Kitten stabbed to death in drunken attack

johnnyskeleton

kraggy wrote: »

1. Not funny considering there's a direct correlation between animal abuse and violence against humans.

Not that I've ever heard of, and it sounds like a pretty strange scientific inquiry for someone to embark upon.

kraggy wrote: »

2. Prove it.

It was a term of art, Dudess has already addressed this.

kraggy wrote: »

3. They were hardly going to take their time now, were they?

You mean they have kitty ambulances, and there is a big problem with overcrowding of the hospital baskets? Instead of morphine, do they give catnip?

kraggy wrote: »

4. What's funny about that you juvenile twat.

It conjures up a ridiculous picture of a struggle between man and...kitten. Also, you have no evidence upon which to base your assertion that I am juvenile, or a twat.

kraggy wrote: »

5. How about "Maddie" and "Missing" or "Scared"? That suit you better?

That's not a juxtaposition, but in any case if I were to say that the newspaper stories about Maddie McCann are ridiculous and overblown that does not mean that I think that child disappearance is ridiculous and overblown.

kraggy wrote: »

Imbicile.

Why?

AtomicHorror

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Not that I've ever heard of, and it sounds like a pretty strange scientific inquiry for someone to embark upon.

I think that's a reference to the finding that most psychopaths begin to push the boundaries of their deadened empathy by torturing and killing animals before they proceed to kill humans. The connection isn't at all as clear as the cop shows would have us believe. If I understand rightly, it's more an indicator of a pre-existing condition (lack of empathy) than a causative factor itself. Meaning that killing animals doesn't make you kill people, it just means that you may be lacking the emotional barriers that should stop you doing either.

kraggy

FFS

How do you break up a persons post so that you can individually quote sentences? Should know this by now..

smemon

Reading it again, i don't see what's wrong with the language... you guys are implying it's 'just a kitten' and doesn't deserve such respect or coverage...

The language is appropriate for the situation... had the kitten sprung out of nowhere and slayed the guy you could understand... but when this guy deliberately sets out to kill the kitten and leaves it for dead, carries on his way and boasts about it later - this guys deserves to be taken down and named & shamed.

Had this been your pet as a kid or your child's pet... you wouldn't just write this off as slow news... you'd want this guy locked up, heavily fined or forced to work with animals.

Dudess

In my opinion, it doesn't warrant such a style of story or to be located in the main national news - a brief in the local paper if there's room for it, and that's about it.

Damn straight I'd want the bastard punished though.

nacho libre

AtomicHorror wrote: »

I think that's a reference to the finding that most psychopaths begin to push the boundaries of their deadened empathy by torturing and killing animals before they proceed to kill humans. The connection isn't at all as clear as the cop shows would have us believe. If I understand rightly, it's more an indicator of a pre-existing condition (lack of empathy) than a causative factor itself. Meaning that killing animals doesn't make you kill people, it just means that you may be lacking the emotional barriers that should stop you doing either.

That's pretty much it.
This alone is why the item is newsworthy in my opinion. It's not just someone displaying drunken agression. Most people who are agressive with drink towards other humans wouldn't dream of torturing an animal for kicks.
With that in mind the sooner this person is caught the better as far as i'm concerned.

AtomicHorror

kraggy wrote: »

FFS

How do you break up a persons post so that you can individually quote sentences? Should know this by now..

I just do it by copying and pasting the quote codes. That said I did once accidentally attribute something Hitler said to a boardsie by using that method carelessly.

kraggy

AtomicHorror wrote: »

I just do it by copying and pasting the quote codes. That said I did once accidentally attribute something Hitler said to a boardsie by using that method carelessly.

Was it "I'm vegetarian. I don't kill kitties, I just kill Jews"?.

Thanks by the way.

Dudess

nacho libre wrote: »

Most people who are agressive with drink towards other humans wouldn't dream of torturing an animal for kicks.

How do you know that though? And how do you know the guy wouldn't have done it if he was sober? Not trying to minimise how horrible it was, but we've no way of knowing it wasn't purely alcohol induced.

EamonnKeane

kwikksilva wrote: »

Its the same guys who say "oh domestic pets have no emotions and we shouldn't care about them", that when they get to look after their friends dog for a week, they don't want to give it back.

