Why did some evacuees leave their pets behind to "die"'? I saw this "Christian" family

[saracat]

their definition, not mine state they videoed their house and pets before they left so they could "remember" them. and then asked "God to bless" both. Another family locked their cat in the bathroom and another left the cat in the yard while yet another let their dogs lose! What kind of monsters are these? They reported the ones that locked their cat in the bathroom had their house burned to the ground. I think these people ought to be prosecuted.I think it was too bad they weren't "locked" in the bathroom, or left in the yard. I just cannot have any tolerance for such people. There is no excuse for this.

[camero]

1. "Christian" monsters are the worst monsters.

Didn't you know?

[saracat]

4. Well, I disgaree with their definition of "Christian".

[camero]

8. I'm actually doing the same

and looking at history.

[Occulus]

18. I wouldn't

If they believe christ is their lord and savior, they are by definition christian, regardless of how much other christians want to disown their behavior.

As much as some here would hate to admit and accept it- all the people in the OP probably are christians, by actual definition.

[atreides1]

50. When did Jesus lock his pet in a burning house

It takes more then a belief, it also requires them to live and act as Christ did, as much as they are able.

1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.

[misanthrope]

55. When you use the second criteria...

...very, very few so-called "Christians" pass muster. It's just too darn inconvenient for them.

[mondo joe]

78. Do you require people to adhere perfectly with your second criteria?

[roguevalley]

140. this is evil behavior. evil, evil, evil. for me, if you don't LIVE your

Christian values, you aren't Christian. God help the animals. I would stay with mine if I couldn't take them. There is no question in my heart about that.

[LanternWaste]

92. Yet it's usually easier to perceive who actually accepts...

Yet it's usually easier to perceive who actually accepts Him through their actions and deeds than through a simple statement of affirmation.

[KittyWampus]

126. So when NeoCons say they are law abiding Americans upholding the Constitution-

we should accept their claims despite their ACTIONS to the contrary?

You see, there's a text called the NEW TESTAMENT about the ministry of one highly advanced yogi named Jesus who embodies the Christos.

His words and deeds and commands are spelt out in the that text.

If you follow his precepts, you are a Christian. Whether you call yourself such or not.

If you do NOT follow his precepts, your are NOT a Christian. Whether you call yourself such or not.

No one expects a Christian to be perfect or 'transgress'.

But Fundies make little attempt to abide by Chist's words and example.

In fact, they embrace quite a lot of beliefs that are anti-thetical to Christ's message.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

156. Christians are self identifying. Don't use the "No true Scotsman" fallacy.

Anybody who says they are not "true Christians" indulges in a logical fallacy called the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

So Hitler and all these other bad people who say they are Christians and go to church and speak to God, ARE Christians, whether you like it or not.

I can't spend my life differentiating between real Christians and fake Christians, so I assume they are self-identifying. If they are bullying, judgmental fundies they are still Christians, and they give the faith a bad name.

Besides, Jesus was NOT always a good guy. Sometimes he was a bad ass, as in "I come not in peace, but with a sword". How about that Jesus???? And he also said he'd come to split families apart, and he's done that with millions of families.

So your Jesus is NOT always a nice guy.

The Fundies go by the OT angry, psychopathic, mass murdering god, and not by the Sermon on the Mount.

They also hate a few Bible quotes I throw at them:

"As you did it unto the least of them, so also you did it unto Me."
"Judge not, lest ye be judged."
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

The canonical Bible was determined at the Council of Nicea and they threw out nearly all the good stuff. They wanted political power and they hated women, especially Paul.
The non-canonical Gospels are much better. Furthermore, there are no contemporary accounts that Jesus lived at all.

I learned all this in religion classes that were like philosophy, not force-feeding doctrine, at a Presbyterian university.

[emilyg]

149. Who said they were "Christian."? How do you know their beliefs?

[leftchick]

2. I agree

I saw a couple interviewed last night who said they left their cat behind and I about shit a brick. WTF is wrong with people. They certainly should never own an animal again. :grr:

[demnan]

3. At least they could set them free

that might give an animal the chance to use its own defenses and live. Nothing is more cruel than shutting up an animal in an abandoned house. The most emaciated animal I ever saw was a rescued cat who was in this situation. And the house hadn't been on fire!

(Cat is now happy and healthy and resides with my mother).

[saracat]

6. They should take them with them .No other action should be considered.

[Johonny]

26. Yes please set your cat free

Because southern California has no huge problem with feral cats.

IDK what to say really. If the prospect is that you are about to lose everything and look to be spending 3-4 months without a home I can understand the feeling that taking care of a pet is beyond you thinking. If your a responsible owner you don't set it free. Your options are to Euthanize it or to it to a costly shelter. Maybe you can’t come to euthanize your pet, and maybe you can’t afford to house it in a shelter. I think I'll pass on judging people under a set of bad options. Sometimes life just sucks.

[saracat]

41. "Beyond their thinking? " WTF? Are their "children" beyiond their thinking too?

Are kids "too costly". Is euthanizing them an option? I will indeed pass judgement on someone who places no value on the lives of the pets for whom they assumed responsibility.

[knitter4democracy]

64. Shelters allow children but not pets, usually.

It's a huge problem--if the shelter you're being evac'd to won't allow your pets and you can't afford anywhere else, what are you supposed to do?

[SoCalDem]

115. California IS a bit different from most states.. We DO make allowances for pets

People around here evac with horses, goats, birds and the more usual dogs & cats.. Strangers have rescued people's horses and spraypainted the locations on their sides so they could be returned later..

[Kajsa]

139. Our local hotels and motels

have waived the 'no pets' rule,
lowered rates and brought water to the evacuees.

They are filled to capacity right now.

[knitter4democracy]

145. That is wonderful!

I can't see that happening here in Michigan, sad to say.

[Kajsa]

181. You never know, Knitter.

The best in people comes out when disasters hit.

It's the closest we come, collectively, to being humanitarian.

:hi:

[nadinbrzezinski]

117. Pets were allowed at all shelters

so that is not a valid excuse.

We had the thought here since our birds are a little more problematic... but they would not stay behind either

[knitter4democracy]

144. Really? Here in Michigan, pets aren't allowed at all.

If you have pets, you go elsewhere and find another way.

