Jump to content

I still call Australia home


Recommended Posts

On 1/14/2019 at 11:53 PM, LB 15 said:

Do you mean the Mr Richards who won Line Honors in this years Sydney to Hobart yacht race? For the 9th time making him the most successful skipper in the history of the race? The one that heads up a highly successful global boat manufacturing company and lives in a mansion in Sydney with his smoking hot partner?

Image result for mark richards wild oats

Yes he is such a loser isn't he. It must suck to be him.

Hope he’s got a good lawyer, that’s gonna be an expensive divorce one day. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 6.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The Advocate nails it again... https://www.betootaadvocate.com/uncategorized/australia-enjoys-another-peaceful-day-under-oppressive-gun-control-regime/ Australia Enjoys Ano

I interrupt this broadcast for a brief non-political statement. Thank you all for your kind words regarding my dad. As I suspected it was a hard task but I got through it and the funeral director said

Tough day. Just laid off 9 staff. All of them are more than my employees, they are like family. But I had to do it if there is going to be a business to come back to when this horror show is over. Kee

Posted Images

10 minutes ago, mikewof said:

I don't have a cat. My dog wears a collar and she is only unleashed if she is with me. But still, to be on the safe side, I said to her, "dog, if you ever set out on your own, and happen to find yourself in Tasmania or wherever that fucknut lives who likes to shoot pets, please at least wear your bulletproof dog jacket ..."

k9_vest_orig.jpg?w=1400

(The latest pet fashion trend in FKT's neighborhood.)

As one who has seen what a pet dog can do to wild swans and sheep, I can promise you, I would still be humane and always go for a headshot.....

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

here's another one. This woman should get the maximum sentance for rape.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-17/canberra-woman-jailed-for-false-rape-claim/10723908

Happening more often in the UK, there’s a move to protecting the accused identity as well. 

Thats a fucking evil thing to do. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sidecar said:

As one who has seen what a pet dog can do to wild swans and sheep, I can promise you, I would still be humane and always go for a headshot.....

ba2b9f76-7071-45ea-8bc2-a754df03b938.jpg.9da0deafec16d7b58bd239a5a64aff8c.jpg

got no issues with that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Se7en said:

Ah, that would be two adults who have each killed someone through their incompetance.

The travesty is that they each get such a minimal punishment for killing another person. And will both regain the 'right' to drive again.

I support the general deterrence theory of punishment, and do not like the messege this sends. 

Deterrence?  Really?   Because that doesn't work.  People purposely commit crime because they think they are going to get away with it.

In relation to these cases,  without being in the court,  hearing the evidence and hearing the judges reasoning,  we don't actually know what the message is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Deterrence?  Really?   Because that doesn't work.  People purposely commit crime because they think they are going to get away with it.

In relation to these cases,  without being in the court,  hearing the evidence and hearing the judges reasoning,  we don't actually know what the message is.

Yeah. What's the appropriate penalty for inattention & possibly momentary stupidity? I really don't know. Should be *something* but putting people in prison for something like this seems inappropriate & likely counterproductive.

Possibly a serious community service order served in nursing homes or similar but even there I don't know - that's getting awfully close to legally enforced servitude for my liking.

Often I think that self-driving vehicles are a damn good idea. Better to attempt to eliminate problems like this than penalise the dumbies after the event.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

sentencing disparity 

I really don't understand how some of our justices can come up with such different sentencing,,even between states

I read this one a while ago and thought it really harsh.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-26/distracted-driver-jailed-over-death-of-cyclist-father-macedon/10554516

Macedon crash driver Emma Kent jailed for killing cyclist after being distracted by music

 

Sorry Mel but as a very active road cyclist I think you've got this wrong. Driver distraction, mostly via the use of mobile phones, is one of a cyclist's greatest fears because it only takes one and your life changes remarkably for the worst, if you survive. In the article it referred to her using Bluetooth to change the music for her radio. What device was she using to change the music for her radio? I'm guessing her mobile. Harsh lesson for her yes but even harsher lesson for the killed father's wife, kids, family and friends.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Yeah. What's the appropriate penalty for inattention & possibly momentary stupidity? I really don't know. Should be *something* but putting people in prison for something like this seems inappropriate & likely counterproductive.

Possibly a serious community service order served in nursing homes or similar but even there I don't know - that's getting awfully close to legally enforced servitude for my liking.

Often I think that self-driving vehicles are a damn good idea. Better to attempt to eliminate problems like this than penalise the dumbies after the event.

FKT

Stupid should pay. Unfortunately the law doesn't know how to deal with it.

 

In your example,  what you call enforced servitude,  I call an educational opportunity. .....

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Deterrence?  Really?   Because that doesn't work.  People purposely commit crime because they think they are going to get away with it.

Ah, OK. Best you tell the legal profession and anyone who looks at legal philosophy this. Because general deterrence is still considered as a major component in sentencing pretty much across the board, both in policy creation and day to day sentencing. I have read prosecution lawyer sentencing arguments where general deterrence is cited in Victoria. Court transcripts would reflect this.

