LMAO - NSF PETA

[The Hen]

Too true BSG. As I stated before, it is the difference in the charges that could potentially be laid in both cases that separates them.

Harassment vs reckless endangerment.

Here the latter has a far greater penalty under legislation.

[The Hen]

As stated, I was nuetral about the kangaroo's treatment and did not mention it. However, personally, I don't think it's cool to do any critter.

So reckless endangerment of animals is hilarious and buzzing them with an unmanned camera is dangerous?

Strange sense of values you hold there Lo.

That might be because as a wee locita, when we visited friend's and family's ranches; I was always told, 'Don't chase the chickens!' 'Leave the goats alone!' etc.
Most ranchers I've ever met, don't like their livestock harassed.

Kangaroos are not livestock.

Those girls leap from roof, to tree, to fence, randomly and recklessly- it's hilarious. ...which is what this video reminded me of: Squirrel Wars. Flinging themselves around is natural behavior.

A squirrel jumping under its own steam will not reach the velocity that you found so hilarious when those arseholes were tormenting them. There is a difference. one I see you still have not been able to get your tiny mind around.

If being a naturalist, makes me a sociopath, so be it.

Nothing you have posted paints you as a naturalist. Your words have put you in the camp of the latter.

So be it.

[loCAtek]

While you have no personal knowledge of squirrels, as they are not found in Australia.

So funny, for you to be so erroneously-of-the-mark judgmental.

Do continue, it's hilarious.

So, be it.

Yup, I be it.

[Gob]

So let me get this right, going on what people have quoted, our city dwelling, trailer park resident, alcoholic, pseudo-buddist, priest child rape supporting, non catholic, country girl, attention whore, is now claiming to be a "naturalist"?

nat·u·ral·ist
   
noun
1. a person who studies or is an expert in natural history, especially a zoologist or botanist.

She gets more bizarrely delusional each day...

[loCAtek]

Nope, not just now, but for over a year in one of your most hit threads 'Happy Trails'

You're welcome.

Oh wait, you don't want to be on topic, but on another pissing match ...this has what to do with squirrels, not found in Oz again?


The control freak can't ignore me, hilarious

Here's your sign;

[Rick]

Ya'll are over the top.

Airports use propane cannons to scare birds away from airports, farmers do the same for catfish ponds.

Hallucinogen laden corn is used to keep pigeons from roosting on tall buildings.

These are rats bushy tail rats but rats none the less...

[Gob]

Vermin control is one thing, maiming animals for fun another.

[Gob]

Animals have always been regarded in Buddhist thought as sentient beings, different in their intellectual ability than humans but no less capable of feeling suffering. Furthermore, animals possess Buddha nature (according to the Mahāyāna school) and therefore an equal potential to become enlightened. Moreover, the doctrine of rebirth held that any human could be reborn as an animal, and any animal could be reborn as a human. An animal might be a reborn dead relative, and if you looked far enough back in one's infinite series of lives, you would eventually perceive every animal to be related to you in some way. The Buddha expounded that sentient beings currently living in the animal realm have been our mothers, brothers, sisters, fathers, children, friends in past rebirths. One could not, therefore, make a hard distinction between moral rules applicable to animals and those applicable to humans; ultimately humans and animals were part of a single family. They are all interconnected.

The Buddha taught that all sentient beings, including those in the animal realm, possess Buddha nature and therefore can attain enlightenment and that from infinite rebirths, all animals have been our past relatives, sisters, mothers, brothers, fathers and children. Therefore it is against the first precept to harm, kill or eat sentient beings as it is the same as harming, killing or eating the flesh of our own child or mother.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animals_in_Buddhism

Pseudo-Buddists like the idea of harming animals for fun and support child raping priests. Sociopathic scum that they are.

[Rick]

I have searched high and low there is no evidence to support the assertion that any squirrels were injured, maimed, killed or any other descriptive...

[dales]

Hallucinogen laden corn is used to keep pigeons from roosting on tall buildings.

What a trip, man!

[Rick]

I will agree that I have seen posts where Lo has claimed to follow (however close) the tenants of Buddhism.

However there is still an assumption here that any of these critters were actually hurt...

[Lord Jim]

I have searched high and low there is no evidence to support the assertion that any squirrels were injured, maimed, killed or any other descriptive...

That's a bit facile Keld...

If I make, (or post) a video of kittens being tossed out of a helicopter for example, it would be a bit disingenuous of me to suggest that because you don't see any of the kittens being "injured, maimed, or killed" in the video, that somehow proves they weren't...

Since I would be the one either engaging in, or defending, the behavior that one could logically believe would do such things, the burden would lie with me to demonstrate that these things did not happen....

Not the other way around....

[Rick]

They weren't dropped out of a helicopter LJ.

We don't even know how far they went.

They're still rats...

[Rick]

Let me clarify, would I make a squirrel catapult?

No

Did I think the video was funny?

Yes

Does that make me a sociopath?

I don't know what a sociopath is supposed to feel like however that lack of experience aside.

No I don't think I'm a sociopath nor do I think anyone else that thought this video was funny is either...

[loCAtek]

I've suggested, for the third time now, look at the other videos that are highlighted by YouTube at the end of the OP video. You can see squirrels landing after a launching in a few, and running away. Obviously 'squirrel obstacles', a great household garden hobby; are not mastered by the beasties on the first try ..and they fall a lot. To live to launch another day.

The only time squirrels are harmed, are if they've been shot in deliberate exterminations. Interestingly, YouTube has no problem with posting squirrel-shooting exterminations.
...because they're considered vermin.

As a matter of fact, the cat, to date has killed two squirrels this year. That's life, and as a Buddhist if their choices are to put themselves in those situations, I just have to accept the squirrel's lifestyle choices.
In the Real World, when I am in a position to, I save such animals lives.

How many Australians have personally saved a squirrel?

Compared to how many Australians have judged a YouTube video of a squirrel not being harmed?

[The Hen]

And for the fourth time, those clips have nothing to do with the clip you found so amusing.

They have nothing to do with your clip.

You have no evidence that the squirrels were unharmed. Showing pictures of other squirrels is yet another strawman from you.

BTW - Australia has no squirrels, we have possums. Far larger, much more aggressive.

[BoSoxGal]

There is nothing wrong with saying, 'on second thought, that video depicts an act wherein an innocent animal was at very least terrified, and quite possibly physically injured or killed, and I'm now sorry I've defended it so vehemently.'

Or, continue defending it - but, don't expect any reasonable people with compassion for (even pest) animals to agree that the video is funny. It's simply not.

Hey, kittens are known for their ability to fall from heights and land on their feet, and they jump from roof to roof and climb trees, too - should we launch a kitten in that contraption from your video?

[Gob]

Why is this video "not safe for PETA?"'

Oh, sorry that's "people for the ethical treatment of animals", this video is not ethical in any way, and would definitely not be acceptable to anyone who loves animals. Thanks for the heads up...

[Rick]

RATS

[Scooter]

Have you never seen the classic "Night of the Lepus"!

Ok, this really is spooky. This is the second bad horror film I had never heard of before, only to see it playing on TV soon after I saw it mentioned here.

It's like someone here is invoking the ghosts of horror schlock films of the past.