Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

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

  • #46
    Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

    I live in a forest, so I know a great deal about wild cats (catch em and take them to the humane society), dogs (same thing), boars (smoke the big ones, catch and give away the small ones) and rodents (kill them when we can).

    When we stay at my inlaws' house in Papakolea, I almost go insane with the peacocks. It isn't their cries, but their dung that winds up everywhere and stinks to high heaven.

    Catch them, pelt the feathers for the lei hulu crafters/vendors and follow a pheasant recipe, I say.

    pax

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

      Sandra Maloney had her day in court and is asking Judge Mike Wilson for a dismissal of the animal cruelty charge.

      http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/ar...ssal+of+charge

      As I said previously, even if she is convicted, Maloney is likely to get a light sentence as she does not have a prior criminal record. But I can't imagine Judge Wilson going along with her attorney's argument that wild peacocks are "detrimental to human life."
      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


      • #48
        Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

        Originally posted by Frankie's Market View Post
        As I said previously, even if she is convicted, Maloney is likely to get a light sentence as she does not have a prior criminal record. But I can't imagine Judge Wilson going along with her attorney's argument that wild peacocks are "detrimental to human life."
        I would guess than neither you nor hizzonner have had the experience of living in close proximity to a clade of peacocks and peahens.

        Imagine living on a property with 10 roosters, and multiply that by 10!

        There screeches sound like human babies being tortured, but at a level of 10x decibels more intense.

        If you can sleep through that, you must be deaf.

        She should plead temporary insanity due to PTSD.

        But,my, aren't they beautiful??????

        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


        • #49
          Green Amazon Parrots

          Originally posted by Frankie's Market View Post
          Animal sterilization = animal cruelty?

          To some folks, maybe. But it's not a view shared by the Humane Society. They view spaying/neutering to be highly preferable to euthanizing or indefinitely caging unwanted animals who cannot find a suitable home.

          Forced sterilization on a human could be considered cruel, since there are other options that can achieve birth control. Animals are different.... unless Dr. Doolittle can find a way to teach them how to practice "safe sex."
          Sorry, off topic, but related.

          If you go up to the park/heiau before the Aiea loop trail,at the right time, you will confront the screeching of hundreds of feral Amazon Green Parrots.

          They are breeding and spreading.... Had a few fly over to Kahalu`u a couple months ago! (Aiea is right over the Ko`olaus)

          They were delicious!

          Then I discovered they go for up to $400 each! Auwe!

          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


          • #50
            Re: Green Amazon Parrots

            Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
            If you go up to the park/heiau before the Aiea loop trail,at the right time, you will confront the screeching of hundreds of feral Amazon Green Parrots.
            Thanx for bring up the greenies, now I don't have to search for the thread where I mentioned seeing one at the main library/Palace areas earlier this year.
            Yesterday I saw 5!
            Alfred Hitchcock, where are you...?
            https://www.facebook.com/Bobby-Ingan...5875444640256/

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

              Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
              I would guess than neither you nor hizzonner have had the experience of living in close proximity to a clade of peacocks and peahens.
              No, but being human, I do take advantage of the fact that I can make a careful and thoughtful choice on selecting the best place to live for me and my family. And if a certain property is close to the habitat of noisy, wild animals, then that certainly has to be taken into account before signing the deal. But that's just me. Maybe other people leap before looking when it comes to that kind of stuff, like Sandra Maloney. Oh well.
              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


              • #52
                Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                She didn't just kill it, did she? I hope she didn't waste all that lovely meat...I hope she had the good sense to pluck and draw the bird and then eat it.
                http://thissmallfrenchtown.blogspot.com/
                http://thefrenchneighbor.blogspot.com/

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                  http://www.yumsugar.com/883996
                  http://thissmallfrenchtown.blogspot.com/
                  http://thefrenchneighbor.blogspot.com/

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                    And it's a home run!!!
                    Life is what you make of it...so please read the instructions carefully.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                      Originally posted by Frankie's Market View Post
                      No, but being human, I do take advantage of the fact that I can make a careful and thoughtful choice on selecting the best place to live for me and my family. And if a certain property is close to the habitat of noisy, wild animals, then that certainly has to be taken into account before signing the deal. But that's just me. Maybe other people leap before looking when it comes to that kind of stuff, like Sandra Maloney. Oh well.
                      Heh, heh.