Because they enjoy the feeling it gives them, not because they love and respect it. A study published a while ago showed that people use pets to act out things they cannot with humans: positive desires such as to love and be loved, but also negative desires such as to control others.

kraggy wrote: »

My point is that what's so ridiculous about having the kitten's name and the word brutal in the same passage?

Why is it so hilarious when a horrendous act has been carried out against an innocent creature.

"Innocent" implies the potential for guilt which implies the ability to make moral decisions. You might as well write "E. coli found guilty of murder."

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Oh, did you miss that day in school? Let me help. Rats are rodents, kittens are felines. A rat observed out in the open is probably wild, untrusting of humans and perhaps aggressive towards humans if cornered. Most kittens are tame and entirely non-threatening to anything larger than a butterfly, and often not even to them. You can typically assume that a rat is unlikely to be owned and loved by somebody, at least not if you see one in the street. Rats in the wild and particularly in urban settings are associated with disease, and not unjustifiably. Kittens don't usually carry Weil's disease and are rarely a source of contamination resulting in disease or death in humans.

Again with the humans! So pets are servants, then: good if they are nice to us. A rat is right not to trust humans. It is not its fault that it carries diseases; and cats cause allergies in many people. Kittens are tame because at that age their mother nurtures them. Cats are menaces to other animals, killing rodents, birds, rabbits, etc. Rats are mostly vegetarians or carrion feeders.

kraggy

EamonnKeane wrote: »

"Innocent" implies the potential for guilt which implies the ability to make moral decisions. You might as well write "E. coli found guilty of murder."

Ah come on. You know well I don't mean "has been acquitted of eating all the Whiskas" like.

Dudess

EamonnKeane wrote: »

"Innocent" implies the potential for guilt which implies the ability to make moral decisions. You might as well write "E. coli found guilty of murder."

"Innocent" also signifies "not responsible for anything that deserves such punishment".

30txsbzmcu2k9w

What kind a horrible c*nt stabs a kitten. That guy deserves a public flogging. This has nothing to do with drink - this country's streets are filled with sub-human inbred troglodyte petite-crime scum. It is a case of breeding. Tiny gene pool = scrambled brains. They should be put down. Put their kids in a bag and throw them in the river.

AtomicHorror

kraggy wrote: »

Was it "I'm vegetarian. I don't kill kitties, I just kill Jews"?.

It was something from Mein Kampf to do with racism and eugenics and I inadvertently made it appear to be a quote from a conservative Christian poster. He was rather upset about it.

Nerin

As someone thats feral and hairy,this disturbs and saddens me. Not more than if they had described it as a human,not less. Its still life. Cuter and less annoying than a human,but,thats another story. Now,i must leave this thread before i call someone a mean name and get banned.

x in the city

thats a sad sad thing to do, its a world gone mad i tell ye

AtomicHorror

EamonnKeane wrote: »

Because they enjoy the feeling it gives them, not because they love and respect it. A study published a while ago showed that people use pets to act out things they cannot with humans: positive desires such as to love and be loved, but also negative desires such as to control others.

We do the same things with humans. What is your point? That people are selfish? We know this.

EamonnKeane wrote: »

"Innocent" implies the potential for guilt which implies the ability to make moral decisions. You might as well write "E. coli found guilty of murder."

Your analogy is broken. Guilt is the opposite of innocence. Also innocence can be used to indicate a lack of capacity for moral responsibility. E. coli is innocent in that it is not capable of morals and thus not morally responsible. As is the kitten.

EamonnKeane wrote: »

Again with the humans! So pets are servants, then: good if they are nice to us. A rat is right not to trust humans. It is not its fault that it carries diseases; and cats cause allergies in many people. Kittens are tame because at that age their mother nurtures them. Cats are menaces to other animals, killing rodents, birds, rabbits, etc. Rats are mostly vegetarians or carrion feeders.

All correct, however you neglected to quote my actual core point. That the comparison between rats and kittens is irrelevant. To violently kill a rat is not okay, not funny and just as indicative of psychopathy.

AtomicHorror

x in the city wrote: »

thats a sad sad thing to do, its a world gone mad i tell ye

The world isn't going mad. It's always been mad. We're just talking about it more now. Opening up, talking to someone when you're crazy is probably healthy. But the world is talking to itself. And it isn't listening, which tells us that it's a fruitcase of epic proportions.

