Interesting to see P.E.T.A. explain this one off...

By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics and access other forums reserved for members. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today by clicking here.

Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:13 am

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090217/ap_on_re_us/chimpanzee_attack

Ouch.

Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:25 am

Quote:

The 200-pound animal viciously mauled a friend of his owner before being shot to death by police.

My money is on PETheticA being interested in only the last part of that sentence. Poor wee thing, all it needed was some counselling and to be understand. It was just a cry for attention. Rolling Eyes

Elite Baiter Joined: 19 Jan 2008 Posts: 1043

Damn tree kittens.

Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:07 am

maybe they should have given it MORE Xanax?

Baiting Guru Joined: 19 Mar 2007 Posts: 2628

Hmmm
So a wild animal was kept in a house, fed a totally inappropriate diet, treated as a substitiute child, not socialised with his own kind and when he became agitated the owner did not seek advice from a vet but gave him a drug that has doubtful effects on humans let alone animals?????!!!!!!

I see she's now backtracking in the Xanax story but even then, why was an animal with Lymes Disease allowed outside
Again instead of getting appropriate help she gets a pal to wave a strange object in its face. An Elmo toy!
That would set me screaming let alone a chimp.

Wild animals are wild animals
Look at Gavin Maxwell ( Ring of Bright Water ) even he had problems with his otters ( count Terry Nutkins fingers )

Not quite a Newb Joined: 14 Jul 2005 Posts: 41

Wise and sage Nanny wrote:

Wild animals are wild animals

Yep.

Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 11:14 am

PETA doesn't believe animals should be pets, so I'm sure they will take the position of condemning the owner just for having him.

Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:09 pm

Sounds like "Bedtime for Bonzo" remade as a horror movie.

Baiting Guru Joined: 19 Mar 2007 Posts: 2628

@ Dortothy
I think the owner should be condemed for owning him.
She obviously had no idea of the stress and trauma the poor thing was under...

She seems to have no idea of chimp behaviour
She didn't feed him properly.
She didn't let him socialise with is own kind
It has also been suggested she gave him drugs which were not prescribed for him.
It seems she wa using hima s a cjild substitute and not thinking of his best interests
If one is going to keep a pet one should understand the species, how it behaves, how it should be cared for, whether its a dog or a chimp.

I'm gobsmacked at the very suggestion she medicated the animal without consulting a vet
I mean how many cats have died because their owners gave them asprin? Yeah it relieves aches and pains in humans but cats lack an enzyme to metabolise it and end up with organ failure
Or giving dogs chocolate?
The theobromine can give them some very nasty side effects

Sorry
rant over

And I do realise the irony of saying one should understand a species and how it behaves when I share a house with a cat. You can read all the books you want, the cat will do what it chooses.

Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:55 pm

Dorothy wrote:

PETA doesn't believe animals should be pets, so I'm sure they will take the position of condemning the owner just for having him.

For me it shows that PeTA doesn't know about animals. Animals kept as pets actually are the owners (especially if they are cats) of the people.

The chimp was a star in commercials. It pains my brain to see the people who teat any animal as family members (sorry pet lovers, it's just me).

Hey, I just noticed that PeTA is just one finger away from PeTS... Shocked

Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:53 pm

I also blame the DEP (Dept of Enviromental Protection) as a law passed a few years ago stopped allowing exotics as pets, but they "grandfathered" this one in, although it sounds more like they didn't care enough to tell the owner to get rid of it.

Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:14 pm

The news stories have stated that the woman was taking baths with the chimp,
also that they slept in the same bed.

Just how close were they?

Smile

Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:17 pm

ParaNoid wrote:

For me it shows that PeTA doesn't know about animals. Animals kept as pets actually are the owners (especially if they are cats) of the people.

That maybe true of cats but certainly isn't of dogs. Or shouldn't be.
Only a bad dog owner is owned by his dog. They're pack animals and as such have to be put in their place. A dog doesn't care where it comes in the pack as long as it knows where it is. Let it own you and sit at the top of the pack and you're asking for trouble - that's when the buggers bite. They feel the need to maintain their place and do so in the only way that they know how.
I own two big dogs, they're at the bottom of the pecking order and they know it.
Although I love my animals dearly, I own them. They certainly don't own me.

As for the chimp in the OP? It was a wild animal - not a domesticated animal. And wild animals should always be treated with extreme caution no matter how tame they seem to be. The owner is responsible for the trouble that the chimp caused and responsible for it's death. I'm absolutely no fan of PETA (wankers) but I'd have no problem if they want to string her up by the tits.

Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:25 pm

^^I hear what you are saying and agree with it totally. Animals (most) are more "secure" when they know their position in the pack, colony, pecking order...

What I meant is that the humans do all of the things that the animals need. WE provide food, shelter, water, vet bills etc. for the pets. Smile

Absolutely, the animals need to know "their place" and that was the issue with the chimp. It had no place living like a human. It is too bad about the neighbor. Sad

edited because I can't type today... Embarassed

Baiting Guru Joined: 19 Mar 2007 Posts: 2628

I agree with Slightly
The only cross word I had with my late sister in law were over the dog. We were at a family gathering. As one of the kids was reaching to get something the dog growled at them. I spoke sharply to it and told it to go lie down
"Aw its just his way"
Not near my kids its not.
My "stepmother" had a wee yorkie that was pamperd, allowed on the sofa, growled if you went to sit down. There was no way on this Earth I'd let them babysit with that dog in the house.
Both dogs didn't know who was boss
Unlike my mums dog who knew his place, was patience itself and looked up to his boss- the cat.

That poor chimp had no idea of his identity
anthropomorphism at its worst

(ooo red letter day. I've agreed with Slighlty and Craig today!!!! )

Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:51 pm

I agree with the responsible ownership discussions--I see the results of irresponsible ownership constantly when they end up in the shelter--and I personally believe the woman should be charged. But what I meant was that PETA wouldn't care whether she raised the animal right or not--since they don't believe people should own pets (many include domestic and service animals in that position) she could have done everything "right" and it would still be her fault for having it.

ETA: And don't get me started on the owners of little ankle-biters who growl, snap, and bite because their owners thought it was "cute" or harmless when the behavior started.

Interesting to see P.E.T.A. explain this one off...	View next topic View previous topic