[Bigjake]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$MWFJHWMK4NXQPQFIQMGSFFOAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2003/07/27/nhls27.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/07/27/ixhome.html

imagine that here (USA), with no firearms to defend yourself with... Scary, since our animal rights idjits would be just as bad unchecked.

[XLMiguel]

????
Din't see any reference to animal rights crazies? Wrong day?

[Apple a Day]

Couldn't find the article on crazy PETA types. There was one on skewing the crime statistics in a report to make it seem as if they were good.

[MicroBalrog]

Here it is (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$MWFJHWMK4NXQPQFIQMGSFFOAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2003/07/27/nhls27.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/07/27/ixhome.html)

[Art Eatman]

Ya gotta feel sorry for the researchers. English law now protects the crooks more than the honest folks.

There's no behavioral difference between the PETA types and the KKK: Equally cowardly, given to group violence against lesser numbers, at night.

A tragic decline for what was once a great nation. Repeat after me, "Sorry is as sorry does."

:(, Art

[Kharn]

"There have been incidents where thugs have gone to homes when the parents are out and their children are surrounded by chanting mobs threatening to kill them and burn the house down," he said. "This isn't a debate about animal testing - it's a sickness and a horrible form of human behaviour."
They're only trying to save the animals. And I've got three eyes. :rolleyes:

I wonder how the above incident would have turned out had it happened on a rural farm in the Southern US...

Kharn

[Duncan Idaho]

I wonder how the above incident would have turned out had it happened on a rural farm in the Southern US...I'd pay money to see that! :D :evil: :D

[MJRW]

You've got to love a country where terrorising people at their home is allowed but defending your home isn't. It gives us a place to send those people in this country who want to do that here.

[mussi]

I'd like that company to show up here and settle down.

When the ALF shows up in Switzerland, it's usually hunting time. And attacking one of your buildings with a molotov cocktail is legally defined as attacking you and your family with deadly weapons, thus justifying lethal means of self defense.

[Black92LX]

haven't seen 28 days later but isn't that the same institute the animal rights crackos release the primates infected with the rage from??????

kind wierd.

[Standing Wolf]

English common law doesn't still exist in England.

[brookstexas]

PETA doesn't support this type of action, this is other groups.
That's as bad as the press linking the NRA to homicide etc..

[243_shooter]

and hooded men attacking them as they walk from the car to the front door

So basically this group believes that animal cruelty is bad, but human cruelty is A-OK?

taking legal action to curb the intimidation of staff, while at the same time lobbying the Government to introduce new laws against harassment.

Yes, that's how you do it.. The current laws are working great, I'm sure some more will cure it.

Easy fix, give 'em all a handgun. I'd be willing to bet that no hooded men would attempt to attack them while they walked home, or at least they'd only try it once.

Leo

[Duncan Idaho]

PETA doesn't support this type of action, this is other groups.Think again dude. PETA is to ALF what Sein Fein is to the IRA.

[SodaPop]

Anyone see the moview "28 days"?????

[raz-0]

PETA doesn't support this type of action, this is other groups. That's as bad as the press linking the NRA to homicide etc..

Acutally, peta doesn't perform this sort of action. To a point. They will damage property.

However, they happily write checks to the types of organizations that DO do this kind of thing. Hence why there has been talk of getting PETA assets frozen for supporting terrorist organizations.

[rrader]

Mr Baker, 54, said that he and his wife had been regularly threatened at their home in New York but that US laws gave them greater protection from harassment. "I am not going to allow these terrorists to win," he said.

Two words that come immediately to mind in describing the British legal system are: low and retrograde.

[Epesiarch]

28 Days Later isn't too good. It does have the moronic animal rights activists releasing the "rage" virus at the beginning, and while it does portray them as a bit stupid and thuggish, it could have slammed them worse.

Also, the movie rips off Dawn of the Dead, Day of the Dead, and The Omega Man bigtime. The shopping scenes from Dawn of the Dead(unfortunately without the gun store); the desolate major city and zombies-at-night of Omega Man; the captive zombie (Bub) and military holdout of Day of the Dead. It's actually ridiculous how much it ripped off that which came before, but it's slick, has fast-moving zombies (instead of Romero-rules-slow), and has been presented to an audience that probably never saw most of these movies and have only heard of them, or watched Night of the Living Dead when they were 10.

