 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / General Topics / March 2005Wisconsin Question
There is a proposal to allow the hunting of Feral cats in Wisconsin. It should be noted this is a proposal, the election will be on April 11th. Now is the time to mobilize voters in Wisconsin to vote against this proposal. Don't bother with the guy who proposed this thing, aim at the voters who being asked to pass this nest month. At this point it is irrelevant how the question got where it is. It's there, it's time for the next step....convince voters to vote against this law. BTW, I would point out slamming the person who put it on the ballot or made the proposal may have the effect of getting voters to vote for the proposal. Today is March 7, the election is only 36 short days away. > It should be noted this is a proposal, the election will > be on April 11th. Now is the time to mobilize voters in Wisconsin > to vote against this proposal. I called the MadCats shop in Madison and they stated that anyone who is a citizen of their county can go to the DNR meeting on April 11th. You can call the nice people in Madison to find out where the meeting is for your county. I have started mobilization efforts by calling the no-kill shelters here in Milwaukee. However, there are cat associations that also need to be alerted about this nutcase proposal... > I called the MadCats shop in Madison and they stated that anyone who is a > citizen of their county can go to the DNR meeting on April 11th. DNR = Department of Natural Resources. > You can call the nice people in Madison to find out where the It should be noted though even if the DNR passes the proposal legislation would have to be passed to permit hunting of cats. Also the law may be struck down by the courts becuase it allows the hunting of cats without collars, and cats implanted with microchips sometimes don't have collars. Also collars can be removed. Also if you live in Wisconsin call your local legislator, tell them you oppose this "hunt" and that you vote. >>I called the MadCats shop in Madison and they stated that anyone who > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Also if you live in Wisconsin call your local legislator, > tell them you oppose this "hunt" and that you vote. Although collars can be removed, they do leave a tell tale sign that an animal was wearing one. It is like a wedding ring. If it is on for any length of time, when you take it off, there is still an ring indentation on your finger. A collar will do the same thing. It won't leave an indentation, but you can definately tell that one was being worn by the animal. > You can call the nice people in Madison to find out where the It should be noted though even if the DNR passes the proposal legislation would have to be passed to permit hunting of cats. Yes, and from the "connected" people that I've talked too, ex. the Cat Association of South Eastern Wisconsin, they have received dozens and dozens of phonecalls from angry, outraged and upset citizens about the whole prospect of "cat hunting in Wisconsin" after the story aired on local TV newscasts. That included phonecalls from children, who rightfully fear for the safety of their pet cats. Still, the whole sick idea of "hunting cats" must be vigorously opposed, not matter who and what is proposing such an insane and morbid idea! This sick idea reminds me of the "canned hunts" of years ago... The guy who started this is a Mark Smith. I think it would be a good thing if a group of people took Mr. Smith and shackled his feet and handcuffed him behind his back and got on horses and did a British style fox hunt using Smith as the fox. >>You can call the nice people in Madison to find out where the It > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > matter who and what is proposing such an insane and morbid idea! > This sick idea reminds me of the "canned hunts" of years ago... > The guy who started this is a Mark Smith. I think it would be a good > thing if a group of people took Mr. Smith and shackled his feet and > handcuffed him behind his back and got on horses and did a British style > fox hunt using Smith as the fox. No need. We've had that much practice here that we wouldn't need to hobble him for it to be fair (as in fair enough to catch and kill him) We're going to hurt a human for expressing his opinion? Are you sure you people are Americans? You sound like Nazis to me. LRH >We're going to hurt a human for expressing his opinion? Are you sure you >people are Americans? You sound like Nazis to me. > >LRH http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law Actually it is known that serial killers get their starts in their killing careers through the torture and killing of small animals, especially cats. Perhaps this desire to kill cats indicates that Mr. Mark Smith