dog slashed 19 times the AA grumpy column

Post by **pantoandy** » Sat May 02, 2009 11:45 am

hello its only me grumps again back with another shocking story.

A VICIOUS knife thug slashed and stabbed a dog 19 TIMES — before leaving it for dead.

The evil maniac tried to slit two-year-old bull mastiff Arnie’s throat nine times and another two sickening blows exposed the pooch’s spine.

But the butchered pooch was saved by vet Neil McIntosh — and now the blade monster is being hunted by cops.

Horrified Neil said: “This is among the worst cases of animal cruelty I have ever seen.

“The dog had 19 wounds, the most significant of being nine attempts at slashing his neck.

“One of the slashes on his neck could not have been closer to exposing the jugular vein. He was incredibly lucky it wasn’t severed.

“He also has four hack marks on his back, two of which were down to the spinal column.

“On one of his legs the muscle had been hacked down to the shin bone.

Arnie was reported missing by his owner in Port Glasgow, Renfrewshire, on Wednesday night and found a day later in agony.

Amazingly the brave pet walked into the vet’s WAGGING his tail — despite the deep, painful cuts all over his body — and is now recovering. Neil added: “A nicer dog you couldn’t meet, yet he’s had to have surgery for three hours and has had 92 sutures.

The twisted attack comes just weeks after The Scottish Sun launched our Stop the Cruelty campaign.

It highlighted the plight of abused animals, and was praised by the Scottish SPCA.

Last night Chief Supt Mike Flynn, of the animal welfare charity, said: “This was an appalling attack on a defenceless animal and it is amazing that the dog survived.

“Unfortunately such savage cruelty to animals is far too common in Scotland.

The Scottish SPCA and Strathclyde Police are appealing for anyone with information to come forward.

Animal attack horror | The Sun |Home Scotland|Scottish News

AAG

i could sum this up in only one word b*****d ( i blanked the word in type)

what need is there to do this ?

the mind boggles

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Sat May 02, 2009 12:23 pm

Yet another joyous story from pantoandy! :rolleyes:

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat May 02, 2009 1:36 pm

This is the sort of act that i would happilly go to prison for and not give a toss about it.

It's about time the courts dealt with this scum and sent them down. They are cowards of the highest order. They would not last five minutes with you or i so they do it to the defenceless.

Victoria · Post by **Victoria** » Sun May 03, 2009 4:17 am

This is just all too common and until we stop saying 'its just a dog'and start treating this for what it is ... a vicious attack by a murderous bastard and then punish as if it were a human victim will will not see a decrease in this sort of attack.

It should also be remembered as I have previously pointed out that once these scumbags enjoyment of hurting animals wanes they generally move on to human victims..

So to anyone who says this is just a dog, dont start bleating when this manic moves onto humans.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun May 03, 2009 7:12 am

Victoria;1183004 wrote: This is just all too common and until we stop saying 'its just a dog'and start treating this for what it is ... a vicious attack by a murderous bastard and then punish as if it were a human victim will will not see a decrease in this sort of attack.

It should also be remembered as I have previously pointed out that once these scumbags enjoyment of hurting animals wanes they generally move on to human victims..

So to anyone who says this is just a dog, dont start bleating when this manic moves onto humans. The police and courts don't seem to see it as 'real crime'. Having said that, i must admit that one police SGT took my cat being killed very seriously. He knew who had done it but we just had no proof for an arrest. He asked me to put a value on the cat (although he was rescue) so that he could arrest for criminal damage to my property. Sadly, we never were able to prove it. If more police and courts took it that seriously, we may get some-where in this country.

I totally agree that many animal abusers go on to harm people. We have had some threads here that discussed this in the past and i had to do some googling about it. Even in the case of Baby P..... it's been reported that the boyfriend who allegedly killed him, tortured animals previously.

Richard Bell · Post by **Richard Bell** » Sun May 03, 2009 12:24 pm

abbey;1182816 wrote: Yet another joyous story from pantoandy! :rolleyes:

Indeed.

Normally, I don't click on these horrific threads, but I just came here to say that I'm getting rather fed up by having yet another grisly account on the FG opening page when I click on to this site.

It certainly detracts from the ForumGarden experience. If I wanted to read about cruel and depraved behaviour, I'd seek out sites devoted to the dark side of humanity.

