Question Tennis

Wimbledon hires pigeon killers: Do you agree with PETA that it was cruel?

raves +4   by Clarity
Wimbledon hires pigeon killers: Do you agree with PETA that it was cruel?
Wimbledon officials hired marksmen to kill pigeons that were disrupting matches. Officials had previously employed hawks to keep the pigeons away, but there were areas where the pigeons were still causing a nuisance. PETA members were upset because they claim the pigeons were killed not as a last resort but as the first option after the hawks had failed. Do you agree that Wimbledon officials were hasty in choosing such a harsh method?
Add Image Add Video
resize

* these fields are required to answer the question

I agree to the SodaHead TOS and Privacy

Loading Loading...
Top Comment
raves +2   by Ayla

Answered No, they have the tournament to consider. It was acceptable.

First of ALL I think PETA are a bunch of nuts.

They put the good of the animal ahead of the humans. If it were up to them we wouldn’t have any red meat to eat (can’t kill them cows) no warm coats or sweaters, (can’t sheer them sheep) and definitely no new drugs to treat diabetes or heart trouble or cancer because you can’t test the drugs on animals. These people are whacked out.

I saw them throw paint at a woman in a fur coat. Holy cow the coat was already dead what good did it do to throw paint on the woman who by the way worked several years to save enough money to buy the coat.

I do not have any respect for the PETA people.

Animal protective league and organizations like that do a lot of good work in protecting animals from cruelty I respect them
view thread
Sort By: Raves | Date 1 2 Next » Last » Comments
  • raves     [-] by madi

    Answered No, they have the tournament to consider. It was acceptable.

    (i really meant to chose the other one)
    they are pigeons for goodness sake. get a bunch of 4 year olds to chase them tournament acceptable pigeons goodness sake bunch 4 year olds chase
  • raves +1   [-] by Di

    Answered No, they have the tournament to consider. It was acceptable.

    Kill'em Kill'em alll the nasty little flying rats
    tournament acceptable killem killem alll nasty fck rs
  • raves     [-] by KimL

    Answered Yes, they shouldn't have killed them right away.

    How selfish are we to kill over a pigeon poop. Shame on anyone that thinks this is good thing to do. They should have turned to an alternative method. Sometimes people just disgust me and this is one of those times.
  • raves +1   [-] by Republic of Honor

    Answered No, they have the tournament to consider. It was acceptable.

    Are you kidding me they should ve done it a long time ago, before the hawks!
  • raves +1   [-] by hunter 44

    Answered No, they have the tournament to consider. It was acceptable.

    Kill them all.
  • raves +1   [-] by imscared

    Answered No, they have the tournament to consider. It was acceptable.

    WHO CARES!!! Rats with wings. Will the world miss a few pigeons? Sorry I care about a lot of things but, the death of pigeons isn't on my care list.
  • raves     [-] by kb

    Answered I'm not really sure, but I think...

    i dont think they should have killed them period. hold your tennis match indoors. humans are so arrogant.
  • raves     [-] by Danielle

    Answered I'm not really sure, but I think...

    Could they have not just shot at them(missing on purpose) just to scare them away?!? Then if not shoot them?
  • raves     [-] by Malibulorie

    Answered Yes, they shouldn't have killed them right away.

    screw the matches! killed screw matches
  • raves +2   [-] by Ayla

    Answered No, they have the tournament to consider. It was acceptable.

    First of ALL I think PETA are a bunch of nuts.

    They put the good of the animal ahead of the humans. If it were up to them we wouldn’t have any red meat to eat (can’t kill them cows) no warm coats or sweaters, (can’t sheer them sheep) and definitely no new drugs to treat diabetes or heart trouble or cancer because you can’t test the drugs on animals. These people are whacked out.

    I saw them throw paint at a woman in a fur coat. Holy cow the coat was already dead what good did it do to throw paint on the woman who by the way worked several years to save enough money to buy the coat.

    I do not have any respect for the PETA people.

    Animal protective league and organizations like that do a lot of good work in protecting animals from cruelty I respect them
  • raves     [-] by kb
    i live in norfolk virginia. this is where their main headquarters are. they are a bit on the nutsy side....however their was a time when they killed animals in movies and so forth. drug testing on animals is ok but we cant explore stem cell? it seems a bit selfish to me to deny stem cell because it goes against the grain but its ok to kill another animal for the good of "man kind". anyway yea peta is "out there" but they have done good things as well. these days it would be unheard of to kill a horse shooting a movie....but thanks to animal activists groups like peta this no longer happens. anyways..im going fishing hope no peta is out on the chesapeake bay bridge with picket signs..............lololol
  • raves     [-] by Heywood Djablomi
    They don't put animals "ahead" of any human, and I think you should do a little more research before you arbitrarily call them "nuts."

