Cat Thread - This is how you do it.

[Waterrat]

Yet you keep coming back!

Ya Rams, keep coming back because i am quite passionate about one thing ..... not so much the cats as per say but the narrow-minded people who post recipes how to trap or kill a cat (one tool even described how to best drawn them) or boast how many they have done. If you only "like" native animals, there is something missing .... and if you hate any animal (apart from parasites, etc) you are one sick puppy.

 

[Ramsayi]

Ya Rams, keep coming back because i am quite passionate about one thing ..... not so much the cats as per say but the narrow-minded people who post recipes how to trap or kill a cat (one tool even described how to best drawn them) or boast how many they have done. If you only "like" native animals, there is something missing .... and if you hate any animal (apart from parasites, etc) you are one sick puppy.

Passionate you may be but some of your responses so far have been way over the top.There is nothing wrong with trapping roaming cats that wander into neighbours backyards yet you seem hell bent on throwing insults at people who do just that. So far you have accused people of paranoia ,called them hero's, idiotic, extremist,moronic,rednecks, narrow-minded,tools and sick puppies.For what all because they don't want cats,feral or domestic coming onto their properties killing native animals that these people are trying to encourage and help out.

No one else in this thread has attacked anyone about being self-righteous,narrow-minded, know it alls have they?

Bottom line keep your cat on your own property and there will be no issues.

 

[gandal88]

i have =P

 

[Waterrat]

Passionate you may be but some of your responses so far have been way over the top.There is nothing wrong with trapping roaming cats that wander into neighbours backyards yet you seem hell bent on throwing insults at people who do just that. So far you have accused people of paranoia ,called them hero's, idiotic, extremist,moronic,rednecks, narrow-minded,tools and sick puppies.For what all because they don't want cats,feral or domestic coming onto their properties killing native animals that these people are trying to encourage and help out.

No one else in this thread has attacked anyone about being self-righteous,narrow-minded, know it alls have they?

Bottom line keep your cat on your own property and there will be no issues.

Ramsay, I have the same right to express my opinion as everyone else here, including yourself. That is how I feel about the issue and that's it, I don't mince my words. If what I said was too offensive, self-righteous,narrow-minded, or whatever you say, the mods would have send me a friendly PM. I stood for my principles, how did you contribute to this debate other that reprimanding me?

 

[ryanm]

This might be a thread about cats, but the justification has been that cats are destructive to our environment, so surely we must consider other factors that are destructive when considering if trapping and killing cats is a worthwhile pursuit.

This has been brought up a couple of times throughout the thread, but has been brushed aside, but a massive percentage of people in this thread are being completely hypocritical about saving our native Wildlife. Why all this talk of how destructive cats are to native animals, when humans are by far the most destructive of all creatures? We knock down their habitats to build our McMansions, pollute the air with our vehicles, clear the land to let our crops grow or our cattle graze, poison the soil with our pesticides and insecticides, excavate vast areas to strip the land of its coal and iron ore and the list goes on yet we are focussing on the impact of cats on the wildlife left in suburbia. Whenever someone has piped up and said that trapping cats will have little or no impact they have been shouted down and the sentiment of "every little bit counts" seems to win. If every little bit helps then there are a million other steps you can take that are less radical, have no impact your neighbours and would have a larger impact on the overall well being of our native wildlife and the conservation of their habitat, however this seems to be overlooked as a large number of you seem to like the idea of harming cats with the justification that you are just "doing your bit".

If you live in suburbia, eat beef, drive a car or watch your 50" plasma TV you are contributing to the destruction of native habitats and the death of our native wildlife just as much as any cat you decide needs to die. I know I do all of the aforementioned things, and I'm certainly not proud of them when I think of the impact they have. We as humans need to take a long hard look at ourselves before we pass the blame onto any other living creature.

 

[waruikazi]

I like your post, there are alot of other major influencing factors that do significant damage to our native ecosystems. I think something does need to be done about all of them.

But like you said, this thread is about cats, not those other things. I think it is a simple fact that if my neighbours know that their cats life is in danger if it gets out or that they will cop a fine, will encourage them to keep their animals locked up inside.

And you are wrong. Like with toads in darwin and the Northern Suburbs and buffalo across the top end, if enough individuals pitch in and do their bit we can significantly reduce cat numbers.

This might be a thread about cats, but the justification has been that cats are destructive to our environment, so surely we must consider other factors that are destructive when considering if trapping and killing cats is a worthwhile pursuit.