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Sun May 03, 2009 1:18 pm

you should not have put in that title.........

instead you should have put 'warning'........like everyone else does here.

just to see that title really really upset me.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun May 03, 2009 2:29 pm

Odie;1183139 wrote: you should not have put in that title.........

instead you should have put 'warning'........like everyone else does here.

just to see that title really really upset me.

The title is perfectly explanatory. If you didn't like the title, you don't have to read his opening post and the details. Andy has only posted the title of the newspaper headline.

I agree it is not a nice subject but like Andy i agree that awareness has to be raised into exactly what happens with animal cruelty. If the newspapers did not report such incidents so vividly, we'd all be totally unaware of the cruelty that goes on in this world. You can not prevent cruelty to animals if the public are unaware that it is happening. Not all members read every newspaper every day. Hats off to Andy for posting the thread and making us aware. Well done Andy, i for one am glad you brought our attention to this.

For weeks we had the horrific details of baby Peters torture and death on this forum and members were distressed by what they read but there were no complaints as to the content of the thread. Certainly, no poster put a warning on the title of the thread.

Jimbo has also posted threads of extreme animal cruelty as i have with no warning.

Carolly recently posted a thread about the rape of a 2 yr old girl with no warning in the title.

Any thread is merely imformation for others who may be interested in it. Not all threads will interest everyone all of the time..... that's why we have a multiple choice here.

The main thing is that the dog went on to recover and will no doubt be placed with new loving owners.

Richard Bell · Post by **Richard Bell** » Sun May 03, 2009 9:25 pm

oscar;1183169 wrote: The title is perfectly explanatory. If you didn't like the title, you don't have to read his opening post and the details. Andy has only posted the title of the newspaper headline.

Not quite.

My opening FG page gives me not only the thread title, but also a few sentences of the first paragraph.

oscar;1183169 wrote: Jimbo has also posted threads of extreme animal cruelty as i have with no warning.

Carolly recently posted a thread about the rape of a 2 yr old girl with no warning in the title.

Any thread is merely imformation for others who may be interested in it. Not all threads will interest everyone all of the time..... that's why we have a multiple choice here.

I dislike the morbid and grisly threads, and I feel it detracts from the FG site. If some people like the shock value and the sense of outrage they get from reading such material, then by all means, they should read it.

I just don't think it's necessary to have graphic details spilled on the "intro" page.

I'm not overly upset about it, but it does make me seek out other forums.

Victoria · Post by **Victoria** » Mon May 04, 2009 2:59 am

Oh dear sorry it upsets,

Well the fact is if more of us got upset and more of us got off our fat backsides and did something about it you wouldnt have to keep reading about it.

But while you close your eyes and turn away the monsters carry on playing thier bloodthirsty little games.

So get up get involved and put a stop to this kind of **** instead of whinging about a nasty thread upsetting your day.

No Offence intend!:yh_rotfl

Victoria · Post by **Victoria** » Mon May 04, 2009 3:07 am

Maybe this will brighten your day the two dogs stolen from their owner in a van she was transporting them in have been sound safe and well:)

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Mon May 04, 2009 5:26 am

Victoria;1183278 wrote: Oh dear sorry it upsets,

Well the fact is if more of us got upset and more of us got off our fat backsides and did something about it you wouldnt have to keep reading about it.

But while you close your eyes and turn away the monsters carry on playing thier bloodthirsty little games.

So get up get involved and put a stop to this kind of **** instead of whinging about a nasty thread upsetting your day.

No Offence intend!:yh_rotfl

fat backside? excuse me?

Let me tell you some things in which 'I' have done....(because if you knew me, you would have known;)

-I support the Toronto Humane Society for the Prevention of Curelty of Animals.

When their commercials come on t.v...- you have no idea what is shown what people have actually done to dogs, cats, raccoons etc etc..

.....and the photos are real.

-I also watch the news, 3 times or or more a day......its there also.

-I have saved over 6 cats that were in distress, 4 dogs, 3 birds, a raccoon,

on my own............

-I also helped a dog when it got hit by a car as the driver continued to drive away......and got him to an emergency vets..(and they then found the owners via his chip.)