Your assertion that people purposely commit crime because they think they could get away with it also doesn't bear close scrutiny. Some people might, but the vast majority of people actually consider the risk of detection and the personal cost of breaking a law, as well as the social impact of performing that action. As either perceived risk or cost goes up, the incidence of the activity goes down.

Consider drink driving vs speeding incidences;

Both low level drink driving and speeding used to be more common.

Fines for speeding have remained relatively low, and loss of license is unlikely. Fines for drink driving are much higher, and loss of license is mandatory.

Incidence of Drink driving has dropped significantly, whilst low level speeding has remained pretty much the same.

General deterrence has definitely been cited as the rational for the harsher penalties inflicted for drink driving.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Yeah. What's the appropriate penalty for inattention & possibly momentary stupidity? I really don't know. Should be *something* but putting people in prison for something like this seems inappropriate & likely counterproductive.

How about the penalty is that the culprit is now only allowed to ride a motorbike rather than drive a car.

And the motorbike has a large spike mounted on the bars pointing back at the riders body.

I suspect they may pay better attention in the future...

(This satisfies the general deterrence and the vengeance theories of punishment)

FWIW I agree that jailing someone is completely counterproductive for that person, in every case where they are not a danger to society. However, for most of us, the ideal of jail does represent a significant deterrent factor. Hence jail one to influence many.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Se7en said:

Ah, OK. Best you tell the legal profession and anyone who looks at legal philosophy this. Because general deterrence is still considered as a major component in sentencing pretty much across the board, both in policy creation and day to day sentencing. I have read prosecution lawyer sentencing arguments where general deterrence is cited in Victoria. Court transcripts would reflect this.

Your assertion that people purposely commit crime because they think they could get away with it also doesn't bear close scrutiny. Some people might, but the vast majority of people actually consider the risk of detection and the personal cost of breaking a law, as well as the social impact of performing that action. As either perceived risk or cost goes up, the incidence of the activity goes down.

Consider drink driving vs speeding incidences;

Both low level drink driving and speeding used to be more common.

Fines for speeding have remained relatively low, and loss of license is unlikely. Fines for drink driving are much higher, and loss of license is mandatory.

Incidence of Drink driving has dropped significantly, whilst low level speeding has remained pretty much the same.

General deterrence has definitely been cited as the rational for the harsher penalties inflicted for drink driving.

Well and good

 

Now, if you think a criminal thinks they are going to get caught before they commit a crime, well, I got a bridge for you.

Deterrence, as a concept, is fine. It effects people such as ourselves who are smart enough to realise that crime doesn't pay. We have prisons full of people that aren't very conceptual.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mikewof said:

This is something new then and we're making some progress, eh?

If you're true to what you wrote up there then, you will no longer shoot a cat that has a collar and bell even if it comes over your fenceline?

As to your outrage, I never disagreed that "cats kill native wildlife" regardless that you seem attached to that fiction. I just had objection with you wanking off to the idea of killing your neighbor's pets. In fact, "cats kill wildlife" in my area too, and they're wild cats; the bobcats kill rabbits, the mountain lions kill deer and elk. We don't seem to have as much of a problem with introduced species as you folks, maybe we fucked up our natural environment a shade less than y'all.

I've stayed out of this cat fight until now but really Mikey you're now using the argument that "cats kill wildlife in your area too"? 

Seriously how long have those wild cats been living in "your area"? I bet a whole lot longer than the good ol USA was first settled back in the 1600's let alone since Colorado was settled. The thing is the other native wildlife in the US have had time to adapt to having feline predators in their territory for thousands of years. That hasn't happened in Australia. Cats have only been here for just over 200 years in some places, less in most. The native wildlife have not adapted.

That's one of the main differences re this issue between Oz and the US and hence why people like FKT will kill cats & dogs straying on to their property. To protect the native wildlife that live on their property. Cat owners have under increasing pressure and awareness to keep their cats indoors, especially if they live near bush.

Shooting of foxes and rabbits is done for the same reason. Only good fox or rabbit is a dead one. The issue with rabbits is they dig their burrows in the same areas as where the small reptiles do and hence the reptiles don't reproduce because that's where they lay their eggs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Now, if you think a criminal thinks they are going to get caught before they commit a crime, well, I got a bridge for you.

Deterrence, as a concept, is fine. It effects people such as ourselves who are smart enough to realise that crime doesn't pay. We have prisons full of people that aren't very conceptual.

I thought we were discussing otherwise 'normal' people who have allowed themselves to be distracted while driving with terrible consequences. Do you consider them 'criminals' or 'people such as ourselves who are smart enough to realise that crime doesn't pay'.

If it's the latter, then you have agreed with me that general deterrence works.

So get your pitchfork out and get up here on the soapbox with me.

