:
>
> >
> > We do have way too many laws, BUT they are not the ones we need. Way
> > too many infringe personal freedoms and way too few protect those who
> > cannot protect themselves, including animals. Our elected
> > "representatives" pass laws not for the common good, but to get
> > themselves re-elected.
>
>
> You are so right. Here is an new story that someone just sent me. What
> should happen to this (sick) person, if they are caught and arrested?
>
> ===================================================
>
> >
> > Two Cats Discovered Mutilated
> > The Oklahoman
> > 07/31/1998
> > By Robert Medley
> > Staff Writer
> >
> > It is not the summer heat that is keeping Gregory
> > Anderson awake all night at his home in northwest
> > Oklahoma City.
> >
> > He is looking out for a serial cat killer.
> >
> > Two of his pet cats have been mutilated by someone who
> > returned to leave parts of their corpses on his front
> > yard and porch in the 1700 block of NW 33.
> >
> > "I can't sleep at night now. I'd love to catch them. It
> > takes a really sick person to do this," Anderson said
> > Thursday.
> >
> > Anderson's 6-year-old feline, Devil, disappeared
> > Saturday. He did not report the silver- tipped Siamese
> > cat missing until Tuesday morning when he looked outside
> > about 8:45 a.m.
> >
> > Parts of his 4-year-old female cat, Big Eye, and Devil
> > were strewn across the yard.
> >
> > "My neighbor thought it was some kind of Satanic
> > ritual," Anderson said.
> >
> > Big Eye's rear paws, front right paw and tail had been
> > severed. Police could not find the cat's paws.
> >
> > Anderson said Devil's limbs appeared to have been torn
> > off.
> >
> > He placed all the cat parts in a plastic bag and
> > disposed of them, a police report said.
> >
> > Anderson said a police officer told him a cat belonging
> > to a woman who lives about a block away had been
> > mutilated last week and the remains stuffed in her
> > mailbox. >
==================================================================
>
> (ken)
>
> See Brownie's personal website at:
> http://www.dogchow.com/pages/chihuahua
>
Revision
: This person should expeirence the exact same pain as the animal did...but
: realisticly, life in jail, although a bit merciful.
: >>The officer told him police think the cats have
: > >been killed by someone between the ages of 12 and 18.
: Why do they always assume it's a teenager? I don't want to start anything
: but-- Why do so many people think all teenagers are raving maniacs with no
: morals?
Excerpt from "Miranda's Book of Human Foiboles"
Teenager - Young adult human typically from ages of 12 to 18. Usually
suffering from some sort of mental depravation generated from chemical
imbalance derived from surges in hormone generation. The only thing
worse than a teenager is a two year old. (see Terrible Two)
But seriously, mutilations of small animals is a tactic used by the Nazis
while training their troops to be less sensitive. The American CIA also
_alegedly_ used this training method while training South American
guerrillas. The target age of the training groups were young males ages
9 to 21. If there was a cult being started, the target would be the same
age groups.
Whether or not law enforcement is used to crack down on animal abuse such
as this is rather a moot point. The problem with teenager joining gangs
and cults usually stems from a troubled home life. Until there is
improvement in the area of Family growth we are likely to see more
"cat mutilations" and other acts of senseless bruitality.
---
As a side note, for those of you that have asked, harrassed, and
threatened me... ;p
Miranda is my 3 year old tabby. She has started to spend less time on
the web thanks to some of your suggestions, such as turning the computer
off when I am not home... She still sits on the back of my chair when
I am using it and directs her commands by taking random swipes at my
neck.
Ah well, so much for my attempt to use humor to tone this thread down.
Also as a side note to CETH, that organization to which Miranda
subscribes, (and which is a very unkown lobbying group) stands for
Cats for the Ethical Treatment of Humans... (Pun intended)
susan moore
wrote:
>> You see, I am a staunch believer in the Second Amendment and I believe
>
>>
>> that cats too have the right to keep and bear arms (in this case,
>> paws).
>
>I agree! I think it is cruel and rude, for a cat to be declawed, I have
>two declawed kitties, I got them after they had been declawed, and I
>can't let them go in their natural envirenment (outside) because they
>can't protect themselves. I feel real bad for them, they just stare
>outside wishing they could go out. :(
>-Chelsea
>
Chelsea,
It is better that your kitties stay inside anyway, too many bad things
can happen to them outside, claws or not.
Susan M
nonema...@hme.com
>In this case, think about what can WE do?
Not a whole hell of a lot WE can do.
>If this was my son, the first thing after 16 killed cats was a psych clinic.
He'd already been institutionalized, was supposed to be on medication that he
wasn't currently taking.
