Poll: Woman guts horse, takes pictures in it's carcass

Recommended Videos

Aizsaule

New member
Oct 10, 2010
54
0
0
The difference between eating meat and doing this is that this seems to be enjoyed alot more.


JochemDude said:
Well morally it's pretty sick, but they didn't hurt anyone doing it.
A 32 year old horse wouldn't be going on for much longer anyway.

Still, sick people.
If nobody was hurt, then there is nothing morally wrong with it.
 

Savryc

NAPs, Spooks and Poz. Oh my!
Aug 4, 2011
395
0
0
It was bought to be eaten. If the lady wants to have a wee root around inside before snacking down more power to her. People who love animals more than other people disturb me far more than this woman and anyone that harps on about "murdering" animals needs to go back to school and pay more attention in English lessons.
 

Dark_Reaction

New member
Apr 14, 2010
45
0
0
> They told Washington County sheriff's deputies that they shot it near Portland with a rifle and gutted it, then Lottin stripped and climbed inside.
> She also posed outside of it, covered in its blood, and with parts of the horse's organs.
> She posted the photos on the Internet
> And she says she can't understand people's interest in her. "No idea why people care," Jasha Lottin, 21, told Seattle Weekly, which published photos that she had posted on the Internet.

> Lottin stripped and climbed inside... posed outside of it, covered in its blood, and with parts of the horse's organs.
> photos that she had posted on the Internet.
> "No idea why people care,"

Really?
Um, maybe because that's the kind of messed up stuff serial killers and other mentally divergent or deranged people do for fun, and anyone that ISN'T seriously messed in the head that does something like that really deserves a resounding 'what the hell is wrong with you?!' from any witnesses?
FFS...
 

EvilPicnic

New member
Sep 9, 2009
540
0
0
It may not be illegal, but it's certainly very twisted. I was raised to treat animals with a lot more respect.
 

Quaxar

New member
Sep 21, 2009
3,949
0
0
That's not news, that's not news at all!
I've seen the pictures roughly 2 months ago on 4chan already...
 

kuolonen

New member
Nov 19, 2009
290
0
0
I couldnt care less even if they did that with the remains of their recently deceased obese grampa. Let people get their kicks if they want to.
 

Sir Prize

New member
Dec 29, 2009
428
0
0
Against the law...well I don't know, is there a law against taking weird pictures of dead animals already?
Chances are no and you couldn't really put that kind of thing into effect, it's also the kind of thing used in 'art'.

Grounds to have someone sectioned or at the very least see if they are nuts, yes.
 

SenseOfTumour

New member
Jul 11, 2008
4,514
0
0
If I had no family or friends, an artist could wear my hollowed out corpse on America's Got Talent doing a special dance for all I care, so long as she throws a few bucks to a charity, I oughta make my death worth something to someone.

So long as it wasn't killed in a sadistic way, I haven't got too much of a problem with it, tho killing an animal for non food reasons does bother me a bit, could she not have bought a horse already on its way out?

On another note, I've seen pictures of a woman with a horse's organ inside her, and that was online too, seems 'horse inside woman' is far more popular than the artist's way around.
 

One of Many

New member
Feb 3, 2010
331
0
0
Well, I'm feeling a little sick about the whole thing, its just creepy she crawled inside the body but illegal? No.
 

xPixelatedx

New member
Jan 19, 2011
1,316
0
0
If we can turn horses into glue, why not do this? I mean, life doesn't get anymore demeaning then glue.
 

KelsieKatt

New member
May 14, 2008
180
0
0
...Uh huh...

I'll keep that in mind next time I see a dying homeless person on the side of the road and feel like slicing them open and rolling around in a pile of their organs.

What?

It was already dead! Don't look at me like that...
 

The Funslinger

Corporate Splooge
Sep 12, 2010
6,150
0
0
The real disturbing part to this is that someone, somewhere has/will masturbate to those pictures...

...

*vomits*
 

Dogstile

New member
Jan 17, 2009
5,093
0
0
Thyunda said:
The hell...why are people even supporting this?

'It was going to be euthanised anyway'

Fine. Let the vets euthanise it. They'll at least do it cleanly.

They did it cleanly too, with a single rifle bullet. That's really not uncommon in rural areas. A vet wasn't needed.

'It was dead, what's the problem?'