[moez]

70. If a pet cat is equivalent to a child to you

You really have some screwed up values.... just sayin....

[saracat]

80. Wow. Because I value "life" equally, I have screwed up values?

Because I place value on the bond we create with the innocent?

[moez]

85. Holy cow! I said all that?!

Wow - I didn't remember typing that much.

I do, however, remember saying that equating a cat to a child is screwed up. And... yes, I still believe that.

[moez]

99. Just out of curiosity -

Do you think that people that left pet snakes, tarantulas, goldfish, geckos, and hamsters are "monsters" as well? Or, is your outrage reserved only for cute, cuddly critters?

[ThomCat]

100. Gees, those would be among the easiest pets to transport.

They stay in cages or tanks and don't require nearly as much space.

[moez]

101. In general, I agree -

(with the exception of a rather large snake) - but, I'm just trying to determine the scope her outrage. Are cute cats and dogs the only animals that are on a par with human children or are all animals? How about the cute critters that skitter around in the garage?

[ThomCat]

103. I have friends with pet rats

and I can tell you that they would make damned sure those rats were rescued. Any pet that you love become part of the family and should be rescued.

[moez]

106. Actually, I'm not disputing that at all-

I have a dog that I love very much and would have gone to extraordinary lengths to save in a similar situation.... But, it is a DOG that I love very much. It is not a child and it is not equivalent to a human. If I had to choose, I would save ANY human before ANY animal.

Saracat has continually equated pets to humans throughout this thread. I am trying to determine which animals are worthy of being equated to humans. Is it just the ones that are cute and fuzzy and come when you call them?

[ThomCat]

109. I think you are picking a fight.

I think it's a false choice, for the sake of being argumentative, to assume that anyone has to choose between a person and an animal.

What harm does it cause you if she considers her animals to be as important as people?

I consider my animals to be more important than some people, at least to me. I'd still do everything possible to rescue a person if I could.

[moez]

114. I'm not really trying to pick a fight

(any more than anyone else around here ever does). I just think that perspective here is very important.

Yes, it's tragic that some animals had to be let go in a horrific time for the people involved. I'm sure that, in the vast majority of cases, the decision was not made lightly. But, to imply that those who had to make that decision (at what was probably the most stressful point in their lives) could just as easily leave their children behind is just nuts.

These people have been through hell. They sure as heck don't need to be judged and ridiculed by a cat lady sitting in her cozy basement in the midwest!

[Chulanowa]

134. Find me a story about people locking their kid in the bathroom to burn alive...

And then we can talk about perspective. Until then, you're just being a jackass. "Cat lady"? For real?

[moez]

141. OK..... let's try this again.....

Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child. Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child. Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child.
Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child. Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child. Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child.
Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child. Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child. Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child.

Can you comprehend that?

No, I cannot find an instance of a person locking their child in a bathroom to burn alive.... BECAUSE IT'S A CHILD.

One more time....

Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child. Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child. Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child.
Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child. Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child. Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child.
Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child. Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child. Cat DOES NOT EQUAL child.

[saracat]

147. For the record, any animal counts the same. That is the scope of my outrage.

[moez]

161. So....

Absolutely never any reason to kill an animal then? Food? Clothing? Accidentally step on one?

[saracat]

164. Not a pet.No. Not one who is a family member.

[saracat]

148. And since you want to start a fight, I value my cats MORE than other peoples kids. And I would

save MY cats before I would a strangers kids. Yup. I am sure you will call me certifiable now. MY cat is MORE important to ME than some peoples children.

[moez]

153. Yep... you're right there....

I would consider your mindset to be very sad. Unfortunately, I think many people here (from what I've seen in this thread) share that opinion. I think it speaks very poorly on our society - yet explains a lot....

[saracat]

166. Excuse me? Are you saying that I should have more consideration for others than those I consider

my family? Make no mistake about it, my animals are equally as much my family as the human members. And have just as much worth.And you think I should be willing f to sacrifice them for others just because they are of my species but have no other connection? I am sad that you cannot see how bigoted and heartless that is.

[moez]

179. That is easily the most narcissistic attitude

that I have ever heard in my life.

I guess I'll have to learn to live with the fact that I am a cat-bigot. Maybe they have some kind of counseling that I can go to.....

[saracat]

185. "narcissistic"? Hmm. At least I am not so hung up on being "human"and think it makes me "worth "

so much more than my fellow creatures. I would try to save both a strange child and my cat but the cat would mean more to me. I have a relationship with my cat.

My point is that ALL creatures have value and I think it is egotistical to assume human life is worth more. Pets are special as we have made a pledge to protect them.We are the ones that domesticated them and took away their ability to protect themselves. We develop realtionships with them and cause them to love and trust us. We do not have the right to abuse that trust anymore than we have the right to abuse a child. But whatever. You are obviously bent on defending the indefensible.

You seem to argue that the lack of feeling and poor planning of this family is defensible because they are going through an emergency evacuation.I contend it is NOT. If they wouldn not leave a child behind , they should not leave a pet.They should be prosecuted.N/T.

[Jade Fox]

154. That's really creepy.

[moez]

160. I am SO glad to hear you say that!

This was beginning to feel like one of those surreal moments where I thought I was the only sane person on the planet.....

[Matariki]

187. Don't worry, you're not alone.

Just that you're willing to argue this here. Your posts make perfect sense, the topic of animals is a very emotional issue with some people around here so the arguments can get a bit irrational. Probably best to let it go, unless you like flame-fests.

[moez]

189. Thank you, Kineta.

I appreciate your advice and I think that I'll take it.

[saracat]

165. Whats really creepy is those who think their lives have so much more value than the pets they adopt.

That is creepy and egocentric.When you adopt a pet you pledge to safeguard their lives.It appears that some feel that is a promise not worthy of keeping.That is what is both creepy and sad.

[Chulanowa]

175. Okay, that statement is indefensible

Ah well. At least your initial point made sense.

[saracat]

186. Honestly, I would save both kid and cat! But I was trying to make a point.

I was just angry at the dismissal of the value of animal life by some. All life is valuable. And I was trying to convey the point that my animals are as special to me as children ought to be to their parents.