 

(Your experience of the criminal justice system and 'criminals' seems somewhat different to mine. I've spoken with people who break the law who know and accept that they are going to get caught approximately x percentage of the time, with a penalty of Y, and take that into account. And by and large are pretty accurate. On the other extreme are the people who committed one act, in rage or while drunk etc, with thought process attached at all. The first group are strongly affected by deterrence, as if Y goes up, the overall return for the crime goes down and it becomes less attractive)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Stupid should pay. Unfortunately the law doesn't know how to deal with it.

 

In your example,  what you call enforced servitude,  I call an educational opportunity. .....

Fuck you will get kicked out of the Lefty club for expressing views like that. Stronger policing? Tougher sentences? Surely they should be given a talking too (not to strong though, you don’t want them to feel uncomfortable or devalued as a person) then sent on a course to draw unicorns and then given so money to stay home until they feel better about themselves. 

Thats the proper way to deal with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless they have a long record of driving drunk/stupid, they probably shouldn't go to jail.

Five years of spending every weekend night cleaning up the blood in a busy emergency ward or being a porter in the morgue seems more appropriate.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, albanyguy said:

I've stayed out of this cat fight until now but really Mikey you're now using the argument that "cats kill wildlife in your area too"? 

Seriously how long have those wild cats been living in "your area"? I bet a whole lot longer than the good ol USA was first settled back in the 1600's let alone since Colorado was settled. The thing is the other native wildlife in the US have had time to adapt to having feline predators in their territory for thousands of years. That hasn't happened in Australia. Cats have only been here for just over 200 years in some places, less in most. The native wildlife have not adapted.

Careful. You start telling Mikey that he knows sweet fuck all about what goes on in Australia and why, the poor soul starts to flip out. You don't want the image of the old fool sobbing in the stairwell on your conscience do you? :lol:

 

1 hour ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Possibly a serious community service order served in nursing homes or similar but even there I don't know - that's getting awfully close to legally enforced servitude for my liking.

I think it's more than reasonable. Hell, give them a choice like the old "enlist or you're going to prison" deal. Five hundred hours of community service in nursing homes and cleaning the local parks or go to gaol for a year. Pick one. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Se7en said:

I thought we were discussing otherwise 'normal' people who have allowed themselves to be distracted while driving with terrible consequences. Do you consider them 'criminals' or 'people such as ourselves who are smart enough to realise that crime doesn't pay'.

If it's the latter, then you have agreed with me that general deterrence works.

So get your pitchfork out and get up here on the soapbox with me.

 

(Your experience of the criminal justice system and 'criminals' seems somewhat different to mine. I've spoken with people who break the law who know and accept that they are going to get caught approximately x percentage of the time, with a penalty of Y, and take that into account. And by and large are pretty accurate. On the other extreme are the people who committed one act, in rage or while drunk etc, with thought process attached at all. The first group are strongly affected by deterrence, as if Y goes up, the overall return for the crime goes down and it becomes less attractive)

We're in agreement on the theory.

Now, I dont rob banks. Not because of the punishment,  but because I think its wrong. Carl Williams knew selling drugs and murder were wrong, but he still did it.

 

As for those that fuck up doing stupid things, well it depends. The law makes an attempt to deal with this with concepts such as mens rea and actus rea and culpability. Throw in the history of the defendant and the sentence can seem minor compared to the consequences for the victim.

Its unfortunate, but if you want justice,  that's how it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LB 15 said:

Fuck you will get kicked out of the Lefty club for expressing views like that. Stronger policing? Tougher sentences? Surely they should be given a talking too (not to strong though, you don’t want them to feel uncomfortable or devalued as a person) then sent on a course to draw unicorns and then given so money to stay home until they feel better about themselves. 

Thats the proper way to deal with it.

I'm happy with stronger policing. Cctv cameras can be in every public place as far as I'm concerned.

I suspect we will probably disagree on sentencing.

 

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/researchpapers/Documents/public-opinion-on-sentencing-recent-research-in-/public%20opinion%20on%20sentencing.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjf95P_tvbfAhXTeisKHYulBKgQFjADegQIChAB&usg=AOvVaw2J3NwnX0BlOU_RH_HMHMk2

Interesting reading. ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bent Sailor said:

Careful. You start telling Mikey that he knows sweet fuck all about what goes on in Australia and why, the poor soul starts to flip out. You don't want the image of the old fool sobbing in the stairwell on your conscience do you? :lol:

The Mikey flipping out train left the station over a week ago. We're keeping it rolling :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, albanyguy said:

Seriously how long have those wild cats been living in "your area"? I bet a whole lot longer than the good ol USA was first settled back in the 1600's let alone since Colorado was settled. The thing is the other native wildlife in the US have had time to adapt to having feline predators in their territory for thousands of years.

And how many small mammals, reptiles and ground-dwelling birds *don't* currently exist in the USA because of cats?

Mikey doesn't know. He can't know except possibly from inferential data in the fossil record.

