I think that she should be thrown in a deep river. Up to six times if she manages to claw her way out. Hell she enjoyed throwing puppies into a river, I'd personally love to boot her ass in a river.
Is $6400 dollars a suitable punishment for animal cruelty? (redhooded newborn puppy killer)
- Thread starter Eddy E.
- Start date
Recommended Videos
...it is a bit much, cruel and f***ed up, but a little high. I don't think it should be that high but there should be another kind of punishment to go with the fine.
A flat, 6800 isn't smart. It should be $400 and up. Then maybe people would be more keen to smack people in teh face with the law.
Threatening HUMAN LIFE isnt' even that much(speeding tickets and the like)
Threatening HUMAN LIFE isnt' even that much(speeding tickets and the like)
FargoDog said:
I don't know seeing how the average yearly income per capita of Bosnia and Herzegovina is somewhere between 6,300 and 7,700 depending on which organization you trust more it should still be enough to give you an idea of how much money that is to these people. It is far to much to take from them. It could cost them their life savings, and possibly their homes as well.Phoenix09215 said:
Vicarious Vangaurd said:
Yes because advocating and wishing to see the rape, murder, and torture of an eleven year old girl is a great sign of mental health. Unless of course you didn't mean that, but are just so used to being the tough guy on the internet becasue you know you never have to worry about following through.Old Trailmix said:
We all know that the later is the case so why even bother pretending? You wouldn't kill this girl for killing puppies and if you did you would be a worse person then her in my eyes.
Thrifty people could buy 3 used cars for that much. considering this, it's way too over the top and should only be dealt to people who are truly threats to all animals ever. Killing a bunch of puppies isn't that big of a deal. Having a barn full of 20 mangy dogs dying of thirst and hunger, that's 6400 and jail time material.Xojins said:
Sensible and logical comments tickle my reasoning-bone.manaman said:
Besides, I don't believe a fine is going to help in any significant way. Quite the opposite. If anything, it will distance this girl from her family because of them resenting her, and she'll come into a situation where she might do crimes of a similar nature.
As cruel as her acts are, I really think she needs help, not punishment. And I don't mean psychology sessions once a week, but a change of setting. Perhaps a foster family could help. I might be going to drastic lengths here, but when a juvenile girl starts throwing puppies in a river, I think something is wrong with her life, not her mind, and that she might need a better one.
So its ok to drown a bunch of helpless puppies for your own amusement, because they would die anyway?Mad Stalin said:
Thats errr real nice that... real nice
Of course its not enough. Puppies have died and that's a life being taken, adorable life at that. The cost should be a lot higher.
6.4 K is enough. The real retribution will be done by the internet at large. Can you imagine trying to get a job, buy a house (or apartment), or find any friends, when the world knows you're a puppy killer and ENJOYING it.
To the dude above me: the problem is more her enjoyment (laughter? mercy killing shouldn't be funny) Its a sign of psychopathy, and is traditionally repressed by fear of retribution. The 6.4k proves that society can and will punish her for failing to control herself.
To the dude above me: the problem is more her enjoyment (laughter? mercy killing shouldn't be funny) Its a sign of psychopathy, and is traditionally repressed by fear of retribution. The 6.4k proves that society can and will punish her for failing to control herself.
And a prison sentence is not going to bring back a dead human, but you can see why it is necessary. I'd say the charges need to be much, much higher, to ward idiots off trying it again.Bobzer77 said:
No fine would satisfy my hatred for them.
If I hear about animal cruelty, I want public humiliation and castration to follow.
*By public humiliation, I mean when you are, by law, required to walk around with a sign explaining what you did.
i.e.- Ask me about how I murdered innocent puppies.
If I hear about animal cruelty, I want public humiliation and castration to follow.
*By public humiliation, I mean when you are, by law, required to walk around with a sign explaining what you did.
i.e.- Ask me about how I murdered innocent puppies.
Aww, it's okay CalumonJack and Calumon said:
They're in a better place now... Away from that horrible girl that deserves to have her life ruined.
Yeah but I mentioned that she enjoyed it... And then you went on and said it didn't matter because they would die anyway. If she was doing it for mercy I doubt she would've drowned them in a river. Its not very humane!Mad Stalin said:
And again... I never said she should be killed, but I think she should get more then a fine because I don;t think thats the right punishment. But then again its in another part of the world to me so maybe its different there. So I am NOT a hypocrite!
You sir... are a jackass!
Parents would be the only ones affected by the fine, if they can even afford it...
1000 hours of community service, minimum. Mandatory therapy for the next 10 years. Investigation into her upbringing. Girl needs to learn more than just to not put her face on YouTube. A hefty fine makes a great example but doesn't address the problem or even necessarily punish the right people.
Just some thoughts, anyway.
1000 hours of community service, minimum. Mandatory therapy for the next 10 years. Investigation into her upbringing. Girl needs to learn more than just to not put her face on YouTube. A hefty fine makes a great example but doesn't address the problem or even necessarily punish the right people.
Just some thoughts, anyway.