# Man arrested for trying to kill raccoons



## solarz

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2011/06/01/animal-cruelty-raccoons_n_869983.html

What do you think?

The article above doesn't say it, but I read in Metro papers that the guy was trying to protect his garden.

Personally, I feel sorry for the guy. He's probably a new immigrant who doesn't realize that there are rather draconian animal protection laws in Canada. He probably thought he was just killing vermin, like rats or something.

I can understand that there is a need for protecting animals from wanton cruelty. I remember a few years back, there was a case of some teenagers flaying cats for kicks. That's definitely criminal in my book.

However, I also think there that property owners should have the right to protect their property from damage by wild animals. Not to say they should have the right to shoot any pigeon that lands in their yard, but if it's a recurring problem, and you've exhausted all other reasonable recourses, it seems pretty unfair that you would be forced to pay hundreds (thousands?) of dollars to hire a pest control company.

Perhaps better education would have helped? Are there standard, legal ways to remove pests from your property?


----------



## conix67

Maybe he wasn't aware, but come on, baby racoons with broken toes? I wouldn't be able to do that to baby rats..


----------



## AquaNekoMobile

My understanding is the guy's been living there for a long time. I read The Star article about it. The thing is, as I understand it watching the news this morning on the TV is that if you call for help I'm not sure if you're charged for the animal removal services but what was said was that the raccons are moved 1km from the disturbance site which the news hosts at the time said 'well youk now what that means then, it means they'll be back given that close range'. 

I mean I have no idea if it costs to remove them. If it costs $100 to remove the family of racoons each time and they keep returning to the area, thrashing up cans, finding a way into the home, chewing up tv, power (suicide), phone, electrical then it becomes a larger problem if the house does not burn down then it's you having to fix the damage to the utilities company. I can see why home owners would be really pissed. I recall reading something before that racoons have like a 1-3km territory thus why they're moved 1km away from the house. Great. So that means you keep getting return trips. I wonder if buddy got an electric fence and put it in his garage and ran the fence out or wires out to charge the fence if it would have kept the coonies away. I heard that those ultrasonic devices don't really work. 

IIRC coonies arn't endangered and thier population in some places are large and they have like what? 2 litters a year at something like 15-20 baby coonies? It's not like the bald eagle or something.


----------



## solarz

AquaNekoMobile said:


> My understanding is the guy's been living there for a long time. I read The Star article about it. The thing is, as I understand it watching the news this morning on the TV is that if you call for help I'm not sure if you're charged for the animal removal services but what was said was that the raccons are moved 1km from the disturbance site which the news hosts at the time said 'well youk now what that means then, it means they'll be back given that close range'.


Yeah that makes no sense. Why bother trapping them if you're just going to release them 1km away? You might as well not have done anything!


----------



## Will

There are ways to remove the pests from your property. However you cannot do it yourself, as that is a crime. However the sanctioned agencies which you call to remove pest animals from your property are only allowed to relocated the animals a max of 1km from the collection point. Their (_lawmakers_) solution to these problems are a problem in itself. What animal could not find it's way back in such a small distance? probably few to none. If they don't find their way back, it's just become your neighbors problem, until the animal reproduces and it's offspring squat on your property once again.

I don't believe that killing is the best solution, and it is illegal, however it's clear their are no legal solutions that work. For that reason, and my own experiences with urban pest animals, I can sympathise with the arrested man. He was clearly at his wits end.

Edit: oops looks like i'm a slow typer...


----------



## AquaNekoMobile

http://www.stormthecastle.com/trebuchet/how-to-build-a-trebuchet.htm and make it 10x the size


----------



## sig

Will Hayward said:


> .. however it's clear their are no legal solutions that work. QUOTE]
> 
> Do we have any real legal solutions in Canada?
> 
> *100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3*


----------



## Hitch

destroying the garden or not, who does that to animals....and even worse, WHO does that to babies, and EVEN worse, WHO does that to a family of raccoons especially when you know the mother was trying to get to her babies and get them to safety!!


----------



## solarz

Hitch said:


> destroying the garden or not, who does that to animals....and even worse, WHO does that to babies, and EVEN worse, WHO does that to a family of raccoons especially when you know the mother was trying to get to her babies and get them to safety!!