>One more cat, and he has a .22 bullet in his head.
Yep, then you'd spend the rest of *your* life in prison for murder.
> I am not extremist, and I
>am not agressive, but for me, life of *any cat animal* is much more worth
>than the whole human society.
If you truely feel that "any cat animal" is of more worth than the whole human
society, then not only are you an extremist, but you also have a serious
valuation problem.
> And I sometimes fell very incomfortable about
>not being a feline.
>Just don't mind me crazy ;].
Obvously.
[...]
Scott & Laura
Yes lets all just let our kitties go in there natural enviroment where
we all know that cars and other dangerous things are so very much apart
of. Wait I was wrong those things aren't part of their natural habitat.
HELLO!!! Kitties safer inside other alternitves to getting fresh air we
let our 2 cats out on our patio and they aren't allowed past that.
Letting kitties out into their supposed natural enviroment is like
telling a kid to play in traffic. I love my cats!!!
dharma
> Ummm.... You people are in a CAT newsgroup....?
This is a CAT newgroup??!!! No!!!???
--
~*~~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
"I fear that I'm ordinary, just like everyone."
"I'm not insane! I'm sane in a crazy world!"
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Museum/8535
Nancy Carter <nfca...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
>
> Ronn Blankenship <ronn.bla...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net> wrote in
> article <35BED7A9...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>...
David Voth
wrote:
>Ms Carter said
>> Ummm.... You people are in a CAT newsgroup....?
>This is a CAT newgroup??!!! No!!!???
Not just cats. Cats with _guns_. Now THAT'S a scary thought!
Reverend David Voth
Chruch of the SubGenius
--
Help the Knights of Xenu expose $cientology!
Can you donate your extra CPU cycles?
See http://www.xenu.net/archive/events/KoX-rc5des/
Ronn Blankenship
On Mon, 03 Aug 1998 22:35:47 GMT, "dharma" <dhar...@yahoo.com>
wrote:>Ms Carter said
>> Ummm.... You people are in a CAT newsgroup....?
>This is a CAT newgroup??!!! No!!!???Not just cats. Cats with _guns_. Now THAT'S a scary thought!
Yes, we're now known as alt.armed.felines
. <g>
-- Ronn! :)
LeeAnne
LeeAnne
kee...@accesscom.com
ronn.bla...@NOSPAM.postoffice.worldnet.att.net wrote:
> we're now known as alt.armed.felines . <g>
>
>
>-- Ronn! :)
Cool! Does anyone have a cat named Schwarzenegger? How 'bout Arnold? Sly?
--
--Please remove the words "NOSPAM" to reply by email--
Bob Avery H.......
> In article <35C7599E...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>,
> ronn.bla...@NOSPAM.postoffice.worldnet.att.net wrote:
> > we're now known as alt.armed.felines . <g>
> >-- Ronn! :)
> Cool! Does anyone have a cat named Schwarzenegger? How 'bout Arnold? Sly?
I think I saw one named "Sly" on my 365 Cats Calendar earlier this year.
in re this thread:
Have some of these humans been abusing Kitty's catnip?
--
Cheers, BobH
"If you want to be a psychological novelist and
write about human beings, the best thing you can
do is to keep a pair of cats." -- Aldous Huxley
Christine Hazlett
affects of rat/gopher poison by shoving his longest claw down his throat to
make himself throw up!
(Sarcasm intended) I have 2 strictly indoor cats now, love them so much,
would never want a coyote/car/poison get to them, claws or no!
wa...@tca.net wrote in message <6qdmvc$env$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <35c3f88a...@news.sprynet.com>,
> su...@sprynet.com (susan moore) wrote:
>> On Wed, 29 Jul 1998 12:37:15 +0000, Chelsea <desi...@cre8ivewrks.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> You see, I am a staunch believer in the Second Amendment and I believe
>> >
>> >>
>> >> that cats too have the right to keep and bear arms (in this case,
>> >> paws).
>> >
>> >I agree! I think it is cruel and rude, for a cat to be declawed, I have
>> >two declawed kitties, I got them after they had been declawed, and I
>> >can't let them go in their natural envirenment (outside) because they
>> >can't protect themselves. I feel real bad for them, they just stare
>> >outside wishing they could go out. :(
>> >-Chelsea
>> >
>>
>
>i am glad i didn't declaw my cat for this very reason.....just the other
day
>it was out playing in it's natural environment (the road) and was nearly
>squashed flat by a speeding mac truck....luckily, my claw-equipped kitty
was
>able to slice the truck in two (just like in the cartoons!!!!) saving
>herself....all i can say is "whew!".....<sarcasm mode off>
>
>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
wa...@tca.net
dlyn...@pacbell.net
>
> > You see, I am a staunch believer in the Second Amendment and I believe
>
> >
> > that cats too have the right to keep and bear arms (in this case,
> > paws).