JupiterKid

Sadly, we Irish are collectively NOT a nation of animal lovers. In fact we are among the most wicked and cruel to animals in all the developed world - and for this we should be deeply ashamed and embarrassed. For instance, we have appallingly high lavels of stray and abandoned dogs - higher in absolute terms than the Uk which has 14 times our population.

Disgusting and shameful.:mad:

andrew

kraggy wrote: »

3. They were hardly going to take their time now, were they?

LO fecking L

kraggy

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Not that I've ever heard of, and it sounds like a pretty strange scientific inquiry for someone to embark upon.

It's a widely known fact that has been well documented in tv programmes and case studies in universities.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

It was a term of art, Dudess has already addressed this.

Term of art? Still don't see anything ridiculous in the piece. I guess those who do see sensationalism in the story may have less of a view of the place of animals in our society.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

You mean they have kitty ambulances, and there is a big problem with overcrowding of the hospital baskets? Instead of morphine, do they give catnip?

Em, no. The owner rushed the kitten that it took in to look after just 3 weeks ago to the hospital. What else would she do? And no, not in a kitty ambulance. Perhaps in her car? Honestly..

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

It conjures up a ridiculous picture of a struggle between man and...kitten. Also, you have no evidence upon which to base your assertion that I am juvenile, or a twat.

"The incident happened on Hartstonge Street in the city on Sunday afternoon when a drunken man picked up the kitten near her home and without reason, brutally stabbed the small animal with a knife"


Does not suggest struggling or grappling to me. If only the kitten could have struggled..

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Why?

I should have attacked your post and not you yourself as my infraction says. I do apologise. But your callous attitude to all this totally goes against my beliefs.

AtomicHorror

JupiterKid wrote: »

Sadly, we Irish are collectively NOT a nation of animal lovers. In fact we are among the most wicked and cruel to animals in all the developed world - and for this we should be deeply ashamed and embarrassed. For instance, we have appallingly high lavels of stray and abandoned dogs - higher in absolute terms than the Uk which has 14 times our population.

Disgusting and shameful.:mad:

Animal protection doesn't have the profile here that it has in the UK. Reality TV shows yeknow.

kraggy

Dudess wrote: »

"Innocent" also signifies "not responsible for anything that deserves such punishment".

Precisely

andrew

For the love of god people, the hilarity in this article comes from the juxtaposition of the style in which it was written and its content. Not the actual content itself.

dsmythy

Christine Yummy Tripod wrote: »

What kind a horrible c*nt stabs a kitten. That guy deserves a public flogging. This has nothing to do with drink - this country's streets are filled with sub-human inbred troglodyte petite-crime scum. It is a case of breeding. Tiny gene pool = scrambled brains. They should be put down. Put their kids in a bag and throw them in the river.

Yeah because in huge gene pools (USA) psychos don't exist. Whose kids are you talking about?

kraggy

andrew wrote: »

For the love of god people, the hilarity in this article comes from the juxtaposition of the style in which it was written and its content. Not the actual content itself.

But my point is what's so hilarious about the style?

Therein lies the difference I think. Those who find it hilarious see animals much further down the back of the queue than those who do not.

Bob the Builder

My dog got ran over last February. Any chance of a box of sympathy? :rolleyes:

I, for one, thought that the article was hilarious. Sick Fecker that did it, but feck me, he sure left a hilarious article.

And if you think killing a cat is bad because the cat is an animal, why dont you stop killing other animals too(cough, mouse traps, cough), or is that just because mice are 'different'?

AtomicHorror

andrew wrote: »

For the love of god people, the hilarity in this article comes from the juxtaposition of the style in which it was written and its content. Not the actual content itself.

For the love of god andrew, we get why it is meant to be funny. But it still isn't.

AtomicHorror

nevf wrote: »

And if you think killing a cat is bad because the cat is an animal, why dont you stop killing other animals too(cough, mouse traps, cough), or is that just because mice are 'different'?

You don't see a distinction between regrettably killing something as a pest, for food, for research or whatever versus violently killing it for fun?

30txsbzmcu2k9w

dsmythy wrote: »

Yeah because in huge gene pools (USA) psychos don't exist. Whose kids are you talking about?

