PETA: People Exterminating Thousands of Animals

posted at 10:15 am on February 26, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

Regular readers know that I’ve had a long standing beef with PETA. (Pun fully intended.) This is an organization which has taken the noble, worthy cause of helping out animals in distress and turned it into a misguided and frequently dangerous cult, frequently doing more to harm legitimate animal care initiatives than to help any four legged friends in need. But the story uncovered by the Daily Caller this week really puts things in perspective. It turns out that in the few cases where PETA operates actual shelters, they have one of the worst records in the country in terms of killing off animals rather than putting in the effort to care for them and find them homes.

Documents published online this month show that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, an organization known for its uncompromising animal-rights positions, killed more than 95 percent of the pets in its care in 2011.

The documents, obtained from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, were published online by the Center for Consumer Freedom, a non-profit organization that runs online campaigns targeting groups that antagonize food producers.

Fifteen years’ worth of similar records show that since 1998 PETA has killed more than 27,000 animals at its headquarters in Norfolk, VA.

This is enough to make my blood boil. It’s not just the raw numbers, but their policy which indicates that 84% of the animals they take in are euthanized within 24 hours of arrival. Dr. Daniel Kovich, of the Virginia agriculture department, investigated PETA’s headquarters.

“The facility does not contain sufficient animal enclosures to routinely house the number of animals annually reported as taken into custody,” Kovich concluded in his report.

“[PETA’s] primary purpose,” Kovich wrote, “is not to find permanent adoptive homes for animals.”

PETA media liaison Jane Dollinger told The Daily Caller in an email that “most of the animals we take in are society’s rejects; aggressive, on death’s door, or somehow unadoptable.”

This is one of the most lame dodges ever for lazy, cruel treatment of lost animals. I have worked at and with a number of shelters over the years. (In fact, my wife and I originally met while volunteering at an animal shelter.) While it is sad, I understand that not every location can be a 100% “no-kill” shelter. All too often there simply isn’t enough space, money and supplies to manage that. But you always make the best effort possible to keep the animals as long as can be managed, to reunite them with their owner or, failing that, find them a new home. Many of these “unadoptable rejects” are simply older animals, or ones that are frightened and confused, finding themselves in a new, unfamiliar environment. Killing them off that fast is simply inexcusable.

PETA is one of the worst examples of a group which could have done something great, but chose instead to turn into a self-serving political, agenda driven organization which forgets their original mission. The report cites that PETA has an annual budget in excess of $27M. Imagine how much help could go to real animals in need if those powerful resources were applied to actually helping the animals. Instead, they film glitzy commercials, run national advertising campaigns and hire lobbyists. Rather than investing their time in feeding, vaccinating and adopting out helpless animals, they spend their time mounting domestic terror campaigns, throwing blood on people wearing leather coats and hiring lawyers to treat killer whales as slaves.

This is the same as environmental groups, some of whom started many years ago with the best of intentions, cleaning up roadside litter and planting trees. Then, years later, they are planting metal spikes in trees to injure loggers. PETA is a total failure and should be shunned by people who are truly interested in helping lost and injured pets.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Penn and Teller exposed PETA several years ago

commodore on February 26, 2012 at 10:19 AM

PETA’s just another communist front like ANSWER, ACLU, Sierra Club or the Democrat Party.

Mr. Mike on February 26, 2012 at 10:24 AM

I always thought that the throwing of paint on fur was beyond stupid. What do they think the peopel who get their fur coats ruines are going to do? Why, they are going to BUY A REPLACEMENT FUR COAT! Beyond stupid.

If anything PETA is just a organization that let’s us know who the biggest hollywood slut$ are.

DethMetalCookieMonst on February 26, 2012 at 10:25 AM

At least dead animals are serving a purpose for normal people providing food and use of their hydes for everything from baseball gloves to upholstery.

PETA seems to want to kill animals just for the sake of killing them.

Hopefully this will awaken some PETA members and supporters to what bthe organization is really about.

bw222 on February 26, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Like the Dem Party infested with Communists and Anarchists, PETA is overwhelmed by the Save-the-Earth (from people) crowd. “Self-destructive” doesn’t come close to describing these fools.

RobertMN on February 26, 2012 at 10:25 AM

PETA media liaison Jane Dollinger told The Daily Caller in an email that “most of the animals we take in are society’s rejects; aggressive, on death’s door, or somehow unadoptable.”

