PDA

View Full Version : Another danger to outside cats.


Bill Graham
June 10th 11, 09:19 PM
I am normally an "Outside cat" person, and my five cats are all
outside/inside cats. (they have two cat doors through which they can get
outside the house) I have gone around and around with inside catters several
times now, and I don't want to renew that discussion. However, recently one
of my cats uncovered another danger that I feel it is instructive to
address. He got into some lawn fertilizer and/or weed chemicals that
poisoned him rather badly. Apparently, cats, being fastidious groomers are
prone to poisoning themselves by licking their feet and/or fur after getting
into anything distasteful. This cat damaged his liver by licking some
unknown quantity of lawn chemicals off of himself. I felt that I should warn
others of this possibility.

at
June 11th 11, 02:48 AM
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 13:19:11 -0700, "Bill Graham" >
wrote:

>I am normally an "Outside cat" person, and my five cats are all
>outside/inside cats. (they have two cat doors through which they can get
>outside the house) I have gone around and around with inside catters several
>times now, and I don't want to renew that discussion. However, recently one
>of my cats uncovered another danger that I feel it is instructive to
>address. He got into some lawn fertilizer and/or weed chemicals that
>poisoned him rather badly. Apparently, cats, being fastidious groomers are
>prone to poisoning themselves by licking their feet and/or fur after getting
>into anything distasteful. This cat damaged his liver by licking some
>unknown quantity of lawn chemicals off of himself. I felt that I should warn
>others of this possibility.

Well: can I get a DUH?

This is just ANOTHER of the MANY reasons why cats are SAFER, and live
LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE.

Bill Graham
June 11th 11, 05:45 PM
> On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 13:19:11 -0700, "Bill Graham" >
> wrote:
>
>> I am normally an "Outside cat" person, and my five cats are all
>> outside/inside cats. (they have two cat doors through which they can
>> get outside the house) I have gone around and around with inside
>> catters several times now, and I don't want to renew that
>> discussion. However, recently one of my cats uncovered another
>> danger that I feel it is instructive to address. He got into some
>> lawn fertilizer and/or weed chemicals that poisoned him rather
>> badly. Apparently, cats, being fastidious groomers are prone to
>> poisoning themselves by licking their feet and/or fur after getting
>> into anything distasteful. This cat damaged his liver by licking
>> some unknown quantity of lawn chemicals off of himself. I felt that
>> I should warn others of this possibility.
>
> Well: can I get a DUH?
>
> This is just ANOTHER of the MANY reasons why cats are SAFER, and live
> LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE.

Yes, but also a lot duller, less interesting lives. This doesn't matter if
the cat has always been an inside cat, and doesn't know any better. But all
my cats were acquired as adults and were outside cats all of their lives.
Most of them just wandered onto my property, and liked the, "cut of my jib",
and decided to stay. If you live in a rural neighborhood, or a farm, the
very idea of keeping your cats inside is ridiculous. If you live in a big
city, it is just as ridiculous to try to keep outside cats. So, to make a
blanket statement about how you keep cats is basically stupid.

(PeteCresswell)
June 11th 11, 08:23 PM
Per Gandalf ingold1234:
>This is just ANOTHER of the MANY reasons why cats are SAFER, and live
>LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE.

Somewhere I read that people live for a very long time in
underground cells in places like Lubianka or Marion prison.

I'm guessing part of the reason is that they are so safe and free
of stress - but I'd rather die 10-15 years earlier and be free.

Rationally, I know that probably doesn't extrapolate to something
with a single-digit IQ, but I still can't help feeling sorry for
the neighbor's indoor cats when I go to care for them when the
neighbor is away.
--
PeteCresswell

Bill Graham
June 11th 11, 10:28 PM
(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Gandalf ingold1234:
>> This is just ANOTHER of the MANY reasons why cats are SAFER, and live
>> LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE.
>
> Somewhere I read that people live for a very long time in
> underground cells in places like Lubianka or Marion prison.
>
> I'm guessing part of the reason is that they are so safe and free
> of stress - but I'd rather die 10-15 years earlier and be free.
>
> Rationally, I know that probably doesn't extrapolate to something
> with a single-digit IQ, but I still can't help feeling sorry for
> the neighbor's indoor cats when I go to care for them when the
> neighbor is away.