But - we do know what's happening. We know how some small marsupial populations recover when feral cats are excluded from their territory. We also know how expensive it is to do this. It's impossible to do even for a small fraction of the Australian landmass which is an even better reason for intensive suppression of feral animals on islands. NB: Tasmania is an island. I help suppress feral animals.

Calicivirus has done a lot to knock back the rabbits and we don't have foxes in Tasmania. Long may it stay that way.

The rabbit population is interesting - that was another classic study when I was at University. Some of the pictures from the 1930's are stunning. One side of a fence, bare dirt and hundreds of rabbits. The other side, native pasture. Myxomatosis gave us a breathing spell from the rabbit plague. Calicivirus another. I'm pretty sure the rabbits will breed resistance though due to their fecundity, just a question of how long.

We have some of the oddest animals left on the planet and I'd really like my grandkids and many subsequent generations to be able to see them in their native environment, not in a zoo. If that means that cats have to go in toto should it come to that, so be it. Responsible cat owners - defined as owners who only have spayed/neutered pets with microchips and whose animals are collared, belled and KEPT TO THEIR OWNERS' PREMISES will help keep even stronger restrictions at bay.

It wouldn't take a lot of people as irresponsible as Mikey to generate a backlash that would see cats prohibited in Tasmania. We probably couldn't eradicate the ferals now but we could put a lot of selection pressure on them. I do wonder about how one could combine low-light cameras, image recognition and some form of trapping in the bush to put further pressure on the feral population. Be a great research project.

Australian ecology is one of my hot buttons I'm afraid. I learned too much about the fuckups of well-meaning people to have any time for bleeding hearts like Mikey. We've had his types try to smuggle in carp in the not so distant past for live bait then let the things go (though the fishery they'd fuck up is introduced trout so maybe that would be a wash ecologically). It took 20 years to eliminate them from a relatively confined area.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-16/fisheries-officers-push-for-carp-free-tasmania/7936798

FKT

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Can we start with a bridge?

Fuck no. I don't even want a bridge over Bass Strait. The Melbourne ferals could walk over and bring their pet foxes with them.

FKT

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Fuck no. I don't even want a bridge over Bass Strait. The Melbourne ferals could walk over and bring their pet foxes with them.

FKT

You could set up entry points with extra points for existing Parliamentarians. Or do you have those any more? Ours went extinct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, back to an old chestnut between Bent and myself from a few months back. 

Will she or won't she? Julie Bishop staying on and contesting the upcoming Federal election that is.

Interesting opinion piece in The West today.

https://thewest.com.au/opinion/sarah-martin/j-bish-its-time-to-hang-up-the-heels-ng-b881076838z

According to the journo Julie is barely speaking to any of her fellow WA pollies (quite rightly too imho). Journo also speculating she might leave it late so the party has limited time to spruik a new candidate, preferably female, prior to the election. 

Another option not canvassed is that Bishop could resign from Liberal party and run as an Independent. Now that'd really stick it up the Federal Libs!! If she really is that pissed off with the WA Liberal Party then don't rule that option out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Calicivirus has done a lot to knock back the rabbits and we don't have foxes in Tasmania. Long may it stay that way.

Sorry dude - strong evidence that you do have foxes, including at least one carcass and a lot of shit. Carcass was from near Longford or perhaps up the South Esk somewhere if I remember correctly. Dept of Nat parks and wildlife (or whatever they are called this week) confirmed both.

I live in hope that the devils recover from the facial tumors and out compete the foxes. Wishful thinking.

And from what I saw a month ago, 'knocked back' for the rabbits just means they are no longer hopping around 3 deep.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, albanyguy said:

I've stayed out of this cat fight until now but really Mikey you're now using the argument that "cats kill wildlife in your area too"? 

Seriously how long have those wild cats been living in "your area"? I bet a whole lot longer than the good ol USA was first settled back in the 1600's let alone since Colorado was settled. The thing is the other native wildlife in the US have had time to adapt to having feline predators in their territory for thousands of years. That hasn't happened in Australia. Cats have only been here for just over 200 years in some places, less in most. The native wildlife have not adapted.

That's one of the main differences re this issue between Oz and the US and hence why people like FKT will kill cats & dogs straying on to their property. To protect the native wildlife that live on their property. Cat owners have under increasing pressure and awareness to keep their cats indoors, especially if they live near bush.

Shooting of foxes and rabbits is done for the same reason. Only good fox or rabbit is a dead one. The issue with rabbits is they dig their burrows in the same areas as where the small reptiles do and hence the reptiles don't reproduce because that's where they lay their eggs.

I guess you didn't notice the purple font?

We don't have a problem with small cats in my area because they get eaten by the coyotes and foxes. The foxes have been here forever, and they're part of the ecosystem, so we leave them alone. Unlike the coyotes, the lions and foxes and bobcats are honorable creatures. The coyotes, however, breed with pet dogs when they aren't hungry, which creates wolf-sized coy-dog hybrids. Thus my point that our ecosystem might be slightly less screwed up than your's.

