Animal welfare in Japan.

[word]

Tell you what, since you're having a lot of trouble with this infinitive business, let's ask someone that you respect more than me. Shall we present your original statement to a non-involved English professor or two and see what he or she has to say about it? Having spent a bit of time with English professors in my day, I can assure you that many of them would LOVE to weigh in on this. The English language is fun, and as everyone here is either an English teacher or an aspiring English teacher, this discussion is very relevant to each and every one of us! Maybe we should spin this infinitive discussion off into its own thread!

[word]

All right, in an effort to keep this thread on track, I have started a separate thread for our grammar debate. I have also submitted a similar question to linguistlist.org; they promise the question will be forwarded to a panel for review within 48 hours. I tried to be very fair and un-biased in both my post here and my request with the Linguist List, as you can see. Hopefully, this thread will get back on a more relevant track.

Hopefully.

[word]

Frankly I don't know what motivates someone to drown puppies. You posed a scenario about a money-motivated person disposing of unwanted property. In that case my solution would work, I've transformed something worthless into a commodity with value.

Except that it wouldn't work in the long run, because you've encouraged the behavior that caused them to drown puppies in the first place. Your solution is a a short-term one at best; unfortunately, it is part of the root cause of the problem.

The second possibility you raised, that of a psychopath, well in that scenario my solution of offering money wouldn't work as the act has "value" in their opinion. However, in that scenario your solution, threatening them with legal action then appealing to their better nature, wouldn't work either, as they're unlikely to coercion and might even attack you if they perceived you as a threat (animal cruelty being a gateway to eventual human attacks). The second motivation (psychopath) is extremely difficult to solve, but would be apparent from the manner in which the act was being conducted.

Possibly, but in my opinion, saving puppies is worth the small risk of attack. I would suspect the first scenario is more likely than the second, wouldn't you?

*Sigh* I got side-tracked by the entire grammar debate, which you have pursued despite me clarifying what I intended. I admit, I made a single, honest, grammatical error over the course of several pages.

I repeatedly offered you the chance to correct your error. In each instance, you attacked and insulted me rather than confront your own mistake. I honestly worried about the effects of your inadvertent posting of incorrect information on these forums. Would you not speak up if you noticed someone posting something that was simply not true? Would you not feel a bit slighted if you were then insulted for attempting to point out their mistake? I believe I am owed an apology, sir.

I clarified my meaning much earlier on.

Did you? I don't remember you acknowledging that it was a violation of Japanese law for a person to abuse an animal anywhere in this thread. Did I miss it?

You, however, continually misrepresented my position, accusing me of advocating not reporting crimes in Japan. I made an honest error, you dishonestly misrepresented my position. I'm only human, but at least I'm a better human than you are.

Funny, that doesn't sound much like the apology I was hoping for.

you're continually constructing straw men...

Straw man. I do not think it means what you think it means.

in order to justify your dishonesty in misrepresenting my positon

I'm just asking you a question; I didn't misrepresent anything! I've offered you some hypothetical situations, because you've made it clear that you believe, in order to avoid potential legal entanglements, ALTs should avoid reporting crimes unless they have photographic evidence of the crime taking place. I disagree with this belief and hope that you will re-examine it, yourself.

Not only am I braver, wiser and generally a better human than you (and humbler to boot), but I'm also more knowledgeable than you...

I think you've said all that needs to be said here. I'll let the readers decide what to make of this statement.

[coop52]

You know, William, you don't have to be right all the time. It's ok to let things go. I've noticed in the last few threads like this that you tend to write very long posts attacking various little details without adding much to the actual discussion. It makes you look very angry when you write novel-length posts attacking someone's grammar. If it was just one time and if it was something obvious, that's one thing. But, it seems like you're actually looking for a fight when you criticize someone over tiny little things every single time. Maybe it's time to unbunch the panties and chill out.

[Antonath]

I've pretty much ignored the arguments you've been having with Word. I'm not a grammar (WWII German ruling party member, to avoid bringing down the wrath of the whatever, from high atop the thing), and if either of you get your kicks derailing every thread, that's your business.

Unlike you I'm posting under my real name. You're hiding behind a nickname.

This? I'm sorry, but practically everyone on this forum is "hiding" behind a nickname. Practically everyone on every forum is "hiding" behind a nickname. That's how internet forums work. Does this mean you think you're "braver" than everyone on this forum (nay, the entire internet), because you used your real name? Feel free not to reply to someone you're "braver" than, by the way.

[Marie_KumamotoPA]

Hi Staticnz,

Thanks for your original post at the beginning of the thread. SPCA is in Japan and here is a link to their website.
http://www.nipponspca.com/ The website has an English version but it is not as comprehensive as the Japanese version. It certainly does not have the same infrastructure as it does in New Zealand (I am also from New Zealand) but I checked and my prefecture has a local branch and we are way down in Kyushuu. Not sure if my prefecture has a shelter but they seem to have some kind of presence, in terms of lobbying for change.

Many Japanese I mix with are concerned about the treatment of animals and our zoo has recently changed some of it's enclosures. Unfortunately they have a long way to go, but I think it is great that the change is happening. There is a lot of cruelty towards animals in my home country and I admire the groups of people that are trying to address this. I also admire the people in Japan who are trying to address the issue of animal cruelty and the hard work they do.

