I started a thread complaining about the use of the dog as bait to catch the crocodile, and the admins DELETED it? There was nothing inappropriate about it!!!
----
Bipartisanship doesn't mean the losers get half.
Strange, it wasn't insulting or anything.
share[deleted]
I'm the OP, and I'm allowed to get mad without having my thread deleted. I didn't violate any rules, and everybody else had his/her say about it. It's hardly the only thread here where feelings have run high, and most of the comments were not by me but by people who couldn't care less about what happened to the dog anyway.
----
Bipartisanship doesn't mean the losers get half.
Tell that to the dog
shareIt's Africa, people think differently about dogs than we do here in USA. But that rubber crocodile couldn't do anything to it.
shareI'm not worried that the real dog was ever in danger. I think that was a real crocodile on the move (the dead version was fake), but I don't believe we ever saw the croc and the dog in the same shot. It's the idea that this was an okay thing to do that bugs me. Even if she takes a dim view of dogs, how about paying clients? He paid top dollar to get that dog back, and instead of just taking the dog home she uses it as crocodile bait? Does she plan on telling its owner what she did? If the first shot had missed and the croc had gotten the pooch, would she claim the dog was never found? It's not a proper way to treat people, let alone canines.
----
Bipartisanship doesn't mean the losers get half.
I think you’re making a bigger deal out of Mma’s decision to use the dog than it really it. Yes, in retrospect in was a kind of messed up thing to do with someone else’s dog, but I don’t think she wouldn’t have taken the risk if she wasn’t a crack shot.
I also don’t think her decision to use the dog in such a manner indicates a lack of respect for her clients. She appears to have a high opinion of people in general, I think she just saw it as killing two birds with one stone as far as case solving. In conclusion, I also don’t think this show said this was an “okay” thing to do.
As far as your previous thread being deleted…most likely someone got a hair across his or her arse and reported your thread. When IMDb catches people who are reporting threads that don’t violate T&A I think that person is penalized, but I think they’re too busy to keep up all of the time. And so, we have people who have threads deleted just because they didn’t like what was posted. Yes, it's very annoying.
When the hurly-burly's done. When the battle's lost and won.
I think you’re making a bigger deal out of Mma’s decision to use the dog than it really it. Yes, in retrospect in was a kind of messed up thing to do with someone else’s dog, but I don’t think she wouldn’t have taken the risk if she wasn’t a crack shot.She wasn't such a crack shot that she didn't go practice for an hour, and with stationary bottles, to shoot a moving crocodile. I don't know how it is with African crocs, but Australian ones are fast. She had one chance to shoot the croc dead before the dog was in its jaws. And no matter how confident she was, the little dog wasn't a bit confident. He was terrified. He could smell that croc before she could even hear it. Even without any physical harm to the dog, it was still animal abuse.
I also don’t think her decision to use the dog in such a manner indicates a lack of respect for her clients. She appears to have a high opinion of people in general, I think she just saw it as killing two birds with one stone as far as case solving.I don't recall her saying to her client "I found your dog, but I'm a crack shot, so can I use it as crocodile bait before I schlep the little thing home?" If I'd been the dog's owner, I certainly feel a lack of respect. Matter of fact, I'm pretty sure if he found out, he could sue.
In conclusion, I also don’t think this show said this was an “okay” thing to do.Don't you? This is the show's heroine, who has always been portrayed as pretty much perfect. She does something that seems to be clever, in the sense that it works. She takes along her secretary, who expresses no misgivings and never criticizes her. She doesn't get caught, and she doesn't tell the dog's owner about what she did, so we'll never know what he has to say about it. If the script writers think it was wrong, they kept their misgivings to themselves. What the author of the original books had to say about it, I don't know. But if he had any misgivings of his own, they didn't make it into the show. And there are people here who think it was absolutely hunky-dory.
As far as your previous thread being deleted…most likely someone got a hair across his or her arse and reported your thread. When IMDb catches people who are reporting threads that don’t violate T&A I think that person is penalized, but I think they’re too busy to keep up all of the time. And so, we have people who have threads deleted just because they didn’t like what was posted. Yes, it's very annoying.You have to state a reason when you report a post, and I don't think a single report will get a post deleted. I still don't get it. Do you suppose they'll delete this thread too?
She wasn't such a crack shot that she didn't go practice for an hour, and with stationary bottles, to shoot a moving crocodile. I don't know how it is with African crocs, but Australian ones are fast. She had one chance to shoot the croc dead before the dog was in its jaws. And no matter how confident she was, the little dog wasn't a bit confident. He was terrified. He could smell that croc before she could even hear it. Even without any physical harm to the dog, it was still animal abuse.
