Quote# 131444


Recently animal liberation activists released 40,000 mink from a fur fam from Minnesota earlier this week. Thousands have died and thousands are yet to be 'recovered', but it caused $750,000 in damages to the man's fur farm.

There's a 100% the mink were going to be killed on the fur farm and skinned for their fur. I'm honestly glad this happened. Even though the mink died (they would have been killed anyway), I think it's better that they died a natural death or a fighting chance then no chance at all confined in their cages.

The damages done to the fur farm are huge, and personally I hope the farmer does not recover from the damages done. What's bothering me is the farmers sympathizers pretending to care about the mink. Do they not realize the mink were doomed from the beginning?

I have also heard rumors that the farmer did it himself to claim the insurance money. He says he is a 3rd generation mink farmer; and for someone who's a mink farmer, i'm sure he's aware of how controversial his career is. You think he would have a security setup, but he did not.

I think the animal liberators did understand that the mink were doomed, regardless of their environment and were willing to risk it to cause serious damages to the farmer. What are you thoughts?

muttstuff, r/vegan 21 Comments [9/10/2017 7:45:23 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Katie

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 | bottom

Kanna

I think you are an apologist for a violent factor in the save-the-animals camp. I'd support them if they went out and picketed furriers, but vandalism is for vandals, who are far beyond reason.

9/10/2017 8:58:33 AM

Shepard Solus

I think that farmer should start a Kickstarter to pay for the damage to his property & business and I hope it brings in four times what those felons cost him. And if they're caught, I think they should have to pay in full for the damage they did plus 10%. Individually.

9/10/2017 9:35:16 AM

Citizen Justin

Fur farms are scumbag industries but loose 40,000 mink into the countryside and the ecology's going to be devastated.

9/10/2017 9:39:57 AM

Gabriel LaVedier

So the minks died and are now doing unimaginable harm to the environment by being in an unnatural ecosystem in shocking numbers. Remember the 10:1 rule? Did you release 400,000 small rodents to support the new population of predators? Oh and I doubt they're apex predators in the region. Unless they undermine the larger predators, though given the area we're probably talking wolverines as the dominant weasel. Which means they're going to eat the minks and might slack on the rodents, leading to a mini population boom. And then that strips resources, leading to a die off that goes too far in the other direction so the wolverines can't get back to normal after finishing off the minks. Great job, fucksticks. Your lack of foresight has done immeasurable environmental damage, killed more animals than the fur farm and likely driven some people to homelessness. And you killed minks, you dickheads.

(Sorry. My boyfriend likes minks, and I've absorbed his care and concern, though I was always a supporter of all things weasel, from least weasels to ratels.)

9/10/2017 9:39:58 AM

Salami

Releasing domesticated animals into the wild is terrible idea. The best case scenario if they are not all recovered is that all the released animals die quickly, like cows have done frequently when they escape or are released. That's because, well, what do you think happens to the minks that survive and their offspring? Natural selection, that's what. They'll be genetically fit for local environment before the local species population learns how to deal with them (via defense, consumption, etc.). This will cause rapid population declines and possibly unhealthy booms that will decimate the plant population.

You know how when humans reached what we know today as North America, a large quantity of species (most famously the buffalo) rapidly went extinct or were put on the brink of extinction? Or how species have a tendency of rapidly dying out and leaving their environments when orcas migrate to their region? Minks can and will have a similar effect on the regions they are released in.

9/10/2017 9:50:17 AM

LAchlan

Because releasing 40,000 predatory carnivores into a local ecosystem has always been a good idea. Dick.

9/10/2017 11:48:20 AM

Philbert McAdamia

I read that book; Gorky Park, by Martin Cruz Smith
Also a movie.

9/10/2017 12:10:13 PM

Chloe

I think that what they did was pointless.

They caused the minks to be killed anyway and the survivors will do damage to the local ecosystem. But hey, at least thry had a natural death despite everything.