has a deep seated desire which could lead to serial killing of human beings... Mr. Mark Smith of Lacrosse is probably in some serious need of emergency psychiatric care before he hurts ANY living thing, cat or human. The birds that he feeds are not even safe! Knowing where this man prone to violence lives could help keep the children of Lacrosse safe... Also, as someone who could be mentally ill, I think Mr. Mark Smith's deep seated desire to harm living things should receive mental health treatment, not violence against him. In the meantime - watch your children if you live in Lacrosse...! ESL You know, I own 3 cats and love them myself. But I may have to agree with what is being proposed, DEPENDING ON WHY it's being proposed. Simply enough--a person shouldn't have to deal with pests in their yard, and should be able to take care of any such annoyances by any means necessary. It shouldn't require the person who's being victimized to mess with animal control, that just takes too much time & paperwork etc. An immediate fix is much better, and if that means shooting an annoyance--so be it. Understand--I'm not saying we should go around shooting cats at whim. Not at all. What I am saying is, simply enough, I want to give the latitude to propertly owners to keep any nuisances out of their yard, period. No questions asked. In fact, to me, the idea that someone would get in legal trouble for shooting an intruding animal just doesn't correlate. Where I grew up, everyone around me--including people who were otherwise big-time pet owners who loved their own pets very much--would, with no thought to the contrary, shoot any stray cats or dogs which got into their trash, ate the food meant for their own pets, harassed their own pets, or even just got in the way. It was totally routine to do this. I'm with the private property owners on this one. If someone has a nice car and they park it outside, they shouldn't have to worry about a stray cat hopping on the hood and getting paw prints on it--or dogs peeing on the tires, any of that--AND they shouldn't have to garage it to prevent those occurences. At the same time, I realize that such shootings will hurt the animal when the owner of the animal is the one responsible. And if you guys/girls reading this are mad, you shouldn't be mad at me, or the guy proposing this rule--you should be mad at the irresponsible pet owners who have no respect for their neighbors & the impact their pets have on them with such aggravations. Responsible neighbors realize that their cat or dog isn't God's gift to the world and that their neighbors could give a sh.t less about them. LRH > You know, I own 3 cats and love them myself. But I may have to agree with > what is being proposed, DEPENDING ON WHY it's being proposed. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > control, that just takes too much time & paperwork etc. An immediate fix is > much better, and if that means shooting an annoyance--so be it. Then we should fund more animal shelters and it should be quick and easy...also - fund the private animals shelters too! > Understand--I'm not saying we should go around shooting cats at whim. Not at > all. What I am saying is, simply enough, I want to give the latitude to > propertly owners to keep any nuisances out of their yard, period. No > questions asked. That is what is being proposed here. It would allow people to shoot cats where and when ever they are found... I personally will not tolerate this if it become reality... I will not become reality, as there is already outrage building in this state over this notion of hunting cats. Personally - I would like to hunt the cat hunters... > In fact, to me, the idea that someone would get in legal trouble for > shooting an intruding animal just doesn't correlate. Where I grew up, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > tires, any of that--AND they shouldn't have to garage it to prevent those > occurrences. Owning property does not mean being able to do whatever you want because you own property. Nor should owning property mean being able to do whatever you want - including violate laws and standards of decency.. > At the same time, I realize that such shootings will hurt the animal when > the owner of the animal is the one responsible. And if you guys/girls [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > LRH Irresponsible pet owners are a problem, but this is not solved by allowing people to shoot offending pets dead. This prospect of shooting cats willy-nilly extends to the poor cat that gets out of the house, cats abandoned by their owners.... There are more positive solutions to deal with feral and homeless cats other than allowing this! Here in Milwaukee, there are at least three private no kill cats shelters... >That is what is being proposed here. It would allow