                      Some things just are not as obvious to everyone other than yourself.

                      Most people see peafowl at parks and such, and think "how pretty." They don't stay there all day and night to check out if they are just pretty or overwhelmingly obnoxious at certain times.

                      Obviously you already know everything, and just as obviously the real estate data mentioned peacocks as being obnoxious pests as well as decorative assets. Shouldn't everyone know this anyway? Even if they haven't been exposed to peafowl 24/7? Jeez, didn't they read their encyclopedia?

                      Well, you know what? Some people are human, and they make mistakes. And they make choices they later regret, because they are not perfect.

                      Unlike you, I guess? How fortunate you must be; won't you help the rest of us out of our primitive morass?

                      Granted, it is incumbent upon each of us to be informed, and we are responsible for our choices and our actions. Have you made no mistakes? Have no regrets? Come, teach us your wisdom! We sorely need it.

                      Oh, and yes, some people do leap - it's called an emotional reaction. Some people do have emotions, you know. And probably 99.9% of us are not perfect. Strangely though, there's a significant percentage above 0.1% who believe they are! (Not you, of course, as you already said you are "human.")

                      Hope you can still take some good natured ribbing, as I have from you in the past.

                      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


                      • #56
                        Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                        Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
                        Most people see peafowl at parks and such, and think "how pretty." They don't stay there all day and night to check out if they are just pretty or overwhelmingly obnoxious at certain times.
                        Speaking for myself, my sympathy for the wild peacocks in Makaha lie not in their physical appearance, but by the fact that those birds have inhabited that area for over a century. In contrast, Sandra Maloney moved into her apartment five years ago. Should the bludgeoning of the peacock be justified because a relative "newcomer" is irritated by the noise? No doubt in some people's mind, whenever there's a conflict between the interests of wildlife and human, the latter should always win out. If an urban development project encroaches on the breeding grounds of an animal species, then too bad for the wildlife. If a fishery uses nets that maximizes the catching of tuna at the expense of snagging and killing sea turtles and dolphins, then too bad for the latter. Might makes right in some people's mind. I don't subscribe to that way of thinking. But if other people do, then they are certainly entitled to it.

                        Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
                        Obviously you already know everything, and just as obviously the real estate data mentioned peacocks as being obnoxious pests as well as decorative assets. Shouldn't everyone know this anyway? Even if they haven't been exposed to peafowl 24/7? Jeez, didn't they read their encyclopedia?

                        Well, you know what? Some people are human, and they make mistakes. And they make choices they later regret, because they are not perfect.

                        Unlike you, I guess? How fortunate you must be; won't you help the rest of us out of our primitive morass?

                        Granted, it is incumbent upon each of us to be informed, and we are responsible for our choices and our actions. Have you made no mistakes? Have no regrets? Come, teach us your wisdom! We sorely need it.

                        Oh, and yes, some people do leap - it's called an emotional reaction. Some people do have emotions, you know. And probably 99.9% of us are not perfect. Strangely though, there's a significant percentage above 0.1% who believe they are! (Not you, of course, as you already said you are "human.")

                        Hope you can still take some good natured ribbing, as I have from you in the past.
                        By all means. Carry on to your heart's content.
                        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


                        • #57
                          Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                          There are times when I feel like bludgeoning my neighbor's incessantly barking dogs. Or the grackles that won't shut up in the spring. But I exercise self control and don't do it. Perhaps the peacocks felt the same way about Sandra. Too bad the bird didn't get a fair fight.