“Ethical treatment” is to animals what “medical treatment” is to pregnant women. It’s colorful language disguising their worldview that belies their hypocrisy.

ted c on February 26, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Instead, they film glitzy commercials, run national advertising campaigns and hire lobbyists.

Well that way they get to feel better about themselves and don’t have to mess with washing stinky animals or clean up after them.

Priorities.

GarandFan on February 26, 2012 at 10:27 AM

Ethics redefined–killing Sparky the Puppy and feeling good about it.

ted c on February 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Animals Are Not Ours to Eat
Animals Are Not Ours to Wear
Animals Are Not Ours to Experiment On
Animals Are Not Ours to Use for Entertainment
Animals Are Not Ours to Abuse in Any Way

PETA’s own site</blockquote>

They need to add a tenant:

But they are OURS to kill.

CW on February 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Has anyone make the inevitable abortion comparison yet?

Count to 10 on February 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM

This is enough to make my blood boil. It’s not just the raw numbers, but their policy which indicates that 84% of the animals they take in are euthanized within 24 hours of arrival.” – Jazz

You’re not the only one. The missus and I take in “rescue dogs” from time to time if they’re the same breed as what we raise and she shows. We find them a home or refer the inquirer to someone who will.
PETA is sickening in more ways than one. Typical Leftist hypocrites:
Do as I say, not as I do!

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on February 26, 2012 at 10:30 AM

PETA; shrinking our carbon foot pawprints 4 at a time…..

ethics.

ted c on February 26, 2012 at 10:30 AM

“Ethical treatment” is to animals what “medical treatment” is to pregnant women. It’s colorful language disguising their worldview that belies their hypocrisy.

ted c on February 26, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Oh, there we are.

Count to 10 on February 26, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Thanks for highlighting this HORRIBLE story.

PETA is to animals as
NAACP is to African-Americans as
NARAL is to women as
ACLU is to religious freedom as…

John the Libertarian on February 26, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Ask yourself what ethics motivates these admitted terrorists.

WyattsTorch on February 26, 2012 at 10:36 AM

PETA: People for the Elimination and Termination of Animals

Weight of Glory on February 26, 2012 at 10:38 AM

84% of the animals they take in are euthanized within 24 hours of arrival.

That’s shocking.

PETA media liaison Jane Dollinger told The Daily Caller in an email that “most of the animals we take in are society’s rejects; aggressive, on death’s door, or somehow unadoptable.”

Absolute BS – she must be auditioning for Jay Carney’s job.

They pet can be older, they may look a little dirty, they may be slightly ill, but if it makes you feel better to claim they’re all on deaths door or ‘dangerous’ then knock yourself out honey.

It’s an outrageous lie and you know it.

CorporatePiggy on February 26, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Regular readers know that I’ve had a long standing beef with PETA.

I’ve got a bone to pick with them, too.

itsnotaboutme on February 26, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Regular readers know that I’ve had a long standing beef with PETA.

A pet peeve, huh?

itsnotaboutme on February 26, 2012 at 10:41 AM

PETA is one of those organizations that exists as simply self-perpetuating. They have never accomplished anything. People still wear fur, they still wear leather, they still eat meat, they still race horses, they still have pets, etc. All PETA does is make money for their executives. Maybe OWS should start protesting them?

Deanna on February 26, 2012 at 10:44 AM

1. Peta has justified killing large numbers of the animals they take in on the grounds that they are so damaged by “animal abusers” that they are un-adoptable.

But those animals would be just the ones most deserving of PeTA’s protection — innocent victims of human abuse.

Know that behind their goofy, glossy facade, and despite their public posture, PeTA’s agenda is directed towards abolishing pet ownership altogether (among other things).

2. Animal Rights advocates, sensu lato, believe that the capacity to suffer should be the basis for “rights,” and that no moral distinction should be made between members of different species. (To grant one species [e.g. humans] certain “rights” but not another [e.g. dogs] would be an act of “speciesism” no less immoral than racism, agism, sexism, etc.-ism. Just as it would be immoral to keep humans as pets, buy their meat at a market, or hunt them, so it is immoral to do so with dogs, cattle or deer.)

3. Animal rights groups — PeTA included — are hugely vocal about the need to spay and neuter “companion animals.”

4. How, one may ask, does PeTA (or any AR advocate) reconcile “animals have the same rights as humans” with PeTA’s wanton killing of animals in its own facility and its call for massive sterilization of pets?