What have you done?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-did you even read this post?

no offense intend!:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Mon May 04, 2009 5:39 am

Richard Bell;1183226 wrote: Not quite.

My opening FG page gives me not only the thread title, but also a few sentences of the first paragraph.

I dislike the morbid and grisly threads, and I feel it detracts from the FG site. If some people like the shock value and the sense of outrage they get from reading such material, then by all means, they should read it.

I just don't think it's necessary to have graphic details spilled on the "intro" page.

I'm not overly upset about it, but it does make me seek out other forums.

'not quite' is so true.........

-there is no need for such graphic titles spilled here

-and if someone had of 'understood my post', they would have realized I never read the opening one.:rolleyes:

Titles should go back to the way they used to be and its so simple: -----------Dog Abuse: WARNING.

Victoria · Post by **Victoria** » Mon May 04, 2009 8:05 am

Baby of 2 raped has 41 replies,

dog slashed 19 times has 12 (13 incl this) in the baby raped story no one has has the gall to say 'dont post this it upsets me' everyone is agreed that it is a horrific crime and needs to be dealt with severely.

If this dog were a baby it would be on the front page of every newspaper up and down the country the police would be out in force looking for the monster that did it it would be on the news for weeks.

Then if and when caught the person responsable would be vilified in the newspapers and online. We would then hear all the details of the trial and be glad when he/she got a long sentance behind bars.

But because this is 'only'a dog no such attention is given it. If the person is ever caught he /she will moost likely get a fine and be ban from keeping other animals.

Well whoopee!

So sorry if I get a bit uptight about it but I get sick of hearing these stories too I get sick because year in year out nothing is done about it. Animal charities have to beg for donations and manpower just to keep going.

If instead of moaning about this thread we all wrote to our MP or senetor and told them maybe just maybe it might do a little bit of good.

But I doubt it cos lets face it its only a dog.:-5

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 9:13 am

Victoria;1183278 wrote: Oh dear sorry it upsets,

Well the fact is if more of us got upset and more of us got off our fat backsides and did something about it you wouldnt have to keep reading about it.

But while you close your eyes and turn away the monsters carry on playing thier bloodthirsty little games.

So get up get involved and put a stop to this kind of **** instead of whinging about a nasty thread upsetting your day.

No Offence intend!:yh_rotfl Well said Victoria, you hit the nail on the head. Very true words.

I personally don't like threads on the rape and torture of baby's but one of the reasons that the woman in charge of Social services that allowed Baby P's death lost her job was due to the public rising up and speaking out. It's the same with animals. We have to be outraged or nothing gets done and as Victoria said, with no coverage in papers or on forums, it just carries on.

When i was campaigning against fox hunting, i didn't want to go on hunts and see what they did and i didn't like gathering graphic photographs of foxes torn to shreds to prove out point, but i had to to help get the law changed. Thanks to thousands of people, we did get the law changed and got it banned.

The same applies with these people who torture animals.... if we don't know it's going on..... we can not fight it.

Or do the people complaining about this thread or title think we should all turn a blind eye and let it carry on?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 9:18 am

Victoria;1183361 wrote: Baby of 2 raped has 41 replies,

dog slashed 19 times has 12 (13 incl this) in the baby raped story no one has has the gall to say 'dont post this it upsets me' everyone is agreed that it is a horrific crime and needs to be dealt with severely.

If this dog were a baby it would be on the front page of every newspaper up and down the country the police would be out in force looking for the monster that did it it would be on the news for weeks.

Then if and when caught the person responsable would be vilified in the newspapers and online. We would then hear all the details of the trial and be glad when he/she got a long sentance behind bars.

But because this is 'only'a dog no such attention is given it. If the person is ever caught he /she will moost likely get a fine and be ban from keeping other animals.

Well whoopee!

So sorry if I get a bit uptight about it but I get sick of hearing these stories too I get sick because year in year out nothing is done about it. Animal charities have to beg for donations and manpower just to keep going.

If instead of moaning about this thread we all wrote to our MP or senetor and told them maybe just maybe it might do a little bit of good.

