Home


  Main Index MAIN
INDEX
FAQ FAQ & HELP FAQ PHOTO GALLERY Who's Online WHO'S
ONLINE
Log in LOG
IN

Home: Dog and Puppies Talk: Current Dog Related Issues and News:
A Real Shock





First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All


tpsing
Dog Kichi

Jun 30, 2006, 3:51 AM

Post #1 of 58 (6898 views)
Shortcut
A Real Shock Can't Post

http://www.chinapress.com.my/...amp;art=0630mb30.txt


simpson
Dog Kichi


Jun 30, 2006, 6:45 AM

Post #2 of 58 (6884 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tpsing] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

Read the news and really shocked me. How could these ppl do this? Isnt dog a life too? The owner might against the rule by keeping so many dogs in his house but not meaning that they can kill them all in the house! Even they had warrant but is it necessary to do it in front of the owner? I cant imagine how deep he hurt . For me, he lost all his beloved in one day. Pls... should all us, dog lover do something to prevent such thing to happen again and again?


janewong
Novice

Jun 30, 2006, 5:11 PM

Post #3 of 58 (6877 views)
Shortcut
Re: [simpson] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

http://www.thestar.com.my/...00989&sec=nation

This is the english version published in the Star newspaper. Poor doggies and owner.


hyenyen
Dog Kichi


Jun 30, 2006, 11:29 PM

Post #4 of 58 (6840 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tpsing] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

Where is our human rights??? Where is the dogs rights??? The Seremban council president and their officers are S**KS!!!! There are inhuman and no sympathy, they are not even qualify to be human, more more worst than the dogs, even the real dogs are more better than them!!! Hope they will get punish soon of what they have done to the dogs.


janiceC
Member


Jul 1, 2006, 12:17 AM

Post #5 of 58 (6833 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tpsing] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

when i read the paper ,i kept cursing those MPS fellas..they were really inhuman..y would them treat the poor innocent dogs in such a way..it's really unfair..they never value the dogs' lives...i belive they will get "balasan teruk" one day...MadPirate
www.dogster.com/?210313


goldilock
Enthusiast


Jul 1, 2006, 8:11 AM

Post #6 of 58 (6812 views)
Shortcut
Re: [janiceC] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

actually the owner is the one to be blame....i read the news he kept 25 dogs in his house....it's 25!! imagine if 25 people live in a terrace house?? how crowded and messy will be.....summore they r dogs......the goverment has give warning and summon to him to remove the dogs but he ignored it....he take it for granted....imagine u live next to him....although i'm dog lover but i think i couldnt stand with the noise and stench from the dogs. I really felt pity for the dogs.....but i think the owner deserved it....:(


`*:.G|d!lck.:*


makubex00
Dog Kichi


Jul 1, 2006, 11:40 AM

Post #7 of 58 (6808 views)
Shortcut
Re: [goldilock] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes I do agree that the owner did wrong, but that didn't justify the act done by the MPS. Just imagine somebody just went into your house and start shooting & killing, the dogs don't even stand a chance, furthermore someone might get hurt by open-gun-shooting. I do believe there are other BETTER solution to the problem, like just catch the dogs & bring it to SPCA or PAWs for adoption, atleast they are given a chance before being put to sleep. Gunning down a dog means suffer before death, i cant imagine the pain.

Lastly, I believe even when the court give authority/warrant to search the house, doesn't mean you can kill the dogs in the owner house!! What will they do next? Pathetic.


janiceC
Member


Jul 1, 2006, 10:18 PM

Post #8 of 58 (6794 views)
Shortcut
Re: [goldilock] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

ya..undeniable that thw owner is wrong..they should confront the owner.those innocent dogs did not deserve death...he was too kind-hearted to adopt so many dogs..i read the ppr this morning,,a society..not sure wat was that..will help mr wong to adopt the dogs..in johor if am not mistaken..
www.dogster.com/?210313


ianlim
Dog Kichi


Jul 1, 2006, 10:22 PM

Post #9 of 58 (6794 views)
Shortcut
Re: [makubex00] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

Here are another version from NST press..

I am attaching the floor picture as it's not available online:

http://www.nst.com.my/.../Article/local1_html

Dogs lovers, seems we never ever get what we wanted here, we says, all dog lovers migrate to the west.., hows that? ? Recently articles on students beatings and rude menners had really makes me really really dissappointed on where i am born.. Frown


straychampion
New User

Jul 1, 2006, 11:10 PM

Post #10 of 58 (6791 views)
Shortcut
Re: [goldilock] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

Do u know the real meaning of dog lover? Don't insult us - true dog lovers - by calling yourself one. I hope you will one day experience hearing the cries of your "children" and seeing them die before your very eyes. The dogs are innocent, like children, and there is no justifiable reason in the whole universe to treat them like this. So, do us a big favour. SHUT UP!!!!!


goldilock
Enthusiast


Jul 2, 2006, 5:34 AM

Post #11 of 58 (6767 views)
Shortcut
Re: [straychampion] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

U r the one who dunno the meaning of dog lover!!