people to shoot cats >where and when ever they are found... >> >> LRH I don't know where you heard this but it is a prime example of people panicking and spreading outlandish ideas. They will have to follow small game hunting regulations you cant discharge a firearm within 500 or 1000 feet of a house or a roadway. You really think they will let your neighbor sneak around with a shotgun to shoot cats. spreading ridiculous rumors doesnt help anyones cause. Brad LIFE'S JOURNEY IS NOT TO ARRIVE AT THE GRAVE SAFELY IN A WELL-PRESERVED BODY, BUT RATHER TO SKID IN SIDEWAYS, TOTALLY WORN OUT, SHOUTING... " HOLY @#$%... WHAT A RIDE!" > I don't know where you heard this but it is a prime example of people > panicking and spreading outlandish ideas. They will have to follow > small game hunting regulations you cant discharge a firearm within 500 > or 1000 feet of a house or a roadway. You really think they will let > your neighbor sneak around with a shotgun to shoot cats. spreading > ridiculous rumors doesnt help anyones cause. Let me put it this way: hunters can and do stupid things even if they are illegal. A while back a woamn was shot by a hunter ten feet from her house while she was hanging laundry. I still can't figure out how you mistake a woman hanking laundry as a deer. There is another case in New Hampshire where a guy painted in huge letters on the side of his cow the words "COW" and it still got shot by a hunter. People will still get shot in their own backyards especially when you add in the booze hunters consume in mass quantities. Around here in the US there have been lots of cases of other hunters getting shot as well as residents, household animals of all sizes and shapes, etc. >> I don't know where you heard this but it is a prime example of people >> panicking and spreading outlandish ideas. They will have to follow [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >getting shot as well as residents, household animals of all sizes and >shapes, etc. What you conveniently forget to mention is that the vast majority of these are stray bullets not being shot at the person.........no less tragic but you shouldn't slant your information.......and the cow one.......well I think I heard that the first time about 20 years ago......I suppose you will tell me now that it was your neighbors cow and you helped paint him huh......sounds to me that you just have a grudge against hunters....... Brad LIFE'S JOURNEY IS NOT TO ARRIVE AT THE GRAVE SAFELY IN A WELL-PRESERVED BODY, BUT RATHER TO SKID IN SIDEWAYS, TOTALLY WORN OUT, SHOUTING... " HOLY @#$%... WHAT A RIDE!" > What you conveniently forget to mention is that the vast majority of > these are stray bullets not being shot at the person.........no less [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > and you helped paint him huh......sounds to me that you just have a > grudge against hunters....... Too many hunters go out hutning while smashed out of their skull on beer or do things like shoot at something moving without investigating what it is before they shoot at it. Yes I have a grudge against hunters. If you're a hunter you have no business touching any alcholic beverage, if you're a hunter and you aim at something, you better make darn sure that thing you're aiming at is a deer or someother animal not a two year old child, a woman in her yard, or a guy hiking through the woods. I'm sick and tired of having to watch for hunters in the woods. I should be able to walk through the woods without having to worry about some hunter shooting and asking questions later. If it were up to me i'd ban hunting altogether, and put a lot of carerless hunters in jail. I should be able to walk through any forest year round without worrying about wearing something brightly colored so some stupid hunter won't shoot me. But then I felt the same way back in 1973 when i would go into the White Mountian National Foreest and have stupid hunters getting rip rouring drunki down the trail and then go hunting. If you're a hunter unless you can say with 200% certainty that what that it is you're shooting at then you have no business being even thinking about hunting. If you're a hunter you have a responsibiltiy to know exactly what you're shooting at and where your bullets are going. Don't want to be bothered doing that? Then stay home. BTW, the cow story...it comes from Howie Carr on his annaul stupid hunters show. > Simply enough--a person shouldn't have to deal with pests in their yard, and > should be able to take care of any such annoyances by any means necessary. Let me put it this way. My yard often has dozens of large Wild Turkeys. It is illegal in the city limits to use to shoot the wild turkeys. > It shouldn't require the person who's being victimized to mess with animal > control, that just takes too much time & paperwork