PDA

View Full Version : old animals


cb0928
July 23rd 06, 02:20 PM
I have 2 dogs that are about 15 years old, there blind and deaf and not in
good health. I can't afford to go the vet to have them put to sleep to end
their suffering what can I do?

Ann
July 23rd 06, 02:58 PM
On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 13:20:19 +0000, cb0928 wrote:

> I have 2 dogs that are about 15 years old, there blind and deaf and not
> in good health. I can't afford to go the vet to have them put to sleep
> to end their suffering what can I do?

Telephone (or email) your local animal shelter (humane society, SPCA,
etc.) and tell them what you have written here. There will be a procedure
where you sign a paper surrendering the dogs to them. Most animal
shelters are on a limited budget so, afterward, put aside the money you
would have spent on dog food for a few weeks and donate it to the shelter.

I know it's difficult but you will be doing the right thing for the dogs.

Charlie Wilkes
July 23rd 06, 03:10 PM
On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 13:20:19 GMT, "cb0928" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I have 2 dogs that are about 15 years old, there blind and deaf and not in
>good health. I can't afford to go the vet to have them put to sleep to end
>their suffering what can I do?

Shoot them in the back of the head, at the base of the skull, with a
large caliber pistol, .38 or better. Give each one a treat like a
bowl of milk, and shoot him while they is drinking it.

Obviously, don't let the second dog see the first one get shot.

Ask a friend to do it if you can't do it yourself. It's tough duty,
but a well-placed bullet is as easy a death as a shot of blue juice.

Charlie

JJ
July 24th 06, 01:21 AM
cb0928 wrote:
> I have 2 dogs that are about 15 years old, there blind and deaf and not in
> good health. I can't afford to go the vet to have them put to sleep to end
> their suffering what can I do?

I think the advise to contact local animal shelters/SPCA/Animal control
is the best advice.

If your animals need to be put to sleep I would definitly have this
done by a *trained*, *professional* utilizing the most painless/humane
methods designed specifically for the pet. (pets weight, pet's
behavior, age, specific needs)

There are humane injections that can put your animal to sleep and
often times there can be a sedative given to the pet just before the
injection so as make sure pet is calm and not stressed. This often
helps to ease owners anxiety as well knowing that their beloved pet is
not suffering or enduring stress. Hopefully your local shelter will
help you, especially if you explain your financial problems to the
shelter workers, most likely they will help you do this.

Please do not shoot your animal or have someone else do this. Doing
this, I fear, will leave you with sorrow and regrets. Plus, shooting
has risks, there are laws against shooting pets, discharging weapons in
certain places etc. etc. Please seek your local animal shelter for
professional, humane treatment of your animals.

I am sorry that you are enduring the unfortunate circumstances and hope
that all of this works out best for you and the animals. I will keep
you and the animals in my prayers. J

Matthew
July 24th 06, 02:08 AM
No offense why in the world would you come to a CAT group to ask about dogs
Try a dog group

cb0928 via CatKB.com
July 24th 06, 02:20 AM
thank you to those who had a heart and replied with compasion. I will contact
the humane society and see what can be done. But I'm not heartless enough to
shoot them in the head unlike some.

JJ wrote:
>> I have 2 dogs that are about 15 years old, there blind and deaf and not in
>> good health. I can't afford to go the vet to have them put to sleep to end
>> their suffering what can I do?
>
>I think the advise to contact local animal shelters/SPCA/Animal control
>is the best advice.
>
>If your animals need to be put to sleep I would definitly have this
>done by a *trained*, *professional* utilizing the most painless/humane
>methods designed specifically for the pet. (pets weight, pet's
>behavior, age, specific needs)
>
> There are humane injections that can put your animal to sleep and
>often times there can be a sedative given to the pet just before the
>injection so as make sure pet is calm and not stressed. This often
>helps to ease owners anxiety as well knowing that their beloved pet is
>not suffering or enduring stress. Hopefully your local shelter will
>help you, especially if you explain your financial problems to the
>shelter workers, most likely they will help you do this.
>
>Please do not shoot your animal or have someone else do this. Doing
>this, I fear, will leave you with sorrow and regrets. Plus, shooting
>has risks, there are laws against shooting pets, discharging weapons in
>certain places etc. etc. Please seek your local animal shelter for
>professional, humane treatment of your animals.
>
>I am sorry that you are enduring the unfortunate circumstances and hope
>that all of this works out best for you and the animals. I will keep
>you and the animals in my prayers. J