Unless, of course, PeTA would kill and sterilize humans for exactly the same reasons they do animals.

BLOC on February 26, 2012 at 10:45 AM

PETA: People for the Elimination and Termination of Animals

Weight of Glory on February 26, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Love it! Should be a bumper sticker and poster.

Deanna on February 26, 2012 at 10:46 AM

SPCA=dog’s best friend.
PETA=dog’s biggest droppings.

S. D. on February 26, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Thanks for highlighting this HORRIBLE story.

PETA is to animals as
NAACP is to African-Americans as
NARAL is to women as
ACLU is to religious freedom as…

John the Libertarian on February 26, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Exactly! I ran into a bunch of them 20 years ago when I was fishing, and they were berating me. Ever since…I’ve wanted to put the hook in their mouth!

KOOLAID2 on February 26, 2012 at 10:48 AM

I Have a friend who is involved in a shelter they take in the worst cases that are not adoptable and put them in stacked cages walking them once per day. They can live in those cages for months on end waiting for adoption. The whole thing seems cruel. She’s also involved with peta. Shes like a different person now and our friendship is pretty much gone. Its almost cultlike.

ldbgcoleman on February 26, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Has anyone make the inevitable abortion comparison yet?

Count to 10 on February 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM

You save the whales
You save the seals
You save whatever’s cute & squeals
But you kill “that thing” that’s in the womb
Would not want no baby boom.

Steve Taylor & Some Band, “Bad Rap”
Album “I Want To Be A Clone”

itsnotaboutme on February 26, 2012 at 10:48 AM

I wonder how many people in the PETA hierarchy are minorities. I ask because it is so potentially offensive to cheapen the Thirteenth Amendment by arguing it applies to captive killer whales.

radjah shelduck on February 26, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Would you expect anything different from a ultra-liberal bunch? They are only good at telling others how to act.

Wade on February 26, 2012 at 10:49 AM

I guess they never heard of the concept of a “no kill shelter“.

Or the meaning of the second word in their acronym.

profitsbeard on February 26, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Ethical treatment is only pushing 1cc of phenobarbitol at a time…..

killing ya softly.

ted c on February 26, 2012 at 10:50 AM

The most dangerous place to be is a liberal’s victim group. This is no different than Johnson’s “War on Poverty Blacks.”

tom daschle concerned on February 26, 2012 at 10:51 AM

When will we get ‘sanctuary cities’ for puppies looking to escape ‘ethical treatment?’

ted c on February 26, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Don’t worry Sparky…..this won’t hurt me a bit…..there ya go now, just think of a niiiiice bone…mmm hmmmmmm, g’nite….

ted c on February 26, 2012 at 10:52 AM

It would appear, to the untrained eye, that PETA & “Planned Parenthood” are one and the same; in same business, so to speak….only their victims of choice are different.

ontheright on February 26, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Many of these “unadoptable rejects” are simply older animals, or ones that are frightened and confused, finding themselves in a new, unfamiliar environment.

They would have killed my Sparky — born with three legs, one of which needed a rod inserted because it lacked a couple of bones, and he’s not the best around little kids. Fortunately a real rescue group intervened, got him medical treatment and housed him for four years until I came across him. They’d also have killed my Susie, older dog, frightened at the pound and in need of dental treatment.

PETA is evil and can go back to Hell.

rbj on February 26, 2012 at 10:55 AM

in same business, so to speak….only their victims of choice are different.

ontheright on February 26, 2012 at 10:53 AM

and business is goooood….

the outcome is a pile of corpses no matter which way you slice it.

ted c on February 26, 2012 at 10:55 AM

THE IRONY OF THE PROGRESSIVE LEFT never ends.

PETA kills animals.

Global Warming “Champions” drive big hulking SUV’s and fly private jets to Emissions conferences.

Planned Parenthood murders future parents by the millions.

Obama talks about energy but then denies the most obvious options to increase the supply.

…..and they preach to everyone about “TOLERANCE” while they push their far left social agenda and TELL US that we’re not allowed to talk about our positions on social issues.

IRONY IS KING.

PappyD61 on February 26, 2012 at 10:55 AM

I haven’t trusted them in years. They are typical lying leftists who do what they preach against.

theaddora on February 26, 2012 at 10:57 AM

“There are no bad dogs, just bad owners”
To paraphrase the talking dog in the TV ad as he is abandoned in the country by his owner. The dog then looks at the camera and says “he left his wallet behind”, and begins to shake the contents all over the road.
I almost changed the channel, but I gave it a sec, and it was well done. I can’t watch the abuse ads.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on February 26, 2012 at 10:57 AM

………..and as someone said earlier (and I’ll add to the IRONY LIST).

