More than a dozen frozen puppies were found : wtf

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 49 points 7 months ago

This is fucked up, but is this functionally worse than freezing mice and rats for snake food? Would we be more comfortable if he had been freezing lambs or piglets for his snake to eat? Should he have euthanized the snake once it grew too large to live on rats? Snakes are carnivores and eat meat. Puppies are just a really cute and loveable configuration of meat. Puppy mills, COVID lockdowns, and the increase in living expenses have resulted in a crisis of too many pets that need homes. Too many dogs are being bred, and too many dogs are being euthanized.

I'm not in any way condoning snake owners freezing puppies to death. It's just weird the way we compartmentalize animal abuse so we can ignore the suffering of animals we arbitrarily choose not to care about.

[-] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 23 points 7 months ago

Were they frozen to death, or frozen after death? It really does make a difference.

[-] Fosheze@lemmy.world 29 points 7 months ago

Exactly. If he was humanely euthanizing them and then freezing them for snake food then there really isn't anything that wrong here. I know most people would prefer that the meat of choice not be puppies but that's just how western society views dogs. But societal views aside it's no different than using piglets which are what a lot of large snake owners use.

[-] Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 7 months ago

Pinkies are a thing for feeding snakes already. Basically baby hamsters. These snakes must have been massive if they needed puppies.

[-] elfin8er@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago

So hamsters are okay, but puppies aren't? As @Fosheze alluded to, it has to do more with the culture that you were raised in than it has to do with any universal standard of morality.

A quick Google search reveals that snakes can eat prey that is the diameter of the widest part of the snake. Some snakes, such as large constrictors, can and will eat a dog. Snakes are carnivores and need to eat a varied diet of prey, so it comes as no surprise that a dog could be a valid option.

Of course, as with everything, it gets more complicated than that. For instance, intent, food viability, local laws and regulations, how the prey was prepared, etc.

[-] Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 7 months ago

I'm with you bud don't worry, I don't have issues with puppy's being used. I'm a rodent lover and I had 10 hamster up until earlier this year when they all started passing away from old age and I understand it's the cycle of life and snakes have to eat too. I have no problem with any of this as long as it wasn't done overly gruesome for the animals being eaten. It's the cycle of life, we're part of it too.

[-] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 8 points 7 months ago

Yup, that's my thought. And I'm one of those crazy dog lovers that would kick the shit out of someone for hurting a dog without a damn good reason. I'd have died for any of my dogs.

[-] Sizzler@slrpnk.net 1 points 7 months ago

Every other animal is fair game though right?

[-] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago

Depends. What kind of argument are you trying to start?

No animal is any more sacred than another for food.

No animal is any more sacred than another when it comes to abuse, which is what I was talking about. This thread was about dogs in specific, and I am one of those crazy dog people that would choose them over most humans, hence my willingness to fuck someone up over that.

Truth is, though? I'd fuck someone up over most animals. I don't really like people as a whole, despite being a friendly person irl. Individuals can be great, people suck, if you catch the distinction.

But there's a line between abuse and necessity. I've killed animals before, for food and in defense of myself or others. Have no problem doing so again, if the need arises. But when hunting or fishing, any kills are done with minimum possible speed. It isn't about the death itself, it's about how you treat living things. It's why I'm against industrial farming, and source our meat locally from small farms, or "hobby" farms. If the critters aren't being treated bad, I have no issue with farming livestock.

But, I'm lucky enough to live somewhere that local farms actually exist, so I recognize that privilege and don't bash anyone that takes their meat as they can.

Now, there's my basic stance.

Since you were probably looking to start an argument, if you dislike any of that, you can go fuck yourself. If I'm wrong and you were asking as a way to connect with another person and have a civil, friendly conversation about the boundaries of what constitutes ethical animal treatment, then don't go fuck yourself, but be aware that the subject gets old fast online, and as soon as you start bullshit, I'm just blocking and moving on with my day.

In that regard, I recognize that people can have contradictory emotional connections to a given type of animal that they don't to other animals. I am fine with that in others, and I'm fine with that in myself when it arises, though my baseline for what animals are and aren't okay to eat or feed to other animals is essentially about the method of death rather than the animal itself. Some animals taken as food for other animals are never killed quickly and in as peaceful a way as possible, and that bothers me.

I grew up with family that are farmers. I have cousins that still run family farms, including dairy and meat. At that scale, the animals are able to be treated well. Plenty of room to move, no hitting or other violence done to them, good feed, and available veterinary care as needed. They die without human action sometimes, and other than the dairy cows, they end up killed eventually. They're killed quickly, and individually (rather than in large groups which is stressful as the process goes on). I am fine with that.