Why *wouldn't* you do it to babies? Would you leave baby rats around if you're trying to clear an infestation?

In most parts of the world, people have no notion of "animal rights".


----------



## Hitch

Because its cruel, simple as that. 

If the person is trying to remove the "pests" humanely, I have no problems with that. But who uses a shovel to attack the animals, without the neighbour and police stopping him, I am sure he would have went further until the entire family is dead. How is that excusable? So to answer your question, no I would not go at a family of rats (babies or adults) with a shovel. 

And I do agree that some parts of the world has no concept of animal protection and animal cruelty, but that person is living in Canada, where we have that notion. So it is not acceptable by any means. Maybe Im just not a gardening type of person, so I cant understand how the potential of ruining a garden is worth the life of an entire family.


----------



## Tearran

Raccoon trap for relocation costs around $50. Then all you do is load the thing in your trunk, drive to a park or wooded area and let the thing free. You don't even have to get close to the darn things.

My family moved probably about 13 raccoons humanely that where killing fish and making a mess of the pond we had in our back yard.

No Excuse.


----------



## Cypher

Don't take this the wrong way... but most of the world is made up of 2nd and 3rd world countries. And their populations are unfortunately still very poor and under educated. Struggling and developing countries wouldn't/ couldn't give a hoot about the welfare of animals when they're still struggling to feed and shelter their own people on a mass basis. Take that into consideration and it's not difficult to see their perspective on animal rights.

We are fortunate enough to live in an economically developed "1st world" country where laws are enforceable and people comparatively are knowledgeable. Thus we *have* to live by and up to higher standards. I.E. human rights, animal cruelty laws, recycling, composting, etc... Why? Because as a society in the developed world, we *can afford* to be compassionate.

This is a case where someone coming from a different country did not understand or failed to see how his actions might offend another person(s). Unfortunately for the animals and him, a lesson he learnt the difficult way.

Even if they were rat babies, you can dispose of those in a humane, less pain filled way and/ or call pest control to take care of the situation for you.



solarz said:


> Why *wouldn't* you do it to babies? Would you leave baby rats around if you're trying to clear an infestation?
> 
> In most parts of the world, people have no notion of "animal rights".


----------



## Hitch

Well said Cypher!

Jackson...isnt that a little extreme?...hahahah


----------



## Guest

solarz said:


> Why *wouldn't* you do it to babies? Would you leave baby rats around if you're trying to clear an infestation?
> 
> In most parts of the world, people have no notion of "animal rights".


Many of those parts of the world have no notion of "human rights" as well. This is Canada not most parts of the world.

How a society treats it's animals reflects upon how they treat their own kind. Cruelty of any sort cannot be condoned or tolerated. We have encroached upon the animals habitat, we provide easily accessible and ample food for these creatures, we kill their natural predators, why shouldn't they thrive.

There are ways to deter and humanely remove nuisance wildlife. Bashing a family of creatures with a shovel begets the consequences afforded by our anti-cruelty laws and will be punished accordingly. This person will probably receive no more than a fine. The best thing this person has done is put second thought into someone who may have contemplated a similar action and made others hype-sensitive to potential perpetrators.


----------



## Jackson

Hitch said:


> Well said Cypher!
> 
> Jackson...isnt that a little extreme?...hahahah


No!

I think they have every right to live just like humans do. Beating them with a shovel is sadistic. Dude could of shooed them off gently but went to the extreme because of his garden. Not his source of food just some stupid plants/flowers. He's a pathetic cuss.

I grew up on a farm up north for a good portion of my life and we never did such things to the *****, rabbits and so on that would eat the veggies and crap that was growing. You do what's right and call an expert to remove them safely and relocate them. Killing what bothers you is what's wrong with the world.


----------



## solarz

h_s said:


> Many of those parts of the world have no notion of "human rights" as well. This is Canada not most parts of the world.
> 
> How a society treats it's animals reflects upon how they treat their own kind. Cruelty of any sort cannot be condoned or tolerated. We have encroached upon the animals habitat, we provide easily accessible and ample food for these creatures, we kill their natural predators, why shouldn't they thrive.
> 
> There are ways to deter and humanely remove nuisance wildlife. Bashing a family of creatures with a shovel begets the consequences afforded by our anti-cruelty laws and will be punished accordingly. This person will probably receive no more than a fine. The best thing this person has done is put second thought into someone who may have contemplated a similar action and made others hype-sensitive to potential perpetrators.