--
Message posted via http://www.catkb.com

Charlie Wilkes
July 24th 06, 11:59 AM
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 01:20:17 GMT, "cb0928 via CatKB.com" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>thank you to those who had a heart and replied with compasion. I will contact
>the humane society and see what can be done. But I'm not heartless enough to
>shoot them in the head unlike some.
>
I live in a remote place. I have had to euth animals without drugs.
I don't like it, but I do it if it's a critical situation and it will
take a long time to get to a vet. I'm not such a deadbeat I have to
ask for charity to handle my problems. But, if you can get a shelter
to euth your dogs for free, great. Next time around, consider getting
a pet you can afford.

Charlie

angel
July 24th 06, 02:43 PM
======
Matthew wrote:
> No offense why in the world would you come to a CAT group to ask about dogs
> Try a dog group

they are too ashamed to goto the dog lovers group
they figure cat lovers would say, take the dogs up into the woods and
shoot them right between the ears

i'ts not like the owner woke up and this thing has happened, they've
had plenty of warning, plenty of time to save up 45.00 or whatever the
fee per animal.
Call the pound tellem come get this stray dog. drive the other to
another county, turn them in to the pound. if the poster is honest and
the dogs are old blind and suffering, the pound will painlessly end the
suffering at the expense of the tax-payer.

cb0928 via CatKB.com
July 24th 06, 03:07 PM
i didn't realize after i posted that it was a cat group and nor did I know
that they was people here that only careed about onr type of animal. As a
matter of fact I have 2 well cared for cats, the dogs were my parents so I
thought someone could help me with the question that I had. But don't worry
the next time I have a question I won't ask it here.
angel wrote:
>======
>> No offense why in the world would you come to a CAT group to ask about dogs
>> Try a dog group
>
>they are too ashamed to goto the dog lovers group
>they figure cat lovers would say, take the dogs up into the woods and
>shoot them right between the ears
>
>i'ts not like the owner woke up and this thing has happened, they've
>had plenty of warning, plenty of time to save up 45.00 or whatever the
>fee per animal.
>Call the pound tellem come get this stray dog. drive the other to
>another county, turn them in to the pound. if the poster is honest and
>the dogs are old blind and suffering, the pound will painlessly end the
>suffering at the expense of the tax-payer.

--
Message posted via http://www.catkb.com

angel
July 24th 06, 03:15 PM
cb0928 via CatKB.com wrote:
> i didn't realize after i posted that it was a cat group and nor did I know
> that they was people here that only careed about onr type of animal. As a
> matter of fact I have 2 well cared for cats, the dogs were my parents so I
> thought someone could help me with the question that I had. But don't worry
> the next time I have a question I won't ask it here.


damn top posters

fine then, take all your cat questions to the dog group, HAAA HAHA

call the pound dumbass LIE TO THEM TELL THEM YOU FOUND THE ONE
TAKE THE OTHER TO ANOTHER COUNTY POUND

AND YOU'RE WELCOME, DAMN INGRATE

you're about as ignorant as the post you made

I don't mind you showing your ignorance, but don't show it all at one
time

Matthew
July 24th 06, 03:41 PM
Well Jeez hence
rec.pets.cats.health+behav

angel
July 24th 06, 08:49 PM
Charlie Wilkes wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 13:20:19 GMT, "cb0928" <[email protected]> wrote:
I can't afford to go the vet to have them put to sleep to end
> >their suffering what can I do?
>
> Shoot them in the back of the head, at the base of the skull, with a
> large caliber pistol, .38 or better. Give each one a treat like a
> bowl of milk, and shoot him while they is drinking it.

Remember... two go out.. but only one comes back
(is an old bugs bunny cartoon)

I was thinking a .22 would be less messy as the bullet would enter the
skull but not leave the skull.. it would just bounce around and
scramble things up. I don't know, you hear things, people talk.

