Poll: Legal responsiblity

[Imitation Saccharin]

Saccharon, you're simply in this thread to point our hypocrisy?

To defend the initial claim.

Yeah, that means you're here just to spoil for a fight.

No, I've yet to respond to a quote that wasn't addressed to me since the initial one.

Your own arguments are hypocritical enough as it is

Unsupported

It's called being a troll.

I have done nothing hurtful, I have instigated nothing except a quip that I have defended, and I have maintained civility throughout.

If you find my defense insufficient or circular, my logic flawed, I heartily recommend you point them out.

If such an attitude is that of a troll, so be it.

 

[Imitation Saccharin]

If it's okay to beat a dog as it is a posession, then it's perfectly fine to beat your wife, as many religions look down on women and see them as objects.

Someone already made this point against me, in almost identical wording.

Good day sir or madam, it is quite clear you intend victory at the cost of good dialectic, and as such I will carry this with you no more.

 

[BlueMage]

It is his dog. He may do with it as he pleases.

If what he "pleases" is torturing the animal, then no, he may not.

 

[Radelaide]

I'm a little upset about this. The kid is obviously sick in the head and needs some help. It's like what happened in Sydney this last week. "Bored schoolchildren" were blamed for the slaughter of 13 chickens and the murder of two dogs. One was hung and the other was horribly burnt. That is really messed up.

But because he's under 10, he can't be held responsible? Where's the justice in that? Would it be the same if he got up in his sleep and stabbed his parents?

When I was 7, I knew what was right and wrong. I didn't go sneaking out in the middle of the night to slaughter innocent animals.

If I was that kid's mother, I'd be sending him down to the local mental home. There is no way that kid is right in the head. I wanna know why the state isn't sending him to a mental facility!

Grrr... People make me angry.

/rant.

 

[The Wooster]

So no one here has ever fried ants with a magnifying glass? Kids are cruel creatures. In the wrong environment and without proper guidance that naturally cruelty can become something more insidious. Those who claim he should be locked up or killed are in fact showing the same kind of detached, anonymous, cruelty the child himself displayed, only they're not seven years old.

 

[Break]

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

The contradiction of "people raise animals for slaughter, but animal abuse is suddenly wrong and bad"? You say there is no difference between them? Fine. Please, prove it. You have not yet attempted to convince anyone that this is the case. You have repeated that "the death of an animal is the death of an animal, regardless of how that animal was treated" without providing any basis for this. If "animals are not worthy of having their feelings judged", prove it. Prove that animals don't feel pain. Or that it doesn't matter if animals feel pain. Modern science says that they do. The fact is, that beating your dog is illegal. Popular opinion holds that inhumane treatment of animals in slaughterhouses is disgusting. If you disagree with this, or think that this is hypocrisy, you're the one that has to give evidence to the contrary.

 

[Pipotchi]

who never burned an ant with a magnifying glass as a kid?

Moi.

Another one here, I never felt it neccessary to inflict torture on animals. Not saying I never stepped on a bug but deliberatly causing pain strikes me as very odd.

To the people whose argument is best summed up as "boys will be boys" or "hes just a kid" I cant help but wonder if you would be as forgiving if he broke into your house an smashed your pets head in with a rock (as he did to some of the lizards)

 

[Logan Westbrook]

Saccharin, you make an interesting and valid point. Yes, It is hypocritical for society to raise cattle for food and to condemn dog fighting, however it should be clear that from the replies that no one really cares that they are being hypocritical.

Short version, you've made your point, you're correct, now please be quiet.

 

[Logan Westbrook]

Saccharin, you make an interesting and valid point. Yes, It is hypocritical for society to raise cattle for food and to condemn dog fighting, however it should be clear that from the replies that no one really cares that they are being hypocritical.

Have to disagree. The point myself and others were trying to make is that animals raised for food aren't subjected to needless pain, nor do we frighten the shit outta them by chasing them down before we kill and eat them. I don't see it as hypocritical to endorse meat as food then condemn someone causing pain to a creature for personal enjoyment. There really is no comparison between using an animal for food, or bashing one over the head for shits and giggles. That's like saying cutting someone open for surgery is the same as stabbing a man in a knife fight.

The fact that some people (Saccharin more than others) kept reverting to the hardline vegetarian "Meat Is Murder" song and dance was irritating us because that's not even the point we were trying to make, which is that what the child in the article did is not normal, and he needs a serious mental evaluation because he is exhibiting signs of a budding psychopath.

Regardless of the fine details, raising cattle for meat and dog fighting both amount to killing animals for our pleasure. That is undeniable, but as I said in my previous post, as logical as the position is, very few people are going to care because society views the two things differently.

Don't get me wrong, I'm on your side Khell but as a rational person I can see the hypocrisy in it. Sensationalist arguments comparing life-saving surgery with attacks with a deadly weapon doesn't help your position at all. All you can do is shrug your shoulders and accept the validity of the argument. You don't actually have to care that it's hypocritical.

I know I certainly don't.

It is his dog. He may do with it as he pleases.

If what he "pleases" is torturing the animal, then no, he may not.

...

...Why the hell not?

Do you really think that?

 

[Logan Westbrook]

Do you really think that?

Well...yes, that's why I said it.

Why the hell not?

So you think animal cruelty is perfectly acceptable behaviour?

 

[Copter400]

We should see if we can figure out why he did it. Institutionalisation seems a little harsh, and doesn't seem like a positive environment to me.

Also, what kind of security system can be bypassed by a seven-year-old boy? Could someone tell me that?

 

[Logan Westbrook]

I'm not sure I know what you mean by plant and insect cruelty.