Frankly, I find that extremely hypocritical.

I can buy mouse traps at Canadian Tire for a few bucks. Mouse traps use a powerful spring to crush whatever mouse triggers it, and it makes no distinction between adult mice or baby mice.

You can also buy poison for ants, wasps, and maybe cockroaches. A family of creatures? Try an entire society of wasps, or entire _civilizations_ of ants.

In farming, diseased cows are routinely processed and used as a source of protein in cattle feed. Why is that not considered to be cruelty? That's also how Mad Cow disease gets spread, BTW.

The point is, there is no line delineating which animals get protected, and which don't, and no clear demarcation of between "cruelty" acts and acts that are tolerated. Barring extreme examples like skinning cats for fun, a lot of these cases of "animal cruelty" are based on value judgments that in turn are based on culture. Raccoons are protected, but not rats.

To illustrate with another example, you probably don't think much of putting a barbed hook through a fish's mouth and pulling it out of water by the cartilage of its jaw, and then cutting open its belly to remove its intestines and scraping off its scales... all the while the fish is probably still alive. Our culture does that sort of thing routinely to fish, and even glorifies it with TV shows and organized competitions. So why is it so unacceptable for other cultures to do similar things to other kinds of animals?

And more importantly, did we ever issue them a memo detailing which animals they can be cruel to, and which ones they can't?

Furthermore, the statement "Many of those parts of the world have no notion of "human rights" as well." is completely wrong. Almost every country in the world has notions of "human rights". It is how those rights are upheld that differs. This is a crucial difference. A person living in the most oppressive dictatorship will still know what respect for human life and dignity is about. That is completely different from someone who never grew up with the idea that animals need to be protected.


----------



## carmenh

+ 10000000. Perfectly said...



Jackson said:


> No!
> 
> I think they have every right to live just like humans do. Beating them with a shovel is sadistic. Dude could of shooed them off gently but went to the extreme because of his garden. Not his source of food just some stupid plants/flowers. He's a pathetic cuss.
> 
> I grew up on a farm up north for a good portion of my life and we never did such things to the *****, rabbits and so on that would eat the veggies and crap that was growing. You do what's right and call an expert to remove them safely and relocate them. Killing what bothers you is what's wrong with the world.


----------



## Cypher

I've lived in many different countries though out my life and I can tell you firstly, *no one is morally and/or intellectually "superior" just because we live in an economically developed country*. Secondly, I will repeat, *living in a developed country, affords us the ability to be compassionate beyond ourselves, more so than those struggling for the survival of themselves/ their families*.

This is the misunderstanding that is occurring here and to the man who abused the racoons. The man has been removed from the prevalent struggles of where he grew up, but *he fails to see/ understand that his circumstance and societal expectations of him as an individual has changed due to geography and circumstance*.

*His actions aren't the actions of an "uncivilized" culture. It's the actions of an individual who's emerged from far harsher conditions than people who've lived their lives in a political and economically stable back ground could understand.* This is not an excuse. This is the reality.

People need to see the back ground and not just the problem. Only then you'll be far more effective in persuading others to your point of view.

Lastly, I do agree with this:


solarz said:


> Almost every country in the world has notions of "human rights". It is how those rights are upheld that differs. This is a crucial difference. A person living in the most oppressive dictatorship will still know what respect for human life and dignity is about. That is completely different from someone who never grew up with the idea that animals need to be protected.


----------



## solarz

More relevant to this issue is the question of social support in various forms such as education and legal recourses.

For example, the neighbor who called the police claims to have seen this man kill raccoons before, but he "left it alone hoping it won't happen again". I wonder, did this neighbor talk with this man, and tell him about alternative, humane, recourses to rid his garden of raccoons? Did this neighbor inform the accused that what he was doing is not only wrong, but illegal? Or did he just go back to his life as if nothing happened?

Another issue is what other posters have mentioned previously: legally, animal control agencies can only move the animal 1km away from where they were caught. That is as good as a complete waste of time and money, as the animal will easily return.