Charlie Wilkes
July 26th 06, 03:43 AM
On 24 Jul 2006 12:49:36 -0700, "angel" > wrote:

>
>Charlie Wilkes wrote:
>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 13:20:19 GMT, "cb0928" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I can't afford to go the vet to have them put to sleep to end
>> >their suffering what can I do?
>>
>> Shoot them in the back of the head, at the base of the skull, with a
>> large caliber pistol, .38 or better. Give each one a treat like a
>> bowl of milk, and shoot him while they is drinking it.
>
>Remember... two go out.. but only one comes back
>(is an old bugs bunny cartoon)
>
>I was thinking a .22 would be less messy as the bullet would enter the
>skull but not leave the skull.. it would just bounce around and
>scramble things up. I don't know, you hear things, people talk.

I suspect a .22 might not deliver a reliably clean result, unless the
operation is performed by an expert. I've got a .38 special that
works well, and with an ordinary target/plinking round, it's not
messy.

Shooting a suffering animal is certainly not heartless, and it's
arguably less cruel than taking the creature to a vet and obliging it
to live its last moments in a condition of stress and fear.

However, it is deeply unpleasant, which is why having a vet perform
euthenasia is the most common choice, and wholly understandable. But
in this case, we've got an individual who doesn't wanna ride the bus
and figures someone else should pay for a cab. I know lots of people
like that. Don't we all, eh?

Charlie

Ann
July 26th 06, 04:12 AM
On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 02:43:36 +0000, Charlie Wilkes wrote:

> On 24 Jul 2006 12:49:36 -0700, "angel" > wrote:
>
>>
>>Charlie Wilkes wrote:
>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 13:20:19 GMT, "cb0928" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I can't afford to go the vet to have them put to sleep to end
>>> >their suffering what can I do?
>>>
>>> Shoot them in the back of the head, at the base of the skull, with a
>>> large caliber pistol, .38 or better. Give each one a treat like a
>>> bowl of milk, and shoot him while they is drinking it.
>>
>>Remember... two go out.. but only one comes back
>>(is an old bugs bunny cartoon)
>>
>>I was thinking a .22 would be less messy as the bullet would enter the
>>skull but not leave the skull.. it would just bounce around and
>>scramble things up. I don't know, you hear things, people talk.
>
> I suspect a .22 might not deliver a reliably clean result, unless the
> operation is performed by an expert. I've got a .38 special that
> works well, and with an ordinary target/plinking round, it's not
> messy.
>
> Shooting a suffering animal is certainly not heartless, and it's
> arguably less cruel than taking the creature to a vet and obliging it
> to live its last moments in a condition of stress and fear.
>
> However, it is deeply unpleasant, which is why having a vet perform
> euthenasia is the most common choice, and wholly understandable. But
> in this case, we've got an individual who doesn't wanna ride the bus
> and figures someone else should pay for a cab. I know lots of people
> like that. Don't we all, eh?

Of course it could have been a troll, but the OP did appear to be someone
who had cared for the dogs for over a decade and is now in limited
circumstances ... but wants to do the "right thing". And, even when a
poster is a selfish "good-for-nothing", how is it helping the animal to
ridicule the owner?

As for taking dogs on public transportation, that's usually not permitted
except for helper dogs.

angel
July 26th 06, 05:50 AM
Ann wrote:

> Of course it could have been a troll, but the OP did appear to be someone
> who had cared for the dogs for over a decade and is now in limited
> circumstances ... but wants to do the "right thing". And, even when a
> poster is a selfish "good-for-nothing", how is it helping the animal to
> ridicule the owner?

it doesn't, it serves me! gives me a chance to flame somebody
now it's your turn, sit down in that chair right there, hold on to your
monitor

acht! dontchew touch that mouse!...