I don't recall her saying to her client "I found your dog, but I'm a crack shot, so can I use it as crocodile bait before I schlep the little thing home?" If I'd been the dog's owner, I certainly feel a lack of respect. Matter of fact, I'm pretty sure if he found out, he could sue.
Don't you? This is the show's heroine, who has always been portrayed as pretty much perfect.
She does something that seems to be clever, in the sense that it works. She takes along her secretary, who expresses no misgivings and never criticizes her. She doesn't get caught, and she doesn't tell the dog's owner about what she did, so we'll never know what he has to say about it. If the script writers think it was wrong, they kept their misgivings to themselves. What the author of the original books had to say about it, I don't know. But if he had any misgivings of his own, they didn't make it into the show. And there are people here who think it was absolutely hunky-dory.
You have to state a reason when you report a post, and I don't think a single report will get a post deleted. I still don't get it. Do you suppose they'll delete this thread too?
What if she had tied up Wellington instead? She could have paid him 2 Pula for his troubles.
shareExactly. She wasn't as convinced of her marksmanship as all that.
----
Bipartisanship doesn't mean the losers get half.
Why the complaint the dog was fine, she killed the crocodile and solved the case.
I would do the same in her situation.
Also as one poster said this is about life in Africa, not America where dogs are carried around in bags and wear shoes and hats??????????
Bean Girl: Charlie Darling
...The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few...
I agree with the previous post. You can't be picky on animal welfare in any African country. Animals are used for practical reasons and not as surrogate children like in the west...
In the previous episode we learned that she does have a heart for animals, when she saw the dog being slapped around by its owner.
I'm allowed to have an opinion about the treatment of animals in other countries. And some Africans obviously love dogs, because the client's wife is beside herself.
In some very rural parts of Greece the villagers have been known to hang a dog from a tree and beat it to death to ward off evil spirits. In Italy, the annual migration of songbirds between Germany and Africa is decimated by shooters who like to fry batches of sparrows. If something is inhumane and/or environmentally destructive, I don't care that some other culture has always practiced it.
AIDS is decimating Africa because (a.) too many African men don't believe in condoms, (b.) some African chiefs think retroviral drugs are a western plot to make African men sterile, (c.) Thabo Mbeki and his cronies in South Africa don't believe HIV causes AIDS and want people to take herbal remedies like beetroot instead of protease inhibitors.
Do you settle something about health care or morality or politics just by saying "that's Africa"?
You know what else Africans in many places don't give a damn about? Homosexuals, whom they kill or jail; adolescent women, whose clitorises they cut off; members of other tribes or religions whom they massacre. I can be "picky on animals" -- and picky on homosexuals, women, non-Muslims or Tutsis -- anywhere I please.
I respect those things in Africa that I respect, and I don't respect those I don't. But as I've already said, even if she doesn't care about the dog, her client does. He paid to get his dog back, not to have him used as crocodile bait.
Even in Africa, if you take a man's money for finding his dog, you surely don't tie the animal up to attract a crocodile. I cannot believe that respect for the rights of another human being, and a client, doesn't preclude that.
----
Bipartisanship doesn't mean the losers get half.
'' Do you settle something about health care or morality or politics just by saying "that's Africa"? ''
Well yeah, life is different when you don't have the resources that we have. Some aspects of life can't be compared to how we solve things. But I understand your objection and I'd rather see that animals are treated as the living beings they are. The truth is that in poor countries it are things like animal welfare that are being considered as less important on the grander scale of things. Life in a third world country is more about surviving than about having the luxury of giving your animals the same treatment as yourself.
I understand that too. Even within the European Union there's a huge problem reconciling different national standards on the treatment of animals. But if you eliminate that, there's still the misuse of the client's property. My fallback position is that she misappropriated one client's pet, terrorized it and risked its life, to prove something to another client.
----
Bipartisanship doesn't mean the losers get half.
She's pretty amateuristic as well. I mean, most of her moral insight comes from some old English handbook. ;)
I think you're taking it too serious. The script made her confident that she would shoot the croc and save the dog and that's eventually what she did.
My fallback position is that she misappropriated one client's pet, terrorized it and risked its life, to prove something to another client.
We see violence against human beings every day on the news. Don't get me started on the genocide that is still going on in some third world countries, but you're right, you have the right to complain about a fictional character that didn't really terrorize a dog in real life.
Yes I do. And about another fictional character that didn't really cut off a child's finger in real life, too.
----
Bipartisanship doesn't mean the losers get half.
[deleted]
Yes, I agree, really weird and with too much time on their hands.
Not sure how to say this but I will keep trying.
THE DOG WAS FINE!!!!!!