etc. An immediate fix is > much better, and if that means shooting an annoyance--so be it. And around here you'd get arrested be it Wild Turkeys, Squirrels, or other wild aniamls. > Understand--I'm not saying we should go around shooting cats at whim. Not at > all. What I am saying is, simply enough, I want to give the latitude to > propertly owners to keep any nuisances out of their yard, period. No > questions asked. Except that nuisance may very well turn out to be a two year old child. > And around here you'd get arrested be it Wild Turkeys, Squirrels, > or other wild animals. R-I-G-H-T ! I'm glad you get it... We have the same laws here in Wisconsin - and inorder to shoot cats there would have to be some sort of "hunting season" - as there is with deer - that can only be done in certain designated locations. There are also a whole host of laws that can be enforced regarding discharging of firearms, hunting in specified locations, and safety of residential areas.... In the Wisconsin State Journal on March 8th, the same day that an editorial condemning the whole notion of "cat hunting" appeared, there was a story about several men arrested for hunting out of season, shinning lights on deer, hunting on on public property, reckless discharge of firearms and a whole host of charges for hunting in the wrong places, wrong manner, and firing guns in reckless manners....They said that they were "addicted to killing." I have saved this article for future reference. Now, folks, there is more than one way to skin wantta' be cat hunters!!! ...and the current state laws, statutes and rules regarding hunting is one way, include in the animal cruelty laws... To make a long story short - a person in Wisconsin just cannot "go hunting" anywhere and at any time he wants...A whole host of laws would have to be changed to do that. And there would be strong opposition not only from police, civic and community groups, but this would (excuse the pun) be shot down in the Legislature. We have a Democratic governor who vetoed a "right to carry" bill that could not withstand veto override...and that's not to mention the public outrage that does and can exist with doctoring the current laws that would need to be "fixed" to enable cat hunting. Actually we probably are - thankfully - light-years from actual, and legal, cat hunting, but we should stop this insane and sick idea right now!!! ESL > Let me put it this way. My yard often has dozens of large Wild > Turkeys. > It is illegal in the city limits to use to shoot the wild turkeys. I'd shoot them anyway--and DARE them to do something about it. In my yard, I am the law--the government has no authority over me. Period. LRH do you watch animal planet at all? theyve prosicuted people for 'taking the law into their own hands' before. you are NOT the law on your private property. if that was true, you could murder and have no recourse. think again you stupid f.ck. kill a cat and ill laugh when your a.s is in federal pound-me-in-the-a.s prison *laughs* > I'd shoot them anyway--and DARE them to do something about it. In my yard, I > am the law--the government has no authority over me. Period. Numerous people have done that around here and have been arrested. Then I would say such laws are communism. My land is my land, period--I don't care if I'm in the city, county, rural area, or what have you. Otherwise, I don't want ot own any land at all--at least if I rent, then it makes sense I can't do with it what I want to. But if I own it, I should be able to--anything less is communism. Then again--if you live in rural areas, no one knows, so in effect you ARE the law anyway. That's just how I like it. LRH >> I'd shoot them anyway--and DARE them to do something about it. In my > yard, I >> am the law--the government has no authority over me. Period. > Numerous people have done that around here and have been arrested. >> Let me put it this way. My yard often has dozens of large Wild >> Turkeys. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >LRH You are hilarious, sound like some kind of radical cultist. You will be stopped from hunting on your property if its within city limits or to close to roadways or houses. Owning property doesn't give you carte blanch to do whatever you wish. Brad LIFE'S JOURNEY IS NOT TO ARRIVE AT THE GRAVE SAFELY IN A WELL-PRESERVED BODY, BUT RATHER TO SKID IN SIDEWAYS, TOTALLY WORN OUT, SHOUTING... " HOLY @#$%... WHAT A RIDE!" > Let me put it this way. My yard often has dozens of large Wild > Turkeys. > It is illegal in the city limits to use to shoot the wild turkeys. You live in the city. That's why. In the rural areas where I grew up, no such problems existed. You just shot the nuisance and went on with your life. That is still how it is, and thank God for it. LRH
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.