> As for taking dogs on public transportation, that's usually not permitted
> except for helper dogs

exactly how capable does one need to be to off a suffering animal

Lets review the facts

he is not alone, in fact they are not even his pets, they belong to his
parents

you tellin me between 3 brains, 3 incomes and 2 households they can't
end the suffering?

ok, pull your panties up, that's all

you can go now
get out my sight

Ann
July 26th 06, 06:37 AM
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 21:50:46 -0700, angel wrote:

> Ann wrote:
>
>> Of course it could have been a troll, but the OP did appear to be someone
>> who had cared for the dogs for over a decade and is now in limited
>> circumstances ... but wants to do the "right thing". And, even when a
>> poster is a selfish "good-for-nothing", how is it helping the animal to
>> ridicule the owner?
>
> it doesn't, it serves me! gives me a chance to flame somebody
> now it's your turn, sit down in that chair right there, hold on to your
> monitor
>
> acht! dontchew touch that mouse!...
>
>
>> As for taking dogs on public transportation, that's usually not permitted
>> except for helper dogs
>
> exactly how capable does one need to be to off a suffering animal
>
> Lets review the facts
>
> he is not alone, in fact they are not even his pets, they belong to his
> parents
>
> you tellin me between 3 brains, 3 incomes and 2 households they can't
> end the suffering?

I told you no such thing.

> ok, pull your panties up, that's all
>
> you can go now
> get out my sight

Learn to use you news client's twit filter if you want me out of your
sight.

angel
July 26th 06, 02:48 PM
Ann wrote:

> Learn to use you news client's twit filter if you want me out of your
> sight.

i seee...
hmmm
--
I feel like calling the poster and ask what he has done with them two
old blind dogs.
just another half baked story gone behind us

Charlie Wilkes
July 27th 06, 04:57 AM
On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 03:12:39 GMT, Ann > wrote:

>On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 02:43:36 +0000, Charlie Wilkes wrote:
>
>> On 24 Jul 2006 12:49:36 -0700, "angel" > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Charlie Wilkes wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 13:20:19 GMT, "cb0928" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I can't afford to go the vet to have them put to sleep to end
>>>> >their suffering what can I do?
>>>>
>>>> Shoot them in the back of the head, at the base of the skull, with a
>>>> large caliber pistol, .38 or better. Give each one a treat like a
>>>> bowl of milk, and shoot him while they is drinking it.
>>>
>>>Remember... two go out.. but only one comes back
>>>(is an old bugs bunny cartoon)
>>>
>>>I was thinking a .22 would be less messy as the bullet would enter the
>>>skull but not leave the skull.. it would just bounce around and
>>>scramble things up. I don't know, you hear things, people talk.
>>
>> I suspect a .22 might not deliver a reliably clean result, unless the
>> operation is performed by an expert. I've got a .38 special that
>> works well, and with an ordinary target/plinking round, it's not
>> messy.
>>
>> Shooting a suffering animal is certainly not heartless, and it's
>> arguably less cruel than taking the creature to a vet and obliging it
>> to live its last moments in a condition of stress and fear.
>>
>> However, it is deeply unpleasant, which is why having a vet perform
>> euthenasia is the most common choice, and wholly understandable. But
>> in this case, we've got an individual who doesn't wanna ride the bus
>> and figures someone else should pay for a cab. I know lots of people
>> like that. Don't we all, eh?
>
>Of course it could have been a troll, but the OP did appear to be someone
>who had cared for the dogs for over a decade and is now in limited
>circumstances ... but wants to do the "right thing". And, even when a
>poster is a selfish "good-for-nothing", how is it helping the animal to
>ridicule the owner?

I doubt if it was a troll. But the OP invoked my wrath by implying
that I was heartless because I suggested he shoot the dogs or have a
friend do it. He's on a budget and bullets are cheap, right?

I used to work with graphic artists. One day I walked into a graphics
dept. and saw an overturned wastebasket. "What's this for?" I asked.
"It's covering a mouse on a glue trap, because we can't stand to watch
it squirm."

I grabbed a manilla folder out of the supply cabinet, slipped the
mouse inside and crushed it under the heel of my shoe. After that,
the girls in the gfx dept. called me "the psycho." I didn't care. I
played along with the joke. But I privately concluded that these
bimbos had their heads up their fat, self-centered asses.

In answer to your question about how my comments help the animal, it
seems useful to point out that the most important priority in
euthenasia is to minimize the trauma and suffering of an animal, not
to appease the squeamishness of the responsible party. Quite a few
people don't seem to understand that.
>
>As for taking dogs on public transportation, that's usually not permitted
>except for helper dogs.

It's a metaphor.

Charlie

-L.
July 27th 06, 07:40 AM
Charlie Wilkes wrote:
>
> I doubt if it was a troll. But the OP invoked my wrath by implying
> that I was heartless because I suggested he shoot the dogs or have a
> friend do it. He's on a budget and bullets are cheap, right?