The NAACP says they are the National Association for the ADVANCEMENT of Colored People but they continue to funnel money and support with worshipful enthusiasm the party that KILLS COLORED PEOPLE by the millions and that keeps them AT THE BACK OF THE BUS where they will never advance.

PappyD61 on February 26, 2012 at 10:59 AM

Further evidence that Liberal = hypocrite.

talkingpoints on February 26, 2012 at 11:00 AM

The core concept of AR ideology is that the life of an animal and that of a human are of equal moral value, and if you wouldn’t do “it” to a human because “it” was immoral, then you shouldn’t do “it” to an animal without “it” being equally immoral.

Now — imagine a burning house with your own beloved dog and a human stranger within. You can only save one life. Which will it be?

Professor Steven Best, an AR luminary (or a former one), was asked this question twice, in two different venues. And both times he gave the same answer: he’d save his dog.

Why? Because neither life is more valuable than the other, and his dog pleases him while the human stranger does not.

Tough tomatoes if that other life was your wife, husband, child, mother, father, best friend . . . his dog was more important . . . to him!

This is a classic example of the “me first” ethic. I’ll save my dog because my dog pleases me more than some stranger pleases me.

Food for thought.

BLOC on February 26, 2012 at 11:00 AM

“Ethical treatment” is to animals what “medical treatment” is to pregnant women. It’s colorful language disguising their worldview that belies their hypocrisy.

ted c on February 26, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Oh, there we are.

Count to 10 on February 26, 2012 at 10:32 AM

It was three minutes before you posted:

Has anyone make the inevitable abortion comparison yet?

Count to 10 on February 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Are you a dimwit?

CW on February 26, 2012 at 11:00 AM

Another left wing front group exposed for what they really are. Sickening!

Wigglesworth on February 26, 2012 at 11:02 AM

PETA media liaison Jane Dollinger told The Daily Caller in an email that “most of the animals we take in are society’s rejects; aggressive, on death’s door, or somehow unadoptable.”

So you can make this brilliant deduction in less than 24 hours, with no time for observation and testing?

PETA has nothing to do with animals. It’s a club for the exploitation of animals for the purpose of personal vanity.

These people are pond scum (appropriate, the Prez’s new energy source).

itsspideyman on February 26, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Learned something new on HA! I always thought PETA stood for People Eating Tasty Animals.

Jocundus on February 26, 2012 at 11:06 AM

I have always had an open invitation to the fine folks at PETA to come out here in the woods for a hunt. They don’t respond. Snobs I guess. I would be a great guide to them.

Bmore on February 26, 2012 at 11:08 AM

PETA media liaison Jane Dollinger told The Daily Caller in an email that “most of the animals we take in are society’s rejects; aggressive, on death’s door, or somehow unadoptable.”

This is one of the most lame dodges ever for lazy, cruel treatment of lost animals. I have worked at and with a number of shelters over the years. (In fact, my wife and I originally met while volunteering at an animal shelter.)
excerpt: Jazz Shaw

.
(Here’s my chance for the “most hated poster at Hotair.com” award)
.
So, there is a sizable number legitimate, potential pet owners out there, yearning for a pet, and being denied the opportunity for ‘pet’ companionship, because of this?
I don’t buy that, Jazz.
What constitutes “cruel treatment of lost animals?”
Heck, what constitutes a lost animal?
.
If a dog or cat is found “free roaming”, with no collar, or ID tags, I would insist that animal is not ‘lost’; It’s ‘discarded’.
And the blame for “lazy, and cruel treatment of lost discarded animals pets” belongs squarely in the laps of the former pet owners.
If PETA is misappropriating funds under the false pretense that they’re using it to feed and house animals, when in reality they’re NOT . . . that’s a whole other issue. And one which carries the possibility of having legal charges filed against it.

But as long as they are killing (YES, I said KILLING) the animals in a quick and painless manner, I defy anyone to point out the cruelty to the animals.
But the fact that PETA is raking in money under the false pretense of taking care of animals, and diverting it to (most likely) other Liberal/Communist causes, IS a matter to be looked into.
.
I have a family member who is also heavily involved in animal rescue, and this debate (argument, actually) NEVER ENDS.
.
The “higher intelligence” that is inherent in domestic/pet dogs and cats does NOT make them “people too.”

listens2glenn on February 26, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Jazz darling – I wrote about this well over a year ago…..

http://www.ladieslogic.com/component/content/article/49-far-left-madness/329-peta-kills-animals.html

Nothing has change -PeTA is a hypocritical organization who does not care about the animals as much as they are about controlling humans.

