Poll: Legal responsiblity

[Eyclonus]

Personally, I kept hearing 'Yakety Sax' in the back of my head while reading that story.

That sounds like a robot chicken re-enactment of it...

Warmachine, its a croc, not an alligator, the difference is size and sheer aggression. Its not possible to pacify a crocodile, you pretty much have to leave the area, or use a tranq dart or six.

 

[Imitation Saccharin]

Where are you getting the parallel about the beef industry?

If you don't want to read previous posts, don't comment on a current one. This debate is already tedious, and I'm not explaining again.

You are stating that people are being hypocritical for holding some life (that of zoo animals) above others (that of animals bred for food)?

Almost. I am saying it is hypocrisy to not regard them as equal moral crimes disregarding the theft element.

 

[Mstrswrd]

The funny thing is, the article didn't state that he was necessarily being cruel to the animals. He could just very well have a fascination with crocadiles (did I spell that right? Wait, I'm to sick to care right now!). People feed insects to reptiles all the time because the're insects. Who cares what they feel. Well, at 7 years old, he could have thought "Big Animal feels more then small animal, big animal gets small animal for food."

The thought patterns of children are simplistic, and while children at that age do have a basic undestanding of right and wrong, it is in a very limited scope. They think of right and wrong in Human terms. Oftentimes, non-humans are not given the same respect as humans. I myself never hurt animals, but my family had 2 cats. I never physically hurt the cats because I loved them, but one of them was very scittish, and when I was 7, I thought it was hilarious to scare the ever-loving crap out of him, no matter how many time I was told not to. By the time I was 10, I had stopped, but you get the idea. Both of the cats have since died of old age, my family got 4 more (oy, 4 fucking cats), and before that, I had a hamster. I've taken very good care of any animals I had to, but If you saw me when I was younger, you would have thought I would turn out to be a horrible person.

What should happen is that he should be given counceling. Not the wimpy "He has trauama we must discover" crap, but the hardcore "You're a fuck-up, and I'm going to fix you even If I need to smack you upside the head until your ears bleed" kind.

Sorry for spelling/grammar errors, but I can barely see because I'm coughing so much. Hard to breath, eyes tear, hard to see.

 

[Amnestic]

You are stating that people are being hypocritical for holding some life (that of zoo animals) above others (that of animals bred for food)?

Almost. I am saying it is hypocrisy to not regard them as equal moral crimes disregarding the theft element.

Why? And I'm not even being silly here. It's a fairly honest question. Slaughterhouse animals are just that. Until we can produce genetically created slabs of meat cost effectively, people on a large scale will never have a moral issue with killing animals for meat. Considering humanity is what makes morals, it's not hypocritical at all to count one life above another. I count the life of my friends and family far above that of Joe Bloggs in the street.

All men are not created equal. All animals are not created equal. Social darwinism at work.

 

[Chickenlittle]

Well, considering the kid broke in, and did this while nobody was around, I have to say they must have known on some level what was going on.

At the least, it was to feed the crocodile. In the middle, the kid was just doing it to amuse himself, cruelly. At the far end, Psychosis, where a person knows what they are doing, but is mentally disconnected from their surroundings.

I believe the child should be institutionalized, and be given counseling to discover why he did it.

For those of you who believe he should go free, why? Most likely, he will do the same thing again, except the next time might involve some little girl's puppy or cat.

 

[Eyclonus]

Where are you getting the parallel about the beef industry?

If you don't want to read previous posts, don't comment on a current one. This debate is already tedious, and I'm not explaining again.

Dude I started this damn thread I have been reading all the posts. I just don't see why your constantly touting militant Herbivore rhetoric and arguing that its relevant, and yet when someone tries to link your own concepts back to the initial topic you get all self-righteous.

No one heres gone the PETA kamikaze, which is excellent because thats only acceptable on forums for PETA suicide bombers, don't derail the thread man.

 

[Imitation Saccharin]

it's not hypocritical at all to count one life above another.

If this is the reason, why is it illegal to butcher cows by convoluted torture?

Dude I started this damn thread I have been reading all the posts.