[slowry]

172. LOL. Type harder, buddeh. n/t

[Chulanowa]

174. Do you get itchy from hugging your strawman so tightly?

Saracat's post was about people who are doing exactly what I mentioned - locking their pets away burn to death, or throwing them to "make it on their own" in the face of an oncoming fire. This attitude is disgusting. She wanted to know if these people would do the same with their children. I find it a reasonable point, because any person who would willingly and knowingly throw a loved pet to die in a goddamned fire, probably can't be expected to hold their own children in high regard, either - such an act demonstrates a great disregard for life and an intense amount of selfishness.

It was not a statement of equivalence of pets and children that you are trying so hard to turn it into. It's a statement of the barbarity of the people in question.

I repeat. Find me a story of a person who locked their kid in a bathroom to wait for a fire, and then your fucking senseless screed will have a point. because then we will have an actual "cat vs child" situation for you to be indignant about.

[moez]

178. I can't decide if your inability to comprehend this is

funny or pathetic....

This sub-thread is based on saracat's response in item 41:

"Beyond their thinking? " WTF? Are their "children" beyiond their thinking too?
Are kids "too costly". Is euthanizing them an option? I will indeed pass judgement on someone who places no value on the lives of the pets for whom they assumed responsibility.

This is saracat equating the lives of animals (which we've later determined to include lizards, hamsters and snakes) to the lives of one's children.

These people have been through the most traumatizing experience of their lives. Their entire world's are being destroyed. For whatever reason, they believed that they could not take the pet with them and escape. They had to make quick decisions that I hope neither you nor saracat ever have to make.

What's "barbaric" is the great internet moralists of the world that can sit back in their comfy houses and condemn these people for their choices after the fact.

Your insistance about "finding a story about someone locking a kid in a bathroom" doesn't even make sense. Really. Obviously nobody would do that. That's the point - a cat's life does not equal a child's (once again).

[LanternWaste]

195. Well, I think it's the internet critics as well as the internet moralists...

"What's "barbaric" is the great internet moralists of the world that can sit back in their comfy houses and condemn these people for their choices after the fact."

Well, I think it's the internet critics as well as the internet moralists. Every person has an opinion and every person is right (except me, of course-- I'm wrong more often than not...)-- at least, that's what every person seems to imply...

[Chulanowa]

198. You're serious, huh?

You're going to tell me that saying "locking your pet in the house that you know is going to be incinerated is barbaric" is... actually more barbaric than actually doing that?

Seriously?

I have been in this position. I've dealt with hurricanes and tornadoes, even a flood. I don't think I can recall ever leaving a pet to deal with the situation on its own. I tend to think that if you have the forethought to videotape your pets so you can remember them after you make them die in a fire, you could have the forethought to cram them in your car with you when you haul ass out of there. Somehow, I always managed this feat that you appear to believe to be impossible.

The point that you are missing, and quite willfully, is that people are responsible for the lives of their pets. If you have an animal, it is your obligation to keep it alive, or at the very least, not kill it. These people are actively causing their pet's deaths, and you're defending them, because you dislike someone noting the fact that pets are akin to children, in regards to this responsibility owed to them.

You better hurry up and decide whether I'm funny or pathetic. I've already come to a secure decision that you're an ignorant twat, so it's only fair.

[Suziq]

182. I VALUE My Pets . . . .

a hell of a lot more than I value you. How cruel and insensitive can you be? :grr:

[moez]

183. Please explain to me what is "cruel and insensitive"?

I'm not condoning the killing of animals. I'm trying to be understanding of people that, in the most horrific situation in their lives, had to make a difficult choice - one, that I hope neither you nor I would ever have to make. And, one that I would not dare to judge sitting in my nice, cool home in the midwest.

This woman goes on to morally judge the people who made these choices in the same light that one would judge someone that drowns their children. That, is both sick and crazy. She goes on to say that she values the lives of her pet cats more than the lives of human children. Again, that is sick and crazy.

So - you value the lives of your pets more than you do me (and presumably any other person with whom you disagree). I think that speaks to how utterly sick and lost our society has become - when the lives of cats, dogs and turtles are held in higher regard than fellow humans. It could be the reason hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are slaughtered without thought - they're not our people, let 'em die.

Personally, I despise disgusting, narcissistic morons - but, I'd still place your lives before that of my dog that I love dearly.

[slowry]

184. That is honestly the dumbest thing I've read on DU

or on any website, IRC channel, instant messenger, Gopher server message of the day, BBS, MMO, email message, usenet posting, source code comment, or internet-based radio station banner.

That, sir, is the dumbest thing I've ever read on the Internet.

[Matariki]

188. You think the dumbest thing you've EVER read is an argument valuing humans over animals?

I have to wonder what's wrong with *you*.

Valuing your pet over a human being in a life or death situation is borderline sociopathic.

I have to say that I too would rescue any one of your children, who I don't know to care about, before saving one of my own beloved cats.

[moez]

190. Now now, Kineta -

You just saved me from my own trip to Bizzaro-Land and here you are venturing into it yourself!

Have fun - just try not to stay in too long or you'll be called a "cat bigot"!

Moez

[Matariki]

191. ;-)

i'm done

[slowry]

194. Ticking time-bomb scenarios...

Not worth arguing about. This wasn't one, and they're fairly rare, I have to assume. Why are these helpless kids left home alone, anyway? Such terrible parents they must have! Besides, I think I could catch my cat, before I'd even know there are incapacitated children in my neglectful neighbors. So, in that sense the cat comes before me, and thus before any hypothetical / potential, incapacitated, neglected, kids.

So yeah, sorry childrens. Put down the wii controllers and Coke, and run for your lives :scared:.

[moez]

192. Thank you, Slowry....

I've never been "number 1" at anything before in my life!

[bobbolink]

197. What is your level of outrage about homelessness?

Just sayin'..............

[SammyWinstonJack]

107. In your opinion, right?

:eyes:

[moez]

108. Uhhh..... yeah.....

Good catch on that one, Skippy! Not much gets by you, huh?

[Fed_Up_Grammy]

79. Thanks for your rational response.

I don't know what I'd do under these awful circumstances and I adore animals.

[havocmom]

31. A quick death would have been kinder than letting a domesticated pet face fire alone

Heartless monsters to abandon their pet. Cowards on top of it if they would not assure a fast, painless death rather than abandoning a terrified animal with a good chance of a horrible, painful death.