LL

Lady Logician on February 26, 2012 at 11:15 AM

Nothing has change

Sigh…. s/b nothing has CHANGED. I obviously need more caffeine this morning…..

LL

Lady Logician on February 26, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Count to 10 on February 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM

I’ll add to the replies you have already received. I am willing to bet the real reason PETA doesn’t make an effort to adopt out the animals they “save” is because it is hard. It takes a lot of effort to care for abandoned animals. Look at humane societies, shelters and those who foster. For PETA it is much easier to make an excuse that these animals are aggressive/damaged animals and conveniently get rid of them. I would allow that it is probably justified in some cases but I am willing to bet it is not applicable to the majority of animals they “save”. Just like the abortion industry trying to conflate abortion with women’s health. How many abortions are done because a pregnancy threatens a woman’s health? The vast majority are done because the pregnancy is simply inconvenient.

DaveDief on February 26, 2012 at 11:18 AM

But as long as they are killing (YES, I said KILLING) the animals in a quick and painless manner, I defy anyone to point out the cruelty to the animals.

listens2glenn on February 26, 2012 at 11:12 AM

I certainly agree with you there; what is on parade here is the blatant hypocracy of taking in animals and killing them within 24 hours.

It also delves into the mindset of the petas; control. It speaks of an Orwellian mindset that creates and controls doctine, an “I know what’s best for you” thought process.

They’re disgusting.

itsspideyman on February 26, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Why would PETA adopt animals out from their shelters? They’re against pet ownership.

gryphon202 on February 26, 2012 at 11:23 AM

The “higher intelligence” that is inherent in domestic/pet dogs and cats does NOT make them “people too.”

listens2glenn on February 26, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Which is exactly what makes it utterly ridiculous that PETA whores itself out to the media on the basis that it has more love and respect for animals than they do people. And given the pride with which many PETA members express their love of animals over their disdain of people, well, it should be obvious why this story bothers so many of us.

gryphon202 on February 26, 2012 at 11:25 AM

PETA:

Killing = kindness

Adoption = cruelty

I think that about sums it up.

EconomicNeocon on February 26, 2012 at 11:30 AM

uncovered by the Daily Caller this week

Haven’t we heard this about peta a year or two ago?

multiuseless on February 26, 2012 at 11:36 AM

The “higher intelligence” that is inherent in domestic/pet dogs and cats does NOT make them “people too.”
listens2glenn on February 26, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Which is exactly what makes it utterly ridiculous that PETA whores itself out to the media on the basis that it has more love and respect for animals than they do people. And given the pride with which many PETA members express their love of animals over their disdain of people, well, it should be obvious why this story bothers so many of us.
gryphon202 on February 26, 2012 at 11:25 AM

.
I have NO PROBLEM calling PETA hypocrites of the highest order, on account of this. I do believe there should be some kind of legal charges brought up against them for misleading donors, and/or misappropriation of funds.
.
But I have a HUGE problem calling ‘animal killing’ CRUELTY.
And that includes dogs and cats.

listens2glenn on February 26, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Suddenly, Cruella de Vil appears to be comparatively compassionate.

Shy Guy on February 26, 2012 at 11:39 AM

…since 1998 PETA has killed more than 27,000 animals at its headquarters in Norfolk, VA.

I used to drive a tugboat past this building several times a week. It is a multi-million dollar property along the banks of the Elizabeth River, in the Ghent section of Norfolk. So anyone sending donations to them is subsidizing their lavish digs while Fido & Fluffy become protein slurry.

TugboatPhil on February 26, 2012 at 11:42 AM

So, there is a sizable number legitimate, potential pet owners out there, yearning for a pet, and being denied the opportunity for ‘pet’ companionship, because of this?
If PETA is misappropriating funds under the false pretense that they’re using it to feed and house animals, when in reality they’re NOT . . . that’s a whole other issue. And one which carries the possibility of having legal charges filed against it.?

Well first off, PETA does not believe in people having pets at all. So they would be hypocrites for even pretending to rescue animals to be adopted as pets. And maybe in the areas where these so called shelters exist people are looking for pets, who knows.

