Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

    Originally posted by matapule View Post
    ... trying to figure out what to call a sterilized peacock.........depeckered?
    Do you put them into Depeche Mode to do so?

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

      Originally posted by Leo Lakio View Post
      Do you put them into Depeche Mode to do so?
      No you use a nutcracker.
      Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

      People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

        Originally posted by matapule View Post
        No you use a nutcracker.
        That's LikaNui's cue, but I'll say it for him:

        "Oh, so you've met my ex-wife, Plaintiff?"

        I can't help but smile when he writes that line; perhaps having been twice-divorced, it resonates with me a wee bit? Maybe? Just sayin' ...

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

          Originally posted by matapule View Post
          No you use a nutcracker.
          Just the utterance of that word, "Nutcracker" makes me cringe. I'd rather be waterboarded than go thru that ordeal
          Life is what you make of it...so please read the instructions carefully.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

            Originally posted by craigwatanabe View Post
            Just the utterance of that word, "Nutcracker" makes me cringe.
            Craig, when you go to the bar and order a beer and some turkey nuts, where do you think they get them? Hellooooooo. You got a bunch of turkeys walking around with high, squeaky gobblers. So go into business providing peacock nuts to Oahu nightclubs. You make money AND take care of peacock problem in Makaha Valley all same time. Matapule know business when he see one. You no get be matapule foa bea dummy. Kay den nuf said.
            Last edited by matapule; December 2, 2009, 11:08 AM.
            Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

            People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

              Originally posted by Frankie's Market View Post
              I wasn't advocating any legal rights for the wild peacocks. I was just stating my personal opinion. Hopefully, you're okay with my doing so on this board, just as you certainly don't hold back on expressing your thoughts.

              The fact that peacocks are not an indigenous creature to Hawaii makes no difference in my opinion that peacocks do not deserve to be clubbed to death. For that matter, dogs also aren't indigenous. If certain peacocks and dogs need to be euthanized, hopefully they will be put to sleep in the most humane way possible.

              Once again, I am simply stating my opinion on this board, just as you are doing the same.

              I don't live in Makaha. But in my neighborhood, I have made 2 complaints to police when I have witnessed what I believed were cruel and abusive treatment of dogs. I do what I can, and that's all that matters to me. What anybody else thinks, I don't really care.

              The fact that animal cruelty happens everyday and many perpetrators get away with it won't change my viewpoint on the matter. So many kids get away with shoplifting. That won't get me to tell my children that petty theft is okay.

              Read what I said earlier about finding humane ways to euthanize animals. Nowhere did I ever advocate preserving the life of every single animal. I realize that ecology is a complex matter and that certain animals have to be subjected to population control for the sake of other species. But even in such cases, I would hope that humane methods of euthanizing and/or spaying/neutering can be found. Once again, this is just my opinion. If anybody else feels otherwise, then they're entitled to state their thoughts.
              And your thoughts and opinions are always welcome Frankie. If you find my comments challenging (in essence - not implying you are challenged), sometimes I just need clarification. You did an excellent job of clarifying your position, and believe it or not, it is very close to mine.

              K
              Be Yourself. Everyone Else Is Taken!
              ~ ~
              Kaʻonohiʻulaʻokahōkūmiomioʻehiku
              Spreading the virus of ALOHA.
              Oh Chu. If only you could have seen what I've seen, with your eyes.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                Originally posted by matapule View Post
                This thread was more fun and interesting when we were trying to figure out what to call a sterilized peacock.........depeckered?
                Uh, peacock -> decock?
                ___peafowl -> defowl?
                Be Yourself. Everyone Else Is Taken!
                ~ ~
                Kaʻonohiʻulaʻokahōkūmiomioʻehiku
                Spreading the virus of ALOHA.
                Oh Chu. If only you could have seen what I've seen, with your eyes.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                  Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
                  And your thoughts and opinions are always welcome Frankie. If you find my comments challenging (in essence - not implying you are challenged), sometimes I just need clarification. You did an excellent job of clarifying your position, and believe it or not, it is very close to mine.
                  Glad to hear. I respect your views.

                  Let me make it clear, if I didn't so earlier. I don't expect Sandra Maloney to receive any prison time. If her attorney cites his client's previous clean record and extenuating circumstances, I'm fine with that. I'm just concerned if the attorney tries to establish a legal precedent that opens the way for others to engage in the same sort of behavior without suffering some sort of repercussion or consequence.

                  Me and my family are dog lovers. But that enthusiasm doesn't blind me to the fact that certain dogs (like certain birds) need to be put down because they are disease carriers and pose a health threat. But even when it is necessary to put such animals to death, it should be done in the most humane way possible. I don't care how fatally diseased a dog might be. Once he is captured and contained, there's no justification for torturing or beating that poor dog to death.
                  This post may contain an opinion that may conflict with your opinion. Do not take it personal. Polite discussion of difference of opinion is welcome.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                    Originally posted by Frankie's Market View Post
                    Glad to hear. I respect your views.