One would like karma to send mountain lions or something to teach some lessons to such heartless cowards.

[ThomCat]

5. Damn!

I'm a broken down old cripple (tm) and I'd go to the ends of my strength and endurance to get my cats out safely. I'd strap the cat carrier to my back and crawl out if I had to. x(

I can't imagine leaving animals to die like that. I just don't understand. :(

[saracat]

11. My cats are my "children" We feel just as much an obligation to them as if

they were our kids. People who do not care for their pets in that manner ought not to be allowed to adopt them.And it is really a shame they are parents.They cannot be good ones with that example .

[ThomCat]

Absolutely! I've given them my love and protection, and they

depend on me to take care of them. I'm not going to break that promise and betray them to a horrible death.

[SammyWinstonJack]

111. My dogs would be out the door ahead of me and they would remain with me, period.

I could never leave them behind and certainly not in a situation such as this.

[VenusRising]

16. That's because you're a wonderful, caring, sensitive human being.

Some people only see pets as an accessory or status symbol. People who really love their pets would do exactly what you would do.

I hope none of those people ever get another pet. x(

[ThomCat]

23. Sadly, you're right. Pets are largely status symbols to many people.

Or accessories to help keep the kids happy and occupied. Just another toy that happens to be a bit higher maintenance. :(

I wish more people truly valued the lives that are in their care.


(Thank you for the complement.) :hug:

[VenusRising]

57. I meant every word.

:hug:

[Occulus]

28. Actually, I think it has more to do with the christian belief

that animals have no souls. They don't need to feel any sense of guilt on their conscience, because they didn't condemn anything as important as a human to death, and whether the animal lives or dies is the will of gawwwwd.

Believe it or not, I have heard this often. Sick, sick, sick. :puke:

[VenusRising]

42. Whatever.

:eyes:

They really will talk themselves in knots to justify whatever is easiest for them, won't they? It's selfish to the nth degree and they have no one around to slap them on the nose with a paper and tell them, "NO!! Bad Christian!!".

Thanks for the insight on that. :hi:

[ThomCat]

61. One of the many aspects of dogmatic theology

that really makes me question how people can accept the things they accept. :(

Have these people never had pets that they loved and cherished?

If they're going to assume the existance of a soul, how can they assume that their pets don't have one too?

[knitter4democracy]

65. Not all Christians go along with that belief, btw.

I know we don't. I just can't believe that my pets don't have souls.

[LanternWaste]

96. I don;t thing it's not a universally accepted belief

I don't thing it's not a universally accepted belief w/in the Christian churches. Might I suggest C.S. Lewis' "The Four Loves" for a very intriguing treatise on the relationships between man, animals and God. A position my church (Presbyterian) has accepted as a de-facto tenet.

[uppityperson]

7. There could be many reasons.

No room, no time, faith in God, faith in their pets ability to survive, disbelief that their house could actually burn, lack of caring.

Lots of reasons. How about they were told to by the authorities. That one just came out.

[LeftyMom]

24. Why would Faith in God lead to the conclusion that cats are immune to fire, heat and smoke?

:wtf:

Next time those good christians should give the animals to an evacuating neighbor and then stay behind and pray.

[ThomCat]

27. "There are many reasons, but no excuses."

I don't know the origins of that quote, but it's served me well over the years.

[Kermitt Gribble]

46. That's a great quote!

and it applies here perfectly.

[uppityperson]

59. That is a good quote

[misanthrope]

34. You forgot...

...lack of fitness to be using resources such as food, air and water to allow their sorry homo sapiens asses to live.

[WilliamPitt]

9. At least they tried to do something ceremonial

Most folks, fearing for their children or spouses, would just bolt the house and not look back.

Just sayin'.

[malaise]

10. I saw one Hispanic caretaker on CNN this morning

his employers left him to watch the property. He got lucky - their house wasn't burnt down. The CNN people were more than a little upset about this one.

Human beings often make me ill. I hope someone takes their photos and locks them in the bathroom next time.

[Elspeth]

25. Where was this caretaker left?

What part of the city or which fire?

[malaise]

47. At a home in one of the fire areas n/t

[Elspeth]

49. Which fire area?

?

[ThomCat]

33. I hope that employer gets hauled up on charges for that.

x(

[Xithras]

123. Extremely unlikely

Legally, you're only responsible for evacuating yourself and any children unable to evacuate themselves. I'm assuming this caretaker is an adult, so his employers had no legal responsibilities towards him. In the eyes of the law, he should have evacuated himself.

Morally and ethically they are scummy and deserve to have their asses kicked, but unless they actually locked him in a room, I don't see how any charges could be filed.

[SyntaxError]

136. If he/she was fired for leaving, wouldn't the caretaker have some sort of legal recourse?

[Manifestor_of_Light]

157. It's called respondeat superior.

The legal term for the responsibility of the employer for the conduct of the employee.

If the caretaker had died, his family could have sued the employer for wrongful death and negligence, and possibly gotten them charged criminally with negligent homicide.

[Xithras]

199. He didn't die, which is why it can't really be used against them.

I could see a wrongful death suit if they had ordered him to stay behind and he'd died, but that isn't what happened. He didn't die. Even if he had, it would have been impossible to prove that they'd issued that order unless they actually admitted to it.

Without proof that he was acting under their orders, respondeat superior wouldn't apply. If he was dead, there would be no proof. Since he didn't die, there are no damages.

Sometimes crappy behavior isn't actually illegal. That seems to be the case here.

[TechBear_Seattle]

12. You can't necessarily blame these people

I agree that the apparently cavalier attitude is cold hearted, but if they were heading to a shelter, they were probably told very explicitly that pets would NOT be allowed. By now, most kennels, pet shelters and refuges are at or past capacity (assuming they have not already been evacuated) and can not help. For a lot of people, there are no options but to leave pets behind and hope for the best.

[saracat]

36. I am sorry that is NOT acceptable.If they would not leave their children behind to a horrible death

they should not leave pets.Pets are not disposable. Do they have an option to leave their children behind if the shelter is full or hotels are price gouging? Sheesh.They need to be prosecuted.