But as long as they are killing (YES, I said KILLING) the animals in a quick and painless manner, I defy anyone to point out the cruelty to the animals.

listens2glenn on February 26, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Again it doesn’t matter whether or not it’s humane euthanasia. It goes against everything PETA supposedly stands for. And that is the story here, the hypocrisy…not whether shelters should euthanize.

Deanna on February 26, 2012 at 11:44 AM

But I have a HUGE problem calling ‘animal killing’ CRUELTY.
And that includes dogs and cats.

listens2glenn on February 26, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Are you even familiar with how, or for that matter how quickly PETA kills the animals in its care? Not all animal killing is cruelty, but I’d be inclined to think that PETA’s methodology qualifies. But that’s just me, and your mileage may vary.

gryphon202 on February 26, 2012 at 11:44 AM

I said it in the last post…some PETA workers were found throwing dead animals in dumpsters illegally here in Hampton Roads several years ago. I need to find the link, but I’m sure it was on the Virginian Pilot. I don’t hold out much hope that they were killing them ethically if they weren’t even disposing of their bodies ethically (or legally, for that matter)…so sick of hearing about this corrupt, soulless group, I hope they face major blowback over this.

ellifint on February 26, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Learned something new on HA! I always thought PETA stood for People Eating Tasty Animals.

Jocundus on February 26, 2012 at 11:06 AM

Thank goodness for Chinese recipes! “Wok the heck is that?”

LOL!

Roy Rogers on February 26, 2012 at 11:47 AM

PETA is one of the worst examples of a group which could have done something great, but chose instead to turn into a self-serving political, agenda driven organization which forgets their original mission.

In other words, they are just like any other group funded and staffed by liberals.

climbnjump on February 26, 2012 at 11:49 AM

SPCA=dog’s best friend. PETA=dog’s biggest droppings.

S. D. on February 26, 2012 at 10:48 AM

The majority of the money donated to ASPCA, and The Humane Society, goes toward anti-hunting campaigns. Contribute to your local shelter only with assurances the money is used for that shelter. Never give to the national programs.

M240H on February 26, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Google maps location of PETA HQ. Go to satellite view and see the prime location.

TugboatPhil on February 26, 2012 at 11:54 AM

@listens2glenn – This is not a debate against euthanasia of animals, but rather the typical hypocrisy of the leftists at PETA.

goflyers on February 26, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Google maps location of PETA HQ. Go to satellite view and see the prime location.

