Animal Rights group calls for a boycott of Love/Hate

My name is URL · 07-10-2013 05:08PM

Jamez735 wrote: »

I understand if they had to kill him for food or something, but they could have made it quick, instead of torturing him, ..they deserve to be flattened by a car or something, to see how they like it.

The whole point of those videos is to torture the animals. People get off on watching that stuff. Seriously.. laws have been passed in the US to limit the sale and supply of such material because it had become so popular =(

Tbh, I'd be more sickened by those watching the stuff than the girls in the video. They're most probably only doing it for the money rather than some twisted psycho desire to see animals suffer.

ScumLord · 07-10-2013 05:42PM

If anything these kind of things happening in TV or film highlight animal abuse rather than promote it. I'm sure the show wasn't showing the cat death in a humorous light (I haven't seen it).

It's like people want to stick their heads in the sand over these issue and pretend they don't exist. If the TV didn't highlight acts of cruelty, dumbass animal rights groups would probably never know they happen.

DwightSchrute1 · 07-10-2013 05:45PM

Baybay wrote: »

Irrelevant to the plot, in my opinion.

I disagree, i think it was done to show us how much of a psycho the young lad was.

As for the animal rights group, i think the just using Love/Hate for some media exposure.

07-10-2013 07:25PM

I actually thought it was another Love/Hate joke at first.
But, Id say it was a PR stunt really

BattleCorp · 07-10-2013 07:31PM

Jake1 wrote: »

I actually thought it was another Love/Hate joke at first.
But, Id say it was a PR stunt really

A PR stunt that made them look like a bunch of tossers ......... imho.

Conmaicne Mara · 07-10-2013 07:57PM

BattleCorp wrote: »

A PR stunt that made them look like a bunch of tossers ......... imho.

Walks like a duck......

Gatling · 07-10-2013 07:59PM

But when poor auld darren got whacked with 2 to the back of skull ,

Where was amnesty international ,or Vincent's de Paul

Poor's Darren's favourite hoody was ruined

wp_rathead · 07-10-2013 08:01PM

Deleted User wrote: »

The Animal rights group with get their knickers in a twist if you fart beside a dog. They look for any excuse to complain.

This made me laugh way more than it really shoudl have

Cd_doe · 07-10-2013 08:04PM

Something tells me they didn't watch the first 3 series...

A dog gets beat to death with an iron bar, a swam gets its neck broken and dano kills enough pigeons to fill 2 black bags..

It's nothing new. The will get over it

homerhop · 07-10-2013 08:05PM

if you looked into some of the characters involved in the animal rights groups here in Ireland they are as bad as the characters played in love hate

hatrickpatrick · 07-10-2013 10:02PM

In very much in favour of animal rights, but these people are ridiculous. The same types went berserk when Hangover 3 came out and featured a giraffe getting decapitated (obviously CGI). It makes no sense.

Objecting to fictional depictions where nothing is actually harmed is something I will absolutely never understand.

wazky · 07-10-2013 10:04PM

In fairness, shows what can happen when you fire off your sub-machine gun all willy nilly.

Good consumer advice in my opinion.

Cupcake_Crisis · 07-10-2013 10:33PM

No one gave a bright blue crap when your man punched a swan to death in the last season. I still hear the squawks in my nightmares

chuck_g · 07-10-2013 11:02PM

Could I get a fizzy orange please??

Foxhound38 · 08-10-2013 12:23AM

WIZE wrote: »

Eh the cat is an actor. Hello!!

Mr Snuffles? That's a dog's naaaame :pac:

Baybay · 08-10-2013 12:30AM

DwightSchrute1 wrote: »

I disagree, i think it was done to show us how much of a psycho the young lad was.
.

I believe so too but there were many targets he could have chosen, any of which would have shown that.
For example, he could have sprayed bullets at the collection of lads in the preceding scene.
Or shot his friend while he was taking the picture before calmly picking up the phone & walking off looking at it.
Or if the two had given chase & hunted down the third lad before shooting his body to a bloody pulp.
Or maybe himself.

The point is, he had many options to show he was the hard man / psycho but chose the target that was least interested in him & was actually going in the opposite direction.
How much better might the scene have been if he had eye to eye, human contact with his prey before killing him?

I think it was written the way it was for the shock value of the blood spatter & because the killing of animals has become a part of what the audience seems to expect.
And yes, maybe we have become somewhat immune to humans being killed in the programmes we watch but maybe it's a good thing that we can empathise with something.

Howard Juneau · 08-10-2013 12:36AM

Surely that isn't the first time a pussy got fcked on Love Hate, why is everyone getting so worked up?!