If he's a poor shot, that's bad advice.

>
> I used to work with graphic artists. One day I walked into a graphics
> dept. and saw an overturned wastebasket. "What's this for?" I asked.
> "It's covering a mouse on a glue trap, because we can't stand to watch
> it squirm."
>
> I grabbed a manilla folder out of the supply cabinet, slipped the
> mouse inside and crushed it under the heel of my shoe. After that,
> the girls in the gfx dept. called me "the psycho." I didn't care. I
> played along with the joke. But I privately concluded that these
> bimbos had their heads up their fat, self-centered asses.

I did something similar with a rat at a dog park - people were willing
to let it suffer to death, and I simply killed it with my shoe
(cervical break), and disposed of the body. Grown men were giving me
disparaging looks and I about chewed them a new asshole for being so
cruel.

>
> In answer to your question about how my comments help the animal, it
> seems useful to point out that the most important priority in
> euthenasia is to minimize the trauma and suffering of an animal, not
> to appease the squeamishness of the responsible party.

I agree but far too many people don't know how to use a gun properly.
I'd much rather tell some unknown on the internet to take the animal to
a shelter for euth, than to tell them to shoot it.

-L.

angel
July 27th 06, 07:48 AM
Charlie Wilkes wrote:

> euthenasia is to minimize the trauma and suffering of an animal, not
> to appease the squeamishness of the responsible party. Quite a few
> people don't seem to understand that.

I agree, I think it's attractive somehow on a female to understand this
she don't have to like it, but to understand it and not give someone
crap about it is attractive.

I know women like that, they are like.. handle your business!
something like that..

some women actually get excited to hear you killed a dear
they know it's meat... food. They recieve those big bloody chunks of
dear tenderloin and never think twice about it.

what a gal!

she chews tobacco too..

you can open a beer on her BEEEEP

ok.. never mind.

just kidding

(carry her home like six pack)

angel
July 27th 06, 07:54 AM
-L. wrote:
>
> If he's a poor shot, that's bad advice.

if you put the cold steel right against the head you cant miss
but you might wanna wear some goggles.


> I did something similar with a rat at a dog park - people were willing
> to let it suffer to death, and I simply killed it with my shoe
> (cervical break), and disposed of the body. Grown men were giving me
> disparaging looks and I about chewed them a new asshole for being so
> cruel.

eeeeeew !

Ann
July 27th 06, 01:50 PM
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 03:57:05 +0000, Charlie Wilkes wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 03:12:39 GMT, Ann > wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 02:43:36 +0000, Charlie Wilkes wrote:
>>
>>> On 24 Jul 2006 12:49:36 -0700, "angel" > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Charlie Wilkes wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 13:20:19 GMT, "cb0928" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> I can't afford to go the vet to have them put to sleep to end
>>>>> >their suffering what can I do?
>>>>>
>>>>> Shoot them in the back of the head, at the base of the skull, with a
>>>>> large caliber pistol, .38 or better. Give each one a treat like a
>>>>> bowl of milk, and shoot him while they is drinking it.
>>>>
>>>>Remember... two go out.. but only one comes back
>>>>(is an old bugs bunny cartoon)
>>>>
>>>>I was thinking a .22 would be less messy as the bullet would enter the
>>>>skull but not leave the skull.. it would just bounce around and
>>>>scramble things up. I don't know, you hear things, people talk.
>>>
>>> I suspect a .22 might not deliver a reliably clean result, unless the
>>> operation is performed by an expert. I've got a .38 special that
>>> works well, and with an ordinary target/plinking round, it's not
>>> messy.
>>>
>>> Shooting a suffering animal is certainly not heartless, and it's
>>> arguably less cruel than taking the creature to a vet and obliging it
>>> to live its last moments in a condition of stress and fear.
>>>
>>> However, it is deeply unpleasant, which is why having a vet perform
>>> euthenasia is the most common choice, and wholly understandable. But
>>> in this case, we've got an individual who doesn't wanna ride the bus
>>> and figures someone else should pay for a cab. I know lots of people
>>> like that. Don't we all, eh?
>>
>>Of course it could have been a troll, but the OP did appear to be someone
>>who had cared for the dogs for over a decade and is now in limited
>>circumstances ... but wants to do the "right thing". And, even when a
>>poster is a selfish "good-for-nothing", how is it helping the animal to
>>ridicule the owner?
>
> I doubt if it was a troll. But the OP invoked my wrath by implying
> that I was heartless because I suggested he shoot the dogs or have a
> friend do it. He's on a budget and bullets are cheap, right?
>
> I used to work with graphic artists. One day I walked into a graphics
> dept. and saw an overturned wastebasket. "What's this for?" I asked.
> "It's covering a mouse on a glue trap, because we can't stand to watch
> it squirm."
>
> I grabbed a manilla folder out of the supply cabinet, slipped the
> mouse inside and crushed it under the heel of my shoe. After that,
> the girls in the gfx dept. called me "the psycho." I didn't care. I
> played along with the joke. But I privately concluded that these
> bimbos had their heads up their fat, self-centered asses.
>
> In answer to your question about how my comments help the animal,