I think people have a right to protect their property, and it's a failure of the legal system when this right comes into conflict with the protection of wild life.


----------



## Zebrapl3co

Jackson, Sig, Cypher, I don't like where your talks are going.
You don't own this country anymore than the guy who hurt the racoon. You have no right to determine who gets to live here. Please think before you post.

*Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!*


----------



## Cypher

Zebra, don't know if you actually read my previous posts on this thread, if you did, it might occur to you my last post was sarcastic. Do I think someone should be kicked out of a country for beating up some animals? No. Hopefully that's straight forward enough.

Totally agree with solarz:



solarz said:


> More relevant to this issue is the question of social support in various forms such as education and legal recourses.
> 
> For example, the neighbor who called the police claims to have seen this man kill raccoons before, but he "left it alone hoping it won't happen again". I wonder, did this neighbor talk with this man, and tell him about alternative, humane, recourses to rid his garden of raccoons? Did this neighbor inform the accused that what he was doing is not only wrong, but illegal? Or did he just go back to his life as if nothing happened?
> 
> Another issue is what other posters have mentioned previously: legally, animal control agencies can only move the animal 1km away from where they were caught. That is as good as a complete waste of time and money, as the animal will easily return.
> 
> I think people have a right to protect their property, and it's a failure of the legal system when this right comes into conflict with the protection of wild life.


But, think about it this way too, animals were here first, human beings are the ones encroaching on their habitat.


----------



## Sunstar

Personally, this person should be smacked repeatedly with a shovel. There is no call for harming an animal if there is an alternative. And there are alternatives. I try to live capture mice and remove well away from here. By well away, I mean over 6 or more Kilometers across the canal that enters hamilton bay. 

I cannot recall why he had them, I think the mother was killed by a car, but a friend of ours who had a farm captured the babies and took care of them until they were old enough then released them.

lets not make with racist jokes. We, canadians, are better than that.


----------



## Cypher

Sunstar said:


> lets not make with racist jokes. We, canadians, are better than that.


The awful, harsh truth is, no we're not. We like to think we are, but the reality is we're not. Let's face that truth in the eye then we as a society can attempt to be better.

Instead of smacking him in the face, why not attempt to talk to him first? Smacking him in the face would only hurt him, in turn next year or when ever, he might continue to hurt more critters. *Talking to him will educate him. And learning the consequence of his actions, there is a far better chance he'll stop hurting animals in the future compared to smacking him in the face.*


----------



## Jackson

Zebrapl3co said:


> Jackson, Sig, Cypher, I don't like where your talks are going.
> You don't own this country anymore than the guy who hurt the racoon. You have no right to determine who gets to live here. Please think before you post.


I did and I stand by what I said.

I could careless where he's from or what he looks like. Man or Woman if you act like this you deserve to be punished in full. 
Throwing out the excuse that I used to do it back in my home land is unacceptable no matter what. I don't think this guy used that excuse but it was mentioned before in this thread. If that excuse was used they have to be told this is not their home land and we do not act or do things like that here. They should know that!

Plus who said we are trying or saying who gets to live here? I did not say anything about not letting people come over.

You just misunderstood what was said.

Forget his face and think about what was done! I don't care about what he looks like or have any hatred towards his looks only his actions.

What if this **** was a neighbors cat or dog? I know then more people would reconsider feeling sorry for this jerk.


----------



## solarz

Jackson said:


> What if this **** was a neighbors cat or dog? I know then more people would reconsider feeling sorry for this jerk.


If this raccoon was a neighbor's pet, then the guy could have talked with that neighbor to resolve the problem, or at the extreme, sue him for damages.

You suggested before that the raccoon could have been humanely trapped. It's also been pointed out that you can legally only move it 1km away, which means that you might as well not have bothered with trapping it in the first place, as it will be back in a couple of hours.


----------



## Hitch

I think we need to calm down a little. 

Lets not use this thread and bring up every issue facing Canada today.

I think everyone (at least most people) agrees that said person needs to be punished for his actions to some degree, whether its a fine or a little time in prison. Thats what the justice system will take care off. So its really pointless for us to start fighting over how he should be punished. 

