PETA is not just a punchline. They are EVIL

The BBQ Pit
1

I know pitting PETA is a low hanging fruit, but I’m not pitting their ad campaigns or anything their directors said. I am pitting their “animal shelter” at their National Head Quarters in Norfolk, Virginia.

Virginia has a “sunshine law” which means all of this is freely available, but I will give you a link here to the VDACS. That’s Virginia’s (PETA’S home state) numbers.

Let me break it down. This “animal shelter” euthanized damn almost 90% of the dogs given to them (and we are not talking about strays - they took took in 11 strays, 718 surrendered by owner, and 0 bite cases) and adopted out 12 dogs. For the entire year. This facility has a current adoption rate of less than 2% (it has been as low as 0.6% in the past) and they claim that they are trying to find homes for these animals.

That’s not an adoption center, or even an animal shelter that unfortunately has to euthanize animals. I fully understand how no kill shelters are not always feasible, but it’s not like Norfolk is overrun with strays. PETA is not operating a shelter that unfortunately has to euthanize animals. The are operating a death mill.

In their own headquarters.

They are evil.

2

Oh ferchrissakes. Of all the things to pit them for (or better yet, don’t–why give trolls attention?) this is lame. PETA’s east coast shelter operation may really be a euthanization operation, but that’d be because for years they’ve been taking animals away from county pounds that euthanize with gunshot or carbon monoxide poisoning (i.e., backing a truck up to the compound and letting the motor run until the animals die). The idea that they’re doing it because they love killing Fido is ludicrous.

3

You looked at the numbers and you forgave them?

4

Heck, even RationalWiki see them as the biggest abusers of the godwin rule, and inflammatory trolls:

5

I hold no brief for PETA, but according to their own description of their so-called “shelter of last resort”, their euthanization rate is so high because they don’t take in the younger, cuter, healthier, more adoptable pets in the first place. Almost all animals with a good chance of adoption are referred to other shelters.

I’m not sure why euthanization of unwanted unadoptable pets is seen as a bad thing anyway. Yes, it’s cruel of people to wantonly or heedlessly neglect pets or let them reproduce unchecked, ending up with more animals that are unwanted and hard to deal with. But I don’t see how letting an animal that’s unwanted and hard to deal with sit in a shelter cage for months or years is really any kinder to it than a quick and humane euthanasia.

This OP has actually succeeded in making me feel slightly and momentarily sympathetic to PETA, which is quite a trick; props. While PETA are annoying assholes in any number of ways, I join with LHoD in feeling convinced that they aren’t euthanizing pets just for fun.

6

You might want to read this article it might change your mind.

7

The article doesn’t address the points raised by the others here.

They aren’t killing healthy, young, pretty, adoptable animals. They’re giving a merciful end to animals that would otherwise linger in prolonged suffering.

I still hold them in low opinion because of their criminal “rescues” of lab animals, but I don’t disdain them for euthanizing shelter animals.

8

So they think animals are better off dead than in human hands

9

Former Norfolk Resident here.

I adopted 3 pets from various agencies while I lived there. I never once heard that you could adopt pets from the PETA headquarters. Everyone knows where the building is, on the water near the NOAA building. The only time I ever saw anything about PETA locally was when the circus came to town and they would “protest” the venue. I always got the impression that they were dying as an organization, because protesting the circus used to be one of their biggest events, but now they can only muster 5 or 6 people with signs, in the city where their headquarters is located? Really?

10

I’m a dog guy, but for all the cat owners, PETA took in 38 strays in 2012, euthanized 1045, and adopted out 7.

I only ask everybody to look at the numbers.

11

Not sure what’s supposed to outrage me here. Were PETA employees supposed to take home 1045 cats? Were there 1045 wannabe cat owners who were turned down? Are they supposed to run a great big no-kill pet ranch for the old and infirm?

These were cats and dogs who couldn’t be adopted out.

12

From here: Issues | Humane World for Animals

13

It doesn’t help PETA’s reputation that some of their members argue euthanasia is a good policy because it’s better to kill animals that let them live in slavery. Or that they try to prevent people from adopting animals in PETA shelters. Or that they say the reason they kill so many of the animals in their shelters is so they can spend more money on propaganda. Or that they have a zero tolerance policy on animal testing when they kill animals themselves.

PETA is evil because they’ve taken a good cause - preventing animal cruelty - and hijacked it for their own extremist agenda.

14

Not really. While PETA may indeed be carrying out unnecessary or improper euthanizations, I certainly wouldn’t take Nathan Winograd’s word for it. He seems to be in his own way about as much of a loon as many PETA types.

In particular, I’m not moved by Winograd’s impassioned denunciation of PETA’s policy on euthanizing feral cats (he’s against it, arguing instead for trap-neuter-release programs, and they’re for it). Feral cats are bad for wildlife populations and damage property, among other things. I don’t think euthanizing them is wrong or inhumane.

To make myself clear, I think all pets should be loved and cared for, people who want pets should adopt them from shelters whenever possible, and pet owners and breeders have a responsibility to make sure that they’re not selfishly foisting more neglected, ill-treated, dangerous, or just plain unwanted animals on the world.

But given that there are so many neglected, ill-treated, dangerous and just plain unwanted animals around, I don’t think humans are morally obligated to refrain from killing them. I don’t oppose shelter “no-kill” policies of the sort that Winograd is so fervent about, but I don’t advocate them either. As I said, I don’t think euthanizing an unwanted animal is a bad thing in and of itself.

I think it’s immoral to abandon or euthanize a healthy pet if you’re the one who voluntarily accepted the responsibility of owning and caring for it. But once that responsibility has been abdicated by the owner, the rest of the world doesn’t have to take it on.