My post wasn't about your suggestion to shoot the dogs. But, since you
bring it up. That's usually only practical in a rural area and if the OP
lived in a rural area, I seriously doubt he'd have asked the question.
(That's what would have been done.)

> it
> seems useful to point out that the most important priority in
> euthenasia is to minimize the trauma and suffering of an animal, not
> to appease the squeamishness of the responsible party. Quite a few
> people don't seem to understand that.

But, in my experience, it's usually an argument not worth getting into.

>>As for taking dogs on public transportation, that's usually not permitted
>>except for helper dogs.
>
> It's a metaphor.
>
> Charlie

Ann
July 27th 06, 02:13 PM
On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 23:54:25 -0700, angel wrote:

>
> -L. wrote:
>>
>> If he's a poor shot, that's bad advice.
>
> if you put the cold steel right against the head you cant miss
> but you might wanna wear some goggles.

But it wouldn't necessarily be euthanasia; that requires obliterating the
part of the brain that controls consciousness (on the first shot). A
high velocity bullet through the motor area, for example, could drop an
animal but it might still feel pain.

>> I did something similar with a rat at a dog park - people were willing
>> to let it suffer to death, and I simply killed it with my shoe
>> (cervical break), and disposed of the body. Grown men were giving me
>> disparaging looks and I about chewed them a new asshole for being so
>> cruel.
>
> eeeeeew !

Charlie Wilkes
July 27th 06, 02:33 PM
On 26 Jul 2006 23:54:25 -0700, "angel" > wrote:

>
>-L. wrote:
>>
>> If he's a poor shot, that's bad advice.
>
>if you put the cold steel right against the head you cant miss
>but you might wanna wear some goggles.

Yes, close range.

I have only done this twice... a cat with her face eaten away by an
abscess, and a seal that had gotten itself chewed up by a boat
propeller. In both cases, I think my range was about 1-1/2 to 2 feet.

In the case of the seal, I probably committed a class 3 felony. I
don't give a ****. It's a hunting ban, and I wasn't hunting. I was
putting a badly injured animal out of its misery.

Charlie
>

angel
July 27th 06, 04:54 PM
Ann goes:

> But it wouldn't necessarily be euthanasia; that requires obliterating the
> part of the brain that controls consciousness (on the first shot). A
> high velocity bullet through the motor area, for example, could drop an
> animal but it might still feel pain.

good point, personally I think I would use one of my turkey guns,
(10ga)

makes a hole about 3" in diameter, that should end the suffering

: /=

Charlie Wilkes
July 27th 06, 07:48 PM
On 27 Jul 2006 08:54:32 -0700, "angel" > wrote:

>
>Ann goes:
>
>> But it wouldn't necessarily be euthanasia; that requires obliterating the
>> part of the brain that controls consciousness (on the first shot). A
>> high velocity bullet through the motor area, for example, could drop an
>> animal but it might still feel pain.
>
>good point, personally I think I would use one of my turkey guns,
>(10ga)
>
>makes a hole about 3" in diameter, that should end the suffering
>
>: /=

Bah. Use the same damn gun you use to hold up liquor stores. It's
important to minimize the suffering of the animal, but there is no
need to blow its head off.

Charlie