[TechBear_Seattle]

56. I sympathize with the emotion, but that does not change the reality

Wow, it feels very odd that I would use that statement against someone else, seeing how often it has been used against me. But I digress....

The reality is that space, food and water are all limited, and providing resources for a cat or dog, no matter how beloved, means fewer resources for everyone else. When you begin to factor in the family with three Bouviers or the elderly woman who has five cats for company, it becomes a problem.

Add in the very real concern that while your animal companion might be well behaved in a crowd of unknown people in a stressful situation, someone else's might not be. Would you want to be sleeping in a YMCA shelter with an unspayed male cat that is spraying everything? An elderly dog with continence problems? A puppy that has not yet been housebroken and still chews on everything that smells interesting?

It is sad, yes, but there is not much that can be done. If you have friends who can take in your pets at a time like this, great. If you don't, there are few options.

[misanthrope]

62. Then they shouldn't have them to begin with...

...Same as kids.

Of course, it seems the more irresponsible humans are, the more they tend to procreate.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

158. What's a Bouvier?

You mean members of Jackie Kennedy's family? Or Marge Simpson's familly (her maiden name is Bouvier, which is an inside joke).??

[Mojorabbit]

169. If they evacuated by car

There was a means to take their pets. If it was a single cat in a carrier they could have carried it.
I have lots of pets including birds, dogs, cats, and rabbits. They all have carriers ready to go if the need arises. I had them all in carriers during the storms the year we had three hurricanes in six weeks ready to go if need be and we would have lived near the car with them where ever we ended up so they could be with us.

If they had a TV and knew fires were anywhere nearby they should have started preparing for possible evacuation. I cannot comphrehend why someone would do this. My aunt told me a story about people in NC who left their german shepard tied up while they evacuated knowing it was going to flood. She was pissed off. It makes no sense.

[never_get_over_it]

173. Thank you

I arrived in Florida on a Sunday, my furniture arrived two days later on Tuesday and on Thursday I evacuated for Frances - I took two dogs and two cats with me and if I had to have lived in my car to do so I would have - I WOULD NEVER HAVE LEFT THEM BEHIND PERIOD...

I do not understand how people could lock a cat in the bathroom to let it burn to death when they could have just put the cat in the damn car and taken it with them....and taking videos of your pets because there is a good likelihood they will burn to death - but have the video to remember them by - that is plain fucking SICK and so beyond my comprehension....if they had time to take the video they had time to get the pets out.

now in the case of a fire that moves fast - and say horses - I can understand the difficulty in that - but an animal that can easily be placed in the evacuating car - makes NO SENSE

[High Plains]

112. They need to be prosecuted? Take a deep breath and get a grip.

These were people faced with awful choices. How easy it must be to be an internet moralist.

[Bluebear]

142. "Internet moralist" or animal lover?

[MedleyMisty]

43. I can very well blame them.

Find another fucking option than leaving a living being to fucking die, and in a way that is very scary and painful and bad.

[TechBear_Seattle]

63. Please, share those options

I am certain that the SPCA, the Humane Society and other such groups are anxious to hear from you. I know that there are volunteers who can shelter pets for others during times of crisis, my sister took in rabbits during a similar fire a few years ago (she was a member of a rabbit club in San Diego.) Unfortunately, she is one of the evacuees this time and can not help.

[Phillycat]

193. Well, all the shelters in Cali took animals.

So your argument is specious.

[Lurking Dem]

196. Not that I agree

with leaving one's pets to die, but there were lots of problems with finding places for pets.

The shelters ran out of space. VCA stepped in but they had limited space at their various hospitals.

People who had nowhere to go (as in someone's private residence) were limited in what they could bring into a public shelter and most of those were "no pet".

People with sick animals, especially those needing medications, couldn't leave them anywhere because no one had enough staff/volunteers to watch and/or medicate various animals.

There were lots of call outs on blogs of people who had large dogs looking for someone, anyone, who could shelter their animal.

It wasn't just a matter of getting out of the way of the flames, either. Horses needed electrolytes and stress meds, some birds needed to get where there was clear air, etc.

One woman I know was prepared to stay in her car, with her elderly mother, rather than leave her chronically ill cat at her house. All the hotels that took pets were full but then the other hotels relented and started taking pets.

But folks here have stated it would have been cruel to stay in the car with the cat? Seriously, what was she supposed to do?

So while folks locking their cat in the bathroom is beyond what I would consider reasonable (or, even, human) it was not so easy for many, many people to get their pet someplace safe. Proving, once again, that nothing beats planning ahead.

[Individualist]

132. Yes I can and do!

There's no way I'd abandon my cat in a dangerous situation.

[Kermitt Gribble]

13. You're exactly right!

These people are monsters, and they should be prosecuted. People need to stop looking at animals as objects and realize they are living things just like human beings. When people take a pet into their home, they are responsible for the well being and the life of that pet. I can't possibly imagine what is mentally wrong with these people who abandon their pets to die.
When I see pictures of rescuers rescuing these abandoned animals, my heart goes out to every one of them - they are very special people.

[LeftyMom]

14. Some people make me wish I believed in hell. nt

[stirlingsliver]

15. Probably Payback

This "Christian" family with a cat probably remembered that early Christians were eaten by lions in Rome.

They probably figured it was payback time.

;-)

[Sequoia]

32. Now, that's a rare opinion !!!!

[Ian David]

51. That makes sense. They keep statues of Christ being tortured to death on a cross...

why not keep reminders around the house of the animals that used to eat Christians?

BTW...

It was actually rare for Christians to be fed to lions. It was usually Mastiff dogs, not lions.

[tuckessee]

17. Because God gave them "domain" over animals.

To them, they are just "things" to be used & abused at the whim of "God's Children".

[Ian David]

29. We know where that leads...

[Kermitt Gribble]

73. They do believe this.

I used to argue with a rabid right winger on a musician's board about this. And its not just animals, they feel god gave them domain over the entire Earth. That's why they have no remorse for pillaging every natural resource they can get their hands on thereby destroying the planet. Taht's why God "gave" them the Earth. Sick, sick people!

[achtung_circus]

133. I deal with this "dominion" crap regularly.

Depending on the client and my mood I either explain that the law is what I'll talk about rather than Biblical interpretation, or I will quote the following:

Proverbs 12:10

King James Bible
A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.