But I doubt it cos lets face it its only a dog.:-5 Don't apologise for getting uptight Victoria..... you've said what alot of people feel. When you look at a thread, as well as the amount of replies, look at the next column to see how many visits it's had and how many have read it. Thats the true picture as some don't like to post.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 9:20 am

Victoria;1183279 wrote: Maybe this will brighten your day the two dogs stolen from their owner in a van she was transporting them in have been sound safe and well:) That is fantastic news and thank you for updating us. I would be crying with relief it were me.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 9:22 am

Odie;1183293 wrote: Dog Abuse: WARNING. What about..... Child abuse...WARNING?

Post by **pantoandy** » Mon May 04, 2009 10:03 am

firstly my apolgies to those who i have upset with my thread.

the purpose of the A.A grumpy column is that i trawl the pages of the national newspapers and find a item of news which i think would be debateable here on the FG and post that news item with my own introduction and personal comment

and the FG members reply on either the story or my comment or both.

either way the column is not to be taken seriously it may be near the knuckle and outspoken at times but im just a voluntary columnist

THE GRUMPS

qsducks · Post by **qsducks** » Mon May 04, 2009 10:09 am

oscar;1183437 wrote: That is fantastic news and thank you for updating us. I would be crying with relief it were me.

Oh that is great news Victoria!:-6

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 10:20 am

pantoandy;1183497 wrote: firstly my apolgies to those who i have upset with my thread.

the purpose of the A.A grumpy column is that i trawl the pages of the national newspapers and find a item of news which i think would be debateable here on the FG and post that news item with my own introduction and personal comment

and the FG members reply on either the story or my comment or both.

either way the column is not to be taken seriously it may be near the knuckle and outspoken at times but im just a voluntary columnist

THE GRUMPS

I don't see why you should apologise Andy or explain to anyone .... infact, if i had seen the article before you, I'd probably have posted it myself as others have done in the past with animal cruelty threads. As a columnist, you have the right to post anything you like the same as any other member does. I myself like your title as it is attention grabbing and these acts of animal cruelty need the attention of others.

I wish the press would release his name and address

qsducks · Post by **qsducks** » Mon May 04, 2009 10:23 am

oscar;1183512 wrote: I don't see why you should apologise Andy or explain to anyone .... infact, if i had seen the article before you, I'd probably have posted it myself as others have done in the past with animal cruelty threads. As a columnist, you have the right to post anything you like the same as any other member does. I myself like your title as it is attention grabbing and these acts of animal cruelty need the attention of others.

I wish the press would release his name and address

I second Oscar:yh_clap:yh_clap

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Mon May 04, 2009 12:06 pm

oscar;1183440 wrote: What about..... Child abuse...WARNING?

what about you, not 'reading my posts'?

'Titles should go back to the way they used to be' ....is what I had said.

-titles is plural, not singular:;)

dog abuse was an example as this is the topic here on THIS thread...your getting off topic again.:rolleyes:

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 12:18 pm

Odie;1183599 wrote: What about you, not really 'reading' my posts?

'Titles should go back to the way they used to be' ....is what I had said.

-titles is plural, not singular:;)

dog abuse was an example as this is the topic here on THIS thread...your getting off topic again.:rolleyes:

The thread is about a dog being slashed.

You complained about the title of the thread. It was you who took it off topic complaining about the title as Victoria pointed out to you.

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Mon May 04, 2009 12:28 pm

oscar;1183606 wrote: The thread is about a dog being slashed.

You complained about the title of the thread. It was you who took it off topic complaining about the title as Victoria pointed out to you.

your just not getting it are you.

- if you had of 'read' my post, I said.... titles...meaning all titles..:yh_doh

-my complaint about this title was not taking this off topic, as this is Andy's thread.:rolleyes:

-your continually taking this thread off Andy's topic with your arguing......

end of discussion....

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 12:34 pm

Andy.... lets ignore the attempts to turn this into an arguement and get back to the content of your thread as it was intended.

What do you think about us Brits all getting together to get the press to name and shame these scum? Perhaps if they printed their names addresses and time and dates of their court appearences, enough people will get together and do something to help rid us of these sicko's or act as a deterent? It might take a few years but we campaigned successfully against fox hunting and got the law changed. How could we go about this?