9/10/2017 1:21:24 PM

Demon Duck of Doom

I don't give a shit snout the property damage here. I don't consider owning other creatures to be a right. What I do care about is the inevitable environmental damage, which has been explained in earlier posts.

9/10/2017 8:52:26 PM

The Angry Dybbuk

There's an ethical line - maybe it differs a little based on person or situation, but not by all that much - that can never be doubled back upon once it's crossed.

While I do think mink farming is cruel and pointless, and so I have sympathy for the vandals' goals (a stance I know is controversial and that I expect few to share), this example of 'activism' comes dangerously close to that line I mention; when good intentions are used to excuse first morally ambiguous deeds, then bad deeds, and eventually, frank evil.

Better to protest the practice of mink farming by using the power of social media, and documentary evidence, than it is to risk crossing that line. There is honestly no way back for those who do.

The ecological damage that will be caused by what these guys were hoping would be an act of good could kill not only the mink (who were likely born in captivity) but the act could kill off other animal and plant life all around the release point. In other words, their "moral act" backfired already. They should be grateful if that is the extent of the damage.

That line I talk about above is real.

9/10/2017 11:28:31 PM

Azereaux

This is the sort of thing we call you idiots for. You "liberate" animals into environments they can't survive in (or that can't easily survive them) because you have a warped definition of "natural", while causing tons of damage. The result is a bunch of dead animals that you were trying to save, and more damage than the initial target caused. Sounds like a pyrrhic victory at best, an utter failure at worst.

You people are as dumb as a sack of rocks.

9/11/2017 8:25:24 AM

Randomosaur

Mink farming is no crueler than factory farming, and is more environmentally friendly than fake fur which is made of petroleum. Look up "fur is green".

9/11/2017 12:01:40 PM

The Angry Dybbuk

Fuck "fur is green." Fur is unnecessary. And yes, I totally agree factory farms are cruel. They're also toxic to the surrounding environment. Fuck them both - mink farms and factory farms - sideways with a spiky metal thing.

I don't always get a choice, but when I do and the choice is between cheap meat from a factory farm or meat from a smaller outfit that offers pastures to free-range livestock, and that doesn't use bonemeal, I'll always pay more for the latter.

9/11/2017 1:46:17 PM



their defiantly not doing this in the right way but again, why do so many people act like animal rights is based just on how well they do on an IQ test wile human rights are based on things like an individual's capacity for empathy and compassion.

9/11/2017 3:14:45 PM

Randomosaur

@2094797

I'm pretty sure intelligence IS the reason for human rights. The dumbest non-anencephalic human is still smarter than the smartest chimp.

9/11/2017 3:16:40 PM



@Randomouser. no. were black people given rights just because it became accepted they were as smart as white people? did MLK's speech say he hoped people would judge others by their intellect?

9/11/2017 3:59:48 PM

Randomosaur

@2094804

Black people are still humans. Again you're not getting the point. Other than anencephalic people there is no intelligence overlap between humans and any non-human animal.

9/11/2017 4:22:16 PM



@randomouser. why do creatures have to be intellectually equivalent to be morally equivalent? and if that's the basis for rights, what's wrong with killing mentally handicapped people so they don't become a burden on society?

9/11/2017 4:54:11 PM

Randomosaur

@2094812

I believe in aborting fetuses with extreme disabilities. And AS I SAID, even the most intelligent non-human animal can't hold a candle to someone with say Down syndrome, so that comparison is invalid and pointless. If you hold lizards and cows morally equivalent to humans you might as well do the same for jellyfish, coral and slime molds.

9/11/2017 5:17:26 PM



@randomouser. my question was that if intelligence is the only factor in determining rights, why not kill mentally handicapped people that are already born?

and I do hold anything with even the most rudimentary emotional ability as more or less morally sequel to humans. that's the point you don't seem to get, I, and most people for that matter, care about emotions, not IQ points when determining rights.

9/11/2017 5:46:05 PM

Demon Duck of Doom

@Anonymous: Don't argue with Randomosaur. He's an anti-vegan fundie.

9/11/2017 9:42:44 PM

1 | top: comments page