However, every person reading this forum will start to get antsy during the movie as you notice that they never, ever stop and go "we need guns!" Even though street cops don't carry in London, just raid a precinct (for a whole variety of stuff)--everybody is dead or a rage zombie anyway and you could waltz right in. They are using molotov cocktails to (barely) stop rage-driven insane zombies but never think to go find some cop guns.

Even later, the main character gets ahold of an SA-80 (and it works!), but instead of shooting bad people/zombies (trying not to ruin it if you do see it), he shoots a chain that causes havoc to be wreaked and then that's it for him and guns.

The British negative group-think about guns is very obvious in the movie, and it's irritating. Even after an apocalyptic situation where survival is doubtful,

1. Guns are still bad--don't use them!
2. People who use guns are insane bloodthirsty rapist maniacs (and I'm not talking about the zombies).
3. It's OK to kill people violently, burn zombies alive, and so on--as long as you don't use a gun. Machetes, molotov cocktails, zombies--those are OK for killing. But no guns.

To sum up, if you see this, it is watchable, and the anti-gun message is subtle and in the background, but it will irritate you.

[taoshooter]

Animal cruelty is bad but human cruelty is ok?

Ok, I'm ready to get flamed but...and I'm not a Peta 'ninny' ....but I used to work in one of those facilities and believe me - A beagle (which they had there) that got punched in the face and shaken would be nothing compared to what was done to them day in and day out in the lab. What lab animals put up with every day is is unbearable. So, what people in England are doing is the wrong way to stop it ...but, I think it takes a 'special' kind of person to do what they do to the lab animals in medical research. The idea that a punch in the face is not allowed but pushing a rod through their eye (oh, sorry orbital opening) is ok?
Yell at their wife? Husband? go ahead I say. Peta is wrong in their methods but who else helps the animals that are trapped there.

I've hunted and am not against it - at least an animal has a sporting chance but in the lab situation...? To say that what goes on isn't torture is the most self-gratifying ridiculous vein of thought by people who blindfold themselves and for what reason?? - and in vitro studies can do it ALL.

I don't know about you all but I have animals and they DO feel pain, both physical and emotional. So tell me - what's the difference between your pet dog and the one that's stuck in a cage with rods stuck into his brain for his entire tortured life? Sorry, but if you want to argue agains PETA tactics go ahead ... but don't forget the animal in the cage when you do.
So there......flame away!:fire:

[rrader]

To say that what goes on isn't torture is the most self-gratifying ridiculous vein of thought by people who blindfold themselves and for what reason?? - and in vitro studies can do it ALL.

I have worked in vivariums also, and I wouldn't dispute that a lot of needless torturing of small animals goes on. But ultimately, there is an irreductable minimum of it which must take place for benefit to humans.

Problem is, based on religious grounds (neo-gaiaism), PETA, Earth First and ALF won't recognize the necessity of that minimum, and that's where I part company with them.

The whole green/animal lib movement is just a new, obnoxious religious cult with a mythology that includes animal rights co-equal with human rights, and a belief in the fantasy of man-made global warming.

[Mostly Harmless]

Back in the late '80s I had a brief gummit contract working for an agency that provided tech support to various UK government departments.

The interview was a shoe-in after I'd answered the following 2 questions:

1. Do you support Animal Rights Activists?

2. Are you willing to sign the Official Secrets Act as part of this contract?

Ended up spending a wonderful time doing PC support for a bunch of medical and other research geeks. They were always happy to talk to someone with 1/2 a clue about what they were doing.

As for the animals... Well some were better treated than others. Just like the employees :rolleyes:

J.
I'd tell you what my answers were, but then I'd have to shoot you.

[bogie]

The company I work for does testing. It's mandated by the FDA. You don't like it, don't bomb us - pressure congress. But think first.

Do you want the new wonder drugs? Do you want a cure for AIDS? (our folks are working on it...) Do you want a cure for cancer? (ditto) Do you want new antibiotics, drugs with fewer adverse effects, etc.? Sometime within the next hundred years? We ain't producing makeup and shampoo here...