15

This, I agree with. However, to be fair, their extremist agenda has its own internal logic. Their argument is that massive amounts of animal suffering are the inevitable result of human domestication of animals, and trying to mitigate it with anti-cruelty programs is like putting a bandaid on gangrene.

They seem to regard more moderate animal-welfare advocates as the “humane masters” of the animal-rights movement, and themselves as its John Brown.

16

Interesting you should say that. PETA employees got charged with removing animals from other shelters and euthanizing them in the back of a van.

They were aquited, but the Commonwealth of Virginia was not happy, to say the least. The state did have to deal with more than 80 dead animals dropped in dumpsters around a shopping in Ashokie.

Also, I was trying to make it clear by the numbers, but PETA never even tried to adopt them out.

17

The shelter I work for has a mission to take in only sick and injured strays. That’s what we do, take in the broken, sick, injured, old cats that are found outside (many likely dumped by careless people and left to fend for themselves and clearly cannot). Somehow our adoption rate is 98%, which goes directly against any claims PETA has about the ones they take in not being adoptable. Well, of course if the only way you choose to treat the sick, injured, broken, and old is by euthanizing them, then yeah, the adoption rate will suck. If you give them proper medical care and rehabilitation, however, guess what? They’re totally adoptable! PETA is full of crap.

If they are fine with shelter animals being euthanized, then just leave them in the shelter - the majority of them are “traditional” shelters and the cats and dogs will be euthanized anyway, PETA’s not making one lick of difference there. Municipal shelters do take in everything that walks or is carried through the doors, and accordingly they also kill animals all day long, so what’s PETA doing? Just helping things go faster? How about using some of those millions in donations to give proper medical care? The example on the linked web page, of an aggressive, unsocialized, mangy dog with an embedded collar living in a back yard? Totally treatable. There’s no way I’ll believe that dog can’t be treated for all those issues unless it’s attempted and failed miserably. But someone has to try first.

If they want to just take animals off people’s hands and euthanize them for their own good, fine. It needs to be made clear to the people giving the animal up what’s about to happen. Misrepresenting what you’re doing and having a “shelter” that really is nothing, and putting “rescued” animals down within minutes of an owner surrendering them thinking the pet might be helped, is reprehensible.

Look at those numbers - there’s another report shown in the Huffpost (I agree it’s not “proper” news, and not solid reporting but rather a blog, but explain puppies and kittens, and some of those pics, there are some valid points) article, in addition to what Monkey posted . There are no transfers happening of any significance, they’re just euthanizing what’s coming in the door. “Traditional” and municipal shelters have better numbers! Example: 2012 percentage of placement for the City of Chicago shelter was 55%. Why wouldn’t PETA be able to do better than that, or for chrissakes at least the same? Well, they would have to start by trying.

Traditional shelters that euthanize daily will always be around as long as people are around to be indiscriminate with their pets. They’re not going away, and I’m saying that as a shelter worker who would be ecstatic to be put out of a job. PETA, though, misrepresents what they do, what they’re about, and their extremist message manages to pull in crap tons of cash that really could do a lot of good, but they choose to spend it on ad campaigns and web presence that perpetuate the myth they’re going to take Fido and find him a home.

18

PETA is almost evil incarnate and I do believe that the PETA mantra is basically that animals are better off dead than as “slaves,” so it doesn’t surprise me at all that they go around killing adoptable pets rather than letting them serve a lifetime of slavery

I have no problem with euthanizing unwanted pets, I hold no ill will toward shelters who put down animals that aren’t adoptable or for other reasons. But the reason that PETA often ‘wants’ to kill animals is an obviously evil one.

19

PETA kills pets because they don’t want them to exist anymore - quotes from Ingrid Newkirk and other high ranking regarding their opinions on pets are easy to find on Google, but the gist is that all animals should live in the wild without any interference from humans (as if that is really possible any more).

Regarding them killing pets that aren’t cute - they are killing puppies and kittens, ain’t nothing cuter! They aren’t trying to give them a “better” death than what they would get at a shelter since most of the pets they kill were owner release and they told these folks they would find a home for the dog/cat being released. There really isn’t anything that different in these pets than those that get adopted from shelters all over the country - the only difference is that PETA doesn’t even try to find them homes. Most of the time, they don’t even get to the shelter.

Regarding were employees supposed to take home 1045 cats - um, if an organization cannot house the cats, don’t take them in. Simple as that.

Feral cats are bad for wildlife, but the purpose of TNR programs isn’t to “save” the cats or anything like that, it is to populate the area with cats who cannot reproduce. Due to widespread irresponsibility by humans, it isn’t possible to eliminate free roaming cats, but if these cats cannot make more cats, it does reduce the number of ferals and cheaper than trying to euth them all.

20

Key quotes:

  1. "A veterinarian who naively gave PETA some of the animals, thinking they would find them homes, and examined the dead bodies of others, testified that they were “healthy” and “adoptable.”

  2. “A mother cat and her two kittens, all perfectly healthy and adoptable and none in danger of being killed until they were given to PETA by a veterinarian who was trying to find them homes and was told by PETA employees that they would have no problem adopting them out. After PETA lied to him and the mother and her kittens were entrusted to their care, they reportedly killed them, within minutes, in the back of a van.”

  3. "Despite $35,000,000 in annual revenues and millions of “animal-loving” members, PETA does not even try to find them homes. PETA has no adoption hours, does no adoption promotion, has no adoption floor, but is registered with the State of Virginia as a “humane society” or “animal shelter. … when asked by a reporter what efforts they make to find animals homes, PETA had no comment.”

Emphasis added.
All that said, I admit I’m not especially outraged at animal euthanasia, nor do I consider it evil. I do find it very odd that PETA does not have adoption hours.