I feel what zebra was trying to get across is the fact that its perfectly fine for us to talk about cruelty to animals and what not, but lets not get the whole immigration and cultural assimilation involved. 

Also, I just realized, no where in the article does it say that said person is a new immigrant or even a first generation immigrant. This conversation went in this direction because some of us took his last name and assumed its a cultural thing. Maybe he is a second generation Canadian, lets face it, there are tons of stories out there about Canadians (Caucasian, Asian what have you) treating animals cruelly. 

I would hate for this thread to be locked by the mods because of this....


----------



## Jackson

solarz said:


> If this raccoon was a neighbor's pet, then the guy could have talked with that neighbor to resolve the problem, or at the extreme, sue him for damages.
> 
> You suggested before that the raccoon could have been humanely trapped. It's also been pointed out that you can legally only move it 1km away, which means that you might as well not have bothered with trapping it in the first place, as it will be back in a couple of hours.


That's the price you pay for living here among wildlife even in the city. Other countries go on hunting sprees to destroy animals who bother their land/property. Here this is not acceptable.

As for my comment about the neighbors pet. What if he had talked more than a few times and was just beyond talking and took these actions against the cat or dog? This does happen.

Edit- another thing most miss is 99% of top removal experts guarantee their work for one full year. Which means if they come back you're not charged when they remove them again. Like I said I've dealt with this stuff before so nothing especially the cost issue will make me think this guy had/has the right to do what he did.


----------



## solarz

Jackson said:


> That's the price you pay for living here among wildlife even in the city. Other countries go on hunting sprees to destroy animals who bother their land/property. Here this is not acceptable.
> 
> As for my comment about the neighbors pet. What if he had talked more than a few times and was just beyond talking and took these actions against the cat or dog? This does happen.
> 
> Edit- another thing most miss is 99% of top removal experts guarantee their work for one full year. Which means if they come back you're not charged when they remove them again. Like I said I've dealt with this stuff before so nothing especially the cost issue will make me think this guy had/has the right to do what he did.


Now I haven't lived on a farm, but a lot of the user comments I read on the articles state that rural folk routinely shoot raccoons and other vermin who damage their property. Maybe some other posters could tell if this is indeed the case?

As for your hypothetical situation about a neighbor's cat, what's the point? The accused man didn't kill raccoons for fun, he did it to protect his property. Would he have resorted to this if he had/knew of other means? We can only speculate.

Finally, how much does raccoon removal cost? Why should property owners be forced to pay it, even if once a year? I also don't see how those agencies can realistically guarantee their work for a year if they are not allowed, by law, to move the pest more than 1km away?

Your argument: "That's the price you pay for living here among wildlife even in the city." is also pretty problematic. You could use that line for pretty much ANY problem.

You got mugged or your property got vandalized? "That's the price you pay for living among criminals in a big city."

People are dying because of wait times at hospitals? "That's the price you pay for living in a country with a public health system."

An ice storm knocked out power on your farm and all your livestock froze to death? "That's the risk you run when you try to farm in a northern country."


----------



## Zebrapl3co

While I agree with you in spirit, I don't agree with how you said it Jackson. Your comment does not address the issue but hurt me instead.

*Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!*


----------



## Jackson

Zebrapl3co said:


> While I agree with you in spirit, I don't agree with how you said it Jackson. Your comment does not address the issue but hurt me instead.


My comments had nothing to do with his culture or looks. To me people are people and they all are the same. I would hate on his actions if he was white, pink or green. To me he's just another heartless person.

I just found the comments made about not knowing better because of where he's from to be ridiculous. Where's he's from has nothing to do with what he did no matter what.

I beleive everyone has the right to live here as long as they do what's right. Do I feel if he was new to Canada he should be deported no way! I do feel if he was new that the punishment(s) should not change.