It was not hung from a tree and beaten to death, it was not starved, maimed or hurt in anyway,
In fact it was rescued.
RESCUED as in saved from a life of wondering the streets eating out of bins and possibly dying by a road somewhere.
Wondering if you are posting this much about the child having their finger cut off or is it only dogs you care about?
Bean Girl: Charlie Darling
...The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few...
Wondering if you are posting this much about the child having their finger cut off or is it only dogs you care about?Wow, weirdo, where the hell are you coming from? At least the show didn't hold up the amputation of children's fingers as a fine and clever thing to do.
Or just over your head.
----
Bipartisanship doesn't mean the losers get half.
We see violence against human beings every day on the news. Don't get me started on the genocide that is still going on in some third world countries, but you're right, you have the right to complain about a fictional character that didn't really terrorize a dog in real life.
What if she had tied up Wellington instead? She could have paid him 2 Pula for his troubles
Exactly. She wasn't as convinced of her marksmanship as all that.
How Wellington comes into it for me is this: it's been said here that she was completely confident that she could get the croc in one shot and that the dog was in no danger.
I don't find that argument convincing for a number of reasons, but one thing I would certainly ask is, would she have used Wellington as bait? I doubt it, and therefore I doubt that she had that much confidence. Enough for a dog but not for a little boy. She simply didn't care that much. If worse came to worse, the dog was expendable. In my opinion, the dog was in danger, and although dogs are resilient, they can indeed suffer long term trauma.
I'll take people's word for it that dogs aren't valued much in Africa (although the owners of this particular dog sure seem to be an exception). But it truly surprises me to read all the rationalizations and so-whats here. I don't personally know anybody who would do that to a dog, or permit it to be done to their own pet. Isn't it mostly Americans and Britons posting here? I certainly never thought liking dogs was such a lonely position in the English-speaking West.
A Frenchman I once knew who had toured with a circus told me people in Spain had brought their pets and tried to barter them for tickets, as food for the circus lions. I'm reminded of it now.
----
Bipartisanship doesn't mean the losers get half.
How Wellington comes into it for me is this: it's been said here that she was completely confident that she could get the croc in one shot and that the dog was in no danger.
I don't find that argument convincing for a number of reasons, but one thing I would certainly ask is, would she have used Wellington as bait? I doubt it, and therefore I doubt that she had that much confidence. Enough for a dog but not for a little boy. She simply didn't care that much. If worse came to worse, the dog was expendable. In my opinion, the dog was in danger, and although dogs are resilient, they can indeed suffer long term trauma.
I'll take people's word for it that dogs aren't valued much in Africa (although the owners of this particular dog sure seem to be an exception). But it truly surprises me to read all the rationalizations and so-whats here. I don't personally know anybody who would do that to a dog, or permit it to be done to their own pet. Isn't it mostly Americans and Britons posting here? I certainly never thought liking dogs was such a lonely position in the English-speaking West.
Isn’t it kind of unfair to imply the OP doesn’t care about major world issues just because s/he brought up a plot point on a television show?
PurpleNiobe, my only issue is that it's only a TV show. Not reality. I love dogs and cats for that matter and may get a little upset when I see them actually get hurt or killed on fictional TV, but little Mutley wasn't hurt and I'm quite sure never saw the croc in real life, so I think the OP is going way overboard. If you want to see animal abuse that would rip your heart out, watch Animal Precinct on Animal Planet.
I don’t even think the reasons are as deep as the people in Africa don’t feel as close to dogs as people in America and Great Britain. I just think the writers didn’t think it was that important of a detail in the grand scheme of the episode.
I agree with you 100%.
That's my opinion of the whole thing. I'm done with now it and can't wait to see the next episode.
PurpleNiobe, my only issue is that it's only a TV show. Not reality. I love dogs and cats for that matter and may get a little upset when I see them actually get hurt or killed on fictional TV, but little Mutley wasn't hurt and I'm quite sure never saw the croc in real life, so I think the OP is going way overboard. If you want to see animal abuse that would rip your heart out, watch Animal Precinct on Animal Planet.
It was a major plot point and turnaround. It tied two strands of the plot together, since Wellington's finding the dog facilitated the luring of the crocodile so that the watch could be found inside the crocodile. It happened at the end of the show too. It was indeed a pretty big action. If they didn't want us to pay much attention to it, they sure gave it a lot of prominence.
----
Bipartisanship doesn't mean the losers get half.
I can concede that she probably didn't care all that much for the dog to be concerned about his feelings. after all, she certainly wasn't crazy about having to take the role of an over priced dog catcher in the first place. She took the case only because as Grace pointed out, the business needed the money.