But that isn't the main point. Your species damage is overwhelmingly due to feral cats, not pet cats with collars and bells. But that abject asshole FKT seems to have convinced himself that killing his neighbor's pets is necessary.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

And how many small mammals, reptiles and ground-dwelling birds *don't* currently exist in the USA because of cats?

Mikey doesn't know. He can't know except possibly from inferential data in the fossil record.

But - we do know what's happening. We know how some small marsupial populations recover when feral cats are excluded from their territory. We also know how expensive it is to do this. It's impossible to do even for a small fraction of the Australian landmass which is an even better reason for intensive suppression of feral animals on islands. NB: Tasmania is an island. I help suppress feral animals.

Calicivirus has done a lot to knock back the rabbits and we don't have foxes in Tasmania. Long may it stay that way.

The rabbit population is interesting - that was another classic study when I was at University. Some of the pictures from the 1930's are stunning. One side of a fence, bare dirt and hundreds of rabbits. The other side, native pasture. Myxomatosis gave us a breathing spell from the rabbit plague. Calicivirus another. I'm pretty sure the rabbits will breed resistance though due to their fecundity, just a question of how long.

We have some of the oddest animals left on the planet and I'd really like my grandkids and many subsequent generations to be able to see them in their native environment, not in a zoo. If that means that cats have to go in toto should it come to that, so be it. Responsible cat owners - defined as owners who only have spayed/neutered pets with microchips and whose animals are collared, belled and KEPT TO THEIR OWNERS' PREMISES will help keep even stronger restrictions at bay.

It wouldn't take a lot of people as irresponsible as Mikey to generate a backlash that would see cats prohibited in Tasmania. We probably couldn't eradicate the ferals now but we could put a lot of selection pressure on them. I do wonder about how one could combine low-light cameras, image recognition and some form of trapping in the bush to put further pressure on the feral population. Be a great research project.

Australian ecology is one of my hot buttons I'm afraid. I learned too much about the fuckups of well-meaning people to have any time for bleeding hearts like Mikey. We've had his types try to smuggle in carp in the not so distant past for live bait then let the things go (though the fishery they'd fuck up is introduced trout so maybe that would be a wash ecologically). It took 20 years to eliminate them from a relatively confined area.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-16/fisheries-officers-push-for-carp-free-tasmania/7936798

FKT

You still don't seem to grasp that your problem is largely feral animals and not, in fact, your neighbor's pets, the mere sight of which makes you want to kill them.

And then you keep trying to justify your deranged behavior under the guise of protecting native species. The reality of course, is that you simply get off on killing your neighbor's pets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, mikewof said:

I guess you didn't notice the purple font?

We don't have a problem with small cats in my area because they get eaten by the coyotes and foxes. The foxes have been here forever, and they're part of the ecosystem, so we leave them alone. Unlike the coyotes, the lions and foxes and bobcats are honorable creatures. The coyotes, however, breed with pet dogs when they aren't hungry, which creates wolf-sized coy-dog hybrids. Thus my point that our ecosystem might be slightly less screwed up than your's.

But that isn't the main point. Your species damage is overwhelmingly due to feral cats, not pet cats with collars and bells. But that abject asshole FKT seems to have convinced himself that killing his neighbor's pets is necessary.

Yep you simply don't get it. I won't bother explaining it to you any further coz you're just digging a deeper hole for yourself.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2019 at 7:43 PM, mikewof said:

You still don't seem to grasp that your problem is largely feral animals and not, in fact, your neighbor's pets, the mere sight of which makes you want to kill them.

So, its just on dusk, and you spot a cat stalking something in your back yard.

How do you tell if its a pet or feral?

No bell, no collar, wandering the bush? Balance of probability points to feral doesn't it

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, albanyguy said:

Yep you simply don't get it. I won't bother explaining it to you any further coz you're just digging a deeper hole for yourself.

You don't get it

Killing a neighbor's pet will offer close to zero help to your local ecosystem, and it will make that neighbor a miserable mess.

The problem is mostly ferals, not pets. But I've no idea why you and FKT refuse to make that distinction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Se7en said:

So, its just on dusk, and you spot a cat stalking something in your back yard.

How do you tell if its a pet or feral?

No bell, no collar, wandering the bush? Balance of probability points to feral doesn't it

Why are you asking me? He was the one who claims to shoot pets with collars. Ask him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, mikewof said:

You don't get it

Killing a neighbor's pet will offer close to zero help to your local ecosystem, and it will make that neighbor a miserable mess.

The problem is mostly ferals, not pets. But I've no idea why you and FKT refuse to make that distinction.

Killing the neighbors cat will immensely improve the eco system. And the neighbor should be more responsible.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mikewof said:

You don't get it

Killing a neighbor's pet will offer close to zero help to your local ecosystem, and it will make that neighbor a miserable mess.