A true dog lover doesnt mean he/she need to keep all the dogs in the world under his/her care...if all the dogs lover acting like that owner, then what the use of SPCA and PAWS?? one must think for the dogs and his abilities, it's not enough by just thinking u love the dogs and want to keep them by ur side, one must be considerate towards his neighbours. ....i'm sure that owner know the officer will come to him to shoot the dogs at any time....the officer has give warning to him...why he still take it for granted?? he is taking the risk that the officer wont shoot his dogs??? imagine urself living next to him.....i'm so sure u wont stand the noise and bad smell from the dogs (if the dogs are noisy and smelly), if u tell me u can stand it....then u must cheating urself....it's really over to keep 25 dogs in a TERRACE house where the rules only permited 2 dogs.....if they r kept in a detached house or farm....then is acceptable.

the owner can send the dogs to any of the community that willing to adopt the dogs like SPCA...i know sending them to SPCA sumtimes it's a death sentence for them, the probabilty to put to sleep is very high but better than stand against with the council....U always can't win from them...they always have reasons to support their cruel act....like in newspaper reported, the neighbours said they like the dogs, no one complaint and the dogs are not making so much noise, but what the council said? it's totally different....i;m sure the people will believe the neighbour rather than the council....but the council won't lose anything although the public know they lies about the truth.....

i'm not arguing the way the dogs died ..it's indeed a cruel and mercilessly killing..i know the council should have choosen a humane way to handle the dogs rather than shooting them but here is malaysia....it's the rules....we can't and dunno how to change this rules.....so as a true dog lover, one must obey this rules too for the sake of the dogs by not keeping more than the limit permited by the council.

once u got bad record listed with them....they will always come to ur house to disturb u until u fully obey to the rules..the officers never and wont let it go....they wont tolerate or sympathy u and ur dogs.....i have once kept 4 dogs in my house for 2 years, I got summon 4 times (RM200 each time) and the officers always PAY VISIT to my house, one year sure come 3-4 times to check u and warn u to remove the dogs although no one complain my dogs, at that time I did like what that owner did....I also rent a house for my dogs (RM200/month) just to keep my dogs on day time, at night I took them back to my house....I'm LUCKY because the officers were not so straight maybe they see me I'm a girl and advised me to remove my dogs, if not the police will come to my house, if i'm not lucky, i'm sure they will shoot my dogs too,....so never take it for granted....dun take the risk to against the officer if u know u r wrong......i know from what i told u, i;m taking the risk too but I still want to advise people not to take such risk for the sake of ur dogs, if u keep more than the limit, plz do sumthing else like renting a another house or put for adoption....

for acknowledgement....the officers will come at ANY TIME...no matter day or night, weekdays or weekends, holiday or not.... for the intention to KILL ur dogs. dun think it's holiday or midnight, they won't come....they r very cunning....


`*:.G|d!lck.:*

(This post was edited by goldilock on Jul 2, 2006, 5:45 AM)


Kookee
Enthusiast


Jul 2, 2006, 8:54 AM

Post #12 of 58 (6762 views)
Shortcut
Re: [straychampion] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Do u know the real meaning of dog lover? Don't insult us - true dog lovers - by calling yourself one. I hope you will one day experience hearing the cries of your "children" and seeing them die before your very eyes. The dogs are innocent, like children, and there is no justifiable reason in the whole universe to treat them like this. So, do us a big favour. SHUT UP!!!!!



My friend,

Emotions are clouding your vision there. Goldilock's rationale stands. Those poor dogs were innocent, simply because they do not have a voice nor choice. The owner is the one who sets the ultimatum and it was his choice that sealed the fate of those unfortunate dogs that were eventually culled. This is the same case when a dog attacks a human, who do think should be responsible, the dog or the owner?

Conclusively, the owner is at fault coz he knows the consequences of ignoring the warnings given and yet he chosen to not heed it. The authority is at fault coz there are more than many humane ways to handle the situation and they chosen the crudest, cruelest way to do so. And the neighbours, I do have to understand their grievance, especially if they dun have dogs themselves and I'm also sure that this is not what they wanted as the outcome.

**Yogi Puiga-Yoga**


wicasa
Novice


Jul 2, 2006, 9:36 AM

Post #13 of 58 (6761 views)
Shortcut
Re: [goldilock] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

This is what you call a mascara of innocent animals!!! Forget about human rights. I never gave a damn about about it. I think the animals have more rights than us to live on this planet. This country really sucks. Im ashamed to be living here, but I cant deny the fact Im a Malaysian. Bloody government officials now order the killing of dogs! Poacher get away with just a summon for killing tigers and they get to plea bargain. Killing of elephants. All this are endangered animals. Out of topic for a doggie forum but what are chances that dogs stand as long this is an Islam country and governed by bloody Malays with their so called "haram" of dog. WTF!

I could not sleep for the pass few day after reading about the news. How can someone be able to carry on with their live after seeing the blood shed of their loved one! Even reading about news causes my eyes to water and blood to boil in rage.

Something seriously has to be done against this act of cruelty. We have to fight for the right our our beloved ones (pets).

I had the unfortunate event that 2 of my Dalmatians were gunned down by Penang bloody council. Mock and Mindy were at my relatives house. The dogs were sick but that's no reason for them to be shot in my grandmother's house compound. My bloody aunt called the council on my dogs. I never forgive her and for that reason she is a @#%! Happened 10 years ago so its history.

Now Ive got a GSD and spitz mix and they are precious to me. Id go ballistic if anything happened to them. Touch my dogs and you will lose your arm!

And `*:.G|d!lck.:* for your information the officials have no right to enter your compound without a warrant. Ask a lawyer. The problem is most of us do not really know our rights and this bloody officials take advantage of it.


Kookee
Enthusiast


Jul 2, 2006, 9:58 AM

Post #14 of 58 (6758 views)
Shortcut
Re: [goldilock] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

And so that everybody does not go into overdrive finger pointing to Mr. Eng, authority, neighbour, yaddah yaddah, yaddah....

A source from the Singapore The New Paper, which carries the report '13 DOGS GUNNED DOWN IN SEREMBAN HOME...Why shoot my best friends?' highlighted on several critical points:

- Seremban Municipal Council President said that Mr Eng's neighbours had been complaining about the stench and incessant barking from the (25) dogs

- They have earlier attempted to get Mr Eng to move his dogs from the terrace house but failed

- In December (2005), court order was granted for the authority to cull the dogs and Mr. Eng was given 6 mths grace period to remove the dogs

- And when no action was taken after the grace period, the council officers initiated several rounds of talks with Mr Eng, but also failed

- Council officers had brought along several veterinary department officers as the initial plan was to tranquilise the dogs first but the dogs become violent and tried to attack the officers

Blame away as you see fit.