>
> I agree! I think it is cruel and rude, for a cat to be declawed, I have
> two declawed kitties, I got them after they had been declawed, and I
> can't let them go in their natural envirenment (outside) because they
> can't protect themselves. I feel real bad for them, they just stare
> outside wishing they could go out. :(
> -Chelsea
Unfortunately, even clawed kitties can't always protect themselves.
After losing my previous cat, Siren, to forces unknown (probably
coyotes), I decided to make my next two indoor cats with an outdoor
enclosure. They loved it, but one eventually scaled an 8 foot fence and
vanished (probably coyotes again, and he was afraid of nothing). I now
have 3 cats, all with claws, all very adept at escaping the enclosure
(finally figured it out, so there have been no escapes for months... had
to use a video cam!!)... I would NEVER declaw my cats, indoors or not.
Denise
Anjie
her feet today, and noticed that her foot pads seemed flatter than my cats.
I was just wondering if cats who were declawed had flatter pads, or if some
cats just do. They were wider, and seemed more spread than my girls (who are
not declawed). Any ideas? Conjecture, supposition? Anjie
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Prairie/3694/
Bob Avery H.......
> I'm kittysitting for a Persian, who's Dad is in the hospital. I was trimming her feet today, and noticed that her foot pads seemed flatter than my cats. I was just wondering if cats who were declawed had flatter pads, or if some cats just do. They were wider, and seemed more spread than my girls (who are not declawed). Any ideas? Conjecture, supposition? Anjie
> http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Prairie/3694/
Angie, et al...
Let us not forget that declawing is accomplished by surgically removing
the first digit of each toe--this is apt to affect the profile of the
paw pads, as the weight distrbution on each paw is now distributed over
a smaller area. This may explain a reference I have read where declawing
sometimes affects a cat's balance.
Cheers, BobH
"The fog comes on little cat feet. It sits looking over the harbor
and city on silent haunches and then moves on." -- Carl Sandburg "The
City"
aco...@sprynet.com
me for them, as opinions are as unique as the person who has them. I am an
avid cat lover. Have been all my life! I currently have four cats (one
being a very tiny kitten). The three adults are spayed/nuetured AND
declawed. I see declawing as a garauntee that my kitties are not going to be
a nuisance within my household by destroying my belongings. I know there are
scratch poles and whatnot out there, however, when I've introduced them to my
cats (before they were declawed) they would look at it, look at me, look at
the couch, and politely walked over to my antique couch and used it again!
I'm an animal control officer, and I have witnessed quite a few of these
surgeries first hand because of the veterinarian we used to contract with.
Just like any surgery, declawing is not a pretty thing! But what surgery is?
It depends on the vet that's doing it. I have seen kittens after being
declawed that have bled to death and kittens that were so severely disfigured
they could never walk again and were euthenized. BUT that is rare! Just
like our human doctors, there are bad/psycho vets out there who can be
classified more as butchers than caring veterinarians. I chose a wonderful
vet who is very caring, and is the leading orthopedic vet in this state. I
also talked with some of his clients who had used him for declawing, and not
a problem. My cats did not bleed when they came home, they were running and
jumping like nothing ever happened! I look at declawing as "saving thier
lives" not dooming them to a damnable life of being locked indoors. As I
said, I'm an animal control officer, and if you saw how many cats are turned
in to our shelter on a weekly basis simply because they are destroying their
owners' property, and for a variety of reasons, I dont know, they choose to
throw the cat away instead of "fixing" the problem! And being an animal
control officer, I see first hand what happens when you let that cat "explore
their natural surroundings". Who do you think is out there scraping up all
the little bodies from the streets? ME! I would NEVER let my cats outside.
I am absolutely terrified that something would happen to them! The thought
of it gives me chills! I know that some people have great luck in tying
their cats out for short periods of times and some cats even will stay in the
yard, but cats being cats (and essentially wild animals) what happens when
they chase a bird out intot he middle of the street? They cant help it,
they're just animals after all right? If you feel that you're cats have to
explore the great outdoors, that's fine, that is your feelings, I'm not going
to say you're a bad person for doing it. You all obviously love your cats,
and that's all I ever ask of any animal owner. Love and care for your pets
the best way that you know how :) I'm sorry this was so lengthy, as it's a
subject I feel very strongly about for so many reasons. Thank you for your
time.