[Sequoia]

19. It was only a matter of time to have to read that sort of thing.

Monster's indeed, how the hell could they even think of it. I'm not sure you can save a huge tank of fish, but other pets...!! Creeps. Throw the book at them.

[EFerrari]

20. That's horrible. How hard would it be to grab your cat.

Those people should be prosecuted. God, sometimes I hate people.

[Ian David]

39. Sometimes cats are good at hiding.

They seem to sense when something is wrong, or when they're supposed to go to the vet, and then take it as their cue to disappear.

I used to live in a large house, and sometimes we wouldn't see the cat for a two or three days at a time.

[EFerrari]

53. That's true. I can never find the cat that's supposed to go

to the vet's.

[JI7]

155. except in the OP it says the people videotaped the pets

so they knew where the pets where.

[Ian David]

21. Standard Operating Procedure for zoos is to let the animals loose as a last resort.

Locking pets inside a yard or a house or a room is practically a death sentence.

Letting pets loose with a collar and tags on, they at least have a chance.

[begin_within]

22. What was horrible was in the Cedar Fire 4 years ago,

a guy with more than 100 exotic birds left them behind in their cages, rather than opening the cages to let them go. He did this on the chance that the fire might miss his property, but it did burn and all the birds died. Someone on this site chastised me for mentioning this recently, claiming that the birds could not have survived on their own, but who's to say that the birds wouldn't come right back to the place, once the fire had passed the next day?

[hedgehog]

37. I could maybe understand his actions.

If he'd let the birds loose, they may well have gone feral and thrived, thereby introducing an exotic species into the ecology.


Locking pets into a house after taking their pictures? That's just weird. Can you imagine watching the video? "Here's Fluffy, just before we left her behind to be burned to death."

[begin_within]

52. He should have opened the cages and let the birds decide what to do fer chrissake.

I can't believe people here are advocating letting exotic birds burn in cages!

[Ian David]

54. I felt the same way about my tank full of Chinese Snake Head Fish. n/t

[begin_within]

66. crossing IanDB1 off my list of potential pet-sitters

[Ian David]

75. Seriously, though...

Depending on the situation and time available:

Plan A: Evacuate people and pets together.

Plan B: Get pets to professional or emergency animal shelter and evacuate people.

Plan C: Follow instructions of state and local authorities (for example, marking building for firefighters to pick-up pets)

Plan D: Force-feed pets with as many calories and as much water as possible, make sure collars and tags are attached, and let them loose. Attach GPS-enabled cell-phone to pet if possible.

Plan E: Shelter in place and eat pets when all available food (including the flesh of the Republican neighbors) runs out.


What I would NOT do is lock pets in my home UNLESS I was VERY SURE that firemen were going door-to-door collecting pets from houses.

I would need to actually see them on TV doing this.

[begin_within]

88. I still think he was wrong. What kind of "bird lover" would not plan for evacuation of his birds?

[Ian David]

90. You're right. He should have had a plan.

But not knowing the details, it's possible he HAD a plan and it fell through.

Maybe his plan was for his friend ten blocks away to take the birds, but his friend evacuated first?

Rather than pointing the finger at that particular bird guy and saying "shame," how about instead saying, "See why bird guys need a good plan?"

[hedgehog]

58. I think it was a case of damned if you do, damned if you don't

Introducing exotics into a fragile environment hurts a lot more animals in the long run; ask any Floridian. Maybe he shouldn't have had all the birds in the first place if he couldn't protect them from the predictable hazard of wild fire.

[begin_within]

67. And what if it was the last remaining specimen of a particular species?

[Ian David]

77. The last remaining individual of a species may as well be dead unless it's pregnant.

Or unless it's capable of asexually reproducing.

If you had the very last remaining specimen of a species, you'd be better off killing it on the spot and taking its body with you so you can hopefully bank its DNA later.

Now, if you had the last male-female PAIR of a species...

[Ian David]

82. There are probably state and/or federal laws against releasing non-native species.

It's possible he could have ended up in jail once flocks of parrots with legbands registered to him were caught stripping entire fields of millet and chile peppers.

[AlGore-08.com]

30. The authorities here were all over TV telling people to leave their animals inside houses & barns

if they could not take them to safety. They said repeatedly that animals running around loose would be a problem for firefighters, but the firefighters would release the animals if necessary.

It was late Tuesday or early Wednesday they started talking about how animal control was bringing cages and animal food to the shelters to house people's dogs, cats, rabbits and reptiles - - and where the collection point was for large animals like horses. I'm still not sure if they these were available in all areas or just the ones profiled.

[Ian David]

38. If that's what emergency officials were saying and promising, then that's different.

Did they ask people with pets left inside to mark their homes so firemen could find them?

[AlGore-08.com]

68. I don't think so, no. The winds were blowing at 80 mph until late Tuesday so the emphasis

Spotting new fires as soon as they sprang up, figuring out where the fires were spreading and getting authorities physically to those areas and telling people about the mandatory evacuation orders. The loss of life could have been much, much worse.

[BlackVelvet04]

94. I heard on CNN officials telling people they SHOULD NOT

let their animals loose and they could not take them to most shelters.

I love animals dearly.....we spend a lot of money putting out feed for the wild critters who habitat our property. I've had dogs who were like children to me, BUT if I had to choose between saving a human being or a dog I'm going to save the human being.

[incapsulated]

138. I don't follow stupid orders

How my cat would interrupt firefighters I would like to know.

They also told people in the twin towers to sit down and don't leave your desks.

The ones who complied, died.

I'm not locking my pets in a house with a fireball coming down on it, and I don't give a shit what anyone tells me.

[ellie]

171. Thank you.

I agree. I am not going anywhere without my cats and my dog.

[MedleyMisty]

35. I will be hiding this thread after this post

Because this is the one thing that gets to me and turns me into a pitchfork and torch mob member looking for vigilante justice.

A few years ago, our apartment flooded. It'd been raining a lot all summer and I looked outside and said, "Boy, it's really coming down." Then we heard a loudspeaker and my husband went out to see what was up and came back in and said, "We have five minutes to get out."