**Yogi Puiga-Yoga**


goldilock
Enthusiast


Jul 2, 2006, 10:13 AM

Post #15 of 58 (6757 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wicasa] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

talking about laws to the council is useless....i am sure they know they r bound by laws contraints them from doing many things like entering the owner house....but in the end, they still do it and have many reasons to support their illegal act, i am sure this inhumane incident will happen again in the future (the officers will enter the house, shoot the dogs), if still got owner ignore breaking such rules.

one is consider LUCKY if the owner is giving chance from the officer to settle the dogs....if u ignore the warning, u hafto the pay the price...there are many cases where the owner did not have that chances, the officer will straight away kill the dogs without summon and warning.

u always can't win from the council if u really commit offence, although the council is breaking the rules too.....y?? bcause the dead one is DOG!!! not CAT!!


`*:.G|d!lck.:*


goldilock
Enthusiast


Jul 2, 2006, 10:23 AM

Post #16 of 58 (6756 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Kookee] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

can u tell me the link? i wanna catch up all the news about it....i see sin chew press has a complete report about it but i dunno read chinese...chinese paper always has more details news.....


`*:.G|d!lck.:*


straychampion
New User

Jul 2, 2006, 12:59 PM

Post #17 of 58 (6749 views)
Shortcut
Re: [goldilock] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
U r the one who dunno the meaning of dog lover!!
Are you breeding pedigrees?
A true dog lover doesnt mean he/she need to keep all the dogs in the world under his/her care...if all the dogs lover acting like that owner, then what the use of SPCA and PAWS?? one must think for the dogs and his abilities, it's not enough by just thinking u love the dogs and want to keep them by ur side, one must be considerate towards his neighbours. U must be rockers to think that Mr Eng wants to keep 25 dogs by his side. The sane ones will believe that he has no other options. He rescued those dogs and I'm sure he wants the best for them. Not to have them Put To Sleep at some society for the prevention of cruelty to animals. ....i'm sure that owner know the officer will come to him to shoot the dogs at any time....the officer has give warning to him...why he still take it for granted?? he is taking the risk that the officer wont shoot his dogs??? Yeah, I'm sure the council would have given warning. 'Hello, I'm coming now to shoot your dogs. Please open the gate. Thank you'. U are missing the point. The point is that they could have removed the dogs, not murdered them this way. By all means, punish the owner, not the animals. They could have forcefully removed the animals, but I guess these are dogs, that's why they get shot so mercilessly. If it's cats, I wonder............. imagine urself living next to him.....i'm so sure u wont stand the noise and bad smell from the dogs (if the dogs are noisy and smelly), if u tell me u can stand it....then u must cheating urself....it's really over to keep 25 dogs in a TERRACE house where the rules only permited 2 dogs.....if they r kept in a detached house or farm....then is acceptable. I don't have to cheat myself. I would not have done what the sneaky neighbours did, for I would have thought of the fate of the dogs and nothing else, should I have made a report to the council. I may not know your meaning of a dog lover, but to me a true dog lover is to help any dogs, be it pedigree or otherwise.

the owner can send the dogs to any of the community that willing to adopt the dogs like SPCA...i know sending them to SPCA sumtimes it's a death sentence for them, the probabilty to put to sleep is very high but better than stand against with the council.... How smart! Knowing it's sending something to die and yet doing it. Why not such true dog lover like yourself do something? U always can't win from them...they always have reasons to support their cruel act....like in newspaper reported, the neighbours said they like the dogs, no one complaint and the dogs are not making so much noise, but what the council said? it's totally different....i;m sure the people will believe the neighbour rather than the council....but the council won't lose anything although the public know they lies about the truth.....
That's right! Kowtow to them. 'Yessir, please shoot. We're at your mercy'. (Few minutes later) 'Thank you for following the rules and doing my neighbours a favour by shooting my dogs. Eternally grateful'. Such weaklings we are!!!
i'm not arguing the way the dogs died ..it's indeed a cruel and mercilessly killing..i know the council should have choosen a humane way to handle the dogs rather than shooting them but here is malaysia....it's the rules....we can't and dunno how to change this rules.....so as a true dog lover, one must obey this rules too for the sake of the dogs by not keeping more than the limit permited by the council.
Shooting animals in your own compound (does it include the owner?) A Malaysian rule? This is certainly something very new. Thanks for your enlightenment. Any other rules that u know and I don't, but I should. I wonder when the rule will be changed to shooting people who are noisy and dirty. Good for the council u are so law abiding. Indeed, lucky Malaysia, to have such a citizen like u. Just obey whatever the council chooses to dish out without a squeak.
once u got bad record listed with them....they will always come to ur house to disturb u until u fully obey to the rules..the officers never and wont let it go....they wont tolerate or sympathy u and ur dogs.....i have once kept 4 dogs in my house for 2 years, I got summon 4 times (RM200 each time) and the officers always PAY VISIT to my house, one year sure come 3-4 times to check u and warn u to remove the dogs although no one complain my dogs, at that time I did like what that owner did....I also rent a house for my dogs (RM200/month) just to keep my dogs on day time, at night I took them back to my house....I'm LUCKY because the officers were not so straight maybe they see me I'm a girl and advised me to remove my dogs, if not the police will come to my house, if i'm not lucky, i'm sure they will shoot my dogs too,....so never take it for granted....dun take the risk to against the officer if u know u r wrong......i know from what i told u, i;m taking the risk too but I still want to advise people not to take such risk for the sake of ur dogs, if u keep more than the limit, plz do sumthing else like renting a another house or put for adoption....
I'm glad to see that u take such trouble for your dogs. Mr Eng may not be that lucky to have resources at hand. My point is still the council beasts can't just enter and shoot the dogs as they please.
for acknowledgement....the officers will come at ANY TIME...no matter day or night, weekdays or weekends, holiday or not.... for the intention to KILL ur dogs. dun think it's holiday or midnight, they won't come....they r very cunning.... What an understatement. Cunning? They beat the fox hands down. So, where does all this leave us for the future? Keep on kowtowing............. Why don't we address the issues at hand? 1. why don't the municipal councils do their jobs - go after the owners who abandon animals, instead of doing target practice with their guns? No abandonment - no strays - no rescue - no overlimit - no shooting or SPCA's favourite PTS 2. why don't SPCA live up to its name? In case the committee members have forgotten the acronym - SPCA stands for SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS. How does SPCA classify the latest act by the Seremban council? Doing their job for them - prevention or PTS? 3. if SPCA or PAWS is effective, there won't be so many independent rescuers, a good example is Mr Eng, and a good many more that I know. 4. if SPCA or PAWS or other organisations dealing with animals make their presence felt strongly enough (9 on the Richter scale), the authorities would be more cautious and not simply do anything they fancy just because they are dogs. 5. the veterinary council - why doesn't it ask its members not to concentrate so much on the profit and loss, instead give more reasonable rates to pet owners. If charges are so exorbitant, like what vets are charging now, some owners with sick animals have no choice but to abandon or PTS, which they also have to pay, but it's cheaper than the treatment itself. To all of us: Let's get off our comfortable b**ts and do something before the council decides to be trigger happy. Few precedents have been set and it gets easier each time. We are dealing with some lunatic council people in Malaysia who should be locked up in an asylum.