--
Keli
http://members.tripod.com/acosonly/
Anjie
szabaga
and I don't regret or feel guilty for having the surgery done. I read
everyone's comments saying that those who get their cats declawed are
essentially evil, and I don't think I am.
My cats were originally strays who never were indoors, but they are now
such indoor cats that they don't even go out the door when I leave it
open. They both recovered from their surgery with no problems
whatsoever - just like your cats, they were running around and playing
within 2 days of their surgeries.
If a pet owner is concerned about their furniture (especially if it's
antique or very expensive), then I think they have every right to
safeguard against damage by declawing their cat. I'd rather pay the
small amount of money to have that done then spend $1000 on a new sofa
every year.
My cats are loving cats, they are friendly cats, and they are playful
cats. They were that way before the surgery, and they were that way
after the surgery.
Jane S.
C&M Towle
I won't repeat them here.
To be willing to perform several amputations to "safeguard"
against furniture damage rather than go through the "trouble"
of the numerous painless options available indicates an
attitude that views pets as commodities, possessions with
which "owners" can do as they please. That saddens and appals
me.
szabaga wrote in message <35CE0E...@worldnet.att.net>...
aco...@sprynet.com
declawing, and how that <disfiguring?> surgery has saved so many kittie's
lives. But, like me, most people are afraid to speak up for fear of being
flamed. As I said in my post, everyone has thier own opinions, however
unique :) My cats are strictly indoor cats, and wouldnt even WANT to go
outside.. too hot! (One has to wonder who the smarter one here is?) I love my
cats with ALL my heart, just like my children, and there's no one on earth
who could EVER convince me that I've hurt them or disfigured them in any way
shape or form. It's unfortunate that these cats cannot talk or reason,
therefore we could give them the opportunity to either use a scratching post
and be happy with it, or have the surgery, but until that super breed comes
along, it's our decisions as owners and care givers. You certainly saved
your cats from an extremely uncertain future. I wonder how they became
strays? Were they scratching someone's couch as kittens and some uncaring
person booted them out of the house? Or was their mother doing the same
thing, and she was booted out by some uncaring (not to mention ignorant)
owner? I see it all in my job! Most strays dont make it as far as yours
did, and most cats that claw up furniture and drapes and waterbeds dont make
it past the shelters. Keep up the great work Jane! And never second guess
yourself as a loving owner.
Keli
http://members.tripod.com/acosonly/
"Man is the only animal that blushes..or needs to."
szabaga <szab...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> Thank you for that note, Keli. I have two indoor cats, both declawed,
> and I don't regret or feel guilty for having the surgery done. I read
> everyone's comments saying that those who get their cats declawed are
> essentially evil, and I don't think I am.
>
> My cats were originally strays who never were indoors, but they are now
> such indoor cats that they don't even go out the door when I leave it
> open. They both recovered from their surgery with no problems
> whatsoever - just like your cats, they were running around and playing
> within 2 days of their surgeries.
>
> If a pet owner is concerned about their furniture (especially if it's
> antique or very expensive), then I think they have every right to
> safeguard against damage by declawing their cat. I'd rather pay the
> small amount of money to have that done then spend $1000 on a new sofa
> every year.
>
> My cats are loving cats, they are friendly cats, and they are playful
> cats. They were that way before the surgery, and they were that wayKeli
http://members.tripod.com/acosonly/
"Man is the only animal that blushes..or needs to."
> after the surgery.
>
> Jane S.
>
--
David Yehudah
>
> On Sat, 25 Jul 1998 23:37:22 -0500, Ronn Blankenship
> <ronn.bla...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >By now, I'm sure everyone in the US at least, and probably the world,
> >has heard about the tragic shooting at the U.S. Capitol Friday
> <snip>
> >Rusty, as the younger Weston is known, killed 16 cats
> >with a .22-caliber weapon.
> <snip>
> > The younger Weston is unmarried and had not worked for some time, his
> >father said. He said Rusty was collecting Social Security disability
> >because of mental problems, which the elder Weston did not specify, and
> >has lived from time to time on family property in Montana.
> <snip>
> >it appears that the younger Weston stole his
> >father's .38 revolver and this was the type of gun used in the
> >shooting. I have heard that Mr. & Mrs. Weston issued a public statement
> >of apology earlier today for the actions of their son, and, as I said
> >before, I consider them victims, too. The only person I blame is the
> >shooter.
> >
> >Well, I just thought it needed to be said. I yield the soapbox.
>
> I don't wish to be seen as anti-American, and this is hardly the forum
> to discuss these matters, but as the matter has been raised, please
> allow me to express my opinion.