The first thing we did was put our cats in their carriers. And then we were loading my car and a woman in the parking lot said that both of the ways out of the parking lot were impassable and I screamed "But we have cats!". We ended up driving my car up on a hill and walking up the hill to a street behind the apartment complex, cat carriers in hand.

There is no fucking excuse for leaving behind a being whose life you are responsible for. None. There was room in their cars. There were people willing to take in and shelter pets.

And oh my fucking god locking the poor baby cat in the damn bathroom??!!!!

Sometimes I seriously hope that there is a hell, and that it is some serious eternal torment.

[SammyWinstonJack]

118. ...

:thumbsup: I'd sleep in my car with my dogs if I had too. No way I would leave them behind to die.

[GoneOffShore]

146. You are one of the people who I will NOT be putting on ignore

after reading this thread.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

40. If nothing else, they could keep their pet in their car

and let it out occasionally.

I recall reading that some of the people who went to Qualcomm Stadium remained in their cars in the parking lot so that they could keep their pets with them.

[ThomCat]

48. Those are good people.

I hope for the best for them and their pets.

[Midlodemocrat]

71. That's what I would have done. I wouldn't have left them behind.

[Xithras]

124. Nope, the animals would have been just as dead.

This is southern California we're talking about, and the temps have been in the mid to upper 80's all week. The inside of any car would have hit the mid-90's even with the windows down, and would have soared to 120+ with the windows up.

Unless they were planning on staying in the car with the A/C running, locking the animals in their cars really isn't an option. Heck, it's actually a FELONY to do so in this state (under Ca law, it's felony animal neglect to leave an animal unattended inside a vehicle).

[Lydia Leftcoast]

143. But in the case of the people who stayed in the parking lot of the QualComm Stadium

my understanding is that people were camping there, in which case the animals would have been okay. A tent on a hot day is no fun, but say, tying the pet to a fender where it can scoot under the vehicle to escape the sun would be an option. I'm not talking about lockig the pet up in the car and just leaving it.

[eyesroll]

44. I take it this wasn't a "you have three minutes to get on this bus and into a shelter" situation?

I have a cat and two birds.
I also have a partner and stepchild.

Now, I'm also fortunate to have a car and a credit card and places to stay, and to live in the midwest where the chances of an emergency disaster-related evacuation are almost nil. (Generally, it's tornadoes here, and you just go to the basement and worry about evacuating after the fact.)

But if, say, I got an emergency evacuation order (hazmat spill? terrorist threat? I don't know), and getting my partner and my child (and yes, myself) to safety meant leaving my pets behind, I'd do so.

But, yes...if the evacuees had a car (and time enough to videotape their house and pets?), they generally had means and enough time to get somewhere with their pets. In that case, yeah. Yuck.

[renie408]

45. Me either. I can't even talk about it. It makes me sick. n/t

[kestrel91316]

60. They had time to video the house but no time to box up the cat.

I have no words.

I better stop now before I find something to say and it gets me tombstoned.

[Ian David]

83. That's a good point. If they had time to make a farewell video...

they probably had time to actually save the damn cat.

[murray hill farm]

69. I am going to recommend this..and I hope others will too.

As uncomfortable as it is to read, it is important to call attention to at this time..and then just maybe if enough people keep talking about it, it will get some needed media attention. It will not help for these fires, etc. But this whole idea of abandoning pets during natural disasters needs to be something that is addressed.

[DemBones DemBones]

72. People were TOLD to leave their pets at home, that

the shelters wouldn't take them with pets.

[Lorien]

76. Were those people going to a shelter?

If they could afford a camcorder then they could probably afford a night in a La Quinta inn in another town, where they allow an unlimited number of pets. I was a hurricane evacuee three years ago and I easily found cheap hotels that excepted my three cats.

[saracat]

84. I assume it was a question of "convienence.".This is unspeakable.

[Ian David]

89. Unlike during Katrina, people from the L.A. Area could go ANYWHERE.

There are no armed police/thugs threatening to shoot them for crossing a bridge into wealthy neighborhoods.

There are highways and airports open throughout the state, from which they can get to anywhwere in the country.

The options open to fire evacuees are not limited by the nature of the disaster to their immediate neighborhood-- unlike during Katrina.

A fire evacuee can theoretically get in their car and start driving East, and somewhere between Los Angeles and Bangor, Maine is going to be a hotel that takes pets and has a vacancy.

Of course, there are many reasons (especially financial) why someone might not be able to do this.

And just because someone can afford a camcorder does not mean they are wealthy.

For all we know, it's an old Betamax recorder they found in grandpa's attic.

[Lorien]

97. Let's assume that it's not an old Betamax

sadly this behavior doesn't surprise me coming from self proclaimed "Christians".I knew a family of these same sort of "Christians" years ago who were very wealthy and still treated their pets very badly. They had two dogs (labs) that they would keep in crates during most of the day because they didn't want them "messing up the lawn" (an acre of chemlawn on their half million dollar property). When the husband was offered a job out of state they euthanized both dogs because they didn't want to put themselves through the trouble of moving them. They had two children, too, who asked why the dogs had to die. The parents said that animals don't have souls so they shouldn't be so upset about losing them. They "made it up" to the kids after the move by buying them a puppy! :eyes: I found out about all of this after it had occurred, otherwise I would have taken the dogs myself. Obviously the incident ended my friendship with them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

119. If you could find a hotel in this town

[Lorien]

129. I live in Orlando. I found a hotel in Atlanta

when you evacuate you tend not to stay in your own town.

[saracat]

86. TS. Other people stayed in their cars with their pets. Where there is a will there is a way!

These rat bastards didn't care. Period.

[Ian David]

91. Idling their cars in the parking lots and putting more carbon in the air? n/t

[Lurking Dem]

95. Uh no.

They were parked with the engines shut off.

Nobody has been able to run their air conditioners because of a) the electricity shortages and b) the amount of ash clogging up filters.

And windows had to be shut in the 98 degree heat because the smoke was making the air unbreathable. So sitting in a parked car was better than being in a hot house in the path of a fire.

[DemBones DemBones]

102. Keeping a pet in a car with the windows closed

in 98º weather isn't a good idea. It's not healthy for people, either, especially children, the elderly, or anyone who's sick.

[saracat]

150. You weouild crack the widows and take them out at times. Its healthier than

being roasted alive in a bathroom!