I'm all in favour of bringing back dog licenses and setting the charge at £250 with pensioners exempt. I'd also like to see every dog registered by law in this country. My nephew has licence to breed exotic reptiles and the moment they are born, they have to be registered costing him £50 for each baby. If every puppy born had the same ruling, we may get some-where with animal cruelty.

daBunnyWendy7 · Post by **daBunnyWendy7** » Mon May 04, 2009 12:54 pm

I feel it is important to bring heinous crimes to the attention of the public particularly if the crime is not appropriately punished. Do we want to be blissfully unaware of these crimes and give the message to demented criminals that they will be ignored or atleast minimally punished??? I say NO WE WON'T ALLOW HEINOUS CRIMINALS TO ROAM FREE!!!

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 12:59 pm

daBunnyWendy7;1183616 wrote: I feel it is important to bring heinous crimes to the attention of the public particularly if the crime is not appropriately punished. Do we want to be blissfully unaware of these crimes and give the message to demented criminals that they will be ignored or atleast minimally punished??? I say NO WE WON'T ALLOW HEINOUS CRIMINALS TO ROAM FREE!!!
Well said.

As an animal rights campaigner and an active one at that in the past, i know the importence of highlighting such acts. We can all look at pictures of cute kittens, close our eyes and believe these acts do not happen. Only by exposing this kind of thing do we get folk enraged enough to take action. If we don't, it just carrie's on.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 1:32 pm

qsducks;1183515 wrote: I second Oscar:yh_clap:yh_clap The truth is..... every one can protest to being an animal lover. We all support animal charities and do our bit and that makes us feel OK about this because we support animals? Well, NO..... it's not OK..... it's not enough. Don't the one's who profess to being animal lovers and supporting rescue homes understand that they are only supporting the end product of such acts as this? They are funding the homes that pick up the pieces when a thug has done this to an animal. How about trying to stop or deter thugs slashing dogs in the first place? Then, perhaps there would not be so many homes having to patch the animals up after they have been abused. It is no different to this countries teenage pregnancy problem. All the sevices are in place to care for the baby after it's born but little in the way to prevent the pregnancy in the first place. To tackle any form of animal cruelty, you have to hit the problem head on and prevent it from happening again not just fund a home to pick up the pieces afterwards. All they doing is turning a blind eye to the real problem of animal cruelty and refusing to face it head on. It needs to be stopped before it starts not after some poor animal has been hacked to pieces. If people really want to see a change in the law they have to do what fox hunting protesters did in this country. That means lobbying MP's, protest marches, sabotaging hunts, gathering photographic evidence, gathering facts and statistics of injured animals, stand in the street for 8 hours a day in pouring rain collecting signatures for petitions........ then they can tell me they do their bit.

If everyone sickened by the injuries this dog suffered started campaigning as anti-fox hunters did in this country, we may just see a change in the law where the people who inflict this cruelty are treated harshly by police and the courts. All the time that the most folk have to say on it is to whinge about a poster bringing this to people's attention, we carry on as we are and we will carry on reading about such acts with bugger all being done.

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Mon May 04, 2009 1:38 pm

Richard Bell;1183119 wrote: Indeed.

Normally, I don't click on these horrific threads, but I just came here to say that I'm getting rather fed up by having yet another grisly account on the FG opening page when I click on to this site.

It certainly detracts from the ForumGarden experience. If I wanted to read about cruel and depraved behaviour, I'd seek out sites devoted to the dark side of humanity.
I agree with Richard, I get sick of seeing doom and ruddy gloom news stories on FG.

Victoria · Post by **Victoria** » Mon May 04, 2009 2:02 pm

abbey;1183629 wrote: I agree with Richard, I get sick of seeing doom and ruddy gloom news stories on FG.

see image

Attached files

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 2:29 pm

Victoria;1183634 wrote: see image Nice one Victoria. :wah: Good on you.

Post by **Peter Lake** » Mon May 04, 2009 5:52 pm

pantoandy;1182804 wrote: hello its only me grumps again back with another shocking story.

A VICIOUS knife thug slashed and stabbed a dog 19 TIMES — before leaving it for dead.

The evil maniac tried to slit two-year-old bull mastiff Arnie’s throat nine times and another two sickening blows exposed the pooch’s spine.

But the butchered pooch was saved by vet Neil McIntosh — and now the blade monster is being hunted by cops.

Horrified Neil said: “This is among the worst cases of animal cruelty I have ever seen.