It has been mentioned already that there are a lot of people that don't care all that much about dogs or thier feelings. I think it's safe to say the heroine of this program is one of those people. She probably doesn't consider herself cruel or unprofessional because she got the job done AND it helped her solve another case.
There is absolutely no indication that this dog is going to spend the remainder of his years shivering in a corner having nightmares about crocodiles. That storyline ended, and the she (and the audiance) moved on to her last case. Even though you make a good point about the dog being a bigger plot device than I think, it's still pretty clear to me the dog's feelings weren't meant to be dwelled upon so deeply.
When the hurly-burly's done. When the battle's lost and won.
OK....Now that was definitely NOT FUNNY...and quite ridiculous!!
"OOO...I'M GON' TELL MAMA!"
I agree, that he said it was ok to that to a dog,i was not happy to hear that
On The Set Of "Fringe"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6_ncx-WxnI&feature=channel_page
I, for one, agree with the OP wholeheartedly. I was appalled that she could just use that poor little dog as bait and disgusted that this act was treated as a light-hearted moment of comedy. It certainly has changed my opinion of the character for the worse. There sure are a lot of animal-hating trolls out there.
shareOP, and Blondeblue, I agree with you too. As an avid dog lover, having had dogs all my life, I was outraged. If anyone did that to my dog,(esp someone entrusted with their safe return); I'd be ready to WHUP THAT
a--! I don't care if she/he was backed up with a fully loaded SWAT team and Navy Seals! It was wrong in so many ways, and to me it went against character, unless JS's character is a heartless, moronic fool!
It certainly has changed my opinion of the character for the worse. There sure are a lot of animal-hating trolls out there.
You've got issues. Seriously, get a grip.
It was wrong in so many ways, and to me it went against character, unless JS's character is a heartless, moronic fool!
How does it go against her character exactly? She's not portrayed to be some sort of a Saint.
Breathe deep, Huckleberry99 . Now exhale. There you go. Now remember, it's only fiction. Not real.
shareI didnt agree with that part of the episode myself. I was a bit uncomfortable when she had the little dog out there with the crocodile. I was like "what is she doing?!" Now that was said....what do you think about the new episodes? Cause this dog conversation is getting old.
shareFolks who take this portion of the series (the dog incident) all that serious, have some deep rooted issues masked by their concern for a dog.
shareRegardless or not if she liked dogs, or felt the case was worthy, the dog was a beloved pet, and this act truly made her INSENSITIVE. And we see her caring for orphans, forgoing her fees for people in need, keeping secrets from betrayed spouses, indicates a SENSITIVE character. Hence a big EFFIN CONTRADICTION. Nonetheless, this pis$ed me off to no END!
Moreover, like another poster said, this b!%ch ain't no trained (GUARANTEED & PROVEN) sharp shooter, and the croc could've easily gotten to the doggie.
And even is she made contact, what size was her ammo? I know she had a rifle of some sort, but do you know how thick croc skin is?
PurpleNiobe, I'm with you on this one.
shareLike someone said. This ish has gotten OLD. & Yes, I do realize it is FICTION, lol. But yeah, I had dogs all my life, I just lost my boy dog (Aug 9, 2008-- he died the same week as Issac. Hayes and Bernie Mac, he was a true soul brother like them-- with a lil Rasta and Cholo Latin homeboy thrown in). I had him 14 years, so I'm a bit sensitive. Me, my boy dog warrior, and my girl dog were 3 the hard way!! You didn't cross one without a battle. So I was well protected! My dog was the ISH.. even though my insurance carriers didn't want to cover my home cuz his breed was seemingly dangerous and unpredicatable, groomers couldn't handle him, vets had to drug him-- my mother in law said he was going to kill me in my sleep, he nonetheless was a big oh gentle teddy bear with me!!! He was a rescue doggie, and we just bonded from day one. We both just don't like insincere bullshi--ers, everyone else was cool!
Purple, I didn't bother to read your last rant. This is not a Friedrich Nietzsche philosophical debate. It made some folks mad, others not so much. Each is entitled to opinion, and NO, whatever A--Ho-- tried to imply the love of dogs masks some sort of mental instability, is simply a buffoonish moron! Get an effn life (it's prob too late to encourage you to find a heart or empathy.) I suspect you spend a lot of time alone. Enough said.
[deleted]
Purple, I didn't bother to read your last rant. This is not a Friedrich Nietzsche philosophical debate. It made some folks mad, others not so much. Each is entitled to opinion, and NO, whatever A--Ho-- tried to imply the love of dogs masks some sort of mental instability, is simply a buffoonish moron! Get an effn life (it's prob too late to encourage you to find a heart or empathy.) I suspect you spend a lot of time alone. Enough said.