TugboatPhil on February 26, 2012 at 11:54 AM

~~~~~

Lol I leave nearby and pass it often, ALWAYS marveling at how well PETA has taken care of itself!

ellifint on February 26, 2012 at 12:03 PM

disdain of people
gryphon202 on February 26, 2012 at 11:25 AM

In a nutshell. Emphasis on nut.

CW on February 26, 2012 at 12:08 PM

Lol I leave nearby and pass it often, ALWAYS marveling at how well PETA has taken care of itself!

ellifint on February 26, 2012 at 12:03 PM

I know they’ve been there since at least 1996. They used to pay for air time on WNIS during Tony Macrini’s show in the morning. It was supposed to be like a regular interview, but Tony made sure to mention that they weren’t just a guest, but paying for the on air time.

TugboatPhil on February 26, 2012 at 12:11 PM

listens2glenn on February 26, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Are you even familiar with how, or for that matter how quickly PETA kills the animals in its care? Not all animal killing is cruelty, but I’d be inclined to think that PETA’s methodology qualifies. But that’s just me, and your mileage may vary.
gryphon202 on February 26, 2012 at 11:44 AM

.
You didn’t go into any detail of their “methodology”.
On that, you might have my agreement. But more information is needed.
.
How soon or fast they kill an animal after it has been brought to their “facility” is irrelevant to me, if they’re being open and honest about it. Why should that be an issue?

But they’d better not be sticking them inside a ‘hermetically sealed’ box, and then pumping “warfare chemicals” inside it (remember the video from Iraq, ten or so years ago?).
Or allowing dogs to get into the hands of “Dog Fighting” trainers and gamblers (Michael Vick).
Or sticking cats inside a bag, with rocks . . . . . . you get the picture.
.
But where I believe most of you would passionately disagree with me is that I would have NO problem with a pet owner killing his/her pet with a GUN.
Or a homeowner shooting stray cats, because they (the homeowner) are trying to feed and proliferate song birds in their yard.

listens2glenn on February 26, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Classic libtardism at it’s best: They are the only ones ‘smart’ enough to know what’s best. The rest of us are cattle.

TinMan13 on February 26, 2012 at 12:14 PM

I don’t see that adopting the animals out or killing them are the only options … if peta really believed their rhetoric, why not use some of that money they’re raking in to provide a farm or something where the animals can live free and not as pets?

Oh, wait … because it’s easier and cheaper to just kill them.

toby11 on February 26, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Thanks for the story….just added PETA to my harass via e-mail list.

Sent about 5 off a minute ago, and have e-mailed every pet owner I know.

Tim_CA on February 26, 2012 at 12:15 PM

@listens2glenn – This is not a debate against euthanasia of animals, but rather the typical hypocrisy of the leftists at PETA.
goflyers on February 26, 2012 at 11:56 AM

.
I went back up and reread Jazz’ post, and I believe this thread is fully BOTH.

And I believe I sufficiently expressed my agreement with all of you on the “hypocrite” side of this, in my previous posts.

listens2glenn on February 26, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Hey leave em alone.

It costs money to put up those really neat billboards, and animal food is expensive.

WryTrvllr on February 26, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Is there anyway we can send PETA and the EPA to Kalifornia, frack right along the Arizona border, and drop them all off into the ocean? That would be a site to see!

angrymike on February 26, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Standard liberal approach: Profess great compassion for some group, fight for the group as a whole, not give a d@mn about any individual in that group

john1v6 on February 26, 2012 at 12:46 PM

In Texas a law was passed several years ago that they can not harass a hunter. I do not remember if it was a fine or subject to arrest and I am not sure if it covers fiishing..

rocrio15 on February 26, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Just how does PETA get its claws on so many animals? Do they have a fleet of trucks out scouring the countryside for “society’s rejects”?

If not, then who in their right mind would take a “dangerous” animal in their car to this Death Row? Why not let Animal Services/Health Department capture the animal?

Something about this stinks to high heaven…

Peri Winkle on February 26, 2012 at 12:59 PM

But where I believe most of you would passionately disagree with me is that I would have NO problem with a pet owner killing his/her pet with a GUN.
Or a homeowner shooting stray cats, because they (the homeowner) are trying to feed and proliferate song birds in their yard.

listens2glenn on February 26, 2012 at 12:12 PM

I wouldn’t disagree with you one bit. PETA would. As goes their methodology, there is paperwork that proves two things that I find rather bone-chilling for an organization that supports “animal liberation:”

A) PETA often kills animals within 24 hours of receiving them. Most city pounds, at least in my home state, will wait for at least three days before killing an unlicensed stray — and these ARE NOT the shelters that adopt animals out. It’s municipal animal control.

B) In at least one instance, PETA spent north of $9700 on a walk-in freezer. Either that money was spent for a place to keep their sides of beef (HA!), or as a place to dispose of cadavers so they could be dumped under cover of darkness illegally.

gryphon202 on February 26, 2012 at 1:00 PM

PETA is just training for when the Progressives get to their agenda of “re-education” for all of us independent thinkers. They will already have the training and apparatus in place for their “final solution” to the “conservative” problem.

djtnt on February 26, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Oh, and quit calling it an animal shelter. It is no such thing.

It should be called Planned Pethood.

Peri Winkle on February 26, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Well the term ” when the rubber meets the road ” applies here