Foxhound38 · 08-10-2013 12:39AM

Baybay wrote: »

For example, he could have sprayed bullets at the collection of lads in the preceding scene.
Or shot his friend while he was taking the picture before calmly picking up the phone & walking off looking at it.
Or if the two had given chase & hunted down the third lad before shooting his body to a bloody pulp.
Or maybe himself.

How are any of these things more acceptable than shooting the cat?

I think it was written the way it was for the shock value

That's exactly why it was written that way, and it was effective in that, and it conveyed the message that the writers wanted to get through about the character in question (that he was a psychopath) without going over the top enough that the reasonable viewer wouldn't be complaining about the fact that the cops didn't decide to hunt him down over it (as they would have had he killed a person in the scene).

Baybay · 08-10-2013 12:50AM

Foxhound38 wrote: »

How are any of these things more acceptable than shooting the cat?
.

They are absolutely not any more acceptable.

They were alternatives to how otherwise the lad could have been presented as a psycho.

ColeTrain · 08-10-2013 01:58AM

Look lads, you just can't be shooting cats with a machine gun, you can't be doing it lads. It's not on at all. Can't be doing it.

padd b1975 · 08-10-2013 07:15AM

That's the thing about machine guns, it's all fun and games until a cat gets shot.

LooksLikeRain · 08-10-2013 01:16PM

Can I hire this guy with his machine gun?
My neighbours cats use my garden as litter tray and I would be grateful if they shoot the next episode of love hate in my garden.
Cats pooh is toxic to children so I will be doing this to protect my children.

OldNotWIse · 08-10-2013 01:18PM

LooksLikeRain wrote: »

Can I hire this guy with his machine gun?
My neighbours cats use my garden as litter tray and I would be grateful if they shoot the next episode of love hate in my garden.
Cats pooh is toxic to children so I will be doing this to protect my children.

If I were your neighbour and you did that to my cat I'd borrow one too...:D

tin79 · 08-10-2013 01:36PM

ARAN seem to be against everything.

Farming, hunting, fur, any dead animal on television, the circus, leaving animals in cars

I though this was particularly good and shows what a bunch of nuts they seem to be:

From their website

Recently an activist locked herself into a scorching hot car on St Stephen's Green for nearly an hour wearing nothing more than a fur coat (that was donated by a member of the public who had a change of heart in relation to wearing fur but whom wanted some good to come from the killing of the animals) - the activist tried to resemble just what life is like for animals trapped in cars in this hot weather where many often die and those who don't often get brain damage and suffer from heatstroke.

I especially love the desperate attempt to justify the use of fur. Oh we don't agree with you wearing fur but its ok for us to use it because its bought already and we have a great pseudoscientific use for it.

Mr Whirly · 08-10-2013 01:55PM

They're dead right about leaving dogs in cars on a hot day. What's wrong with highlighting that when lots of ill informed people do it?

You also don't have to be an animal rights activist to have a problem with hunting, fur and circuses that use animals.

An animal getting killed by a youth is a popular way of getting across that someone is a psycho. It's been used 1000's of times. Nothing wrong there.

meemeemee · 08-10-2013 01:57PM

Indeed. There have been many studies, that showed some of the most infamous psychopaths started as children hurting animals.

Dancor · 08-10-2013 01:59PM

Complaining about the cat being shot but they don't care about Tommy chocking the chicken? Eijits

pookiesboo · 08-10-2013 02:03PM

chuck_g wrote: »

Could I get a fizzy orange please??

I've been laughing at that line since Sunday night. You know people are going to be saying it for a long time!

tin79 · 08-10-2013 02:04PM

Mr Whirly wrote: »

They're dead right about leaving dogs in cars on a hot day. What's wrong with highlighting that when lots of ill informed people do it?

You also don't have to be an animal rights activist to have a problem with hunting, fur and circuses that use animals.
.

Its the way they do it that's mad. Getting naked, popping on a fur coat and sitting in a car doesn't suggest a balanced mind or logical argument to me.

Plus they are against wearing fur.... until its suits their agenda to do so.

ThisRegard · 08-10-2013 02:06PM

DwightSchrute1 wrote: »

I disagree, i think it was done to show us how much of a psycho the young lad was

Baybay wrote: »

I believe so too but there were many targets he could have chosen, any of which would have shown that.

From what I remember the cat was shot accidentally anyway. He was aiming at the feet of the other guy who was running and the cat ran across him and got shot.

Animal Rights group calls for a boycott of Love/Hate

Comments