                          Can't think of anything creative this time

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                            Originally posted by Frankie's Market View Post
                            Speaking for myself, my sympathy for the wild peacocks in Makaha lie not in their physical appearance, but by the fact that those birds have inhabited that area for over a century. In contrast, Sandra Maloney moved into her apartment five years ago.
                            So that amounts to... what? Squatter's rights? Adverse possession?

                            I'm one of those folk who have a soft spot in my heart for indigenous species over introduced. Indigenous species have evolved with the environment; introduced species generally mess it up.
                            Certainly the invasive peacocks have less justification than Homo Sapiens Sapiens - HSS having been here MUCH longer than peafowl.
                            And I'm not a racist, so the varieties within a species mean nothing to me.
                            Hawaiians, Caucasians, etc., all ONE species, whereas peafowl don't fit, they are adapted to a different climate/region.

                            Should the bludgeoning of the peacock be justified because a relative "newcomer" is irritated by the noise? No doubt in some people's mind, whenever there's a conflict between the interests of wildlife and human, the latter should always win out.
                            I can't justify her actions unless it was done for food or the maintenance of sanity. If she didn't kill the cock, would her neighbors be next? Should we let wild pigs dig up Kapiolani Park? I suppose according to you we should not kill the rats that invade our gardens or homes? Or the ants, or fleas, ad infinitum?
                            Somewhere a line must be drawn. Are you the arbiter? The final judge?

                            If an urban development project encroaches on the breeding grounds of an animal species, then too bad for the wildlife. If a fishery uses nets that maximizes the catching of tuna at the expense of snagging and killing sea turtles and dolphins, then too bad for the latter.
                            Wake up, Frankie. Look around you. It's happening all the time! Are you doing anything to stop it? I hope so, because you know what they say: "if your not a part of the solution... you're part of the problem."

                            I'm certain you are, though, because of your KNOWLEDGE of the problem, and your position, which would be threatened by a DUI, I trust you are putting your energies where mine are, into protection of our environment, and of our NATIVE species. Or are you into the protection of mongooses over Nene?

                            Might makes right in some people's mind. I don't subscribe to that way of thinking. But if other people do, then they are certainly entitled to it.
                            Thinking becomes action. I can't stop them from thinking, but when it becomes action I'll say: "Not on my watch."

                            By all means. Carry on to your heart's content.
                            How politically correct!

                            As expected,
                            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


                            • #59
                              Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                              Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
                              So that amounts to... what? Squatter's rights? Adverse possession?
                              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.

                              Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
                              I'm one of those folk who have a soft spot in my heart for indigenous species over introduced. Indigenous species have evolved with the environment; introduced species generally mess it up.
                              Certainly the invasive peacocks have less justification than Homo Sapiens Sapiens - HSS having been here MUCH longer than peafowl.
                              And I'm not a racist, so the varieties within a species mean nothing to me.
                              Hawaiians, Caucasians, etc., all ONE species, whereas peafowl don't fit, they are adapted to a different climate/region.
                              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.

                              Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
                              Are you the arbiter? The final judge?
                              I could ask the same questions of you as well.

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

                              Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
                              Wake up, Frankie. Look around you. It's happening all the time! Are you doing anything to stop it? I hope so, because you know what they say: "if your not a part of the solution... you're part of the problem."
                              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.

                              Originally posted by Kaonohi View Post
                              I'm certain you are, though, because of your KNOWLEDGE of the problem, and your position, which would be threatened by a DUI, I trust you are putting your energies where mine are, into protection of our environment, and of our NATIVE species. Or are you into the protection of mongooses over Nene?
                              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.
                              Last edited by Frankie's Market; December 2, 2009, 03:45 AM.
                              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


                              • #60
                                Re: Sandra Maloney v. The Peacock

                                This thread was more fun and interesting when we were trying to figure out what to call a sterilized peacock.........depeckered?
                                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

                                Working...
                                X