    "Warm Coats".......gimmee a freakin break.....how many Chinchilla's or Minks do you own or need??? Ever heard of....."wool?"...it's pretty damn warm and doesn't require the slaughter of an animal to keep you very warm.

    You anti-PETA people are as ridiculous as extremists on the other side.
  • raves     [-] by hunter 44
    Wool doesn't require slaughter of an animal? I guess you haven't done enough research otherwise you would know that is false. What do you think happens to the sheep after it's sheared?
  • raves     [-] by Heywood Djablomi
    Ummm....the animal isn't killed FOR it's fur. Don't try to spin this, it won't work. Slaughter is not "required" as a by-product of sheep shearing.
  • raves     [-] by hunter 44
    Yes it is. The sheep will be slaughtered after shearing. The fact that you get more then one shot at it doesn't mean the sheep survives.FYI, wool and fur are two different things entirely.
  • raves     [-] by Heywood Djablomi
    Not true. My family has owned a farm for 45 years, so I know that's not always the case.
  • raves     [-] by hunter 44
    So on your family farm the sheep lived nice long lives until they died a natural death. Despite the fact that sheep lose the wool making ability after a few years, atleast an economicaly viable amount of wool. It is also fact that it costs more to shear a sheep then the return on the wool but that loss is offset by slaughtering the sheep. Yea, I've been on a farm or two as well.

    "so I know that's not always the case."

    LOL, so you admit the sheep are slaughtered.
  • raves     [-] by Kathy

    Answered I'm not really sure, but I think...

    they did what they thought was best for the tournament. It's not like there aren't many pigeons in the world.
  • raves +2   [-] by wolf

    Answered Yes, they shouldn't have killed them right away.

    Simple, place a couple of statues and freshly washed cars outside the arena,
    job done.
    What are they doing about the noisy jet traffic?
    Surface to air missiles?
  • raves     [-] by PLANETEATER

    Answered No, they have the tournament to consider. It was acceptable.

    I wish I could hire my own "pidgeon killer" so I can save money on my water bill from washing bird shit off my car.
  • raves +1   [-] by cappsy has a barcode

    Answered I'm not really sure, but I think...

    PETA can be cruel to animals themselves.


    There is a story about when a PETA lady chucked a live raccoon onto a lady wearing a fur coat how is that protecting the raccoon



    PETA is overrated


    Depending on this particular situation though depending on the way they were taken care of or disposed should determine the cruelty aspect
  • raves     [-] by Crazy C
    LOL! That raccoon thing was funny, but it was probably a fake one. Unless it was a nasty, aggressive raccoon sent to attack the lady in fir. I ponder.

    I believe pigoens shouldn't be killed. I am sure we got in the way first. I think that's why they take aim and poop away.
  • raves     [-] by cappsy has a barcode
    we killed off one type of pigeons I assume we are attempting another
  • raves     [-] by Crazy C
    Sometimes I wonder what the opposite of "kill" is; so I can practice it.

    Alas, my only antidote is to live.

    I have played tennis for so many years years; we use to have many squirrels in our courts; all we did was wait till they left.

    The point is, humans keep pointing at anything and pulling the trigger with out reason or thought.
  • raves     [-] by cappsy has a barcode
    That is true but also that id how we survive we kill all threats even if they aren't really threats
  • raves     [-] by hunter 44
    What do you think they hawks would have done? Joined the pidgeons in a group hug?
  • raves     [-] by cappsy has a barcode
    oh definitely they would
  • raves     [-] by Tracy

    Answered I'm not really sure, but I think...

    If they ate them, or gave them to something to eat, than no it wasn't cruel.
    But if they just let them lay or threw them away, then it's a waste and a crying shame! ate eat cruel lay threw waste crying shame
  • raves     [-] by Gramma Lil

    Answered I'm not really sure, but I think...

    I'm guessing scarecrows don't work with pigeons.... guessing scarecrows work pigeons
  • raves +1   [-] by Silas

    Answered Yes, they shouldn't have killed them right away.

    It's always been my opinion that golf squanders precious resources for a few (mostly rich) people's entertainment. If pigeons are a problem why didn't they bring in hawks to take care of that instead of having to shoot them all. A pair of hawks would decimate a pack of pigeons in a couple of days.
  • raves     [-] by hunter 44