Castanet

keith1612 wrote:i think considering both were proven animal abuse cases by cruel people with no care for animals that were both given a light slap on the wrist they are similar.

if he had any decent human feelings he would have stopped far before he slaughtered 50 healthy animals.
they both deserved and should have recieved prison terms and life bans from owning and being around ANY animals.
its time for the Canadian government to step up and start protecting any living thing that cant protect itself from these animals.

Two COMPLETELY different people...one a sick, sadistic nut case....and one who thought he was doing the best for the animals. I'm quite sure you won't be able to see that....as you have probably never had to put down an animal you cared for...or dealt with the REAL things of life involving animals. If you haven't, then I don't expect you to understand.

simnut wrote: Two COMPLETELY different people...one a sick, sadistic nut case....and one who thought he was doing the best for the animals. I'm quite sure you won't be able to see that....as you have probably never had to put down an animal you cared for...or dealt with the REAL things of life involving animals. If you haven't, then I don't expect you to understand.

Yes, two completely different people but still the guy who killed the sled dogs had other options yet he chose the cruel inhumane option.
FYI, I have had to euthanize two pets whom I loved very much as they had untreatable and uncurable conditions and they were suffering.It was done calmly and was painfree and I was with them.
A person need not have euthanized an animal to know that the sled dogs killer was wrong in his actions.

I think it's funny how people get so emotionally upset about killing an animal with a gun, but then go out the next day and go fishing, or give the thumbs up for a wolf cull in there own back yard.

Lore wrote:FYI, I have had to euthanize two pets whom I loved very much as they had untreatable and uncurable conditions and they were suffering.It was done calmly and was painfree and I was with them.

I don't mean being there, I mean DOING it. If you have had to put down an animal you care for YOURSELF....you will understand!!! And, to be blunt, a .22 can be as painless as a shot by the vet. Sure, a shot from a vet may make YOU feel better...but the animal doesn't feel the difference......right?

A person need not have euthanized an animal to know that the sled dogs killer was wrong in his actions.

I disagree......if you HAVE euthanized an animal for the right reasons, you can realize that he DID what he thought was right.....

The guys method of euthanizing should not have been done in front of other dogs and it was not done painlessly as he had to resort to use of a knife on some of the dogs. If posters here cannot see the cruelty in which this was done then there is nothing I can say to make you see any differently.I would never ever think to even attempt to euthanize (by my hand) one of my pets. What if something went wrong and they suffer? I could not live with that. Hope the monster who killed the sled dogs is tormented about it his whole life as he should be.

Lore wrote:he had to resort to use of a knife on some of the dogs.

I agree, and that is why is has been charged and sentenced.

If posters here cannot see the cruelty in which this was done then there is nothing I can say to make you see any differently.

Only with the nine dogs that he used a knife on...

I would never ever think to even attempt to euthanize (by my hand) one of my pets. What if something went wrong and they suffer?

For those of us that have euthanized our own animals CAN understand why he would have done it.....because we have done it for many reasons. Like I have said before, unless you have done it....YOU won't understand......right? Many people will have their animal euthanized, by SOMEONE else...and can feel better about it.....that's not a bad thing. The animal is still being euthanized. But there are some of us that CAN do it ....and I for one, do it for the love and care of the animal....not for the enjoyment of it.....there is NO enjoyment...but a necessary thing that I have to do or want to do for my animal...whether a cow, horse, cat or dog etc.

"If posters cannot see the possible "care" in WHY this was done, there is nothing I can say to make you see any differently.

simnut wrote: For those of us that have euthanized our own animals CAN understand why he would have done it.....because we have done it for many reasons. Like I have said before, unless you have done it....YOU won't understand......right? Many people will have their animal euthanized, by SOMEONE else...and can feel better about it.....that's not a bad thing. The animal is still being euthanized. But there are some of us that CAN do it ....and I for one, do it for the love and care of the animal....not for the enjoyment of it.....there is NO enjoyment...but a necessary thing that I have to do or want to do for my animal...whether a cow, horse, cat or dog etc.

"If posters cannot see the possible "care" in WHY this was done, there is nothing I can say to make you see any differently.

Sounds like you are talking about euthanizing one animal----not fifty.
To shoot an animal one by one and have the other animals witness that
is cruel. Dogs are usually terrified of thunder. I imagine the sound of gunfire
would also terrify them.

Lore wrote:Sounds like you are talking about euthanizing one animal----not fifty.
To shoot an animal one by one and have the other animals witness that
is cruel. Dogs are usually terrified of thunder. I imagine the sound of gunfire
would also terrify them.

Now, in that respect, I can agree with you a little. I am talking about WHY he might have done it in the first place.....I don't agree with EVERYTHING that took place....but can perhaps understand WHY he did it. Does that make sense?

Glacier wrote:I think it's funny how people get so emotionally upset about killing an animal with a gun, but then go out the next day and go fishing, or give the thumbs up for a wolf cull in there own back yard.

i never would agree to any species being culled.
as for comparing fishing for food to the cruel slaughter of healthy animals done by fawcett to save money/work thats absurd.
so if someone wants to kill kittens for amusement thats the same as fishing?
if you catch fish for sport and then kill them and toss on the shoreline i would agree.
its a shame child murderers and rapists get more respect and fair treatment than that slime fawcett gave his loyal so called beloved pets.
these were not sick or starving dying animals.
they were brutally slaughtered by a careless uncaring piece of garbage to appease his boss.
i hope the pictures of all the animals he killed for zero reason haunt him till his end.

I'm guesing you between age 16 and 12. Either that, or you work for PETA. Rapists don't get more respect than this guy. What a delusional statement.

Glacier wrote:I'm guesing you between age 16 and 12. Either that, or you work for PETA. Rapists don't get more respect than this guy. What a delusional statement.

i said child molestors get more fair treatment than animals, try reading.
no i dont work for peta i just am disgusted by people who could care less if family pets are slaughtered and tortured for fun or when owners get bored.
glad you find it acceptable.
animals should not be considered a waste byproduct we can just kill and throw away for fun.
and these husky's were 100% killed for fun.
they were bought to amuse the whistler olympic crowd and then once they lost the fun aspect they became trash.
no different than killing a lion in africa.
what a society.
the olympic commision and the canadian government should also be found at fault for this.

I never said I approved, so please don't put words in my mouth. And as has been explained to you on multiple occasions, the dogs were not killed "for fun."

keith1612 wrote:animals should not be considered a waste byproduct we can just kill and throw away for fun.
and these husky's were 100% killed for fun.

OK, that's quite enough. I think most of us here have been quite patient with you because of your obvious passion for the animals but this statement that the animals were killed for fun is absoulutely ludicrous and strips you of any credibility or the ability to form a rational thought on the subject whatsoever.
Further, if you had allowed yourself to actually follow the story and the facts in this case, you would know that very few of these dogs were actually Huskies. The bulk of them were mixed breeds, many without any husky in them whatsoever. While the breed of the dogs is really unimportant when it comes to their slaughter, your lack of this basic knowledge of the dogs specific to this tradgedy prooves to me that you do not know the facts of this case and are responding based on emotion and heresay that does not allow or support your conclusions.