I beleive in a free country but rules and laws must be followed no matter where you're from or who you are. Plus the length of time you've been here should not be considered. It's like giving new comers 1 year to learn the law if you break any in that time frame it's ok because you're new lol


----------



## Jackson

solarz said:


> Now I haven't lived on a farm, but a lot of the user comments I read on the articles state that rural folk routinely shoot raccoons and other vermin who damage their property. Maybe some other posters could tell if this is indeed the case?
> 
> As for your hypothetical situation about a neighbor's cat, what's the point? The accused man didn't kill raccoons for fun, he did it to protect his property. Would he have resorted to this if he had/knew of other means? We can only speculate.
> 
> Finally, how much does raccoon removal cost? Why should property owners be forced to pay it, even if once a year? I also don't see how those agencies can realistically guarantee their work for a year if they are not allowed, by law, to move the pest more than 1km away?
> 
> Your argument: "That's the price you pay for living here among wildlife even in the city." is also pretty problematic. You could use that line for pretty much ANY problem.
> 
> You got mugged or your property got vandalized? "That's the price you pay for living among criminals in a big city."
> 
> People are dying because of wait times at hospitals? "That's the price you pay for living in a country with a public health system."
> 
> An ice storm knocked out power on your farm and all your livestock froze to death? "That's the risk you run when you try to farm in a northern country."


Yes! that's what you get for being alive and having to deal with the real world. We don't live in a baby blanket sucking on bottles and have our asses wiped everyday just because this is north america. 
If you live where storms are bound to happen you should be prepared. Or maybe you should beat the air with a shovel and show it who's boss.
Criminals and sick minded individuals live in even the smallest community not just the big city. 
If you grew up sheltered from reality and don't know these demons exist that's your parents fault not societies. 
Schools try to teach kids to protect their asses from drugs, sex offenders, gangs, criminal activity and so on. It does not always work and the choice they make is theirs. What more do people want?

Should the government drop leaflets each week from plains in every spoken language telling the citizens what's up and how to live? 
No that is the reason why people come here so the government does not crawl up there back sides telling them how to think or feel.
The laws are in place and it's the people's responsibility to know them and follow them. Ignorance is not an excuse.

Yes we protect certain animals over others. Why because we can and that's great IMHO. It's also done for a reason. Why I don't know. I don't make the rules I just follow them. Yes we have rules/laws in place on how to deal with these animals. They are there for a reason.

Mice and rats jeopardize health, homes and businesses. They destroy crops and come in much larger number than raccoons. Killing them has proven to only do very little when trying to control them but it's the best solution. In the city mice and rats are invasive and don't have many predators. They even spread disease to other animals.

Roaches are invasive not native and don't belong here. Killing is the right way.

Carpenter ants destroy homes and come in the hundreds or even thousands at once. The damages they cause is much worse than any raccoon can cause.

For the bug examples do you really expect people to trap them and relocate them? Killing is the best solution. There are more of them than people on the face of the earth. Same probably goes for mice and rats.

Fishing is a sport. It's a hobby. It's brings tourists over from other countries. Generates money and provides jobs. Hunting is the same.
There are strict laws that must be followed for both sports/hobbies. People break them and face the consequences.

Mad cow and the treatment of farm animals has no place in this conversation. People need to eat that's a fact. Not much can be done about that. There are laws protecting those farm animals as well. People screw up and pay the price example being mad cow disease.

I won't even begging to talk about our crap health care system it's another huge issue all in itself. I will say this though. The Canadian people chose the idiots who screwed it up for all of us.

Yes raccoons are a pita. Yes they carry disease. The ones trapped should be tested before released to make sure they are healthy and disease free. They are not that's why the recommend them being released on site or in the same area to prevent the spread of disease. They are easily controlled. They are native to our land. They are remarkable animals who are only given the name pest because people have taken over where they live. People have turned them into pests by providing garbage and junk for them to eat. Same situation as the black bears in landfills. It's all related to people not the animals. They were not put here to piss us off. When you're normal have a heart and brain you take care of the problem by proper means. These rules/laws are in place for a reason. There not there to make life harder on us.

Why should a home owner have to pay for removal. Well that's life its part of trying to protect your home the right way. Just like home owners insurance and a security system. You can argue those services should be free as well. You just want to protect what's yours.
There's a lot of crap we have to dish money out for that seems like it's not fair. 
Plus raccoon removal is a lot cheaper than paying for a lawyer. It's also better then having your face posted in news papers and in the news showing others how cruel you are. I'd rather dish out the cash to remove them then piss on my own name and even your families name.