straychampion
New User

Jul 2, 2006, 1:02 PM

Post #18 of 58 (6748 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Kookee] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

In Reply To
Do u know the real meaning of dog lover? Don't insult us - true dog lovers - by calling yourself one. I hope you will one day experience hearing the cries of your "children" and seeing them die before your very eyes. The dogs are innocent, like children, and there is no justifiable reason in the whole universe to treat them like this. So, do us a big favour. SHUT UP!!!!!



My friend,

Emotions are clouding your vision there. Goldilock's rationale stands. Those poor dogs were innocent, simply because they do not have a voice nor choice. The owner is the one who sets the ultimatum and it was his choice that sealed the fate of those unfortunate dogs that were eventually culled. This is the same case when a dog attacks a human, who do think should be responsible, the dog or the owner? Anyone who has seen the pictures in the Chinese newspapers would have been emotional, unless it is a heartless "animal lover".

Conclusively, the owner is at fault coz he knows the consequences of ignoring the warnings given and yet he chosen to not heed it. The authority is at fault coz there are more than many humane ways to handle the situation and they chosen the crudest, cruelest way to do so. And the neighbours, I do have to understand their grievance, especially if they dun have dogs themselves and I'm also sure that this is not what they wanted as the outcome. Whatever it is, there is no justiable reason to shoot animals in cold blood in a residence or anywhere.The beasts who could do it reflects the evil in them although they tried to justify it.



(This post was edited by straychampion on Jul 2, 2006, 1:06 PM)


straychampion
New User

Jul 2, 2006, 1:10 PM

Post #19 of 58 (6745 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wicasa] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
This is what you call a mascara of innocent animals!!! Forget about human rights. I never gave a damn about about it. I think the animals have more rights than us to live on this planet. This country really sucks. Im ashamed to be living here, but I cant deny the fact Im a Malaysian. Bloody government officials now order the killing of dogs! Poacher get away with just a summon for killing tigers and they get to plea bargain. Killing of elephants. All this are endangered animals. Out of topic for a doggie forum but what are chances that dogs stand as long this is an Islam country and governed by bloody Malays with their so called "haram" of dog. WTF!

I could not sleep for the pass few day after reading about the news. How can someone be able to carry on with their live after seeing the blood shed of their loved one! Even reading about news causes my eyes to water and blood to boil in rage.

Something seriously has to be done against this act of cruelty. We have to fight for the right our our beloved ones (pets).

I had the unfortunate event that 2 of my Dalmatians were gunned down by Penang bloody council. Mock and Mindy were at my relatives house. The dogs were sick but that's no reason for them to be shot in my grandmother's house compound. My bloody aunt called the council on my dogs. I never forgive her and for that reason she is a @#%! Happened 10 years ago so its history.

Now Ive got a GSD and spitz mix and they are precious to me. Id go ballistic if anything happened to them. Touch my dogs and you will lose your arm!

And `*:.G|d!lck.:* for your information the officials have no right to enter your compound without a warrant. Ask a lawyer. The problem is most of us do not really know our rights and this bloody officials take advantage of it. Hip-hip-hooray. Well said!! Three cheers!



(This post was edited by straychampion on Jul 2, 2006, 1:13 PM)


wicasa
Novice


Jul 2, 2006, 7:39 PM

Post #20 of 58 (6736 views)
Shortcut
Re: [straychampion] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

In Reply To

My friend,

Emotions are clouding your vision there. Goldilock's rationale stands. Those poor dogs were innocent, simply because they do not have a voice nor choice. The owner is the one who sets the ultimatum and it was his choice that sealed the fate of those unfortunate dogs that were eventually culled. This is the same case when a dog attacks a human, who do think should be responsible, the dog or the owner? Anyone who has seen the pictures in the Chinese newspapers would have been emotional, unless it is a heartless "animal lover".

Conclusively, the owner is at fault coz he knows the consequences of ignoring the warnings given and yet he chosen to not heed it. The authority is at fault coz there are more than many humane ways to handle the situation and they chosen the crudest, cruelest way to do so. And the neighbours, I do have to understand their grievance, especially if they dun have dogs themselves and I'm also sure that this is not what they wanted as the outcome. Whatever it is, there is no justiable reason to shoot animals in cold blood in a residence or anywhere.The beasts who could do it reflects the evil in them although they tried to justify it.



Well its true that emotion is clouding our vision. But heck with such calamity, anyone would be enraged with the officials.