Yet again you are wrong Mikey. I live opposite a highly regarded reserve very close to downtown Albany. Cats are not welcome in the reserve, neither are unrestrained dogs.

Would someone shoot an unrestrained dog or free-roaming cat in that reserve? Most likely no, however if i came across one and knew who the owner of said cat or dog was then I'd have a few harsh words with said owner.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mikewof said:

You don't get it

Killing a neighbor's pet will offer close to zero help to your local ecosystem, and it will make that neighbor a miserable mess.

The problem is mostly ferals, not pets. But I've no idea why you and FKT refuse to make that distinction.

Because there is no distinction.

If you live anywhere in semi urban australia, the hills around sydney or melbourne, where the cul de sac of 3 bed brick homes sit on a 1/4 acre block and backs onto a ferny state park .our small wild creatures are continually stalked and killed by domestic cats. 

How did this "debate" for want of a better word get here?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, albanyguy said:

Yet again you are wrong Mikey. I live opposite a highly regarded reserve very close to downtown Albany. Cats are not welcome in the reserve, neither are unrestrained dogs.

Would someone shoot an unrestrained dog or free-roaming cat in that reserve? Most likely no, however if i came across one and knew who the owner of said cat or dog was then I'd have a few harsh words with said owner.

So lessee ... You wouldn't kill someone's pet, but you're defending someone else to kill that pet?

And he didn't mention anything about a reserve, the pets that die are just the ones who have the misfortune of wandering over his fence line.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

Because there is no distinction.

If you live anywhere in semi urban australia, the hills around sydney or melbourne, where the cul de sac of 3 bed brick homes sit on a 1/4 acre block and backs onto a ferny state park .our small wild creatures are continually stalked and killed by domestic cats. 

How did this "debate" for want of a better word get here?

There is a distinction, you're arguing for the position of dysfunction.

A pet is a member of a human, taxpaying family, a feral is not.

Any mild benefit to the native species from killing someone's pet is violently overwhelmed by the inherent anti-social nature of the desire to kill one's neighbor's pets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mikewof said:

Ah, so you have data of the wildlife killed by collared pets versus ferals? Do tell.

A paper published in the  2016 journal Biological Conversation, estimates feral cats kill 316 million birds a year, while pet cats kill 61 million birds annually. More than 99% are native.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Mikey still thinks cats are pets.

 

Too funny.

Cats are pets but like all introduced species to Australia, they have a very detrimental effect on the native flaura and fauna. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, dreadom said:

Cats are pets but like all introduced species to Australia, they have a very detrimental effect on the native flaura and fauna. 

Cats are not pets. Just because you can own one, doesn't make it a pet. Just because it can live in a domestic setting, doesn't make it domesticated.

When you can teach a cat to come when called, sit and roll over, then you might have a point. Until then they're just wild animals that like to cough up fur balls unto the floor

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now lets get back on the main purpose of this thread - taking the piss out of you leftists. Have any of you taken the '10 year challenge' that seems to be sweeping the social media world among the attention challenged?

This is good...

Image may contain: 2 people, text

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, dreadom said:

Cats are pets but like all introduced species to Australia, they have a very detrimental effect on the native flaura and fauna. 

Cats are 0.0001 generations removed from animals that can and do survive in the wild with no human assistance. There is no functional difference between a cat with its own personal servants and a cat that has to hunt & kill its own food AS LONG AS THE OWNER LETS IT RUN LOOSE.

Which point Mikey, despite *numerous* opportunities, STILL refuses to address.

And BTW here's a challenge for Mikey seeing as he spends a lot of his time & energy defaming me - find a single post by me where I state that I have ever shot a cat wearing a collar and bell. Should be dead easy for you since you've stated as fact that I've done so.

Of course you could simply admit that your statement was a figment of your imagination and desire to score points, but you don't have the required amount of intellectual honesty to do that. Watching you thrash about will be entertaining though.

And Meli, I dragged this over here by posting that ABC article about feral cat research. Thought it belonged in PA more than GA.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Now lets get back on the main purpose of this thread - taking the piss out of you leftists. Have any of you taken the '10 year challenge' that seems to be sweeping the social media world among the attention challenged?

This is good...

Image may contain: 2 people, text

Never mind, Shorten and his cohort will fix that for us. I've given up on the House of Reps, going to vote for all the hard Right ratbags in the Senate for maximum disruption of ALP legislation.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Now lets get back on the main purpose of this thread - taking the piss out of you leftists. Have any of you taken the '10 year challenge' that seems to be sweeping the social media world among the attention challenged?

This is good...

Image may contain: 2 people, text

Yet spending as a % of gdp has hardly varied.

Its about revenue....

file-20170508-20729-efgrak.png?ixlib=rb-

 

And before you gloat in your fishing abilities,  what the fuck is that cunt palmer doing sending me texts?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

And before you gloat in your fishing abilities,  what the fuck is that cunt palmer doing sending me texts?