There is no question that cats are, "SAFER, and live
LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE." The question is, is it better to live a
longer life, or an enjoyable life? If a cat has never been outside, then he
might live a very enjoyable life inside. but if he has lived free all of his
life, then perhaps it would be unkind to force him to abandon that free life
in the interest of safety. All creatures, large and small, have to die
sooner or later. So, you might as well enjoy life while you've got it, and
cats, with no understanding of their own eventual death, can't understand
why they are trapped inside when others can come and go. And, what does it
really matter in a universe that is over 20 billion years old, whether they
live 15 years or 15 months? As long as you give them days that are as
enjoyable as they can get, you can't do any more for them than that.

Bill Graham
June 12th 11, 03:30 AM
(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Gandalf ingold1234:
>> This is just ANOTHER of the MANY reasons why cats are SAFER, and live
>> LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE.
>
> Somewhere I read that people live for a very long time in
> underground cells in places like Lubianka or Marion prison.
>
> I'm guessing part of the reason is that they are so safe and free
> of stress - but I'd rather die 10-15 years earlier and be free.
>
> Rationally, I know that probably doesn't extrapolate to something
> with a single-digit IQ, but I still can't help feeling sorry for
> the neighbor's indoor cats when I go to care for them when the
> neighbor is away.

There is no question that cats are, "SAFER, and live
LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE." The question is, is it better to live a
longer life, or an enjoyable life? If a cat has never been outside, then he
might live a very enjoyable life inside. but if he has lived free all of his
life, then perhaps it would be unkind to force him to abandon that free life
in the interest of safety. All creatures, large and small, have to die
sooner or later. So, you might as well enjoy life while you've got it, and
cats, with no understanding of their own eventual death, can't understand
why they are trapped inside when others can come and go. And, what does it
really matter in a universe that is over 20 billion years old, whether they
live 15 years or 15 months? As long as you give them days that are as
enjoyable as they can get, you can't do any more for them than that.

at
June 12th 11, 10:28 PM
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 19:30:49 -0700, "Bill Graham" >
wrote:

>(PeteCresswell) wrote:
>> Per Gandalf ingold1234:
>>> This is just ANOTHER of the MANY reasons why cats are SAFER, and live
>>> LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE.
>>
>> Somewhere I read that people live for a very long time in
>> underground cells in places like Lubianka or Marion prison.
>>
>> I'm guessing part of the reason is that they are so safe and free
>> of stress - but I'd rather die 10-15 years earlier and be free.
>>
>> Rationally, I know that probably doesn't extrapolate to something
>> with a single-digit IQ, but I still can't help feeling sorry for
>> the neighbor's indoor cats when I go to care for them when the
>> neighbor is away.
>
>There is no question that cats are, "SAFER, and live
> LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE." The question is, is it better to live a
>longer life, or an enjoyable life? If a cat has never been outside, then he
>might live a very enjoyable life inside. but if he has lived free all of his
>life, then perhaps it would be unkind to force him to abandon that free life
>in the interest of safety. All creatures, large and small, have to die
>sooner or later. So, you might as well enjoy life while you've got it, and
>cats, with no understanding of their own eventual death, can't understand
>why they are trapped inside when others can come and go. And, what does it
>really matter in a universe that is over 20 billion years old, whether they
>live 15 years or 15 months? As long as you give them days that are as
>enjoyable as they can get, you can't do any more for them than that.

You really are an idiot.

You have reached a new high in self delusion.

Everybody that owns a canary or other bird: according to this numbskull,
you MUST let them ALL go, immediately.

Keeping them in a cage indoors is CRUEL! Set ALL ANIMALS free NOW!

Sure, they'll starve to death, shortly, or die in the fall, when it gets
cold, but they will die HAPPY.

Or so **** for brains says.