“The dog had 19 wounds, the most significant of being nine attempts at slashing his neck.

“One of the slashes on his neck could not have been closer to exposing the jugular vein. He was incredibly lucky it wasn’t severed.

“He also has four hack marks on his back, two of which were down to the spinal column.

“On one of his legs the muscle had been hacked down to the shin bone.

Arnie was reported missing by his owner in Port Glasgow, Renfrewshire, on Wednesday night and found a day later in agony.

Amazingly the brave pet walked into the vet’s WAGGING his tail — despite the deep, painful cuts all over his body — and is now recovering. Neil added: “A nicer dog you couldn’t meet, yet he’s had to have surgery for three hours and has had 92 sutures.

The twisted attack comes just weeks after The Scottish Sun launched our Stop the Cruelty campaign.

It highlighted the plight of abused animals, and was praised by the Scottish SPCA.

Last night Chief Supt Mike Flynn, of the animal welfare charity, said: “This was an appalling attack on a defenceless animal and it is amazing that the dog survived.

“Unfortunately such savage cruelty to animals is far too common in Scotland.

The Scottish SPCA and Strathclyde Police are appealing for anyone with information to come forward.

Animal attack horror | The Sun |Home Scotland|Scottish News

AAG

i could sum this up in only one word b*****d ( i blanked the word in type)

what need is there to do this ?

the mind boggles

Thanks for posting this Pantoandy. We need to highlight cruelty to animals to constantly raise awareness and provoke public outrage.

I agree with the lady who pointed out the 'it' just a dog' syndrome'.

From my experience with the RSPCA, they are ruthless in tracking these people down and are excellent at getting the police involved. I hope to see a follow up story that he has been caught and dealt with.

Richard Bell · Post by **Richard Bell** » Mon May 04, 2009 8:01 pm

Victoria;1183634 wrote: see image

Shocking avian abuse!

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Mon May 04, 2009 8:02 pm

abbey;1183629 wrote: I agree with Richard, I get sick of seeing doom and ruddy gloom news stories on FG.

great to hear from our mod!:guitarist:guitarist

I am just so shocked at the titles on FG, as before they were never explicit, so if you didn't want to be traumatized.....you didn't have to be.

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Tue May 05, 2009 3:28 am

Victoria;1183634 wrote: see image
I dont stick my head in the sand victoria I just get pissed off seeing him post the same dour stories.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue May 05, 2009 5:44 am

Richard Bell;1183226 wrote: I just don't think it's necessary to have graphic details spilled on the "intro" page.

I agree with this post - attention to formatting by the original posters would prevent this sort of thing happening. It's also unfortunate when various other types of thread are splattered (yes) all over the FG home page (which has been re-designed, by the look, so it's not, though, as bad in effect as it used to be).

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Tue May 05, 2009 8:49 am

Bill Sikes;1183837 wrote: I agree with this post - attention to formatting by the original posters would prevent this sort of thing happening. It's also unfortunate when various other types of thread are splattered (yes) all over the FG home page (which has been re-designed, by the look, so it's not, though, as bad in effect as it used to be).

AMEN!

bravo!:guitarist:guitarist

lets hope explicate titles will be changed here on fg from now on........

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue May 05, 2009 9:16 am

Odie;1183928 wrote: SIZE="5"]COLOR="DarkRed"]AMEN!

To clarify, I'm not "getting at" pantoandy - just making a general point.

qsducks · Post by **qsducks** » Tue May 05, 2009 9:18 am

Bill Sikes;1183948 wrote: To clarify, I'm not "getting at" pantoandy - just making a general point.

It's called I believe free speech.

And myself, have never seen a thread titled with "Warning".

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue May 05, 2009 9:24 am

qsducks;1183951 wrote: It's called I believe free speech.

And myself, have never seen a thread titled with "Warning". I second you Ducks..... I have never seen a thread titled 'warning' either. You have been a member far longer than me so you would be the one to know.

qsducks · Post by **qsducks** » Tue May 05, 2009 9:32 am

oscar;1183958 wrote: I second you Ducks..... I have never seen a thread titled 'warning' either. You have been a member far longer than me so you would be the one to know.