Just for the record if the guy was caught smashing mice with a shovel I'd feel the exact same as I do about the raccoons. It's the actions that are inexcusable. If you want to get rid of mice or rats use the spring loaded traps. Not the glue pads that are just cruel and barbaric. If the world was perfect nothing would have to die but it's not.


----------



## J-P

The guy has every right to protect his property from damage.. how he goes about it is a matter choice. Is it cruel? Maybe... Do the raccoons have a right to be there? That view is subjective, but probably not.. A raccoon poaching in any other animal's den would have ended up with a much worse fate.

Since we don't know the background on the situation; only the sensationalist headlines, we can't judge. We don't know if the animals weren't already relocated. We don't know if he had exhausted all his options. Most likely we'll never know. The court reports will never hit the newsprint, as I highly doubt the paper will do a follow up. Since we don't know the background it is really a moot point discussing "mights" and "would have / could have / should have". It is useless conjecture.

I also don't think anyone (including myself) have an animal behavioral science degree, work for the MNR, or are in anyways qualified, in any respect, to doll out advice on what should be done about the raccoons. Leave that to the professionals.


----------



## Hitch

That, I completely disagree with. There is no reason in the world would warrant someone the right to brutally attack those raccoons.

Im not going to start the wildlife vs human talk in terms of property rights. But even if the raccoons have no "right" to be there, even if the person tried many times to rid of the raccoons, even if the raccoons are digging up his vegetables, that still doesn't give the person the right to start attacking them brutally with the shovel.


----------



## J-P

he probably didn't own a gun


----------



## bigfishy

Hitch said:


> That, I completely disagree with. There is no reason in the world would warrant someone the right to brutally attack those raccoons.
> 
> Im not going to start the wildlife vs human talk in terms of property rights. But even if the raccoons have no "right" to be there, even if the person tried many times to rid of the raccoons, even if the raccoons are digging up his vegetables, that still doesn't give the person the right to start attacking them brutally with the shovel.


+1 to hitch

Every living being in this world have equal right!

If the person whacked the raccoon because it destroyed the garden... Isn't the raccoon suppose to whack the person because he invaded its home

raccoon is native to North America, and the person is not (he is the invasive species)


----------



## Ciddian

I know this is a difficult topic to deal with without tying in cultural issues, because here we are all different cultures and we all have different ideas of what might be acceptable. 

But saying comments, that might be intended as sarcastic or a joke are not acceptable here. 

IMHO this person did not handle the raccoons properly. I do not feel there are appropriate measures either sometimes with the government to help people deal with these animals if they are indeed causing health issues or harm to property.

Sometimes spraying them with hoses and the like don't work when someone enjoys feeding them outside, or leaves cat food out or doesn't double bag and lock their garbage only a yard away.

Other issues where people trapping and relocating the wrong way. 

I listened to a talk show and it was 50% of people seemed to side with the man who tried to attack the animals, but not once, did someone make 'send them home' comments or assimilation remarks. 

Please try to remember that we do like to have discussion here on this site but you still need to be mindful of what you say about others on the site. Even if meaning it as a harmless joke or comment. It's way to easy to misunderstand.


----------



## J-P

bigfishy said:


> Isn't the raccoon suppose to whack the person because he invaded its home)


Did he invade the raccoons home? or did he unintentionally invite something over he couldn't control?

See.. we don't know... we can't judge.

Raccoons in the wild have a HUGE roaming area. The population is far from what you see in the city where they are opportunistic feeders and their population grows accordingly. To say "we invaded their space" isn't exactly correct. We did, they adapted and flourished. Thus, they are in fact the "invasive" species as you want to call it and we (as a society) allowed it to happen. We (as a species) also have the right to protect our domicile. We as a society have the obligation, to reduce our impact on wildlife. When those boundaries are crossed, regardless of the animal (including humans), conflict occurs.


----------



## Ciddian

That's one great comment too j-p. This is a passionate subject naturally, especially with the people on this forum caring so much but the fact that our information is limited is very dangerous.


----------



## Jackson

No one said send him home. Words have been twisted and taken the wrong way.

The assimilation comment was clearly a joke. Anyone could see that.

No one threw out comments directly at any other member.

I for one did not even think twice about his country if origin. The major reason is I could careless where he's from and the other being who's to say he's not born here? Plus even people born here commit crimes like this it's not limited to immigrants. It's probably committed more by nonimmigrants.