Animal testing is EXPENSIVE. But it works okay most of the time, so that we don't release drugs to the public that'll kill folks. Before a drug even sees human trials, it's been through a wide gamut of in vivo studies. And no, you _can't_ duplicate that in vitro. You can make educated guesses. That's it. If in vitro studies would work, don't you think they'd be used, rather than the expensive methods being used now?

FWIW, we've had promising substances that worked fine in mice. But that killed dogs. We don't know what it would do to a human. Maybe in some other countries, where they have their pharmaceutical folks go straight to the human model, using convicts (and it's sometimes amazing what folks are "convicted" of...), they'd know.

[AJ Dual]

I've got a compromise.

Animal rights and eco-terrorists can earn permanant criminal immunity if they agree to be tatooed with a mark that denies them and thier children all medical treatment derived from animal testing.

Come home from a hard day of burning down the lab and setting monkeys free to find out that cough your kid has is lukemia?

Darn, too bad...

[Bog]

Two words that come immediately to mind in describing the British legal system are: low and retrograde

I have three words.

"Low Level Format"

[Moparmike]

A beagle (which they had there) that got punched in the face and shaken would be nothing compared to what was done to them day in and day out in the lab. Dont tell me that, it makes me very sad, and quite enraged. I wouldnt go so far as to bomb a lab, but I would sure as hell do anything else in my power. I have a beagle that I love more than my own life, and beagles are too cute and loving to harm in any way. I am going to go home after work and hug my dog. (Yeeesss, suuuch a coooot Beagawwyy pupppyyy dooogggg, yesss you arree...)

That said, British laws are absolutely deplorable. I would never live there because I couldnt protect myself, unless I turned to a life of crime. As a criminal, I could expect better treatment by the law than the average citizen. Therefore, the criminal class is a higher class than the average peasant.

Two words: Deplorably useless.

[Zundfolge]

I see Agricola has been silent on this one.

[Bog]

Forgive me if I seem to be defending him, but I think this sort of thing would stick in his craw just as badly as the UK turning into an RKBA nation.

He might be misguided, but he aint' mindless.

[Zundfolge]

Actually I didn't mean that to be an insult.

He usualy stands up and defends goings on in England that we here tend to disagree with ... but even this is too goofy for him to defend.

In retrospect though I guess I could see how my statement could be interpreted ... sorry Aggie :p

[Bog]

Yer a gent, Zundfolge ;)

[brookstexas]

1-There has never been a confirmed link to ALF or the Feds would take PETA down under RICO etc.

2-There is too much anti- PETA "Spin" from the NRA etc., that's due to the billions spent on hunting and a vested interest business has in that slice of pie. The NRA even uses derogatory terms "like "whacko" in official publications. Kind of like "Gun Nuts" isn't it?

3- I don't agree with everthing PETA does but those "stunts" get great press and many new members. Overall PETA has many great accomplishments that ended needless cruelty, can't argue with that unless you are the "Dog fighting is cool" type.

4-Someone made the point that the FEDS would like to classify animal rights groups as terrorist organizations.
The FBI already produced a pamphlet (I have a copy) for Law Enforcement on how to identify "Single Issue Terrorists & Right Wing Extremists" .
Quote:
-Defenders of US Constitution
Against the Fed Govt & UN (Super Patriots)
-Christian Identity
-Animal Rights
-Lone Individuals

Do we remember the old
"First the came for the Poles but I wasn't a Pole.
Then they came for the Czechs but I wasn't a Czech.
Then they came for me and there was nobody left to speak out...

[taoshooter]

we've had promising substances that worked fine in mice. But that killed dogs.

Obviously promising for us is justification for dead for dog. (sorry mods) but there is so much talk here about OUR rights - the right to own our guns; protect ourselves, our families and our homes - I agree with them all and do what I can to help protect those rights. But are we the only ones with rights? What about that dead dog? I'm sure he didn't volunteer to end up as a caged experiment for the betterment of humanity and then killed. Why not just say "ok, it's wrong; the animals live tortured lives but it serves us so we do it" At least that would be honest. An argument for justification of a wrong doesn't do anyone any good, and want doesn't justify wrong.

As for the British and their anti gun laws = They passed bad laws and disarmed themselves and now....they're at the mercy of the mob. A lesson for us.

Done