Bill Graham
June 12th 11, 10:53 PM
> On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 19:30:49 -0700, "Bill Graham" >
> wrote:
>
>> (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>>> Per Gandalf ingold1234:
>>>> This is just ANOTHER of the MANY reasons why cats are SAFER, and
>>>> live LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE.
>>>
>>> Somewhere I read that people live for a very long time in
>>> underground cells in places like Lubianka or Marion prison.
>>>
>>> I'm guessing part of the reason is that they are so safe and free
>>> of stress - but I'd rather die 10-15 years earlier and be free.
>>>
>>> Rationally, I know that probably doesn't extrapolate to something
>>> with a single-digit IQ, but I still can't help feeling sorry for
>>> the neighbor's indoor cats when I go to care for them when the
>>> neighbor is away.
>>
>> There is no question that cats are, "SAFER, and live
>> LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE." The question is, is it better to
>> live a longer life, or an enjoyable life? If a cat has never been
>> outside, then he might live a very enjoyable life inside. but if he
>> has lived free all of his life, then perhaps it would be unkind to
>> force him to abandon that free life in the interest of safety. All
>> creatures, large and small, have to die sooner or later. So, you
>> might as well enjoy life while you've got it, and cats, with no
>> understanding of their own eventual death, can't understand why they
>> are trapped inside when others can come and go. And, what does it
>> really matter in a universe that is over 20 billion years old,
>> whether they live 15 years or 15 months? As long as you give them
>> days that are as enjoyable as they can get, you can't do any more
>> for them than that.
>
> You really are an idiot.
>
> You have reached a new high in self delusion.
>
> Everybody that owns a canary or other bird: according to this
> numbskull, you MUST let them ALL go, immediately.
>
> Keeping them in a cage indoors is CRUEL! Set ALL ANIMALS free NOW!
>
> Sure, they'll starve to death, shortly, or die in the fall, when it
> gets cold, but they will die HAPPY.
>
> Or so **** for brains says.

I have an idea Gandy.... Why not make a law that dictates that everyone has
to spend their entire lives in a padded cell? that way, there is no way they
can accidently hurt themselves, and everyone will live as long as is
physically possible. And, as an honorary early proponent of this idea, you
can be the first to enter your cell.......

Bill Graham
June 13th 11, 06:48 AM
Bill Graham wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 19:30:49 -0700, "Bill Graham" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>>>> Per Gandalf ingold1234:
>>>>> This is just ANOTHER of the MANY reasons why cats are SAFER, and
>>>>> live LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE.
>>>>
>>>> Somewhere I read that people live for a very long time in
>>>> underground cells in places like Lubianka or Marion prison.
>>>>
>>>> I'm guessing part of the reason is that they are so safe and free
>>>> of stress - but I'd rather die 10-15 years earlier and be free.
>>>>
>>>> Rationally, I know that probably doesn't extrapolate to something
>>>> with a single-digit IQ, but I still can't help feeling sorry for
>>>> the neighbor's indoor cats when I go to care for them when the
>>>> neighbor is away.
>>>
>>> There is no question that cats are, "SAFER, and live
>>> LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE." The question is, is it better to
>>> live a longer life, or an enjoyable life? If a cat has never been
>>> outside, then he might live a very enjoyable life inside. but if he
>>> has lived free all of his life, then perhaps it would be unkind to
>>> force him to abandon that free life in the interest of safety. All
>>> creatures, large and small, have to die sooner or later. So, you
>>> might as well enjoy life while you've got it, and cats, with no
>>> understanding of their own eventual death, can't understand why they
>>> are trapped inside when others can come and go. And, what does it
>>> really matter in a universe that is over 20 billion years old,
>>> whether they live 15 years or 15 months? As long as you give them
>>> days that are as enjoyable as they can get, you can't do any more
>>> for them than that.
>>
>> You really are an idiot.
>>
>> You have reached a new high in self delusion.
>>
>> Everybody that owns a canary or other bird: according to this
>> numbskull, you MUST let them ALL go, immediately.
>>
>> Keeping them in a cage indoors is CRUEL! Set ALL ANIMALS free NOW!
>>
>> Sure, they'll starve to death, shortly, or die in the fall, when it
>> gets cold, but they will die HAPPY.
>>
>> Or so **** for brains says.
>
> I have an idea Gandy.... Why not make a law that dictates that
> everyone has to spend their entire lives in a padded cell? that way,
> there is no way they can accidently hurt themselves, and everyone
> will live as long as is physically possible. And, as an honorary
> early proponent of this idea, you can be the first to enter your
> cell.......