>
> It seems to me that the real problem with this and many of the other
> random acts of shooting that get reported in the UK is the free
> availability of guns of all descriptions. It seems bizarre that a
> household containing a mentally-disturbed individual is allowed to
> have at least two guns.
>
> In the UK following the Dunblane shooting (where a paedophile shot
> dead a class of 4 and 5 year old children), all guns (except shotguns)
> have been banned. All holders of shotguns are required to have a
> licence issued and updated by the local police, and if they have any
> concerns that you are not using it for legitimate reasons, if they
> have any doubts as to your mental state, or if you do not keep the gun
> in a steel locked cabinet, then that licence can be withdrawn.
>
> I wonder what it is going to take to get Americans to remove the
> "right to bear arms" from your constitution, and institute some
> serious gun control!
> --
> Hugo Nebula
> Put Alex before @ to reply.
Actually, it's no more difficult now than before the gun laws were
passed to get handguns in the UK illegally, only slightly more
expensive. The only difference is that now only the criminals have them;
honest people don't. And the criminals know it.
Cordially,
--Dave
C&M Towle
"fixing" the problem. And you, as an animal control officer at
that, choose to "fix" the potential damage to furniture by
amputating their digits. Don't you see how absurd your
argument is?
aco...@sprynet.com wrote in message
<6qkmoc$s8v$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
Lots snipped......
... I dont know, they choose to
>throw the cat away instead of "fixing" the problem! And being
an animal
>control officer, I see first hand what happens when you let
that cat "explore
>their natural surroundings". >
>--
>
>Keli
>http://members.tripod.com/acosonly/
Scott & Laura
> throw the cat away instead of "fixing" the problem! And being an animal
> control officer, I see first hand what happens when you let that cat "explore
> the little bodies from the streets? ME! I would NEVER let my cats outside.
> I am absolutely terrified that something would happen to them! The thought
> of it gives me chills! I know that some people have great luck in tying
> their cats out for short periods of times and some cats even will stay in the
> yard, but cats being cats (and essentially wild animals) what happens when
> they chase a bird out intot he middle of the street? They cant help it,
> they're just animals after all right? If you feel that you're cats have to
> explore the great outdoors, that's fine, that is your feelings, I'm not going
> to say you're a bad person for doing it. You all obviously love your cats,
> and that's all I ever ask of any animal owner. Love and care for your pets
> the best way that you know how :) I'm sorry this was so lengthy, as it's a
> subject I feel very strongly about for so many reasons. Thank you for your
> time.
>
>
> Keli
> http://members.tripod.com/acosonly/
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
I was trying to say that exactly when I first orginally posted this
whole declawing thread. I was just stating my opion and it seems as
though I have been flamed over and over again because I do what I belive
in my heart to be right. You just put it maybe a little better than I
did. :)
Laura
Shena Delian O'Brien
>
> your cats from an extremely uncertain future. I wonder how they became
> strays? Were they scratching someone's couch as kittens and some uncaring
<< RANT MODE ON >>
Oh REALLY now! There are SO many reasons that people "toss away" cats;
justifying declawing because it supposedly makes a cat more of an
attractive pet (fixture), and keeps them out of shelters, doesn't really
hold a lot of water!
For example it's MUCH more common to toss cats out because they
procreate & mark their territory - and declawing does not stop that
behavior in the least.
And how *many* times do certified people have to come into this group
and testify as to the *number* of *real* cats in shelters that ARE
ALREADY DECLAWED, and ARE AGAIN STRAYS, before this argument stops
coming up? My very own boyfriend found and cared for a stray once that
had been declawed! Yes, a stray, wandering around in the Virginia
countryside in the middle of nowhere (obviously purposely dropped off).
Now I've no doubt that there are people out there who will do their best
to provide a safe and stable home for their declawed cats, just as there
are people who do their best to provide a safe and stable home for their
UNdeclawed cats.
But the kind of people that are liable to make cats strays are *still*
going to make DECLAWED cats strays; the reasons for declawing are
already shallow (regardless of your feelings on the declaw issue, you
really can't argue with the reason for it being, in most cases, "I don't
want my furniture [material possessions] ruined" - which is in any book
a shallow reason for such a serious modification) and symptomatic of
someone who finds cats *already* semi-inconvenient... it'd take little
provocation after the surgery for the cat to find itself out on the
street, defenseless.
What if kitty missed the litter box too many times? What if kitty yowls
too loudly in the middle of the night? What if kitty bites, hisses, or
is otherwise unfriendly at times, what if what if what if what if? I'd
say the act of declawing your cat already tells us that the poor
creature that he needs to walk on eggshells! (Daren't be any more
*inconvenient*. After all, aren't we the kings of the world, *we* get to
decide what lives with us and what doesn't, we're so HIGH and MIGHTY.)