That guy who stabbed the kitten wasn't a psycho. He was just another nob-end who thinks shoving a banger up a cats arse is funny. A lack of (emotional) intelligence is responsible for this guys twisted act.

conceited

johnnyskeleton your a ****ing idiot.

AtomicHorror

Christine Yummy Tripod wrote: »

That guy who stabbed the kitten wasn't a psycho. He was just another nob-end who thinks shoving a banger up a cats arse is funny. A lack of (emotional) intelligence is responsible for this guys twisted act.

Yes but that sort of behaviour does suggest the lack of empathy associated with psychopathy. I don't think we're going far wrong calling the fella "a psycho" in the every day sense.

Bob the Builder

AtomicHorror wrote: »

You don't see a distinction between regrettably killing something as a pest, for food, for research or whatever versus violently killing it for fun?

Nope.

But I suppose i can't really talk.
there's just nothing like the feeling of grabbing a knife in the right hand a live mouse in the other hand, wobbling around trying to escape, and then BAM! BANG! and the mouse is gone. Well the mouse is gone in two different directions.
This is called Bisection. Do it another few times and we have Disection.

Now, not many people are going to be offended by this because they do it all the time with their conventional mouse trap, now if I was to replace them words with cat, well that would be a totally different ball game.

Why can't we use cats in laboratory's? or are they just too stupid to spin the wheel?

andrew

kraggy wrote: »

But my point is what's so hilarious about the style?

Therein lies the difference I think. Those who find it hilarious see animals much further down the back of the queue than those who do not.

You're missing my point. The humour in this has NOTHING to do with the fact that the cat was murdered. The humour comes from the style not the subject. They are different things.

AtomicHorror wrote: »

For the love of god andrew, we get why it is meant to be funny. But it still isn't.

Obviously you don't. Otherwise you wouldn't be getting as offended as you are.

Bob the Builder

conceited wrote: »

johnnyskeleton your a ****ing idiot.

johnnyskeleton, has just proven a point. But for you to rebut, you had to bring it down to a shouting contest... catlovers and treehuggers - can't love them - can't hate them.

kraggy

andrew wrote: »

You're missing my point. The humour in this has NOTHING to do with the fact that the cat was murdered. The humour comes from the style not the subject. They are different things.



Obviously you don't. Otherwise you wouldn't be getting as offended as you are.

No you're not getting our point. Clearly.

To us, there is no humour in it.

conceited

Thats my opinion bud ! And your a twisted **** aswell:pac:

Bob the Builder

conceited wrote: »

Thats my opinion bud ! And your a twisted **** aswell:pac:

Nope. I'm just a mouse-lover.
and your cat ate my mouse you biatch.

AtomicHorror

nevf wrote: »

Nope.

But I suppose i can't really talk.
there's just nothing like the feeling of grabbing a knife in the right hand a live mouse in the other hand, wobbling around trying to escape, and then BAM! BANG! and the mouse is gone. Well the mouse is gone in two different directions.
This is called Bisection. Do it another few times and we have Disection.

Are you just typing to fill space?

nevf wrote: »

Now, not many people are going to be offended by this because they do it all the time with their conventional mouse trap, now if I was to replace them words with cat, well that would be a totally different ball game.

Mice eat anything they can scavenge and tend to **** in people's cupboards, spreading disease. Killing them is the only alternative to living with them. I'd be worried if someone found that killing to be enjoyable or funny.

nevf wrote: »

Why can't we use cats in laboratory's? or are they just too stupid to spin the wheel?

Lots of practical reasons. Is it relevant to this thread?

andrew

Saying it's ok to kill Rats but not cats because cats have been domesticated is pretty hypocritical. Is it ok to kill a feral cat then?

Bob the Builder

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Are you just typing to fill space?

Darn, you just uncovered my game plan. Nice one Batman, or should I say Catwoman?

Mice eat anything they can scavenge and tend to **** in people's cupboards, spreading disease. Killing them is the only alternative to living with them. I'd be worried if someone found that killing to be enjoyable or funny.

I know lots of people who find killing animals enjoyable. and in fact, this thread was created about a newspaper who made a drama out of stabbing a cat, and banging it repeatedly off a wall.

and yah, sure it's cruel, but writing an article like this, and then the owner making a big public anonymous drama out of it, is a tad ridiculous.