Those were innocent lives taken away in such a heartless act. I do agree the owner crossed his boundaries but that does not give the council right to act as barbarians. We are civilized, unless the council still lives in the 1400 AD. There are a bunch of homeless / beggars / drug addicts hanging around Kota Raya area. I believe they are a nuisance so will they be shot??? Shot them instead of those innocent creatures.

Heck, tell me what you want. The owner is at fault and the council has right to remove the dogs. Fine I do agree but nevertheless its just the WRONG THING. It can never be justified that what the council did was right. They say the owner became aggressive and the dog became aggressive too. Who would not when you have 4-6 officials out to gun you down! Even before they went there they had already the mission in their head just to kill. I do not believe they tried to even consider the possibility of tranquilizing the dogs. The dogs were just murdered in cold blood. Its all bullshit that the officials tried to talk and tranquilizing the dogs. I know how the council or anything related to the goverment works. Save cost and get things done quicker. THE STUPID OFFICIAL WAY OF THIS COUNTRY! I hope all of them burn in hell.


Kookee
Enthusiast


Jul 2, 2006, 10:15 PM

Post #21 of 58 (6728 views)
Shortcut
Re: [straychampion] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

Straychampion,

What makes you think we felt any lesser than you feel now? Or care any lesser? Or experience less pain? You are hitting out at another forumer who is voicing out his / her stand in the issue, which doesn't prove him / her to be any less of a dog-lover. I'm sure all of us have read the report, seen the traumatic aftermaths......Why are you ranting out about kowtowing to the authority? There are laws, rules and policies to abide to, whether you like it or not. Mr. Eng chooses otherwise.

What would you do if you are in Mr. Eng's shoes? Would you bring in 25 dogs into your home? Provoke your neighbours? Mobilise the authority? Defy the law? WHAT WOULD YOU DO? GIVE SOLUTIONS, NOT CONDEMN.

Legally, the authority has the right to put down those poor innocent dogs (they have a court warrant, bear in mind) but MORALLY, THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO PUT DOWN THE DOGS THE WAY THEY DID.

We are all angry, believe us, we do. Mr. Eng takes strays off the streets, no problem...if he practise a little bit of common sense to rehome them and keep those within his capacity. Do you think you are capable of taking care of all 25 dogs, at one time? Give them equal attention, equal love, enough food, enough comfort? And he is asking for trouble, from his neighbours and the authority. I have 2 dogs and even though I would love to have more, I know I can't coz MPSJ stipulated we can only have 2. So, imagine I get several more dogs in, draw complains from the neighbours and the council comes knocking.

You know what is my greatest fear? That one of my neighbour owns 4 dogs few doors away from my home and none of them are licensed. And his neighbours are already complaining. My fear is one day, the authority would come, do something unthinkable and then, they would go around checking out all the houses and do something to mine. FEAR AND PARANOID, MY FRIEND! Some irresponsible dog owner (dog-lover still) becomes the catalyst to escalating nightmares. The tightening of rules and laws and pet ownership policies would eventually affect you and me.

Yeah, you have every right to voice your concern. Me, I just felt sad and fear. I am angry at Mr. Eng coz he sets the ball rolling. The hand that gives becomes the taker. If he rehome them, they might have stand a better chance. If he sends them to SPCA, some of them might be saved, some might not (with full understanding of SPCA's predicament). IT SHOULDN'T BOILS DOWN TO ALL THESE, THE KILLINGS OF INNOCENCE, THE TRAUMA OF THE FAMILY AND THE OUTRAGE OF ALL ANIMAL-LOVERS.

And you know what, I strongly wonder if the high-handedness of this case is because it involved a different race and a different type of animal.... I have not heard cats being culled before.

**Yogi Puiga-Yoga**


Kookee
Enthusiast


Jul 2, 2006, 10:35 PM

Post #22 of 58 (6727 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wicasa] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

In Reply To

In Reply To

My friend,

Emotions are clouding your vision there. Goldilock's rationale stands. Those poor dogs were innocent, simply because they do not have a voice nor choice. The owner is the one who sets the ultimatum and it was his choice that sealed the fate of those unfortunate dogs that were eventually culled. This is the same case when a dog attacks a human, who do think should be responsible, the dog or the owner? Anyone who has seen the pictures in the Chinese newspapers would have been emotional, unless it is a heartless "animal lover".

Conclusively, the owner is at fault coz he knows the consequences of ignoring the warnings given and yet he chosen to not heed it. The authority is at fault coz there are more than many humane ways to handle the situation and they chosen the crudest, cruelest way to do so. And the neighbours, I do have to understand their grievance, especially if they dun have dogs themselves and I'm also sure that this is not what they wanted as the outcome. Whatever it is, there is no justiable reason to shoot animals in cold blood in a residence or anywhere.The beasts who could do it reflects the evil in them although they tried to justify it.



Well its true that emotion is clouding our vision. But heck with such calamity, anyone would be enraged with the officials.

Those were innocent lives taken away in such a heartless act. I do agree the owner crossed his boundaries but that does not give the council right to act as barbarians. We are civilized, unless the council still lives in the 1400 AD. There are a bunch of homeless / beggars / drug addicts hanging around Kota Raya area. I believe they are a nuisance so will they be shot??? Shot them instead of those innocent creatures.

Heck, tell me what you want. The owner is at fault and the council has right to remove the dogs. Fine I do agree but nevertheless its just the WRONG THING. It can never be justified that what the council did was right. They say the owner became aggressive and the dog became aggressive too. Who would not when you have 4-6 officials out to gun you down! Even before they went there they had already the mission in their head just to kill. I do not believe they tried to even consider the possibility of tranquilizing the dogs. The dogs were just murdered in cold blood. Its all bullshit that the officials tried to talk and tranquilizing the dogs. I know how the council or anything related to the goverment works. Save cost and get things done quicker. THE STUPID OFFICIAL WAY OF THIS COUNTRY! I hope all of them burn in hell.