<< RANT MODE OFF >>
--
** Shena Delian O'Brien **
Co-Founder, Web Guard - http://www.darklock.com/webguard/
The Graphics Kitty! - http://www.darklock.com/abstract/
or The Graphics Bug! - http://www.darklock.com/graphbug/
Fantasy Age - http://www.darklock.com/fantasy/
** Visit a Darklock Site! **
jny
Shena! You said everything I wanted to say and more! Thank you - you did it
so much more eloquently that I could have. One thing I would like to add
though is this: I live in New Zealand where declawing is practically
non-existent. We have more of a problem with people not bothering to
spey/neuter their animals. In fact, the SPCA has just started a month-long
campaign to spey/neuter animals of people who can't afford it, free of charge.
But I digress, the point I'm trying to make is maybe that's why I find the
whole declawing business abhorrent because its just not the done thing here
(different cultures maybe?) or maybe because people have better things to spend
their money on (that goes for speying/neutering as well - sad but true).
I do value everybody's opinions and realise that not everybody is going to
agree. Its actually interesting to read what people do think. I just wish
that everybody would see things the way I see them! ;-)
- Jennie
aco...@sprynet.com
anyone else accuse you of being too lazy to have your cat declawed? Did I
accuse you of being some sort of fruitcake that believes her cats should run
the household? Did you even bother to get your cats spayed/neutered? Did
you bother to have them tested for FLIV and FIP? Are you going to call
caring, loving and responsible cat owners like me and MILLIONS of others
heartless unfeeling people? I'll tell you what, why dont you come down to our
shelter or your local "kill" shelter and volunteer for just ONE week and you
tell me how many people turn their cats over to be euthenized simply because
it's destroying the furniture or carpeting. But ok, if you cant find the
time or energy to volunteer at a shelter for a week, why dont you call a few
of them, and get some statistics as to the number of owned "unaltered" cats
are turned in at those shelters in a weeks amount of time versus owned cats
that are declawed? Unlike you, I am not telling people that they are
absolutely HORRIBLE and UNCARING monsters if they do or do not declaw their
cats. It is the owner's choice and thier choice alone. But I garauntee you
that I will be the FIRST in line to get in yours (or anyone elses') face and
tell you what I think of you when you or anyone else turns a cat into a
shelter because it's destroying the house, and you're too PROUD to get it
declawed! I'm so sick of this "throw- away" society that I could scream!
And that's exactly what people do to their cats that destroy their
belongings.. right or wrong that's what happens! Right or Wrong,,, Good or
Bad.... who's choice is it anyway? There's NO WAY you could EVER convince me
that I did not make the right choice in helping my cats be better pets. If
your cats use a scratching post or whatever, then hey.. I'm really happy for
you! It would've been really nice to spare myself about $1,000 on the
declawing of all my cats over the years. But the sad fact and I will
reiterate the word f-a-c-t is that not all cats will use a scratching post.
I'm truly sorry that you have the attitude that you do. Feeling that because
we choose to declaw our cats we feel that they are "commodities and
possessions to be owned". I'm telling you right now.. YOU ARE DEAD WRONG!
You are mistaking those who choose NOT to declaw their cats later to turn
around and throw them away in the area sheleters to be euthenized with those
who feel that cats are "commodities and possessions to be owned". Think
about it! I suppose you feel that spaying and neutering is "apalling" also
becuase you're taking away thier precious organs! Have you ever witnessed a
spay/neuter surgery???? It's not pretty either! BUT necessary!
We all have one common goal here right? To be responsible loving pet owners.
I'm sure that you are one, as I know that I am one also. We just have
different ways of going about it. Just remember, there is no law in this
country against declawing your cat. When I or anyone else breaks a law and
maliciously abuses or neglects their animals, then and only then can you say
that they view their animals as commodities and possessions.
--
Keli
http://members.tripod.com/acosonly/
"Man is the only animal that blushes..or needs to."
> My views against declawing have been voiced several times and
> I won't repeat them here.
>
> To be willing to perform several amputations to "safeguard"
> against furniture damage rather than go through the "trouble"
> of the numerous painless options available indicates an
> attitude that views pets as commodities, possessions with
> which "owners" can do as they please. That saddens and appals
> me.
