Why PETA will always be a joke to me

[Jupiter551]

The witch hunt to remove Richards (a registered Republican) was led by a gang of legislators who are all Democrats. I assumed they were Liberal Democrats. If you know better, please enlighten me.

There were petitions signed by over 30,000 people to have him removed, and despite what you think a great many people find his behaviour highly unethical and a conflict of interest (one of the things the commission has specifically stated that they're tightening in, I think, april). Statements like "I'm glad it's legal in Idaho" hardly endear him to the Californian public who overwhelmingly supported the protection of mountain lions. If he went and sat on the commission in Idaho, problem solved.

You can have your opinion, but there are a lot of people who think he should be removed and not from any political standpoint. Likewise he is being supported and protecting the hunting and fishing lobby groups, just as the animal rights and environmental lobbyists want him gone. As I said, have your opinion but don't just dismiss the fact that people who care nothing about the politics have serious doubts about his ethical, moral, and objective ability to serve the public on that board.

Keep your arguments rational, there are republicans who don't hunt and democrats who do. If this was nothing more than a political agenda this wouldn't (still) be in the news.

Richards’ six-year term on the Commission ends in January 2013. However, even though his job is safe for now, Assemblymember Hueso and Assembly Speaker John A. Perez (D-Los Angeles) have changed tactics to instead work on introducing legislation which would “improve the standards and practices of the California Fish and Game Commission.”
Among other things, the bill will reportedly include a revised conflict-of-interest code for commissioners.

I think I mentioned that it was a clear conflict of interest a few pages back, seems I'm not alone in thinking that - though I hadn't seen it mentioned til the last few days in relation to this incident.

He also really looks like a tool

 

[Bocefish]

My opinion is based on sound, scientific game management principles and trust the professionals who manage them for everyone. It is not swayed by how beautiful or majestic a critter is, nor is it swayed by partisanship.

 

[Jupiter551]

Scientific evidence of what, it's fun to kill shit? Wildlife management isn't the issue, as I first brought up when we started this discussion the issue is his actions are an inappropriate embarassment and a disregard of the ethics of the people he represents. It's professional stupidity.
I think this article states it really well, written by a self-confessed sometime hunter http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-cap-mountain-lion-20120308,0,4342693.column

The root problem here is Richards' failure to adhere to a rule we're all taught at a young age — or should be — and that is to remember who you are and whom you represent.

And in Richards' case, he is not merely an avid hunter who represents a declining segment of the California population, which tends to patronize Western Outdoor News, the niche website where he sent the stunning snapshot.

The Upland real estate developer represents the entire state of California as president of the powerful state Fish and Game Commission.

His constituency consists not only of the 268,000 Californians who last year bought hunting licenses, down from 762,000 in 1970, despite the state's population nearly doubling in that span. Richards also represents the 37.5 million non-hunting Californians, many of whom barely tolerate the killing of animals for sport.

The larger constituency merely expects the Fish and Game Commission to be the guardian of California wildlife. And people get nervous when they see the commission president flaunting the out-of-state kill of an imposing creature that would be protected in California.

As the senate leader said, and I couldn't have put it better myself:

"This guy has acted like a jackass," Steinberg said of Richards. "When you hold a high public position, you have a responsibility to act with decorum….

 

[hornygods]

The subjective values people place on different things varies on personal judgement. The ethical positions on the practices would always vary because of that - but our objective isn't really to see how many people support a position. Our objective is to determine the validity of an ethical position, and support the one that's the most valid and substantiated.

I haven't read too deeply into this thread, but could someone do a brief overview on what the discussion is about precisely? Is the dispute over whether it is ethical to kill animal threats, or to kill for sport/food?

 

[Bocefish]

Here we go again talking in circles, saying the same shit over and over again. IMO it is all about game management. What's legal in one state may be illegal in another due to numbers and other criteria. His decision to hunt a legal animal out of California in no way influences or hinders his ability to make sound judgements regarding the management of game in his state of residence. I'm done arguing about it.

 

[Mirra]

Yay quoting myself again.

[Killing the mountain lion] does seem a bit hypocritical and perhaps displays a lack of foresight on his part. The more public your job profile, the more mindful of such politics you must be to succeed.

The fact of the matter is while you, Boce, perceive it to cause no conflict of interest in performing his job, some of the people of California apparently do. With a position like his you have to manage your public image very carefully or something like this fiasco can happen.