Everything dies. Even the self regenerating jellyfish and tardigrades, they can die, and will die eventually. What happens to a corpse is meaningless. It's going to feed something, somewhere. I don't care if what it feeds is humans, or other animals instead of bacteria, fungi, and insects.

I will, however, protect my animals by any means available. And I have a soft spot for dogs that means I'll go to harsher methods sooner, even when they aren't mine. More than any other animal, they are our partners. We owe them our best. Is my proclivity to violence as an early option regarding dogs compared to other critters imbalanced? Sure. Don't care. I'm fine with that in others, and myself; we are allowed to have soft spots and inconsistency.

Any other questions are fine, but I'll say again that if you're looking to be a dick, you'll be wasting your time, and I'm who decides that you're being a dick to me.

[-] Sizzler@slrpnk.net 1 points 7 months ago

Nothing is sacred and life is meaningless so you being however you want is just fine, got it. Don't worry, the amount you replied tells me how triggered you were.

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I guess it would depend on Oregon's definition of cruelty and what constitutes as "good animal husbandry."

[-] sun_is_ra@sh.itjust.works 16 points 7 months ago

Is that crime specific to puppies or in theory they woukd have got into trouble if they froze another animal like a rat or mouse or rabbit ?

[-] venusaur@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago

Frozen rodents are already a thing for snake food. They feed rats to snakes no problem and rats really intelligent creatures.

[-] Fosheze@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago

The choice of puppies is weird but a snakes gotta eat and you can't exactly just feed them a head of lettuce. Is puppies really that much worse than piglets or rabbits?

Once a snake gets to a certain size rats won't be enough anymore. At that size there aren't any good mass market options so those snake owners will usually take what they can get. I knew a guy that bred reticulated pythons and he wound up having a deal with a pig farm where they would sell him any piglets that happened to die early for dirt cheap (because what else where they going to do with them). But if you don't luck into an arrangement like that what do you do? If you have an ample supply of unwanted puppies I guess it would make sense to use puppies. As awful it sounds to western sensibilities, dogs are livestock in other parts of the world.

[-] otacon239@feddit.de 5 points 7 months ago

Maybe don’t own an animal you’re not prepared to take care of?

[-] Fosheze@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago

He was taking care of it. Just not with meat that most westerners like thinking of as meat.

[-] venusaur@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

Look at a bag of frozen baby mice or rats. It’s just as sad as puppies.

[-] FIST_FILLET@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

never ask a meat eater what the difference between killing dogs and pigs is

[-] Dasus@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago

One is delicious and has a lot of meat, the other doesn't and is very fucking expensive in comparison.

That's about the gist of it.

Anything else?

Never ask a vegan why we can't use wool products.

[-] FIST_FILLET@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago

the wool industry is exploitative, as is the farming of all animals

[-] Dasus@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Exploitation aside, what's your alternative?

See even if we actually magically got control of the wool industry so we knew with 100% certainty there was zero exploitation anywhere and producing a lot of wool wouldn't be the priority anymore, and profits weren't chased, but just the best care we can provide for sheep. Like the absolute best possible.

In that case, the sheep still have to be sheared, which produces wool. Why shouldn't that wool — essentially a waste product at that time — be utilised by someone?

Or are you suggesting the sheep aren't sheared? Because that's very unhealthy for them in the long term, because it's an animal that's evolved to rely on humans shearing them. They literally wouldn't properly survive, they'd become over entangled with wool and start having all sorts of health problems.

That is animal cruelty, to inflict something like that on purpose. Then the only alternative left is exterminating every sheep in the world.

That or there will be some wool that is completely moral to use.

One can oppose exploitative practices and still use wool. I have several wool items, and they last years and years, despite me getting them from second hand stores. I also have a leather jacket, which was originally made in the 70's.

Someone who buys cheaply made clothing from some Asian sweat shops is definitely contributing more to the suffering of sentient being than I.

Wool isn't immoral, exploitative practices are. Eating meat isn't bad, exploitative farming is.

My brother hunts deer (as a part of a hunter's association who function as the local nature conservationists essentially by taking care of the populace) and I have absolutely no moral qualms eating the meat from him. I don't like buying industrially farmed meat, it's just not ethical.

My point is vegans often take so absolute positions that they are literally impossible to defend without revealing the lack of logic in the absolutist positions.

WTF