>
dejanew
aco...@sprynet.com
sort of thing happens. People in these newsgroups dont seem to realize that
people have their own opinions and sometimes like to share them. Whether
anyone agrees with you or not. The bad thing is that people get "evil" with
you simply because they do not agree with you, and accuse you (and I) of not
caring and loving our animals, only looking at them as commodities. Any
"normal" person who read my post would know how much I love my cats, and for
someone to turn around and say that I dont, and that I'm cruel is absolutely
ABSURD! That would be like someone telling me that becuase I "chose" to have
my two sons circumsized I scarred them for life! Hey, I wonder if that's why
men who are circumsized have no balance? hmmmmm :) Hang in there Laura, and
know that you are not the only one out there who believes that ultimately
declawing saves a cats' life! -- Keli http://members.tripod.com/acosonly/
"Man is the only animal that blushes..or needs to."
> I was trying to say that exactly when I first orginally posted this
> whole declawing thread. I was just stating my opion and it seems as
> though I have been flamed over and over again because I do what I belive
> in my heart to be right. You just put it maybe a little better than I
> did. :)
>
> Laura
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
kk
(her "dad" was a sailor on active duty and had no business with a cat anyway!)
was the pound. I had both done at the same time at the recommendation of the vet
(she was 8 mo. old) because he felt that one trauma was better than two, and that
she would be so punk from the spaying that the declawing would be less
uncomfortable for her.
I had her declawed, BTW, because I suffer from venous stasis, and a scratch on my
leg, like a diabetics, is a major medical problem. If I hadn't had it done, I
couldn't have adopted her, and she would have been dead rather than "maimed."
She's been my cheerful companion for over 4 years, now, and if I'm sitting on the
couch, she must come sit on the back of it and rest a paw on my shoulder. I
don't think she's pissed at me.
Actually, I don't think she misses her claws...I don't think she knows they're
gone. She has MAJOR sharpening sessions all over the place, and seems quite
content afterward, so there's no "natural instinct" thwarted here. To her, she's
given the couch/mattress/rug a grand workout and goes on to other interesting
things. She may not be able to crochet or play the violin anymore, but other
than that, she's a happy cat!
LeeAnne
you surgically removed the toes from your feet (or even just the big toe I
believe) you would have a hell of a time walking because you use them for
balance. Declawing a cat does not just pull the nail out, they have to
surgically alter the foot so it doesn't grow back and sometimes they do grow
back causing infection from ingrown nails.
I'm not getting into pro or con, I'm just stating the facts as I've read them.
I'm going to go find the URL now.
Thanks
LeeAnne
askme wrote:
> Toe??? Uh....correct me if I'm wrong but its a claw...right....or are we
> just trying to give it a human equivelant to make it seem more grusome.
> Also how is removing the claw of each toe going to affect weight
> distribution? What facts do you have to support such claims? How will it
> affect the profile of the pads? What evidence do you have besides
> "somthing you read" that a cats balance is affected by its claws. Can you
> cite any specific source to support anything you just said, or are you just
> an idiot?! I hate to seem brash but this is really stupid. Does anyone
> have ANY, REAL information on this subject?
>
> -Matthew
> -mou...@wwics.com
>
> > Angie, et al...
> > Let us not forget that declawing is accomplished by surgically removing
> > the first digit of each toe--this is apt to affect the profile of the
> > paw pads, as the weight distrbution on each paw is now distributed over
> > a smaller area. This may explain a reference I have read where declawing
> > sometimes affects a cat's balance.
> > Cheers, BobH
Shena Delian O'Brien
>
> I had her declawed, BTW, because I suffer from venous stasis, and a scratch on my
> leg, like a diabetics, is a major medical problem. If I hadn't had it done, I
You know something, my mom is a "brittle" diabetic. She takes shots of
insulin 2, sometimes 3 times a day. She gets infections from cat
scratches and they take a long time to heal. And you know what?
All our cats are fully clawed and they will forever STAY THAT WAY,
period.
WE realize that by choosing to take an animal such as this into our home
to be our companions, WE must make these sacrifices because WE are the
ones with the responsibility, intelligence, awareness, and ability to
make these kinds of decisions for ourselves. Cats don't have the ability
to decide whether or not to be declawed, so to force it on them is
inhumane.
I might have not replied to your email, I might have given your
situation more tolerance because it is a medical reason on your part,
except that the rest of your mail is very clear on your position that
declawing is a wonderful thing and does no harm to the animal. (gag)
Chad
without getting them declawed our furniture would be trashed. Our cats
are STRICTLY indoors cats. The only exception is once in awhile I will
take our male cat outside but I always hold on to him so he can't get
away. We love our cats dearly and see nothing wrong with declawing them,
though I would never remove their back claws.
kk
gets severe infections from cat scratches, in order to preserve the claws of your cats.
Have you told her this?? Whatakid.