Hope this information helps in some way.

Kind regards,

Marie

[variouscurtains]

A quick Google search shows that there are some laws in place to protect neglected or abused animals in Japan, or at least laws that punish those who neglect or abuse animals by way of fine or prison sentence.

I like your writing an anonymous letter idea. If you feel it should be reported, one step you can take is to make a report to the police and they will decide whether to investigate it or not.

[Antonath]

Unlike you I'm posting under my real name. You're hiding behind a nickname.

This? I'm sorry, but practically everyone on this forum is "hiding" behind a nickname. Practically everyone on every forum is "hiding" behind a nickname. That's how internet forums work. Does this mean you think you're "braver" than everyone on this forum (nay, the entire internet), because you used your real name? Feel free not to reply to someone you're "braver" than, by the way.

Except all the PAs, who are required to identify themselves.

Very true, and a point I was condsidering mentioning, but I thought it was blindingly obvious to everyone concerned. I shall remember to point out the blindingly obvious to you from now on.

The PAs also have "PA" in their usernames.

Y'know, just in case that one slipped by you.

As for braver, well, prove me wrong, create an account with your real name here and use it instead of your nickname. Until you do you've proven my point for me.

One, second accounts aren't allowed. They get you banned. (Which is bad, in case that one slipped by you.)

Two, I could create an account calling myself Jeff Bartlett, Claire Smith, Tom Jones, or Carlos Spicyweiner, and you'd have no way of knowing if that was my real name. Just like we have no way of knowing that "William MacDonald" is your real name. (A hint: my name isn't Carlos Spicyweiner.)

Three, even if it is your real name, that doesn't make you brave for using it. It makes you... less than fully educated... in the ways of the internet. As an example: sticking your hand into a lion's mouth doesn't make you brave.

Four, won't someone please think of the abused animals!

[coop52]

You know, William, you don't have to be right all the time. It's ok to let things go. I've noticed in the last few threads like this that you tend to write very long posts attacking various little details without adding much to the actual discussion. It makes you look very angry when you write novel-length posts attacking someone's grammar. If it was just one time and if it was something obvious, that's one thing. But, it seems like you're actually looking for a fight when you criticize someone over tiny little things every single time. Maybe it's time to unbunch the panties and chill out.

Umm... coop52, I think you may need to re-read the thread. I wasn't attacking Word's grammar, he was attacking mine. I made a mess of suggestions, and then Word pretty much attacked me around page 2 and I kept responding to his idiotic scenarios and accusations trying to clarify things for him... until I realised he had no interest in clarifications or understanding, all he wanted was to troll. My bad for falling for a troll and assuming that someone might just actually misunderstand something.

.... so seriously coop52, if you're going to criticise someone one these grounds you've got the wrong person.

Honestly, I stopped reading your and word's whole posts because they were getting long, pointless, and dumb. There's no reason to write a whole novel; be succinct. Even if word was the one who started it, that doesn't mean you have to feed into it. He'll stop if you ignore it. He carries on because you let it carry on. If you don't want to argue with him, then just let it go.


How in the world do you have time to write a novel every day? Don't you work?

[Sleazysauce]

I am confused. What does your real name have to do with anything? Arguments stand and fall on their own ground. It doesn't really matter who you are. Using your real name has not lended you anymore credibility or made your argument any stronger. Oh, word's name isn't really word (I always assumed it was)? I will have to agree with william macdonald's argument then because I know that he uses his real name... I don't think you were trying to make an argument from authority here. However, it's possible you were and it should be pointed out that those are often a big red flag for fallacies. If william macdonald says it's true then it must be! Although, I think you were just flaunting your "bravery" or as Antonath put it your ignorance of the internet. Anonymity is a good thing to have because otherwise some troll might google William Macdonald and find some information that they may use in a rude or uncomfortable manner. It's usually best to keep stuff like your name private if you're going to engage in arguments with strangers on the internet.

[Cytrix]

Also it makes it super easy for your employees to find out you've been slacking off on paid time. Because believe it or not...arguing semantics and starting quote-wars is not part of the job

[Namisuke]

How in the world do you have time to write a novel every day? Don't you work?

The exact same idea crossed my mind.

And ditto to the name thing. Please be careful about using your real name on the internet. With one quick Google search, one could see your online resume, where you work, your photo, and so on. When considering animal welfare, you have to consider your own welfare also. We too are animals, right?

[Cytrix]

Yeah I'm literally looking at your resume right now

[coop52]

Nice cheetah by the way

[word]

Another angle the OP might try if the owners have young children (kindof a long shot, but you never know) is talking to them about the potential health benefits of having a dog inside. According to a recent study (there have been other similar studies in the past), dogs may help protect infants from breathing problems and infections! There may be some truly amazing positive side effects to bringing that poor dog inside, giving him a bath, and letting him live a bit more comfortably!

http://news.yahoo.com/babies-dog-owning-families-may-healthier-041915748.html

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2012/07/03/peds.2011-2825.abstract?sid=d9a7101d-a252-4bce-ab82-c0cf315ec40e

A pet cheetah? That's pretty cruel, in my opinion; I dunno if I could be friends with someone that kept an endangered animal as a pet.