Tuesday, February 9, 2010

The Popeye Report

"That's all I can stands, cuz I can't stands n'more!"


I've tried to avoid sounding off on the whole pierced kitten controversy, but Popeye and I "can't stands n'more!"


Putting ten holes in a kitten and cutting off the flow of blood to the tail, until the tail dies, is animal abuse.  Case closed.


Let's take a quick look at some of the opposing arguments.


I've heard people say piercing the ears of children is okay. Therefore, piercing cats is permissible.  Ear piercing involves a tiny needle, not the 14 gauge mother that was used on the cats.  Perhaps we should stop piercing children until they're old enough to make the choice for themselves, and old enough to realize it hurts.  There's no need to decorate our kids.


Another person said we pierce wild animals for tagging purposes.  True, and it's something we should do to learn more about them, and how to protect them.  Wild animal piercing has a reason.  Piercing kittens serves no purpose.  No one was trying to sell a pierced bear on E-Bay, as the kitten piercer was.  The woman accused was not an experienced piercer. She told authorities she did it because she thought it was "neat."  Brilliant!  At least she had a good excuse.


Some breeds of dogs regularly have their tails and ears altered.  It's time we stop doing that, as well.


The next step has to come from Harrisburg.  Animal abuse laws need to be toughened.  The penalties need to be more severe.  Perhaps it would cause some people to think twice before they pick up a needle.


This was a disgusting case from the word "go."  The rationalization for the abuse is just as horrible.