I'd like to know that, too. Is there any way of blocking a sender on an Android phone?

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

I'd like to know that, too. Is there any way of blocking a sender on an Android phone?

FKT

There is but I think they are unblockable....

 

Click on number in phone log.

When contact comes up, click on 4 vertical dots in top right corner.

Click add to reject list.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dreadom said:

A paper published in the  2016 journal Biological Conversation, estimates feral cats kill 316 million birds a year, while pet cats kill 61 million birds annually. More than 99% are native.

No we're getting somewhere. An Aussie who uses actual data and science.

Okay, so pet cats kill about 20% of the birds that feral cats kill, right? Do you have a link to the study? Because I'll bet even money that pet cats with reflective collars and bells in some dude's backyard kill close to 0% of that total.

Now, how many birds are killed in Australia due to other human activity like power lines, wind farms, agriculture, building collisions, lighting, etc.? I don't have that data for Oz, but I have it for Canada, where the cold greatly diminishes the contribution from feral cats relative to pet cats, and it seems that other non-cat human activities about match the contribution from pet cats, presumably most of which are uncollared and unbelled. http://theconversation.com/wind-farms-are-hardly-the-bird-slayers-theyre-made-out-to-be-heres-why-79567

I'll wait for your link for the data in Oz, but it sure seems that we're gradually getting to the reality the the neighbor's pets represents ... if these pet-killing assholes in this thread were really as intelligent as they claim, they would be out hunting humans in an effort to save birds, rather than pets.

But it's funny how science and data works for the scientifically-illiterate huh? They thump the data for backup in global warming, even right here in PA, but when it comes to pets, they ignore the data and science, presumably because they enjoy killing pets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Cats are 0.0001 generations removed from animals that can and do survive in the wild with no human assistance. There is no functional difference between a cat with its own personal servants and a cat that has to hunt & kill its own food AS LONG AS THE OWNER LETS IT RUN LOOSE.

Which point Mikey, despite *numerous* opportunities, STILL refuses to address.

And BTW here's a challenge for Mikey seeing as he spends a lot of his time & energy defaming me - find a single post by me where I state that I have ever shot a cat wearing a collar and bell. Should be dead easy for you since you've stated as fact that I've done so.

Of course you could simply admit that your statement was a figment of your imagination and desire to score points, but you don't have the required amount of intellectual honesty to do that. Watching you thrash about will be entertaining though.

And Meli, I dragged this over here by posting that ABC article about feral cat research. Thought it belonged in PA more than GA.

FKT

I'm waiting for you to clarify ... do you not kill collared pet cats in your yard? Because you earlier claimed that you do kill pet cats, you didn't make the exclusion of pets that have collars.

Feeling a little dysfunctional with your earlier post perhaps?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dreadom said:

Cats are pets but like all introduced species to Australia, they have a very detrimental effect on the native flaura and fauna. 

By "introduced species", do you include all those Europeans and their water-wasting, pollution-spewing, concrete-paving descendants? Or do you mostly just include things like cats and pigs and cane toads?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, mikewof said:

By "introduced species", do you include all those Europeans and their water-wasting, pollution-spewing, concrete-paving descendants? Or do you mostly just include things like cats and pigs and cane toads?

Yes I mean everything that has been introduced since 1788. Now fuck off and do your own research.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, dreadom said:

Yes I mean everything that has been introduced since 1788. Now fuck off and do your own research.

You know the SA rules, pix or it didn't happen. You cited the research without giving a link.

Anyway, so it seems clear that humans cause more bird deaths than collared pets, should FKT and other self-annointed pet hunters like him be given a license to hunt humans?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mikewof said:

You know the SA rules, pix or it didn't happen. You cited the research without giving a link.

Anyway, so it seems clear that humans cause more bird deaths than collared pets, should FKT and other self-annointed pet hunters like him be given a license to hunt humans?

Mikey it’s time to go back on your meds. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, mikewof said:

Now, how many birds are killed in Australia due to other human activity like power lines, wind farms, agriculture, building collisions, lighting, etc.? I don't have that data for Oz, but I have it for Canada, where the cold greatly diminishes the contribution from feral cats relative to pet cats, and it seems that other non-cat human activities about match the contribution from pet cats, presumably most of which are uncollared and unbelled. http://theconversation.com/wind-farms-are-hardly-the-bird-slayers-theyre-made-out-to-be-heres-why-79567

Cool - lets extrapolate from Canada, where you have shitloads of endemic mammalian predators, and the whole country freezes to death each year, to Australia where we have essentially none, and we boil water by leaving it outside in the shade.

That seems sensible

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, dreadom said:

Mikey it’s time to go back on your meds. 

Seems kinda silly huh? Hunting humans. But that dysfunctional logic is used in this thread to justify hunting the neighbour's pets.