.....Of course, mental health is not guaranteed by the above solution. but
then, you don't care about that, do you Gandy? Going crazy from boredom
doesn't matter a damn to you. Just so long as you live for as long a time as
possible, you will be happy.....

at
June 15th 11, 01:17 AM
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:48:43 -0700, "Bill Graham" >
wrote:

>Bill Graham wrote:
>>> On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 19:30:49 -0700, "Bill Graham" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>>>>> Per Gandalf ingold1234:
>>>>>> This is just ANOTHER of the MANY reasons why cats are SAFER, and
>>>>>> live LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE.
>>>>>
>>>>> Somewhere I read that people live for a very long time in
>>>>> underground cells in places like Lubianka or Marion prison.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm guessing part of the reason is that they are so safe and free
>>>>> of stress - but I'd rather die 10-15 years earlier and be free.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rationally, I know that probably doesn't extrapolate to something
>>>>> with a single-digit IQ, but I still can't help feeling sorry for
>>>>> the neighbor's indoor cats when I go to care for them when the
>>>>> neighbor is away.
>>>>
>>>> There is no question that cats are, "SAFER, and live
>>>> LONGER LIVES, if they stay INSIDE." The question is, is it better to
>>>> live a longer life, or an enjoyable life? If a cat has never been
>>>> outside, then he might live a very enjoyable life inside. but if he
>>>> has lived free all of his life, then perhaps it would be unkind to
>>>> force him to abandon that free life in the interest of safety. All
>>>> creatures, large and small, have to die sooner or later. So, you
>>>> might as well enjoy life while you've got it, and cats, with no
>>>> understanding of their own eventual death, can't understand why they
>>>> are trapped inside when others can come and go. And, what does it
>>>> really matter in a universe that is over 20 billion years old,
>>>> whether they live 15 years or 15 months? As long as you give them
>>>> days that are as enjoyable as they can get, you can't do any more
>>>> for them than that.
>>>
>>> You really are an idiot.
>>>
>>> You have reached a new high in self delusion.
>>>
>>> Everybody that owns a canary or other bird: according to this
>>> numbskull, you MUST let them ALL go, immediately.
>>>
>>> Keeping them in a cage indoors is CRUEL! Set ALL ANIMALS free NOW!
>>>
>>> Sure, they'll starve to death, shortly, or die in the fall, when it
>>> gets cold, but they will die HAPPY.
>>>
>>> Or so **** for brains says.
>>
>> I have an idea Gandy.... Why not make a law that dictates that
>> everyone has to spend their entire lives in a padded cell? that way,
>> there is no way they can accidently hurt themselves, and everyone
>> will live as long as is physically possible. And, as an honorary
>> early proponent of this idea, you can be the first to enter your
>> cell.......
>
>....Of course, mental health is not guaranteed by the above solution. but
>then, you don't care about that, do you Gandy? Going crazy from boredom
>doesn't matter a damn to you. Just so long as you live for as long a time as
>possible, you will be happy.....


Wow. What an incredibly witty and clever response.

/sarcasm/

I'm having a battle of wits, with an unarmed opponent.

John Doe
June 16th 11, 05:56 PM
Since you admittedly have been warned about the dangers of keeping
cats outside... If you want forgiveness, stop trolling here and
see a priest or something.
--



"Bill Graham" <weg9 comcast.net> wrote:

> Path: news.astraweb.com!border6.newsrouter.astraweb.com! news.glorb.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!Xl.ta gs.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp .giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.gi ganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 15:19:12 -0500
> From: "Bill Graham" <weg9 comcast.net>
> Newsgroups: rec.pets.cats.health+behav
> Subject: Another danger to outside cats.
> Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 13:19:11 -0700
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18417
> Message-ID: <GJudnWDXwbPd4W_QnZ2dnUVZ5sGdnZ2d giganews.com>
> Lines: 12
> X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
> X-Trace: sv3-KQg71Ee8t1axTAKuCqkyAwnRY45n1KfuNv8Qx+jiY/8YPLSaeYpLS5yXriREYoqqlk3qmPXGW8sjvLC!HfdIrVE+G0pk a3h/dd3dJNGomKOIorxWVEv9SShhNtZnKKq/Dg1+LBCpJGppCbcyMnfSN7DylT94
> X-Complaints-To: abuse giganews.com
> X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
> X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
> X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
> X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
> X-Original-Bytes: 1928
>
> I am normally an "Outside cat" person, and my five cats are all
> outside/inside cats. (they have two cat doors through which they can get
> outside the house) I have gone around and around with inside catters several
> times now, and I don't want to renew that discussion. However, recently one
> of my cats uncovered another danger that I feel it is instructive to
> address. He got into some lawn fertilizer and/or weed chemicals that
> poisoned him rather badly. Apparently, cats, being fastidious groomers are
> prone to poisoning themselves by licking their feet and/or fur after getting
> into anything distasteful. This cat damaged his liver by licking some
> unknown quantity of lawn chemicals off of himself. I felt that I should warn
> others of this possibility.
>
>
>