[knitter4democracy]

74. That's why we all need to plan for the pets, too.

Food that's easy to grab, enough water for them, too, carriers, and vet records in addition to the human stuff.

I need to update my storm box.

[Lorien]

87. It's dead simple to have an emergency plan for the pets

My home was hit by three hurricanes in 2004. I have three cats and there is NO WAY that I would shrug my responsibilities for them during a natural disaster. I keep three cat carriers in my attic near the opening. The cat's health records are kept in a compartment on top of each carrier. I also keep a box near the carriers that contains cat food dishes, disposable litter pans, and towels. In an emergency I can get all three out in a matter of minutes. I also know which hotel chains within a days drive allow pets. Just Google "pet friendly hotels" and make a list to keep in the pet's carrier or in your emergency kit.

[Ian David]

93. I keep their records in my glove compartment. But on top of the pet carriers is a better idea. n/t

[Baby Snooks]

81. "We'll get another one later when the insurance check comes in..."

It really has nothing to do with religious or political beliefs but rather the "designer" mentality of Americans. Most pets are merely part of the decor. And the most easily replaced. We musn't leave the things that matter behind when fleeing a fire and a cat or a dog would take up space in the car or van. So they are left behind.

People who abandon pets shouldn't have pets to begin with. In a perfect, world, they wouldn't. But, alas, this is not a perfect world.

[Name removed]

98. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[theboss]

104. Where the hell did you see this?

Artcle? TV? In person?

[waiting for hope]

105. I heard on NPR yesterday

that there were several shelters that accepted pets, and the woman they were interviewing said at the place she was at, they still had plenty of room. Sounds to me that they are lazy and didn't want to fool with bringing their pets.

[pingzing58]

110. But Jesus said "I do not know you." Mt 25:12

[SoCalDem]

113. One can only hope that they will always remember that they participated

in the death of their "pets".. And maybe late at night when they are thinking of all they have lost, they may question whether that carload of "stuff" they took instead is more comforting than the unconditional love they got from those helpless creatures they killed..

If someone was at work when the evac orders came and they could not get back to their pets, that's one thing, but to literally walk away from them and to leave them to die a horrible death..that's colder than cold..

We have more cats than we really should (longtime DUers know why), but we also have a plan for getting them out if we had to..and somehow we would find a way to first get away..and then when all are safely away, we would figure out what to do next ..

The cynic in me wonders how long it will be before those people are settled again, and off to get more "pets"..because they just love animals, y'know:grr:

[LynneSin]

116. This story reminds us all that petowners should plan for what to do in emergency

Knowing that many rescue shelters will not take pets in during emergency, now is the best time to start planning for what you'll do in case of an emergency if you must evacuate with your family and pets.

There are hotels, motels and shelters that will take pets - so plan now in order to prevent pets being abandoned because there are no other options.

[midnight]

120. I suppose these people will be voting for Romney. N/T.

[emilyg]

121. How do you know they were "Christian.?

[spoony]

167. Because they fit the negative stereotypes here

Ergo, they must be Christians. Fundies at that. And Republicans. And they probably eat at the Olive Garden.

[emilyg]

170. That's what I thought. Thanks.

[saracat]

168. They said they were.I said I didn't accept their "definition" but that is what they claimed.

I am not against Christians.I was raised as a Catholic(some say Catholics aren't Christian either!) but the hypocrisy of these folks galled me.

[BrklynLib at work]

122. Could not agree more. That is just about the most "unchristian" thing I have heard of in a long time

Nice example for the kids as well....<puke>

[NekoChris]

125. I agree with you

I have four cats. I would never, ever, leave a single one of them alone in a situation where I was completely capable of vacating them. I have a carrier for each, and the means to transport them. My shoulders. There is no excuse for abandoning an animal to die and running off. To me it's sickening.

They should be prosecuted. If they had the time to lock the cat in the bathroom then flee they had time to secure the cat in a carrier and leave with it.

[quiet.american]

127. They had time to make a video of the house *and* the pets, but no time to grab them and run?

Horrific. There's just no other word for it.

[Rosie1223]

128. Why did they have to *lock* the bathroom door?

Could the cat work the unlocked knob?

[Gemini Cat]

130. Sick.

Locking an animal in a room and then fleeing like a coward after they take time to video them. Figures.

These assholes forget that animals feel pain and know fear just like any other being.

[ladjf]

131. If they had an automobile, the pets could have gone with them.

If they walked out, they could have led the pets on leashes. What were those people thinking?

[SyntaxError]

135. Not to be an asshat here, but...

if they were a muslim family or some other non-christian family, would you have pointed out their religion with the same sort of contempt?

Eihter way, these people are obvious morons without a clue. If there was no way for them to take their animals with them then they should have let the thing free so that it could at least have a chance. Although, I know if I was in the same situation then I would have took my dog with me and would have slept outside with him if I had to.

[saracat]

151. If they practice a religion that espouses "love" for all creatures as a part of its creed, yes.

I mentioned their "religion" because I feel they are hypocrites and they were the ones that mentioned it in the interview.Otherwise I would not have known.They made it an issue.

[Heywood J]

159. Yeah.

Pretty much, yeah. Anybody who uses their religion as a shield for actions like that deserves it.

[axollot]

137. some facilities.....

Wouldn't allow animals. So you end up with a choice, you and your kids or your dog, kids and yourself winging it at home.


I feel if you could take your pet - you BETTER - but I also can see why somepeople just couldn't.

cheers
Sandy

[JI7]

152. i don't know, makes no sense to me

i remember during earthquakes we would always make sure the dog was safe and keep him close to us.

[lonestarnot]

162. Family fucking values.

[bobbolink]

163. Why do so many leave poor people behind to die?

Yet, they aren't prosecuted, either.

[tabasco]

176. Same reason they let their kids ride motor bikes / quads without a helmet.

If they get killed, it will be because God wanted them to come home.

[ironflange]

177. Sheesh, I thought kitty threads were supposed to be fun

So much for that notion. I'll slink back to the Lounge now.

[and-justice-for-all]

180. I agree...

I do not have any tolerance for Pet neglect.. It makes me sick to think about it, I would let all my shit burn and save my Kitties.