Since you mention "meds" it does seem outright crazy to run around like a glazed idiot, shooting the neighbor's pets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Se7en said:

Cool - lets extrapolate from Canada, where you have shitloads of endemic mammalian predators, and the whole country freezes to death each year, to Australia where we have essentially none, and we boil water by leaving it outside.

That seems sensible

That's the point, and I wrote that, they don't have the feral cat problem that you have, and the human contribution there is significant. And further they list the feral vs. per cat impact in Canada, and the pet cats have an even larger relative impact in Canada than they have in Australia! (Compared to the Australian study that Dread cited but didn't provide a link.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, mikewof said:

You know the SA rules, pix or it didn't happen. You cited the research without giving a link.

Anyway, so it seems clear that humans cause more bird deaths than collared pets, should FKT and other self-annointed pet hunters like him be given a license to hunt humans?

The perfect mikey post.

A criticism of someone for not linking to research followed by an unsupported accusation.

"It seems clear humans cause more bird deaths than collared pets"

WFD!

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Killing the neighbors cat will immensely improve the eco system. And the neighbor should be more responsible.

 

How can you say this. Mikey knows all about how the native fauna is preyed in by both feral and pet cats in countries he knows fuck all about. As I live in one of those countries I can only assume I was into the drug scene to much and hallucinated the neighbours fluffy knocking of the chicks around our pond. Must have imagined getting rid of it as well, which is good as I have been having trouble sleeping. Can sleep peacefully, like the cat, from now on. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, mikewof said:

Seems kinda silly huh? Hunting humans. But that dysfunctional logic is used in this thread to justify hunting the neighbour's pets.

Since you mention "meds" it does seem outright crazy to run around like a glazed idiot, shooting the neighbor's pets.

The bylaws here in Aus are that if you own a cat it must be kept indoors between sunset and sunrise, it must also be micro-chipped. Hardly any fucken cat owners take notice.

Best anything I ever did was to invest in a trap which I periodically bait and set at night, on my property. I would say the ratio of feral/domestic is 50/50. I then do my Greenie leftist bit and take them up to the RSPCA, if they unclaimed after 10 days they get the needle. Amazing how much native reptile and bird life comes back after you've done this for a while. Cats kill near on everything, except Canetoads of course.     

 

Best place for a cat

c83c35b86a2b87a3eb2117b613ba34655c43a7e1  

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, FinnFish said:

The bylaws here in Aus are that if you own a cat it must be kept indoors between sunset and sunrise, it must also be micro-chipped. Hardly any fucken cat owners take notice.

Best anything I ever did was to invest in a trap which I periodically bait and set at night, on my property. I would say the ratio of feral/domestic is 50/50. I then do my Greenie leftist bit and take them up to the RSPCA, if they unclaimed after 10 days they get the needle. Amazing how much native reptile and bird life comes back after you've done this for a while. Cats kill near on everything, except Canetoads of course.     

 

Best place for a cat

c83c35b86a2b87a3eb2117b613ba34655c43a7e1  

Surely a responsible cat owner would keep their cat indoors so as not to be taken by a snake.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

There is but I think they are unblockable....

 

Click on number in phone log.

When contact comes up, click on 4 vertical dots in top right corner.

Click add to reject list.

 

Text him back a dick pic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Yet spending as a % of gdp has hardly varied.

Its about revenue....

file-20170508-20729-efgrak.png?ixlib=rb-

 

And before you gloat in your fishing abilities,  what the fuck is that cunt palmer doing sending me texts?

Me gloat? Never. I do however love this place and not just for the fishing (which is terrific BTW...)

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

A rat leaving a sinking ship.

She had a chance to support the claims of others of sexism and bullying in the liberal party and sold out for 20 pieces of silver. Her mentor, peter costello, would be proud.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Text him back a dick pic.

Text him back a pic of a successful nickel mine instead.

A dick and a successful nickel mine. 2 things that fat fuck hasn't seen since 1974.

I hope he gets his giant, floating monstrosity built and comes to you to learn about the sea......

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

The perfect mikey post.

A criticism of someone for not linking to research followed by an unsupported accusation.

"It seems clear humans cause more bird deaths than collared pets"

WFD!

I linked data that supported it, if you dispute it, prove it, otherwise, perhaps you should crawl back into the stupid hole from which you periodically emerge to post unsupported nonsense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, FinnFish said:

The bylaws here in Aus are that if you own a cat it must be kept indoors between sunset and sunrise, it must also be micro-chipped. Hardly any fucken cat owners take notice.

Best anything I ever did was to invest in a trap which I periodically bait and set at night, on my property. I would say the ratio of feral/domestic is 50/50. I then do my Greenie leftist bit and take them up to the RSPCA, if they unclaimed after 10 days they get the needle. Amazing how much native reptile and bird life comes back after you've done this for a while. Cats kill near on everything, except Canetoads of course.     

I also try to avoid killing animals when possible. Why do you give the cats a chance to be reunited with their families instead of just killing them?

Given your druthers, would you get rid of all invasive species in Oz?

Link to post
Share on other sites