Managing perceptions can be a bitch.

 

[Nordling]

The witch hunt to remove Richards (a registered Republican) was led by a gang of legislators who are all Democrats. I assumed they were Liberal Democrats. If you know better, please enlighten me.

Then you should have said "Democrats." If you look at Congress, e.g., you'll see that the "liberal caucus" is a MINORITY wing within the Democratic Party. Most democrats tend to be centrists. And prior to "the southern strategy," many Republicans were centrist to progressive.

 

[Bocefish]

The witch hunt to remove Richards (a registered Republican) was led by a gang of legislators who are all Democrats. I assumed they were Liberal Democrats. If you know better, please enlighten me.

Then you should have said "Democrats." If you look at Congress, e.g., you'll see that the "liberal caucus" is a MINORITY wing within the Democratic Party. Most democrats tend to be centrists. And prior to "the southern strategy," many Republicans were centrist to progressive.

You're right, I shouldn't have assumed. Next time I'll just say Democrats. :lol:

 

[AmberCutie]

I thought it was a common thing for people to replace the words Republican/Democrat with Conservative/Liberal.

LOL, what the hell am I doing in this thread. I thought I told myself to not touch it with a 10 foot pole.

 

[Nordling]

I thought it was a common thing for people to replace the words Republican/Democrat with Conservative/Liberal.

LOL, what the hell am I doing in this thread. I thought I told myself to not touch it with a 10 foot pole.

It is. All too common, since it's not accurate. lol

 

[AmberCutie]

I thought it was a common thing for people to replace the words Republican/Democrat with Conservative/Liberal.

LOL, what the hell am I doing in this thread. I thought I told myself to not touch it with a 10 foot pole.

It is. All too common, since it's not accurate. lol

Well I'd suggest, since it IS such a common thing, not to try to change the world's incorrect use of it by shooting down one person on a cam girl thread for using it. :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Bocefish]

LOL, what the hell am I doing in this thread. I thought I told myself to not touch it with a 10 foot pole.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

You're in it now.

 

[Nordling]

:lol: I probably wouldn't have if I hadn't suspected it was being used in a snarkish way.

My favorite Democrat and Oklahoman in history said this:

"I belong to no organized party. I'm a Democrat." -Will Rogers

 

[Jupiter551]

Just an addendum: as far as trusting "professionals" to decide wildlife management, Dan Richards profession is real estate. He's a realtor. And a hunter. And a buddy of the former governor. That's about as far as his professional expertise seems to extend.

I'm stating this because I think some people are under the impression he's some kind of professional park-ranger dude.

http://sd28.senate.ca.gov/news/2012...onicle-cougar-hunter-target-try-oust-him-post

Richards, a commercial Realtor and developer from Upland (San Bernardino County) who has been on the commission since then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger appointed him in 2008

 

[Bocefish]

There are three different agencies where some people believe there is only one. Richards is on the F&G Commission.

The Department of Fish and Game http://www.dfg.ca.gov/

The Mission of the Department of Fish and Game is to manage California's diverse fish, wildlife, and plant resources, and the habitats upon which they depend, for their ecological values and for their use and enjoyment by the public.

They maintain native fish, wildlife, plant species and natural communities for their intrinsic and ecological value and their benefits to people. This includes habitat protection and maintenance in a sufficient amount and quality to ensure the survival of all species and natural communities. The department is also responsible for the diversified use of fish and wildlife including recreational, commercial, scientific and educational uses.

Fish & Game Commission http://www.fgc.ca.gov/public/information/
http://www.fgc.ca.gov/strategic_plan/mission.pdf



Wildlife Conservation Board

WCB is a separate and independent Board with authority and funding to carry out an acquisition and development program for wildlife conservation. WCB's three main functions are land acquisition, habitat restoration and development of wildlife oriented public access facilities, which are carried out through its PROGRAMS.

I never sought the commission spot, it just happened. I served three or four years on the San Bernardino County Fish and Game Commission. When there was an opening at the state level, Senator Bob Dutton asked if I’d be interested. The timing was perfect. They were due a Republican sportsman. I went through the process. I was candid about who I am and what I believe in. I had both Democratic and Republican support. I was the right guy at the right time and here we are.