It's dead, yes, but it's still a thirty-two year old animal, that would have meant a lot to people. What if you looked after that horse for most, if not all, of your life, and sell it to some young couple who naturally wouldn't have told you exactly why they wanted it. Then they shoot it and take pictures, naked, inside your companion? You're telling me that THAT isn't wrong?

Of course its wrong... morally. Morality however, doesn't come into laws for a damn good reason, that reason being subjectivity.

'They killed it humanely, it's not abuse'

Right. There are a thousand things wrong with this. Killing an animal so you may pose inside it is NOT humane. The method may have been, but it's still fucking murder. Yes. I eat meat. I understand that the animals killed for meat aren't always killed in the most humane of ways...but I'm not here to debate that. The point is this. Killing an animal for food is fine, because you intend to fucking eat it. It is NOT morally justifiable to kill animals just because you did it humanely. To justify it in that way is bordering on psychopathy.

Yeah, they actually killed it so they could eat it. They posed with the parts that they weren't eating. That was actually stated in the article "Lottin reportedly told investigators that they wanted to humanely kill the horse and eat it ? and she wanted to feel what it would be like to be inside the dead horse.".

'Han Solo did it in Star Wars, nobody cared then'

That was because Luke would have frozen to death otherwise...I'm not sure how you can use this as an argument.

Yeah, I thought that argument was a bit odd too. I'm just gonna assume most of them are joking
I'll just shove my pointers in bold in your quote, easier to connect to your argument.
 

Herr Uhl

New member
Sep 25, 2010
48
0
0
KelsieKatt said:
...Uh huh...

I'll keep that in mind next time I see a dying homeless person on the side of the road and feel like slicing them open and rolling around in a pile of their organs.

What?

It was already dead! Don't look at me like that...
It is also illegal to make a fashionable coat out of said homeless man or to eat him.
 

Thyunda

New member
May 4, 2009
2,955
0
0
dogstile said:
Thyunda said:
The hell...why are people even supporting this?

'It was going to be euthanised anyway'

Fine. Let the vets euthanise it. They'll at least do it cleanly.

They did it cleanly too, with a single rifle bullet. That's really not uncommon in rural areas. A vet wasn't needed.

'It was dead, what's the problem?'

It's dead, yes, but it's still a thirty-two year old animal, that would have meant a lot to people. What if you looked after that horse for most, if not all, of your life, and sell it to some young couple who naturally wouldn't have told you exactly why they wanted it. Then they shoot it and take pictures, naked, inside your companion? You're telling me that THAT isn't wrong?

Of course its wrong... morally. Morality however, doesn't come into laws for a damn good reason, that reason being subjectivity.

'They killed it humanely, it's not abuse'

Right. There are a thousand things wrong with this. Killing an animal so you may pose inside it is NOT humane. The method may have been, but it's still fucking murder. Yes. I eat meat. I understand that the animals killed for meat aren't always killed in the most humane of ways...but I'm not here to debate that. The point is this. Killing an animal for food is fine, because you intend to fucking eat it. It is NOT morally justifiable to kill animals just because you did it humanely. To justify it in that way is bordering on psychopathy.

Yeah, they actually killed it so they could eat it. They posed with the parts that they weren't eating. That was actually stated in the article "Lottin reportedly told investigators that they wanted to humanely kill the horse and eat it ? and she wanted to feel what it would be like to be inside the dead horse.".

'Han Solo did it in Star Wars, nobody cared then'

That was because Luke would have frozen to death otherwise...I'm not sure how you can use this as an argument.

Yeah, I thought that argument was a bit odd too. I'm just gonna assume most of them are joking
I'll just shove my pointers in bold in your quote, easier to connect to your argument.
Very reasonable responses. The first one especially. I just didn't like the idea of shooting an animal yourself because somebody else was going to anyway.

The morality point - also well worded and rational, but one I disagree with. Morality IS subjective, but on the point of pointless corpse desecration, there is something objectively wrong with this.

And the point about eating it. Okay, you got me there. Except...at what point do you look at your freshly butchered animal and think to yourself, "I wanna be inside that."?
 

PleasantAsAHeadcrab

New member
Jan 22, 2011
139
0
0
Not really a crime, per se, but incredibly disgusting? Hells yes.

Of course, I'm an animal lover to the extent that I sobbed hysterically when I had to remove a dead fish, which is to say that I'm a huge pussy. xD;;