Well as long as the dog was well treated, then... er, yeah, i guess so.... more than anything it's just weird to eat your pets. And am having trouble with the idea that dog is the same as crayfish.bjj hero said:Does a pet count as free range?pipboy2009 said:Fundamentally speaking there's nothing wrong with eating dog. It's just that in most countries where dogs are eaten regularly, the dogs are treated like shit in tiny little cages, and electrocuted to death. Not pretty.
sasquatch99 said:yes...very much so.
MaxTheReaper said:I've known plenty of dogs who were much more interesting than the majority of people I've met.
He didn't do anything wrong, but he's still a dick.
Just 'cause.
Really? It's wrong to eat animals? I didn't know we had PETA members here on the escapist, I might very well need to stop coming here if that's the case.xmetatr0nx said:Well it falls under cruelty to animals, its not like he was in an emergency situation where he needed food. He will probably get a slap on the wrist, its kind of weird mind you. I guess it wouldnt be so strange if we farmed pitt bulls for food like chickens or cows, but since we dont.
it says he killed it because he was bored of pet ownership. he could have taken it to a dog pound or something.Kajin said:sasquatch99 said:yes...very much so.MaxTheReaper said:I've known plenty of dogs who were much more interesting than the majority of people I've met.
He didn't do anything wrong, but he's still a dick.
Just 'cause.Really? It's wrong to eat animals? I didn't know we had PETA members here on the escapist, I might very well need to stop coming here if that's the case.xmetatr0nx said:Well it falls under cruelty to animals, its not like he was in an emergency situation where he needed food. He will probably get a slap on the wrist, its kind of weird mind you. I guess it wouldnt be so strange if we farmed pitt bulls for food like chickens or cows, but since we dont.
Joke aside, it's only wrong because you think it's wrong, and no it most certainly does NOT fall under cruelty to animals. If he killed it quickly and with as little pain as possible, he did absolutely nothing wrong.
I for one applaud this man for his humane actions. Most people would have abandoned the animal, condemning it to the suffering and abuse that comes along with trying to survive in our society without an owner. He did the right thing by choosing to end the suffering before it could start by instead choosing to kill the animal off quickly.
Why thank you, I take my new position with humble dignity.xmetatr0nx said:Even more random crap.Kajin said:random crap
Have you ever seen a dog pound before? My dog went missing and ended up at the pound. He spent about three days there before we could manage to go get him. In those three days, he had been through so much mental trauma that he was never the same dog again. I'd sooner put a bullet through my dog's head than to send it to a pound because that way they don't suffer nearly as much.sasquatch99 said:it says he killed it because he was bored of pet ownership. he could have taken it to a dog pound or something.
This. It would only fall under cruelty to animals if he killed it in some torturous way. If he just killed it quickly and cooked it up, I don't see anything wrong with that.Vianyte said:As long as it was a quick death and was cooked very well there shouldn't be any problem.
Actually I think it is pretty obvious that this particular guy did not form an emotional attachment with his pet.ArcWinter said:Actually, my friend went to Vietnam and ate dog just a week ago. He said it was delicious if you cook it right. So there is nothing wrong about that, although you really shouldn't eat an animal you have as a pet unless you're starving. Get a pet, or a meal, not both. I mean, if it's someone else's pet, go ahead, but your own.... You form an emotional connection with pets and there's something slightly off about eating something you have an emotional connection to - it's sort of like cannibalizing your cousin.
Sort of.