4769537

Re: Dangerous dogs.

January 14th, 2009 07:10 PM

The choices we're presented with when there is an owner who would not be willing to have a claw bearing cat are simple enough: Death or minor disfigurement. It may be a non-issue to the cat, but given that the cat can't choose the human chooses instead.

4769547

Re: Dangerous dogs.

January 14th, 2009 07:18 PM

You're forgetting the option of not getting the cat and letting someone else get it. People who declaw cats are just another example of humans who don't have enough respect for their pets to treat them properly. Rather than raising the animal right and taking care of it, they would rather take a shortcut. Unfortunately sometimes when dog owners don't take enough of an interest in raising their dog properly and insist on taking "shortcuts" they end up with untrained (or mistrained) dogs that do not behave properly.

I think at shelters they should put "do you plan to disfigure your cat for your convenience?" on the application, to better deny those people pets. People who want pets should take it seriously, not just consider the animal property that they can do whatever they like with. This is one of the biggest problem-causers as far as aggressive pets are concerned.

4769556

Re: Dangerous dogs.

January 14th, 2009 07:32 PM

Apart from for extremely rare breeds there are far more cats than there are potential owners. It's not a case of, 'can I get a cat, will one be available?' There are always cats going free. If a cat doesn't get an owner because we're being fussy about its claws being taken out then even if it's bought by another owner that's one less owner taking a cat out of the system and one cat more in the system that's eventually going to be killed.

4769558

Re: Dangerous dogs.

January 14th, 2009 07:33 PM

You don't honestly think that situation is indicative of human interference as well?

4769565

Re: Dangerous dogs.

January 14th, 2009 07:42 PM

I feel that removing the claws from the cat ruins the cat owning experience.

4769617

Re: Dangerous dogs.

January 14th, 2009 08:26 PM

Obviously the population has been artificially inflated. In the natural world they'd die of natural causes. Slow painful causes. Still dead though.

4769647

Re: Dangerous dogs.

January 14th, 2009 08:58 PM

I agree with you that declawing is unnecessary, but finger nails are made out of dead keratin, not bone. So it's not quite the same, but yes it would still hurt like hell. From the diagram in the link you added, it looks as though then severe a tendon between the actual toe and the claw to disconnect it. It's not really chopping off a finger, it's more like severing the tip of it.

4769651

Re: Dangerous dogs.

January 14th, 2009 09:05 PM

The fact that they're not made of bone was exactly my point. It hurts to lose a nail, but when we lose a nail they a) grow back, and b) don't have to cut through a bone and part of our fingers.

4769658

Re: Dangerous dogs.

January 14th, 2009 09:11 PM

It's much easier, and cheaper to buy a scratching post for them. Or just build one.

4770118

Re: Dangerous dogs.

January 15th, 2009 08:57 AM

I find keeping a cat indoors all the time inhumane, but declawing, that is in another league. Poor little cat.

Some people just should not be allowed to have pets.


Your cat would have been better off dead instead of a life of suffering, but the only real solution would have been to accept it as it was. Some destroyed furniture is to be expected if you have a cat, get a bunny if you prefer having your cables cut.


As a piece of advice, keep quiet about your crime (although declawing actually for some weird sadistic reason seems to be legal in the US), people who mutilate defenseless animals are not popular.