The reality is that there are thousands of unwanted animals that can’t be left to walk the streets for numerous reasons. They all cannot be taken care of either. Fact

There is only one alternative

Now the planned parenthood of animals claims lofty goals and disparages many for one reason only and that’s gubmint money which no doubt finds its way back to commie candidates pure and simple

You can apply this model to anything they are involved in

Corner market

Line pockets

Crappy product

Sonosam on February 26, 2012 at 1:09 PM

PETA and HSUS are using their money and political clout to organize against hobby dog breeding and have won in some amazing places (Texas, Georgia, Alabama), criminalizing the breeding of dogs for sport or working use, while leaving the puppy mills, the real enemy of pets, largely intact. ASPCA is involved in this effort also, using the dollars that animal lovers send them to make sure there are no more dogs as pets.

I give my dollars only to my local shelters, not affiliated with any of these satan-spawn organizations. I recommend this practice to those who really care about animals. The big national organizations only care about acquiring political power.

jclittlep on February 26, 2012 at 1:09 PM

It should be called Planned Pethood.

Peri Winkle on February 26, 2012 at 1:04 PM

I think you will have to call it something else like Planned non-human animal Partnerhood.

/

CW on February 26, 2012 at 1:11 PM

A) PETA often kills animals within 24 hours of receiving them. Most city pounds, at least in my home state, will wait for at least three days before killing an unlicensed stray — and these ARE NOT the shelters that adopt animals out. It’s municipal animal control.

gryphon202 on February 26, 2012 at 1:00 PM

That’s true and it is what bothers me about the 24 hour time limit. At least give the owner a chance to claim the pet if that is the case. A good reminder though that if your pet is micro-chipped you need to keep that information current. I’ve worked with rescue organizations and the amount of dogs who were chipped but registered to disconnected phone numbers or out of state addresses was astounding.

BakerAllie on February 26, 2012 at 1:26 PM

An old story which should really be common knowledge by now. Keep spreading the word.

tuffy on February 26, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Liberal=Hate+Hypocrisy+Ignorance+Arrogance

jukin3 on February 26, 2012 at 1:40 PM

PETA criticism above is true… however, I do like their “nekkid wimen” pictures.

ultracon on February 26, 2012 at 1:54 PM

People Eating Tasty Animals……

ultracon on February 26, 2012 at 1:57 PM

It should be called Planned Pethood.

Peri Winkle on February 26, 2012 at 1:04 PM

I think you will have to call it something else like Planned non-human animal Partnerhood.

/

CW on February 26, 2012 at 1:11 PM

That was careless of me. It should probably be NAAAAP (go to sleep, little rejected doggy :-)

National Association for the Accelerated (Extermination) of Animal-American People

Peri Winkle on February 26, 2012 at 2:08 PM

I’m in agreement with the others who ask, “Isn’t this old news?”

There’s a video on YouTube of NRA’s Wayne LaPierre debating some guy from PETA from 5+ years ago where PETA admitted to “putting to sleep” a large percentage of the animals they get.
http://youtu.be/NlQlJrgZwOk

L1b3r7y.0r.D347h on February 26, 2012 at 2:20 PM

I just realized something profound by stitching together several of the comments here…

PETA is not about helping animals, but about CONTROLLING humans!

dominigan on February 26, 2012 at 2:21 PM

The majority of the money donated to ASPCA, and The Humane Society, goes toward anti-hunting campaigns. Contribute to your local shelter only with assurances the money is used for that shelter. Never give to the national programs.

M240H on February 26, 2012 at 11:52 AM

PETA and HSUS are using their money and political clout to organize against hobby dog breeding and have won in some amazing places (Texas, Georgia, Alabama), criminalizing the breeding of dogs for sport or working use, while leaving the puppy mills, the real enemy of pets, largely intact. ASPCA is involved in this effort also, using the dollars that animal lovers send them to make sure there are no more dogs as pets.

I give my dollars only to my local shelters, not affiliated with any of these satan-spawn organizations. I recommend this practice to those who really care about animals. The big national organizations only care about acquiring political power.

jclittlep on February 26, 2012 at 1:09 PM

I was going to mention that about the HSUS also, that they have a political agenda far beyond their intentional heart wrenching commercials showing photos of horribly abused animals. I have read about their eventual goal of preventing people from owning any kind of pet.

I would love to have a dog again, but because of our work schedules, it would be pretty tough to manage right now. But out of curiosity, I looked up a few local pet adoption places and discovered that their procedures were a couple steps shy of what people have to go through to adopt humans. Some places had home inspections to make sure the prospective owner had enough room, that he or she had enough resources (read: money, of course) to take care of the animal adequately, and so on. What I found most disturbing and enraging was that one place had “required” home visits after the animal was taken home, presumably to check that the owner was following “proper procedures,” which I’m sure is sometimes enforced to the letter with no leeway, i.e. you bought dog food that is the wrong age group for your dog, so we will have to remove it from your home immediately.

It’s not bad enough that there’s already enough government intrusion in everyone’s lives, so of course, the usual environmental wackos disguised as non-profit agencies are trying to get into the act any way they can also.

When the time comes, I’ll go to a no-kill shelter a couple miles away from my home and adopt a dog there.

PatriotGal2257 on February 26, 2012 at 2:50 PM

It’s not bad enough …

Meant: It IS bad enough.

PatriotGal2257 on February 26, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Comment pages: 1 2