Wicasa, very true....dogs take cue from their owner. I dun blame the dogs from turning aggresive. This is Malaysia.......and we all know how things are done here.......and with those in power.....sadly, this would continue to happen. And let us just say that this not only happen to certain breed of pet, but to human as well....I admit I'm in denial stage now but I'm checking out my option, another country, perhaps. Where a certain breed of pet would receive more respect.

**Yogi Puiga-Yoga**


goldilock
Enthusiast


Jul 2, 2006, 11:53 PM

Post #23 of 58 (6725 views)
Shortcut
Re: [straychampion] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

U r the one who dunno the meaning of dog lover!!
Are you breeding pedigrees? No, I never rear pedigree b4, all the dogs i have are mongrels but how it is related i'm not a dog lover?I rescue stray puppies and re-home them....so far i have successfully give 4 stray pups and will be added 5 soon a good home and I visit them now whenever I think of them. do u do that?
A true dog lover doesnt mean he/she need to keep all the dogs in the world under his/her care...if all the dogs lover acting like that owner, then what the use of SPCA and PAWS?? one must think for the dogs and his abilities, it's not enough by just thinking u love the dogs and want to keep them by ur side, one must be considerate towards his neighbours. U must be rockers to think that Mr Eng wants to keep 25 dogs by his side. The sane ones will believe that he has no other options. He rescued those dogs and I'm sure he wants the best for them. Not to have them Put To Sleep at some society for the prevention of cruelty to animals. he indeed wants the best for the dogs but he chooses the wrong way when the council warned him to remove the dogs and he still keeping them. if the council was unknown of it, then of cos the best for the dogs are under his care rather than send to SPCA but since the council has purposely come to deal with him the problem, and he still stand against them, then the best for the dogs is to remove them either put for adoption or send to SPCA. Sending them to SPCA would be last choice, although he knows they will PTS, but doesn't he knows the council will shoot his dogs if he ignore the warning? don't tell me, he'll think that the council will 'so kind' help him re-locate the dogs, I never heard such news that the council will do any other move than gunned down the dogs. here is Malaysia, not US, where u see animal police will seize the dogs from the owner and send to animal shelter. unless the dogs are really good behavior, very tame, they might think to help to remove the dogs, but how can u expect the dogs will react that way when they see the officers are coming to catch them? so the dogs sure gunned down even they bark only one time to the officer. I'm sure that owner know the officer will come to him to shoot the dogs at any time....the officer has give warning to him...why he still take it for granted?? he is taking the risk that the officer wont shoot his dogs??? Yeah, I'm sure the council would have given warning. 'Hello, I'm coming now to shoot your dogs. Please open the gate. Thank you'. U are missing the point. The point is that they could have removed the dogs, not murdered them this way. By all means, punish the owner, not the animals. They could have forcefully removed the animals, but I guess these are dogs, that's why they get shot so mercilessly. If it's cats, I wonder............. the owner sure will be punish, i know he has receive summons from the council. although his dogs are dead, he still need to pay for the summons, whether he will going to jail or not, I dunno. on that morning, when that group of officers come to shoot, Mr.Eng can negotiate with them, he can do anything to save the dogs life even begging in front of them, promising them the dogs will be remove by that day. if he willing to negotiate with them, the ending might not be same. The officers might not be take such cruel action if they see Mr.Eng has the sincere to comply the rules. I have negotiate with those dog cathers few times, I know they r not so merciless, if u willing to coorperate with them. imagine urself living next to him.....i'm so sure u wont stand the noise and bad smell from the dogs (if the dogs are noisy and smelly), if u tell me u can stand it....then u must cheating urself....it's really over to keep 25 dogs in a TERRACE house where the rules only permited 2 dogs.....if they r kept in a detached house or farm....then is acceptable. I don't have to cheat myself. I would not have done what the sneaky neighbours did, for I would have thought of the fate of the dogs and nothing else, should I have made a report to the council. I may not know your meaning of a dog lover, but to me a true dog lover is to help any dogs, be it pedigree or otherwise.
I din say tat u cheating urself is mean u'll report to the council. what i mean is u can't accept that kind of noise and stench from the dogs if the dogs are really smelly and noisy, if the dogs are not making so much noise and not smelly, i think everyone will tolerate that. if the dogs are really nuisance and u live next to him, ur emotion won't get disturb? won't u go and talk to Mr.Eng? if yes, means u can't stand with it la....the word noisy and smelly give diff meaning to everyone, so the tolerate level also diff. Maybe mr. eng's dogs are not that nuisance to u, but to his neighbours, they really feel being disturb every day and night, they r his neighbours, they will live there maybe for the rest of their life, so u expect them to endure for rest of their life with noise and smell pollution?? maybe the neighbours had talk to Mr.eng b4 reporting to council, and maybe mr. eng has try his best to solve that problem, but if the problem still exists, u can't blame the neighbours to take such action to report to council.

the owner can send the dogs to any of the community that willing to adopt the dogs like SPCA...i know sending them to SPCA sumtimes it's a death sentence for them, the probabilty to put to sleep is very high but better than stand against with the council How smart! Knowing it's sending something to die and yet doing it. Why not such true dog lover like yourself do something? if really no choice, no one to adopt the dogs, and u know the council will come to shoot ur dogs at anytime, u still dun wan to send them to SPCA??u still want to keep them in ur house and fight against with the council who equip with guns?? sending them to SPCA doesn't 100% the dogs will PTS. they might get adopted by someone else. if really PTS, they died in peaceful way, no suffer. many people think sending the dogs to SPCA like 100% sending them to death, so when they dun wan to rear the dogs anymore, they will release them in the wild with the hope they can survice as long as they can rather than sending them to SPCA. but this is absolutely wrong. other case like mr.eng, keeping more than limit of dogs, they think the dogs are keeping in their own premises, they have the rights to keep anything in their own place as long as the things is not illegal. dog is not illegal possesion so the people will think they r not commiting crime, y the council will come to disturb them?? But the reality dun permit them to do that even they r doing good things. U always can't win from them...they always have reasons to support their cruel act....like in newspaper reported, the neighbours said they like the dogs, no one complaint and the dogs are not making so much noise, but what the council said? it's totally different....i;m sure the people will believe the neighbour rather than the council....but the council won't lose anything although the public know they lies about the truth.....
That's right! Kowtow to them. 'Yessir, please shoot. We're at your mercy'. (Few minutes later) 'Thank you for following the rules and doing my neighbours a favour by shooting my dogs. Eternally grateful'. Such weaklings we are!!! we r not weaklings, it's just that we cannot do anything....u think no people stand up for the animals arguing with the council?? what is the result?? the council always has or maybe create evidence to make public belief they have no other choices other than shooting the dogs. like in this case, they even have warrant from court to enter the premise to shoot the dogs where the actual law they can't do that without the presence of the owner. u see the newspaper reports, the council has give many reasons for themself to make public know that they have done at their best like: the court order stated that they think to tranquilize the dogs, they r not coming to shoot the dogs. i believe the truth is they indeed coming to shoot the dogs. tranquilize is only used for the dogs which are very tame, no bark, wagging the tails. they have no choice to shoot the dogs bcause the dogs r attacking them. aren't they should know the dogs will attack them in that situation? or they expect the dogs will be very quiet, no bark, licking them when the officers approach them??if they dun wan them to attack, they should be friendly to dogs, treat them nicely before taking such cruel action. they didn't give the chance to dogs to familiar with them. this is called no choice?? they said they have receive numerous of complaint from neighbours if it's true, show evidence, they must have record the complainers details. i'm not saying show to public...at least they need to proove that many neighbours complaint about the dogs. I know although no one complain, they purposely want the dogs die....they won't let it go once they know u breaking the rules. I have the experience where the officers will drop by my house 3-4 times a year to check my house. last year 2005, they came about 4 times. this year 2006, they have come 2 times, and i am expecting they will come again no longer although now i have obey the rules. i'm not arguing the way the dogs died ..it's indeed a cruel and mercilessly killing..i know the council should have choosen a humane way to handle the dogs rather than shooting them but here is malaysia....it's the rules....we can't and dunno how to change this rules.....so as a true dog lover, one must obey this rules too for the sake of the dogs by not keeping more than the limit permited by the council.
Shooting animals in your own compound (does it include the owner?) A Malaysian rule? This is certainly something very new. Thanks for your enlightenment. Any other rules that u know and I don't, but I should. I wonder when the rule will be changed to shooting people who are noisy and dirty. Good for the council u are so law abiding. Indeed, lucky Malaysia, to have such a citizen like u. Just obey whatever the council chooses to dish out without a squeak. the owner wont get hurt....they will pull the owner out of the house b4 shoot the dogs so that the owner can't disturb them and not getting hurt. U think they will so stupid shooting the dogs when the owner is free to protect the dogs?? if u really want to protest the council and u think u can make a difference for the animals, why u dun take the trouble to make official complaint?? dun just sit here facing the computer and write so many things stated u really a pure dog lover. once u got bad record listed with them....they will always come to ur house to disturb u until u fully obey to the rules..the officers never and wont let it go....they wont tolerate or sympathy u and ur dogs.....i have once kept 4 dogs in my house for 2 years, I got summon 4 times (RM200 each time) and the officers always PAY VISIT to my house, one year sure come 3-4 times to check u and warn u to remove the dogs although no one complain my dogs, at that time I did like what that owner did....I also rent a house for my dogs (RM200/month) just to keep my dogs on day time, at night I took them back to my house....I'm LUCKY because the officers were not so straight maybe they see me I'm a girl and advised me to remove my dogs, if not the police will come to my house, if i'm not lucky, i'm sure they will shoot my dogs too,....so never take it for granted....dun take the risk to against the officer if u know u r wrong......i know from what i told u, i;m taking the risk too but I still want to advise people not to take such risk for the sake of ur dogs, if u keep more than the limit, plz do sumthing else like renting a another house or put for adoption....
I'm glad to see that u take such trouble for your dogs. Mr Eng may not be that lucky to have resources at hand. My point is still the council beasts can't just enter and shoot the dogs as they please. in this case is diff, the council has obtained the court order to enter the premise to shoot the dogs. because they tolerate with him at their maximum level, mr. eng still dun wan to comply after few negotiations and 6 months grace period to remove the dogs, i think they got rights to enter his premise in this case but shooting the dogs in the house is another subject. for normal case, of cos the officer can't enter the premise to shoot the dogs because they dun have warrant.
for acknowledgement....the officers will come at ANY TIME...no matter day or night, weekdays or weekends, holiday or not.... for the intention to KILL ur dogs. dun think it's holiday or midnight, they won't come....they r very cunning.... What an understatement. Cunning? They beat the fox hands down. So, where does all this leave us for the future? Keep on kowtowing............. Why don't we address the issues at hand? 1. why don't the municipal councils do their jobs - go after the owners who abandon animals, instead of doing target practice with their guns? No abandonment - no strays - no rescue - no overlimit - no shooting or SPCA's favourite PTS 2. why don't SPCA live up to its name? In case the committee members have forgotten the acronym - SPCA stands for SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS. How does SPCA classify the latest act by the Seremban council? Doing their job for them - prevention or PTS? 3. if SPCA or PAWS is effective, there won't be so many independent rescuers, a good example is Mr Eng, and a good many more that I know. 4. if SPCA or PAWS or other organisations dealing with animals make their presence felt strongly enough (9 on the Richter scale), the authorities would be more cautious and not simply do anything they fancy just because they are dogs. 5. the veterinary council - why doesn't it ask its members not to concentrate so much on the profit and loss, instead give more reasonable rates to pet owners. If charges are so exorbitant, like what vets are charging now, some owners with sick animals have no choice but to abandon or PTS, which they also have to pay, but it's cheaper than the treatment itself. To all of us: Let's get off our comfortable b**ts and do something before the council decides to be trigger happy. Few precedents have been set and it gets easier each time. We are dealing with some lunatic council people in Malaysia who should be locked up in an asylum. The exists of Indepedent Rescuers doesn't mean the SPCA and PAWS are not good in handling the animals....we need more organization like this to provide more shelter to help the homeless animals. we cannot fully depend on just SPCA and PAWS to help the animals as their space and funds are very limited to help every homeless animals.


`*:.G|d!lck.:*


wicasa
Novice


Jul 3, 2006, 12:15 AM

Post #24 of 58 (6723 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Kookee] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

In Reply To

In Reply To

In Reply To

My friend,

Emotions are clouding your vision there. Goldilock's rationale stands. Those poor dogs were innocent, simply because they do not have a voice nor choice. The owner is the one who sets the ultimatum and it was his choice that sealed the fate of those unfortunate dogs that were eventually culled. This is the same case when a dog attacks a human, who do think should be responsible, the dog or the owner? Anyone who has seen the pictures in the Chinese newspapers would have been emotional, unless it is a heartless "animal lover".

Conclusively, the owner is at fault coz he knows the consequences of ignoring the warnings given and yet he chosen to not heed it. The authority is at fault coz there are more than many humane ways to handle the situation and they chosen the crudest, cruelest way to do so. And the neighbours, I do have to understand their grievance, especially if they dun have dogs themselves and I'm also sure that this is not what they wanted as the outcome. Whatever it is, there is no justiable reason to shoot animals in cold blood in a residence or anywhere.The beasts who could do it reflects the evil in them although they tried to justify it.



Well its true that emotion is clouding our vision. But heck with such calamity, anyone would be enraged with the officials.

Those were innocent lives taken away in such a heartless act. I do agree the owner crossed his boundaries but that does not give the council right to act as barbarians. We are civilized, unless the council still lives in the 1400 AD. There are a bunch of homeless / beggars / drug addicts hanging around Kota Raya area. I believe they are a nuisance so will they be shot??? Shot them instead of those innocent creatures.

Heck, tell me what you want. The owner is at fault and the council has right to remove the dogs. Fine I do agree but nevertheless its just the WRONG THING. It can never be justified that what the council did was right. They say the owner became aggressive and the dog became aggressive too. Who would not when you have 4-6 officials out to gun you down! Even before they went there they had already the mission in their head just to kill. I do not believe they tried to even consider the possibility of tranquilizing the dogs. The dogs were just murdered in cold blood. Its all bullshit that the officials tried to talk and tranquilizing the dogs. I know how the council or anything related to the goverment works. Save cost and get things done quicker. THE STUPID OFFICIAL WAY OF THIS COUNTRY! I hope all of them burn in hell.



Wicasa, very true....dogs take cue from their owner. I dun blame the dogs from turning aggresive. This is Malaysia.......and we all know how things are done here.......and with those in power.....sadly, this would continue to happen. And let us just say that this not only happen to certain breed of pet, but to human as well....I admit I'm in denial stage now but I'm checking out my option, another country, perhaps. Where a certain breed of pet would receive more respect.


Anyone would turn aggressive once felt threatened. I think SPCA in this country has no fangs! They are the sole body to stand up against such acts. But sadly this is Malaysia and things work here differently. As long there are those with the Malay mentality about dogs and their false teachings, the entire species would not receive any respect. They only need the K9's to do their work as rescue workers and sniff out drugs. Apart from that purpose dog are forbidden animals, unclean and haram. As long this mentality exists, the fighting chances are slim.

Everyone just loves dogs all over the world. Here what I see in people is a general fear of dogs. Number one cause of this would be the bloody hell religion then the next cause would be the bad media. I take my GCD for evening walks and I see people walking away as if Im walking with lion or bear! This Malay guy told me "Anjing lu ganas lah" then he went on to tell me about it being haram in Islam. ( She is an 8 month old GSD whos just a baby and get frighten by other smaller dogs ). I felt like punching him till his grandmother can't recognize him anymore. With such neighbors of cause the dogs will not be welcomed anywhere. In fact once, my spitz made so much noise and chased off a few burglars who tried to enter my neighbors house. No once cares about it but everyone bothers that the dogs are haram.

Perhaps in other countries, dogs are respected and loved. The more I continue on this topic, the more enraged I become at this group of people and it might turn in racism. It boils down to the religion, people and politics that govern this country.

PS: I think this would not have happened if he was Malay and had 25 cats!!!


Kookee
Enthusiast


Jul 3, 2006, 6:20 AM

Post #25 of 58 (6709 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wicasa] A Real Shock [In reply to] Can't Post

Heyah Wicasa,

It's already an age old argument, certain group of people are not really fond of certain breed of domesticated pet. And I disagree on the part of SPCA having no fang. You must understand, in the more 'civilised' part of the world, there's stringent animal protection law, continuous enforcement and of course, a collective efforts of profit and non-profit organisation. Animals, is known as man's best friend in those part of the world, having its own right in legislation. Now, do we have that here? Let's not kid ourselves.......that wouldn't happen, as long as those in power now remains in power.

And I'm sorry to hear about your GSD. But you know, blanket statement is not really fair coz I do know of some % of certain group of people is not dead set against dogs. Just two days back, I was walking my two dogs and there's this one Chinese lady bringing her children out from her house. She halts her children immediately and as her children starts saying, 'Mama, doggie, doggie', the mum said,'The doggie will bite bite' and you know what, I turned around and gave her the dirtiest look I can summon. Yeah, I do feel like giving her a piece of my mind.

What a sad world we are living in now .... Culture, education, belief, environment...all of them stink.

**Yogi Puiga-Yoga**

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All
 
 




Copyright 2001~ 2002 Hileytech Sdn Bhd , All Rights Reserved.  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement
For comments and Suggestion, Please contact the Webmaster at puppy@puppy.com.my