This has been brought up a couple of times throughout the thread, but has been brushed aside, but a massive percentage of people in this thread are being completely hypocritical about saving our native Wildlife. Why all this talk of how destructive cats are to native animals, when humans are by far the most destructive of all creatures? We knock down their habitats to build our McMansions, pollute the air with our vehicles, clear the land to let our crops grow or our cattle graze, poison the soil with our pesticides and insecticides, excavate vast areas to strip the land of its coal and iron ore and the list goes on yet we are focussing on the impact of cats on the wildlife left in suburbia. Whenever someone has piped up and said that trapping cats will have little or no impact they have been shouted down and the sentiment of "every little bit counts" seems to win. If every little bit helps then there are a million other steps you can take that are less radical, have no impact your neighbours and would have a larger impact on the overall well being of our native wildlife and the conservation of their habitat, however this seems to be overlooked as a large number of you seem to like the idea of harming cats with the justification that you are just "doing your bit".

If you live in suburbia, eat beef, drive a car or watch your 50" plasma TV you are contributing to the destruction of native habitats and the death of our native wildlife just as much as any cat you decide needs to die. I know I do all of the aforementioned things, and I'm certainly not proud of them when I think of the impact they have. We as humans need to take a long hard look at ourselves before we pass the blame onto any other living creature.

 

[ryanm]

And you are wrong. Like with toads in darwin and the Northern Suburbs and buffalo across the top end, if enough individuals pitch in and do their bit we can significantly reduce cat numbers.

I don't disagree with that idea in my post, I agree that if enough people were to get involved you would see significantly reduced numbers of cats, my point is we should be getting involved in other more productive measures.

 

[rhysmachine101]

I'm right there with you, ryanm. Well said!
Not that some people will take that on-board and have a good hard think about it. But what can you do? People love to irrationally hate things.
Human nature I guess.
It is kinda annoying that they wont admit that their hatred IS irrational and keep trying to justify it.
Just admit it- you hate cats for no real reason.

I'm going to throw one out there... I hate dogs! Thats right; I HATE DOGS!
They are smelly, slobbery creatures who are allowed to roam by their owners and they KILL native wildlife! (hands up who hasn't seen a dog chewing on a blue-tongue, before?)
Not only that, but they attack humans and kill kids in their own houses! (which cats cannot be accused of.)
I therefore conclude that every dog I see off its own property- without a responsible owner in tow- will be trapped and sent to the pound and hopefully put down.
Hey, I might even go super-bogan on their asses and shoot them or maybe even bludgeon them to death.
They are not on their own property- therefore they are feral and I have a moral obligation to eliminate the threat to our native wildlife and especially our kids!
Christ, you could justify just about anything with this reasoning couldn't you?
Ta,
Newly-Dog-Hating-Rhys.

 

[killimike]

I therefore conclude that every dog I see off its own property- without a responsible owner in tow- will be trapped and sent to the pound and hopefully put down.

The total lack of a rational argument in the rest of the post aside, I agree with this sentiment of your dog hating straw man. Except for the hopefully put down bit. Stray dogs are a problem. Only thing is, no reasonable person says their dogs should be allowed to roam and pee and crap wherever. That's been the whole argument with cats in this thread. So analogy fail

From someone who looks after four cats and a dog.

 

[Cockney_Red]

Poor Pussy

 

[rhysmachine101]

The total lack of a rational argument in the rest of the post aside, I agree with this sentiment of your dog hating straw man. Except for the hopefully put down bit. Stray dogs are a problem. Only thing is, no reasonable person says their dogs should be allowed to roam and pee and crap wherever. That's been the whole argument with cats in this thread. So analogy fail

From someone who looks after four cats and a dog.

My entire post was a satire- the point (which you might have missed) was that there WAS no rational argument. For cats either.
No reasonable, responsible person believes that their CATS should be allowed to roam free to pee and crap wherever, either. So analogy win.
Although, I must admit that a lot more people stupidly believe so.

From someone who owns a cat and two dogs.

 

[Colin]

yes killimike thats it in a nutshell.. its not a cats fault or a dogs fault if they are left to roam where ever and instinctively kiill native animals..
Its THEIR SELFISH IRRESPONSIBLE OWNERS FAULT..

the sooner legislation is introduced to make it law to keep cats on there own property like dogs the better in my opinion.

 

[killimike]

My entire post was a satire- the point (which you might have missed) was that there WAS no rational argument. For cats either.
No reasonable, responsible person believes that their CATS should be allowed to roam free to pee and crap wherever, either. So analogy win.
Although, I must admit that a lot more people stupidly believe so.

From someone who owns a cat and two dogs.

It was very obvious that you were caricaturing the people holding the opposite view to yourself. What did you think I meant by strawman? The fail comes in when the supposedly analogous case, that you are making sound as extreme as possible so people will see that their own position is inconsistent/not tenable, is actually something that the other side already agrees with. Stray dogs should be taken to the pound? Why would you think people who trap stray cats would have a problem with that?