Then quite frankly sir, I question your honesty.

yet when someone tries to link your own concepts back to the initial topic you get all self-righteous.

I've defended the claim at least twice, that you can't be bothered to remember is honestly of little interest to me.

In the interest of civility, do you want me to quote myself?

No one heres gone the PETA kamikaze

I pointed out a hypocrisy. Who I am is irrelevant.

But Socratic debate is so very hard to put fallacies into isn't it? S'why I love it.

 

[Eyclonus]

Socratic debate assumes that a truth alrady exists

 

[Imitation Saccharin]

Socratic debate assumes that a truth alrady exists

It merely assumes the opposition's initial conclusion as true, and then extrapolates on them to find self-inconsistencies.

 

[Eyclonus]

Either point, Socratic methods lead to emotional reactions, I prefer DeBono logic, but I can see that your probably not interested in that.

 

[Imitation Saccharin]

Either point, Socratic methods lead to emotional reactions

Because it's so annoyingly definitive. It's the logicians greatest tool.

 

[Amnestic]

If this is the reason, why is it illegal to butcher cows by convoluted torture?

Because it's illegal to cause unnecessary pain to another living being, perhaps?

Now unfortunately I had to use the word unnecessary, to which your rebuttal would be to fall back on the humans can be vegetarians defence, however I call upon society as my evidence in that they can't. The fact that we're still eating meat, even though it may be cheaper to grow peanuts as you said, seems to me that it's a necessary part of human nature and society to eat meat. (Note that I'm talking en masse here, not individuals)

The meat market is necessary in that you can't get rid of it, as such, killing animals for meat is necessary. Torturing them is not.

Edit: And on that note, time for bed. Expecting a semi-important phone call tomorrow and would rather be awake and alert for it than half asleep.

 

[Imitation Saccharin]

it's a necessary part of human nature

Many ugly things are. Yet they have been overcome.
We do we make an exception here?

The meat market is necessary in that you can't get rid of it

Have you tried?

Edit: Further, I question the validity of the claim requirement comes from inability to rid one's self of something.

 

[AntiAntagonist]

Lolz, that doesn't work here. In Alberta, if you're sane enough to ask to be let out of the nutbin, they legally must release you. Exceptions for those locked in the padded cells instead of jail (criminal wackos) but they can't prosecute the kid, he could just walk here. I hope for the sake of all my Aussie friends that their loonybin laws are a little more "keep em locked up" than my province's.

That sucks. Here in the states I'm pretty sure it's up to whomever admitted the kid (until the kid hits suffrage, and is not an obvious danger). It's hard to remember, with 50 frickin different major jurisdictions.

EDIT the script quoted someone else

 

[Break]

The systemic raising, killing, skinning, and butchering of mammalian creatures, who spent the majority of their lives so close together they can't move, is so plainly a neutral activity compared to the concentrated evil that is beating them over the head the moment you find them.

Sorry, I was confused about that for a moment.

Out of interest, do you actually have a point? I mean, relevant to the topic, and not just "people are stupid". Are you saying that the existence of the meat industry makes punishing the kid hypocritical, or..?

Anyway, you should answer the following before you talk about hypocrisy:

Moreover. Saying shit like "it's his dog" and following it up with "if it doesn't hurt anyone, let them do what they like" is goddamn hypocrisy. You think that pain is a human invention? Or is it that it's fine because he owns the dog? Please tell me that I've completely misunderstood you, because I do not want to think that somebody could be so... Whatever. Explain yourself.

 

[Eyclonus]

In Victoria it is possible for the state parliament to pass a bill to commit a specific individual to a psych ward. But that requires parliament to pass it.

 

[Imitation Saccharin]

Out of interest, do you actually have a point?

I pointed out a contradiction that people have been trying to defend.

I mean, relevant to the topic, and not just "people are stupid".

You personally make a good case for it, but no, I am defending my statement.

Anyway, you should answer the following before you talk about hypocrisy:

You think that pain is a human invention?

EDIT: A faster defense is that I do not consider animals worthy of having their feelings judged.

 

[Bob the Average]

personally i just think his mother should give him a good spanking and ground him till he's 15 but I'm an animal lover.