Ciddian said:


> I know this is a difficult topic to deal with without tying in cultural issues, because here we are all different cultures and we all have different ideas of what might be acceptable.
> 
> But saying comments, that might be intended as sarcastic or a joke are not acceptable here.
> 
> IMHO this person did not handle the raccoons properly. I do not feel there are appropriate measures either sometimes with the government to help people deal with these animals if they are indeed causing health issues or harm to property.
> 
> Sometimes spraying them with hoses and the like don't work when someone enjoys feeding them outside, or leaves cat food out or doesn't double bag and lock their garbage only a yard away.
> 
> Other issues where people trapping and relocating the wrong way.
> 
> I listened to a talk show and it was 50% of people seemed to side with the man who tried to attack the animals, but not once, did someone make 'send them home' comments or assimilation remarks.
> 
> Please try to remember that we do like to have discussion here on this site but you still need to be mindful of what you say about others on the site. Even if meaning it as a harmless joke or comment. It's way to easy to misunderstand.


----------



## Ciddian

Jackson said:


> No one said send him home. Words have been twisted and taken the wrong way.
> 
> The assimilation comment was clearly a joke. Anyone could see that.
> 
> No one threw out comments directly at any other member.
> 
> I for one did not even think twice about his country if origin. The major reason is I could careless where he's from and the other being who's to say he's not born here? Plus even people born here commit crimes like this it's not limited to immigrants. It's probably committed more by nonimmigrants.


Saying half of Toronto should be sent home, or that people should take classes on how to live here was said in this thread.

The comment wasn't taken as clearly as you might feel is was, or should be taken.

Race is not the taboo subject here, its the comments that came along with it when people assumed things. Not saying -you- jackson assumed anything.

I personally feel, and also PM'd you about that there are many people here in ontario who treat animals unfairly. I know a good handful and have seen a large amount of races speak poorly of animal welfare while working in pet retail.

Lets curb this issue for now and please keep the discussion on track.


----------



## bigfishy

J-P said:


> Did he invade the raccoons home? or did he unintentionally invite something over he couldn't control?
> 
> See.. we don't know... we can't judge.
> 
> Raccoons in the wild have a HUGE roaming area. The population is far from what you see in the city where they are opportunistic feeders and our population grows accordingly. To say "we invaded their space" isn't exactly correct. We did, they adapted and flourished. Thus, they are in fact the "invasive" species as you want to call it and we (as a society) allowed it to happen. We (as a species) also have the right to protect our domicile. We as a society have the obligation, to reduce our impact on wildlife. When those boundaries are crossed, regardless of the animal (including humans), conflict occurs.


Let turn this around, it make sense too!

Humans in the wild have a HUGE roaming area. The population is far from what you see in the city where they are opportunistic feeders and their population grows accordingly. To say "Human invaded Raccoon's space" isn't exactly correct. Raccoon did, Human adapted and flourished. Thus, Human are in fact the "invasive" species as you want to call it and Raccoon (as the bottom of the food chain) have to allowed it to happen. Raccoon (as a species) also have the right to protect their domicile. Raccoon as the species have the obligation, to reduce their contact with humans. When those boundaries are crossed, regardless of the animal, conflict occurs.

You can say we are right, because we are on the top and we have the power to control, so we look down on other animals

But if they have the power to control, have the power to kill us, evict us, have the same right as humans, then this isn't about a guy whacking a poor animal anymore...

We are all equal! Regardless of what type of species you are!


----------



## J-P

bigfishy said:


> But if they have the power to control, have the power to kill us, evict us, have the same right as humans


That is an "if" that doesn't exist. Not all animals are equal, which is why there is a food chain. Cruelty is not a human concept. It is a word we use to associate certain actions that we deem inappropriate. "Cruelty" exists in the animal world also. Chimps can and do kill for pleasure (not for survival or food), as do killer whales. What differentiates US in this scenario is the fact that we can curb these behaviors and choose not to partake in a particular action.


----------



## ameekplec.

I've closed this thread. Although it might be headed back in a civil direction, it's gone too far off track already.

Remember folks, winning an argument on the internet is like winning an argument on the internet. You've still won nothing.


----------