Unknown
>To be willing to perform several amputations to "safeguard"
>against furniture damage rather than go through the "trouble"
>of the numerous painless options available indicates an
>attitude that views pets as commodities, possessions with
>which "owners" can do as they please. That saddens and appals
>me.
I understand you have strong feelings about the matter and appreciate
your concern. I have one cat who is front-declawed and fixed. Before
I had the operation performed I went through a lot of anguish trying
to discover what would be the best thing for the cat, not just for me.
At the time he was very playful and very affectionate, and I didn't
want to do anything to him which would be detrimental to his life or
alter his personality at all. I talked to other pet owners, vets, and
anyone else who had an opinion before making the decision to go ahead
with it. Since the operation (7 years ago) he has changed only to the
effect that he has grown more affectionate over time.
I understand the argument that it is "unnatural" to declaw. I can't
think of a comparable procedure in humans, anyway. But it is no more
unnatural than spaying or neutering, in my opinion. And almost
everyone agrees that these are necessary operations. To say that one
thing is okay because it is a universally accepted practice and then
call the other "barbaric" is arrogant at best. They both involve
surgically changing the cat in a way that is unnatural.
My concern when thinking about declawing was not for my furniture. At
the time I had almost no furniture of my own, and couldn't care less
what happened to it anyway. But being a renter (living in apartments)
I didn't have the luxury of making this decision completely on my own.
It is hard enough finding apartments which one can afford that allow
pets, and most of them require any cats to be declawed. I love my
cat, and have turned down many great places to live because he wasn't
welcome there. With his front claws removed my options are much
greater for places to live. Now we live in a large townhouse which he
seems to enjoy immensely.
As I talked to people about the operation, the only argument I heard
for keeping the claws was "for protection outside". Well, I knew then
that he was going to be an indoor cat, so this argument had no real
basis for me. In the past 8 years, he has only gotten outside once
and within a minute or so was on the window sill trying to get back
in.
Anyway, sorry for the length of this explanation. I just felt that
someone should say something in defense of others who have taken this
step. As I said before I agonized over the decision and only made it
once I was sure that the life of my cat would be better once it was
done than it would be otherwise.
Bob Avery H.......
>
> Hello :) I'm about to give my opinions on a few things, and please dont flame
> me for them, as opinions are as unique as the person who has them. I am an
> avid cat lover. Have been all my life! I currently have four cats (one
> being a very tiny kitten). The three adults are spayed/nuetured AND
> declawed. I see declawing as a garauntee that my kitties are not going to be
> a nuisance within my household by destroying my belongings.
==========
What a wonderful parent you'd make. :(
--
C&M Towle
Actually we are not making anything sound more gruesome than
it is. Feline digital amputation (it is described in medical
texts as a surgery or amputation of convenience) is gruesome
and the euphemism "declawing" makes it seem a lot less
gruesome than it actually is because it results in many people
believing that it involves "just" the removal of the claw (as
if that in itself would be acceptable!), i.e. the nail. This
is not the case. Contrary to a human's fingernails, a cat's
claw is set into the joint in a much more complex manner
allowing claw extension and retraction. The surgery involves
the amputation of the claw including the last full joint of
the toe. Multiply the surgery times the number of toes and you
have multiple amputations on one cat!
Cats are tip-toers (watch their gait) which means that they
carry their weight primarily on their toes, not on the soles
of their feet as we do. A declawed cat, by definition,
therefore, must shift its weight further back and it stands to
reason that this would affect its back, legs, and balance. As
to your assertion "it's a claw" implying, I think, it's "just"
a claw..., you may, in addition to your misunderstanding of
what the surgery involves, also not know that claws and
scratching have several functions. Claws are needed for
efficient climbing as well as defence. Claws are essential in
grooming: they are used to minimize itching and skin
irritations, untangle matted hair, etc. Scratching is also
used for marking. When a cat scratches, the sweat and scent
glands on the balls of a cat's feet excrete its scent, marking
its territory.
The above information is contained in several texts. Here are
some for your info. "The Natural Cat" by Helga Hoffman,
"Catwatching" by Desmond Morris, "The New Natural Cat" by
Anitra Frazier.
In "The Cat Who Cried for Help", Dr. Nicholas Dodman,
professor of behavioural pharmacology, calls feline digital
amputation inhumane and cites a "highly regarded British
textbook by Turner and Bateson on the biology of cat
behaviour" which concludes that "the operative removal of the
claws, as is sometimes practiced to protect furniture and
curtains, is an act of abuse and should be forbidden by law in
all, not just a few countries." I hope this sheds some more
light for you on the subject.
Monica
askme wrote in message <01bdc481$29196f80$846ac8cc@boss>...