C l u t c H 385
Banned
Fine, but it's not just extreme animal rights people who disagree with you. Most people do. That's why doing those hideous things to dogs in punishable with prison.
People have lost their damn minds
- Thread starter TheItinerantSon
- Start date
Fine, but it's not just extreme animal rights people who disagree with you. Most people do. That's why doing those hideous things to dogs in punishable with prison.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
It seems like people who take things to the "extreme" seem to be the problem here.
C l u t c H 385
Banned
Like people who equate a cheeseburger with torturing a dog?
Or people that want to pretend that a dog's life is just as important as a human's therefor equal punishment for treating either badly should apply.
C l u t c H 385
Banned
Exactly, I'm glad no one said this. That would be stupid.
It should be telling here that Scat and I agree on almost nothing but are in lockstep on this issue.
I think you're interpreting the fact that the laws are on the books incorrectly. There's a political consideration here. To wit: the legislator that votes against animal cruelty laws will be portrayed as being in favor of animal cruelty in his next election campaign. This stuff happens all the time to criminals who are continually demonized excessively and unfairly often because local politicans don't want to be vulnerable to a charge that they are soft on crime.
True story: When I was working in Tennessee the legislature voted to amend their sexual offender registration law. Under the previous law, which had been enacted in the early 1990s, all persons who had been convicted of a sexual offense and were currently serving time or in prison had to register for the law as well as all people who committed sexual offenses going forward. So if by the operative date of the law (I think it was 1993) you had already served your time and were off probation you didn't have to register as a sex offender.
In 2007 or 2008 the legislature amended the law to say that you had to register as a sex offender no matter when you committed the offense. The only people this change in the law affected were people who had not committed a crime in 15 years, because all reoffenders would have had to register after their subsequent offense. This passed because no one wanted to be portrayed as soft on sex offenders later down the line.
For all this, I blame Willie Horton. I suspect there is a similar dynamic at play with animal cruelty laws.
Here's a sensible punishment: Fines. Butchering an animal without a license. Start it at $1,000 for an offense and escalating upwards from there. Don't ruin people's lives over a cat or a dog.
PETA has taken that position in the past, including comparing Kentucky Fried Chicken to Nazi death camps.
Also, and apropo of nothing, PETA is prominently involved in what I consider to be one of the most poorly reasoned court decisions I have ever read.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_for_the_Ethical_Treatment_of_Animals_v._Doughney
I usually agree with Tink, but not here.
I equate my dog to a family member. If someone killed or tortured her for fun or sport or whatever, they'd answer to me. The answer being a severe beating and/or killing. Yup, I'd kill for the life of my dog. I love her like my wife and kids.
I equate my dog to a family member. If someone killed or tortured her for fun or sport or whatever, they'd answer to me. The answer being a severe beating and/or killing. Yup, I'd kill for the life of my dog. I love her like my wife and kids.
C l u t c H 385
Banned
I thought he was implying someone here said that. PETA does many retarded things.
I figured awesome analogies would be right up your alley after the "Vick torturing dogs = kids pulling off insect legs" gem you had earlier.
C l u t c H 385
Banned
Regardless of how you interpret the meaning of the existence of a law, I think you would find that most people (even other than politicians) agree with prison sentences for Vick-like behavior and are also just fine with requiring the registering of sex offenders even long after they have finished their sentence.
billyshelby
Well-Known Member
Kicky, let me see if I'm following your logic. Lets say your cat escapes. I see it on the street. I say, "Here Kitty Kitty." And it comes running up into my arms, all scared and everything because its lost, hungry, and just wants to get home to you. I say, "Don't worry, Kicky's kitty, I'm going to take you straight home."
Then I take it behind the back of a dirty 7/11 and gouge out its eyes. You know, just to get a few laughs watching it try to run away without eyes. Then I dunk it in a drum of moldy rainwater a few times till it almost drowns because that cracks me up. Finally I douse it in gasoline and set fire to it. I positively love watching your cat suffer, and I'm sorry when it ends.
So when I voluntarily confess and write my 1,000 dollar check out to the State of California, you and me are square, right? I'm not saying we'll go bowling, but as far as you're concerned I broke the law, paid my dues, and life goes on.
Then I take it behind the back of a dirty 7/11 and gouge out its eyes. You know, just to get a few laughs watching it try to run away without eyes. Then I dunk it in a drum of moldy rainwater a few times till it almost drowns because that cracks me up. Finally I douse it in gasoline and set fire to it. I positively love watching your cat suffer, and I'm sorry when it ends.
So when I voluntarily confess and write my 1,000 dollar check out to the State of California, you and me are square, right? I'm not saying we'll go bowling, but as far as you're concerned I broke the law, paid my dues, and life goes on.
If its Kicky's Kittie and had proper tag, you'd be stealing his property and be committing a theft or destruction of property or whatever. So you can get time for that. Then, Kicky can sue you big time in a civil court for emotional distress and related damages and you'd be broke. Thats not enough for you?
billyshelby
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I thought about getting every detail square. So let me revise. Kicky's kitty escapes and some little kid takes the tag off it without thinking. The kitty is not microchipped. So when I find it, it's just a lost kitty. Yeah, I could surmise it's not a wild cat--well groomed, not afraid of me, clearly domesticated--but by the letter of the law it's a cat without tags that as far as I know was not someone's property. And just to finish the story right, I coincidentally was torturing it in the alley behind his house that I walked to from the dirty 7/11 where I found it. He saw me cackling in its death throes. I shrugged I didn't know it was his, there were no tags or microchip, it didn't occur on his property, and I was just disobeying a law that costs 1,000 to make right.
C l u t c H 385
Banned
+ a lot
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
"It's just a damn dog" is a completely ridiculous argument to make. I'd say a good portion of the population don't fine canines to be "damn dogs."
Boondocksaint27
Active Member
Put me in the "It's not ok to torture a dog and get a slap on the wrist" camp
So we're going with "majority rules" now? I guess this means you support prop 8 because the majority voted for it?
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
And I'm sure your argument there is, "They're just damn gays," right?
C l u t c H 385
Banned
That's pretty much how laws work. As a society we decide what is or isn't OK. Most people think you shouldn't kill someone, so we make it illegal.
Poor attempt at deflection and misdirection... I'll ask again, does the majority rule or not? That's your argument. Animal cruelty is a federal offense because a majority of people say it is. If that's the case, gay marriage is illegal because a majority of people say it is. You can't pick and choose.