                    Let me make it clear, if I didn't so earlier. I don't expect Sandra Maloney to receive any prison time. If her attorney cites his client's previous clean record and extenuating circumstances, I'm fine with that. I'm just concerned if the attorney tries to establish a legal precedent that opens the way for others to engage in the same sort of behavior without suffering some sort of repercussion or consequence.

                    Me and my family are dog lovers. But that enthusiasm doesn't blind me to the fact that certain dogs (like certain birds) need to be put down because they are disease carriers and pose a health threat. But even when it is necessary to put such animals to death, it should be done in the most humane way possible. I don't care how fatally diseased a dog might be. Once he is captured and contained, there's no justification for torturing or beating that poor dog to death.
                    It seems that what you are saying, FM, is that we need a way to find a humane solution to resolve the almost universal (I have researched other peafowl-inhabited areas as well) problem created by excessive peafowl in close proximity to human habitation.

                    In other areas of the USA, hunting seasons solve the problem. In fact, that is how we limit the over-population of pigs on O`ahu, and the other islands.

                    We hunt pheasant, grouse, pigs, lord knows what else (including fish), for sport, for food, for population control. I don't agree with all of it, but it's not my decision. I am NOT the ultimate arbitrator, I just get to include my opinion, and if I do ( in any official capacity) then it WILL be informed! Otherwise I am not being 'responsible.'

                    I love animals, and plants, too. I eat plants, but I am growing away from eating animals. I kill ants, earwigs and other invasive bugs, but I don't eat them (what a waste!); I don't want to kill animals, not even to eat, at this time in my life - but things change.

                    I don't think peafowl, swans, dolphins, turtles, whales or even humans have any particular "right to survive over all others." Natural selection has done a pretty good job over the millennia, and it took into consideration advanced HSS with our "weapons of mass destruction," (the stone-tipped spear!)

                    Frankie and I are seemingly both against unnecessary suffering (who would have known???)! And, that's a GOOD thing!

                    K

                    (perhaps there's even hope for the human race!?)*








                    * NOT!
                    Be Yourself. Everyone Else Is Taken!
                    ~ ~
                    Kaʻonohiʻulaʻokahōkūmiomioʻehiku
                    Spreading the virus of ALOHA.
                    Oh Chu. If only you could have seen what I've seen, with your eyes.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                      Originally posted by matapule View Post
                      Craig, when you go to the bar and order a beer and some turkey nuts, where do you think they get them? Hellooooooo. You got a bunch of turkeys walking around with high, squeaky gobblers. So go into business providing peacock nuts to Oahu nightclubs. You make money AND take care of peacock problem in Makaha Valley all same time. Matapule know business when he see one. You no get be matapule foa bea dummy. Kay den nuf said.
                      I stay away from stuff that looks like Turkey Nuts. As for Peacock nuts...hmmm...I'm thinking they must be tiny nuts to go with tiny cocks...you know...pea cocks? Rim Shot please!!!
                      Life is what you make of it...so please read the instructions carefully.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                        Sandra got a conviction today, according to KGMB.
                        The peacock is still dead.
                        The judge said the cock was not a species considered to be vermin.

                        What is vermin? And why? Snakes? Mosquitos? Bulbuls? Magpies? Judges? Homo S.S.?
                        Be Yourself. Everyone Else Is Taken!
                        ~ ~
                        Kaʻonohiʻulaʻokahōkūmiomioʻehiku
                        Spreading the virus of ALOHA.
                        Oh Chu. If only you could have seen what I've seen, with your eyes.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                          Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
                          Sandra got a conviction today, according to KGMB.
                          Good! About time someone was held accountable for their actions!

                          The judge said the cock was not a species considered to be vermin.
                          My husband will be so pleased to hear that.

                          Can't think of anything creative this time

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                            Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
                            The judge said the cock was not a species considered to be vermin.
                            You just have to suck out the poison.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                              Originally posted by surlygirly View Post
                              I saw a peacock once at the Dole Plantation. I was eating pineapple ice-cream, turned around, and there was a peacock, looking like she was about to take a nibble off my cone.
                              Oh, you mean your ice cream.
                              Beijing 8-08-08 to 8-24-08

                              Tiananmen Square 4-15-89 to 6-04-89

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                                Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
                                (perhaps there's even hope for the human race!?)*


                                * NOT!
                                Finally, you're seeing my way.
                                Beijing 8-08-08 to 8-24-08

                                Tiananmen Square 4-15-89 to 6-04-89

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X