I’m satisfied with my public service. I’m a husband, I’m a father, I’m a grandfather, I’m a businessman. I have a full and rich life outside of my service on the Commission. I enjoy the commission, I enjoy trying to do the right things, but I don’t define myself as the president of the Fish and Game Commission. I literally wake up every day thankful. When my time is up on the commission, I’ll still wake up every morning thankful and still do what I do and be who I am.

 

[Jupiter551]

He's a pro-hunting-lobby stooge - you know it, I know it, everybody knows it.

 

[Bocefish]

He's a pro-hunting-lobby stooge - you know it, I know it, everybody knows it.

Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. You just think yours is more important. Oh, I forgot, you're a fucking know-it-all. NOT!

 

[SoTxBob]

Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. You just think yours is more important. Oh, I forgot, you're a fucking know-it-all. NOT!

Here we go again talking in circles, saying the same shit over and over again. ....I'm done arguing about it.

:violence-swords: LMFAO.. While I do realize that "have the last word" egos are in play, it seems fairly simple to me.... All it takes is for one person to step away and STFU... circle ended. :sad-bored: rcs-cheers:

 

[Jupiter551]

He's a pro-hunting-lobby stooge - you know it, I know it, everybody knows it.

Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. You just think yours is more important. Oh, I forgot, you're a fucking know-it-all. NOT!

I think you're being a tad naive about the world of politics and political appointments, and oblivious to the standards of conduct expected of those in high public office, but I'll refrain from insulting you personally.

 

[KylieJacobs]

This is disturbing....I have ALWAYS been an animal lover. I knew I didn't trust PETA. Lots of pictures...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-j- ... 79220.html

While claiming to be an animal rights organization, PETA does not believe animals have a right to live. Instead, it believes that people have a right to kill them, as long as the killing is done "humanely," which PETA interprets to mean poisoning them with an overdose of barbiturates, even if the animals are not suffering. In 2012, 733 dogs entered this building. They killed 602 of them. Only 12 were adopted. Also in 2012, they impounded 1,110 cats. 1,045 were put to death. Seven of them were adopted. They also took in 34 other companion animals, such as rabbits, of which 28 were put to death. Only four were adopted.

 

[JerryBoBerry]

This is disturbing....I have ALWAYS been an animal lover. I knew I didn't trust PETA. Lots of pictures...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-j- ... 79220.html

While claiming to be an animal rights organization, PETA does not believe animals have a right to live. Instead, it believes that people have a right to kill them, as long as the killing is done "humanely," which PETA interprets to mean poisoning them with an overdose of barbiturates, even if the animals are not suffering. In 2012, 733 dogs entered this building. They killed 602 of them. Only 12 were adopted. Also in 2012, they impounded 1,110 cats. 1,045 were put to death. Seven of them were adopted. They also took in 34 other companion animals, such as rabbits, of which 28 were put to death. Only four were adopted.

Seems about right. Animal lover and PETA have nothing in common. PETA has and always will be about raising money for the sole purpose of gaining power. Animals are just a tool to be used to that end. Hunter's who pay for deer tags, duck stamps and so on have more caring for animals welfare than PETA has ever demonstrated. I have no respect for that scam of an organization.

 

[Bocefish]

What's really surprising to me is the list of celebs that still promote them after everything that's been revealed about their practices.

http://www.looktothestars.org/charity/peta

 

[AmberCutie]

PETA is stupid. Any group that is super-duper-hardcore into any cause or topic loses focus of the original meaning of their efforts.

How about everyone just act like good people and we'll all be fine. Why can't that be a thing? Instead of having a "cause" everyone just be good people.

 

[KylieJacobs]

Well said, Amber!

 

[Bocefish]

:icon-cry: This recent tragedy is so very sad and makes no sense to me, suicides rarely do:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/1 ... 56282.html

 

[KylieJacobs]

:icon-cry: This recent tragedy is so very sad and makes no sense to me, suicides rarely do:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/1 ... 56282.html

:shock: That's horrible...

I like how the article says...

"She obviously feared that upon her death, these abused dogs would be placed in harm's way," the website says.

Then at the end of the article says....

"Lertzman also left behind 20 cats. They were unharmed."

Obviously, she didn't kill the dogs because she wanted to "protect them" if the 20 cats were unharmed. What is wrong with people???