 

[rhysmachine101]

Because a lot of people who trap stray cats wouldn't agree with it- dog comes into their yard, they give it a pat and play with it a little then send it on its way. Cat does the same thing- they shoo it away call the pound or try to trap or kill it.
It happens- I'm sure we've all seen this hypocrisy in action.

In my original post I was saying that people were using this native wildlife moral argument as a cover for their irrational hatred for cats- this is what the rest of the post was about.
So I'm saying that: no, not all of the 'other side' would agree with me, in practice.
In theory, sure, they'll pipe in and say- 'of course we'd do the same for dogs as for cats'- but lets be honest, there is a sizable percentage that wouldn't.

Edit: I've honestly never heard of the strawman expression before- so my mistake there, for that, you have my apology.

 

[killimike]

Because a lot of people who trap stray cats wouldn't agree with it- dog comes into their yard, they give it a pat and play with it a little then send it on its way. Cat does the same thing- they shoo it away call the pound or try to trap or kill it.
It happens- I'm sure we've all seen this hypocrisy in action.

In my original post I was saying that people were using this native wildlife moral argument as a cover for their irrational hatred for cats- this is what the rest of the post was about.
So I'm saying that: no, not all of the 'other side' would agree with me, in practice.
In theory, sure, they'll pipe in and say- 'of course we'd do the same for dogs as for cats'- but lets be honest, there is a sizable percentage that wouldn't.

Edit: I've honestly never heard of the strawman expression before- so my mistake there, for that, you have my apology.

Thanks for clarifying your position! I still disagree, but it's a free country..... so far

I dunno if it's fair to just say that people who trap cats are hypocrites, and are providing justifications for their behaviour that they do not truly believe, despite any explicit protestations they may make to the contrary. That right there is a way to argue for absolutely anything, which was what you said about cat trappers and their arguments in your earlier post.

If a dog appeared in my backyard, I guarantee 100% I would not pat it and send it on its way. I would assume it got there by mistake. There's the difference between dogs and cats again, the same assumption would not be there for a cat. Most of the time it would have been allowed to roam. Another reason why the analogy doesn't hold, the situations are dissimilar.

So I still think from looking at it that the structure of your original post suggests that you were making an argument from analogy coupled with a dose of exaggeration. But then again, I'm just procrastinating right now, so don't take me too seriously

 

[waruikazi]

I won't tell the story but i am not a hypocrite.

Because a lot of people who trap stray cats wouldn't agree with it- dog comes into their yard, they give it a pat and play with it a little then send it on its way. Cat does the same thing- they shoo it away call the pound or try to trap or kill it.
It happens- I'm sure we've all seen this hypocrisy in action.

In my original post I was saying that people were using this native wildlife moral argument as a cover for their irrational hatred for cats- this is what the rest of the post was about.
So I'm saying that: no, not all of the 'other side' would agree with me, in practice.
In theory, sure, they'll pipe in and say- 'of course we'd do the same for dogs as for cats'- but lets be honest, there is a sizable percentage that wouldn't.

Edit: I've honestly never heard of the strawman expression before- so my mistake there, for that, you have my apology.

 

[Jeffa]

Wow, I am still suprised to see this thread still going, thanks moderators and members for your responsible posts. At the end of the day I am going to continue what I am doing (2 cats). Call me everyname under the sun (the fact this obviously frusturates you, pleases me. Maybe that is the redneck, moronic and all other insults coming out). knowing that I now have potentially saved hundreds of native animals from a certain death and not to mention quiter nights of sleep and hopefully educating an IRRESPONSABLE PET OWNER.
Oh and Waterrat I honestly dont what is easier to bait, the cats or you?

PHave a nice day all.

 

[Waterrat]

You have a nice day too champion.

 

[KaotikJezta]

If a dog appeared in my backyard, I guarantee 100% I would not pat it and send it on its way. I would assume it got there by mistake. There's the difference between dogs and cats again, the same assumption would not be there for a cat. Most of the time it would have been allowed to roam. Another reason why the analogy doesn't hold, the situations are dissimilar.

I assume you didn't see my post about my neighbours indoor cat that escaped from its crate on the way to the vet, by accident, after never ever being outside before. Their biggest worry was cat haters killing it. My cat escaped once when someone didn't latch the back door properly, it has seizures so it was quite a worry. When it returned the next day it could hardly walk and had a lovely wound on it's head from some kind of blunt object. This is what happens when people take the law into there own hands. My cat had seizures everyday for over a week after that because some heartless piece of dirt decided it was just an abandoned or uncared for stray.

 

[Jeffa]

You have a nice day too champion.

:lol: