Comments:Wimbledon Officials receive criticism from animal rights group after shooting birds

PETA crying about animals getting killed when they killed 19,200 animals. (reasons very) --66.229.25.248 18:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you comparing this situation to euthanisation? Wikidsoup (talk) 20:03, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 66.229.25.248, killing an animal to prevent it :suffering is slightly different to killing to make the tennis easier to play. Anonymous101 (talk) 20:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

That why i say "reasons vary" if a animal that been torture yeah i understand it, But perfectly find animals have been killed because PETA believe no animals belong as pets. If the humane society was raising this issue I won't have a problem.--66.229.25.248 21:07, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * PETA doesn't have a policy to discourage people from having pets. In fact, they actively encourage people to adopt animals from shelters, as opposed to purchasing them. Wikidsoup (talk) 22:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Street pigeons are typically considered vermin. PETA is annoying. --SVTCobra 21:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Point? I don't know about you, but I wouldn't mind seeming annoying to stand up for what I believe. Wikidsoup (talk) 22:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * My point is these disease-ridden vermin should be exterminated just like rats. PETA is just using Wimbledon to get their name in the news. PETA doesn't care about the pigeons. --SVTCobra 22:54, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Should people with diseases be exterminated? No? What about a dog with a disease? Where do you draw the line? And please justify: "PETA doesn't care about the pigeons." Wikidsoup (talk) 00:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That is a matter of opinion, of course, but PETA does exterminate dogs with diseases. However, I think the real question is not where do I draw the line (I tend to draw the line at humans), but where does PETA draw the line? Do I have to avoid exterminating head lice on my children's heads because they are just animals with feelings that are struggling to survive? I think not! It is one thing to oppose the intentional maltreatment of animals, it is another thing to elevate them to the same level as humans. --SVTCobra 01:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * They exterminate dogs with diseases because these dogs can't live in our society without our help, and there aren't enough resources to help them. Pigeons, on the other hand, CAN live in our society without our help, as they are much better scavengers, and so will not suffer as the dogs would. It's a tough call, as you can't tell when an animal is suffering since humans & other species can't communicate well together. Wikidsoup (talk) 19:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * And I don't know who was elevating animals to the "same level as humans," whatever that means. We are definitely different. But yes, I oppose the intentional maltreatment of animals.
 * Sorry, I forgot to justify "PETA doesn't care about the pigeons." Well, I guess I can't prove that, but I am unsure of what, if anything, PETA cares about. Nonetheless that remains my opinion. As Ingrid Newkirk said: "We are complete press sluts." --SVTCobra 01:54, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Being a press slut doesn't mean you don't care though. Being a press slut means you get your message out, and I think people like Newkirk are really passionate about their message! Wikidsoup (talk) 19:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes they are just proving heir stupidity by defending the rats with wings, that being said can't you kill these f*ck*ng thngs by raising hawks? Nyarlathotep (talk) 22:26, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

This counts as 'News'? Why does anyone care what PETA is whining about now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.129.114.64 (talk) 03:47, 26 June 2008 (UTC), Sorry, wasn't logged in. Bo (talk) 03:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

PETA doesn't mind killing animals and dumping their bodies. It doesn't mind terrorising children at McDonalds. It does however mind if someone shoots vermin. Rather an odd group, PETA. Bo (talk) 03:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Can you see the difference between educating children and killing living animals that fell pain.
 * Can YOU see the difference in educating and terrorising? Bo (talk) 18:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

"It is one thing to oppose the intentional maltreatment of animals, it is another thing to elevate them to the same level as humans."

- SVTCobra

And what makes humans more superior.
 * perhaps the fact that the pigeons can't shoot back?
 * Or maybe the fact that they're not having this discussion?
 * Or perhaps the very nature of the beasts v. the nature of Man? Bo (talk) 18:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Animals shouldn't need to be elevated to the same level as humans because thay should already be there. Animals have emotions and feel pain, why should they be inferior? Anonymous101 (talk) 05:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * If you want to play the 'all equal' game, then play it to the hilt.
 * We are the premier predator, all creatures are below us on the food chain. Taking the pain of prey into consideration is actually a unwise caloric choice.  They are inferior because we can kill them for the fun of it and there is nothing they can do about it.


 * Of course you could take a more reasonable approach, and see that we are charged with the keeping of the garden, to include those pesky birds, but a garden is a well regulated place, not the 'weed field' that PETA would have...

Bo (talk) 18:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

=Pigeon shooting is a SPORT!= Out here in the English countryside pigeon shooting is a sport. It's not done on driven shoots like pheasants and the much smaller, faster, more intelligent and alert wood pigeons have a much fairer chance of survival.

People come here (many of them from the cities) to PAY to shoot pigeons. Often several hundred per day. And that's not even mentioning the thousands that are shot every year by sportsmen and farmers who live out here.

Of course.. it is also totally necessary... a bunch of pigeons will make short work of an entire crop in very little time. Short work of MANY crops if allowed. Yes, some of you city folk find it hard to stomach, even when you're eating your £50 stuffed wood pigeon from some fancy restaurant (ever wonder where it came from?) but that's how the real world is. You think that the pigeon on your plate came from some sort of pigeon farm? Chances are that it too was shot. And if it was shot then it can be considered lucky because it had a TRULY free range life before being dipatched quickly and humanely. Unlike the birds on poultry farms that are killed by very hit and miss automated machinery or minimum wage workers who often have little idea what they're doing. Keep your bullsh*t in Westminister and we'll keep ours in the countryside.

The fact remains that pigeon shooting is a perfectly legitimate past time. Yes... even on tennis courts! It has been for far longer than PETA and city folk have been on this Earth. It is most definitely NOT illegal! Shane.Bell (talk) 07:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * PETA: People for the Eating of Tasty Animals. --Brian McNeil / talk 08:13, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Haven't heard that one before. (damn, wish sarcasm could come across on the old www) Wikidsoup (talk) 19:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

3 PRESTONFIELD MILNGAVIE GLASGOW G627PZ.

KILLING OF PIGEONS AT WIMBLEDON, THEY ARE, AND ALWAYS WILL BE TREATED AS VERMIN THEY CAUSE A TOTAL MESS WITH THERE DROPPINGS, AND HAVE TO BE CONTROLLED IN MANY CASES THEY ARE TRAPPED IN CAGES FOR HEALTH REASONS PIGEONS ARE AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN CONTROLED IN PLACES LIKE DISTILLERYS GRAIN INTAKES ETC THERFORE FOR A FEW OF THE BIRDS TO BE SHOT DURING THE TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIPS,JUST TO MAKE SURE THE DO NO     MAKE A MESS OF THE PROPERTY ,OR COURTS, OR THE PEOPLE WATCHING WILL DO NO DAMAGE WHATSOEVER IF THERE DROPPINGS LANDED ON THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MAKING THIS RIDICULOUS COMPLAINT JUST ASK THEM HOW THEY NOW FEEL AS THE LAUNDRY BILL COULD BE VERY HIGH.

YOURS MR J.G.CARNEGIE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.10.108.213 (talk) 19:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)