IMO, if you don't like the title too bad but then don't go reading the article and b&m about it. I mean, you can look at it but I also second your reasoning that since far more peeps looked at it and didn't respond that says alot.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue May 05, 2009 9:40 am

qsducks;1183962 wrote: IMO, if you don't like the title too bad but then don't go reading the article and b&m about it. I mean, you can look at it but I also second your reasoning that since far more peeps looked at it and didn't respond that says alot. I accept that the title could take some-one by surprise but that is just the way Andy writes. We all style and write differently..... it is our freedom of choice and freedom of speech. Andy has as much right to post what he likes the same as anyone else. Some members may have found Carolly's thread title 'Baby of 2 yrs old raped' in the same manner, yet i did not see one single complaint about that title.

This is a huge forum with many many multiple choices of catagories and threads to choose from. Why is just this thread by Andy being picked up on and not all the other threads posted with shock titles? For example, Jimbo posted a thread some weeks back and if my memory serves me correct, the title of the thread was about a dog being hung slowly to it's death. Again, i saw no complaints against Jimbo.

The thread is about a dog being slashed. Not what the title is.

Can we please get back to the subject of the dog and how we can do something to prevent further cases like this...... as Andy intended when he posted the thread.

Thankyou.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue May 05, 2009 9:40 am

qsducks;1183951 wrote: It's called I believe free speech.

And myself, have never seen a thread titled with "Warning".

Free speech? How is that relevant to FG?

A thread "titled with "Warning""? Where did that idea come from?

I don't know what point you think I'm making. What point do you actually think I'm making?

Post by **Sunshine** » Tue May 05, 2009 9:44 am

Most titles are just so you know what you will be reading about. If you don't like the title, don't read it.

I have a real thing for animals so I didn't read it. For those of you who did and didn;t like it, you were warned by the title. Simple as that.

qsducks · Post by **qsducks** » Tue May 05, 2009 9:46 am

oscar;1183971 wrote: I accept that the title could take some-one by surprise but that is just the way Andy writes. We all style and write differently..... it is our freedom of choice and freedom of speech. Andy has as much right to post what he likes the same as anyone else. Some members may have found Carolly's thread title 'Baby of 2 yrs old raped' in the same manner, yet i did not see one single complaint about that title.

This is a huge forum with many many multiple choices of catagories and threads to choose from. Why is just this thread by Andy being picked up on and not all the other threads posted with shock titles? For example, Jimbo posted a thread some weeks back and if my memory serves me correct, the title of the thread was about a dog being hung slowly to it's death. Again, i saw no complaints against Jimbo.

The thread is about a dog being slashed. Not what the title is.

Can we please get back to the subject of the dog and how we can do something to prevent further cases like this...... as Andy intended when he posted the thread.

Thankyou.

You are right Oscar. I didn't see anyone b&m about any of the other horrific threads either. Peeps can post a thread in any manner they feel or know that will get a response.

Bill Sikes;1183972 wrote: Free speech? How is that relevant to FG?

A thread "titled with "Warning""? Where did that idea come from?

I don't know what point you think I'm making. What point do you actually think I'm making?

No Bill, I'm not advocating "warning" in the title whatsoever...I just think some peeps got upset about it but then had the nerve to b&m about this one particular thread.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue May 05, 2009 10:17 am

Read post#9 from Mr. Bell. The title isn't (necessarily) the problem.

qsducks · Post by **qsducks** » Tue May 05, 2009 10:33 am

Bill Sikes;1183999 wrote: Read post#9 from Mr. Bell. The title isn't (necessarily) the problem.

I know.

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Tue May 05, 2009 1:26 pm

Sunshine;1183974 wrote: Most titles are just so you know what you will be reading about. If you don't like the title, don't read it.

I have a real thing for animals so I didn't read it. For those of you who did and didn;t like it, you were warned by the title. Simple as that.Moderators do have to read the content, it's not the content that was highlighted but the fact it was yet another gloomy thread on the home page.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue May 05, 2009 2:24 pm

abbey;1184062 wrote: Moderators do have to read the content, it's not the content that was highlighted but the fact it was yet another gloomy thread on the home page.

To be fair, of course, one could say it's not a problem with the thread titles or content, but with the "home page". I seem to remember saying something like this in the year 200zzzzzzzzzzzz.......

Harumph!