Lots of practical reasons. Is it relevant to this thread?

Yes. Why can't we use cats?
I'm sure if we made the wheel big enough, cats would use that too...

KnifeWRENCH

nevf I assume is not a cat lover?

To violently kill an animal, ANY animal, in this way is sick Hope that fcuker gets a massive fine or some jailtime for it.

As for the article itself, the style of writing was a bit sensationalist but I wouldn't say it was funny.

Bob the Builder

andrew wrote: »

Saying it's ok to kill Rats but not cats because cats have been domesticated is pretty hypocritical. Is it ok to kill a feral cat then?

I say invest in a gun, and either kill them all, or none.

At least by doing that, the animals are exercising their rights to equality.

AtomicHorror

andrew wrote: »

AtomicHorror:
For the love of god andrew, we get why it is meant to be funny. But it still isn't.

Obviously you don't. Otherwise you wouldn't be getting as offended as you are.

The article was written in a style that suggests strong emotional impact. The language used is almost identical to the sort that would be used in a case of murder or assault on a human. Am I far off the mark?

The reason why yourself and the OP think that this is funny is because you see a greater distance in value between a human and a kitten than many other posters here do. Hence the article seems farcical to you. Much as I might if the article were written about a house plant. However I see the value of a kitten's life, whilst being considerably less than that of a human, as not being insignificant enough to make the tone of the article "funny". I can see it as being over the top for the subject matter, but not the thigh slapper that apparently you see it as.

AtomicHorror

andrew wrote: »

Saying it's ok to kill Rats but not cats because cats have been domesticated is pretty hypocritical. Is it ok to kill a feral cat then?

Feral cats do get put down if captured, don't they?

conceited

Lets hope they don't find nevf.:D

brendansmith

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/kitten-stabbed-to-death-in-drunken-attack-1473411.html



Am I a bad man to think this is hillarious? The funniest part is that they took the standard "A man was fatally stabbed" story and replace man with kitten. So the "badly injured kitten was rushed to the Treaty Vetinary Clinic in Thomondgate but died a short time later".

I apologise in advance if the owner of the cat reads this; I'm not laughing at the death of the cat so much as the style of the article and the surreality of drunkenly attacking a cat.

You disgust me!

andrew

AtomicHorror wrote: »

The article was written in a style that suggests strong emotional impact. The language used is almost identical to the sort that would be used in a case of murder or assault on a human. Am I far off the mark?

The reason why yourself and the OP think that this is funny is because you see a greater distance in value between a human and a kitten than many other posters here do. Hence the article seems farcical to you. Much as I might if the article were written about a house plant. However I see the value of a kitten's life, whilst being considerably less than that of a human, as not being insignificant enough to make the tone of the article "funny". I can see it as being over the top for the subject matter, but not the thigh slapper that apparently you see it as.

Feral cats do get put down if captured, don't they?

Well, if you actually feel that way about animals, i can see where you're coming from.

So it is ok to kill a feral cat, but not a domesticated one then? Whats the difference? Do you not think that a feral cat has value in of itself, just as a human being does?

dsmythy

brendansmith wrote: »

You disgust me!

You see this is the kind of response that fuels the flames.

AtomicHorror

nevf wrote: »

Darn, you just uncovered my game plan. Nice one Batman, or should I say Catwoman?

I get it. Because we're talking about a kitten? This humour business is tricky.

nevf wrote: »

I know lots of people who find killing animals enjoyable. and in fact, this thread was created about a newspaper who made a drama out of stabbing a cat, and banging it repeatedly off a wall.

and yah, sure it's cruel, but writing an article like this, and then the owner making a big public anonymous drama out of it, is a tad ridiculous.

It sure is, but the ridiculous is not necessarily funny.

nevf wrote: »

Yes. Why can't we use cats?
I'm sure if we made the wheel big enough, cats would use that too...

Oh we're going to do this then. Okay. They don't breed fast enough or produce big enough litters. They grow too slowly and don't reach reproductive age for months. They're are large, they eat a lot and they tend to become aggressive when caged, poked at or prodded in any manner. They are extremely uncooperative when it comes to running mazes or accepting injections. When they decide to hurt someone, it really hurts. And of course, they are a widely domesticated species and most scientists have enough issues culling mice and rats without having to euthanize something that looks like their beloved household pet.