Animal Abusers

Walter H Price

Avery Sour Cranberry wrote: »

It is ridiculous, but in some countries it's also a crime. I don't mean to offend you, but your comments are very naive and out of touch with reality. It's not normal to chose the life of an animal over that of a human. You can still love your pets very much.

where do you draw the line ? if you saw an elderly person be mugged by a bunch of Roma or a junkie would you intervene and do what need to be done to hlep that vulnerable person or would you be too conflicted that the roma /junkies lives were equal to the OAP , i've been in the situation i know what i did and i'm proud of it.

I saw a group of teen chasing a tiny frightened 5 week old kitten with a BB gun, lost scared and on its own , big brave lads they were , until i stepped in. i felt the same rage and anger towards there behavior as i did towards the Roma i saw mug that old woman i took the same course of action i didn't flinch didn't think. Its not niave its my instinct its natural as natural as breathing.

had i walked away i wouldn't have been able to sleep. Those who prey on the weak as victims be they , Kids , the Old , the Disabled , Animals, they are not worthy of any sort of respect or dignity in their treatment. they just need to be shown up for the cowards they are , humiliated, Hurt , i personally would have them killed as they are of little value to society, but at the least they should do hard time.

OldNotWIse

Why do these discussions always descend into, "would you choose to save a human or a cat" or "do you really think animals are more important than people?" - first of all, human and animal welfare are not mutually exclusive. It is possible to have empathy for both. It's not a fúcking competition. All that whataboutery and whatifery is ridiculous - who is ever going to be in a weird position where they have to choose whether to save an animal or a child ffs.

I love animals. I love my animals. I love them more than I love other people except my family and friends. So my order list goes
- my family and friends
- my pets
- other animals
- other people

That's not to say that if I had to save the life of either an animal or a person that I don't know that I would save the animal. I would of course save the person because I recognize the value of human life over animal life, and whereas I might not have any particular feelings of love or empathy towards the person I don't know, I would hope that if it was someone else making the decision and the person was MY family member, that they would do the same... but when would I ever be in this ridiculous position?? It's just absurd to be arguing about hypothetical situations.

Ragnar Lothbrok

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Why do these discussions always descend into, "would you choose to save a human or a cat" or "do you really think animals are more important than people?" - first of all, human and animal welfare are not mutually exclusive. It is possible to have empathy for both. It's not a fúcking competition. All that whataboutery and whatifery is ridiculous - who is ever going to be in a weird position where they have to choose whether to save an animal or a child ffs.

I love animals. I love my animals. I love them more than I love other people except my family and friends. So my order list goes
- my family and friends
- my pets
- other animals
- other people

That's not to say that if I had to save the life of either an animal or a person that I don't know that I would save the animal. I would of course save the person because I recognize the value of human life over animal life, and whereas I might not have any particular feelings of love or empathy towards the person I don't know, I would hope that if it was someone else making the decision and the person was MY family member, that they would do the same... but when would I ever be in this ridiculous position?? It's just absurd to be arguing about hypothetical situations.

OldNotWIse making a mockery of her username!

Obviously, the scenario of having a child and a cat handed over to someone who is then forced to choose which one to kill is ridiculously far-fetched, but Walter stated categorically in an earlier post that he would choose to kill a child in this hypothetical situation.

Without going back through all the posts here, I can't recall if he was the first one to bring it up or whether he was asked the question first. Regardless, I still find his assertion that he would kill a child rather than kill his kittens to be extremely unsettling.

OldNotWIse

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

OldNotWIse making a mockery of her username!

Obviously, the scenario of having a child and a cat handed over to someone who is then forced to choose which one to kill is ridiculously far-fetched, but Walter stated categorically in an earlier post that he would choose to kill a child in this hypothetical situation.

Without going back through all the posts here, I can't recall if he was the first one to bring it up or whether he was asked the question first. Regardless, I still find his assertion that he would kill a child rather than kill his kittens to be extremely unsettling.

I don't know why you would find his answer unsettling, when by your own admission, the situation would never arise.

As for your dig at my username, is this the only way that you can validate your argument?

Ragnar Lothbrok

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I don't know why you would find his answer unsettling, when by your own admission, the situation would never arise.

As for your dig at my username, is this the only way that you can validate your argument?

Sorry OldNotWIse, it was the opposite of a dig at your username. I meant that I totally agreed with your above posting, and that despite what your username suggests, your point proved that you are very wise.

I find his answer unsettling because it reveals his feelings, even though such a situation couldn't ever arise.

OldNotWIse

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

Sorry OldNotWIse, it was the opposite of a dig at your username. I meant that I totally agreed with your above posting, and that despite what your username suggests, your point proved that you are very wise.

I find his answer unsettling because it reveals his feelings, even though such a situation couldn't ever arise.

Oh sorry, maybe I am justifying the username now

I take your point on the answer alright.

Walter H Price

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

OldNotWIse making a mockery of her username!

Obviously, the scenario of having a child and a cat handed over to someone who is then forced to choose which one to kill is ridiculously far-fetched, but Walter stated categorically in an earlier post that he would choose to kill a child in this hypothetical situation.

Without going back through all the posts here, I can't recall if he was the first one to bring it up or whether he was asked the question first. Regardless, I still find his assertion that he would kill a child rather than kill his kittens to be extremely unsettling.

I was asked and tbh don't give a short one if you're unsellted it's hat i'd do , i love my cats , more then i would ever care about another random human beging i have 0 emotional connection too ... how about if it was your child or another child what would you do then if we want to keep playing this silly little game.

we don't have kids yet , but we have rescued those kittens , one directly(from people not worth the sh1t off my shoe) cared for them, raised them , watched their little personality's develop , minded them when the were sick etc... so obviously i feel more for them then i ever could a random person a stranger someone i had 0 emotional connection too or experience with , id choose them 100 times out of 100, i'd do it with a second thought.

But i will never have to because it's a RIDICULOUS hypothetical.

When it came down to it with those scumbags and there bb gun and what at that point was a random frightened little kitten ... My choice, my actual in real life choice was to walk away and let it be hurt , maimed , tortured , killed etc... or step in and do whatever needed to be done to stop that, including taking whatever physical action against the "people" needed to be taken, i will never regret that decision not for a second. Though i'm sure those sumbags deeply regretted their's when i was done

Ragnar Lothbrok

Walter H Price wrote: »

I was asked and tbh don't give a short one if you're unsellted it's hat i'd do , i love my cats , more then i would ever care about another random human beging i have 0 emotional connection too ... how about if it was your child or another child what would you do then if we want to keep playing this silly little game.

we don't have kids yet , but we have rescued those kittens , one directly(from people not worth the sh1t off my shoe) cared for them, raised them , watched their little personality's develop , minded them when the were sick etc... so obviously i feel more for them then i ever could a random person a stranger someone i had 0 emotional connection too or experience with , id choose them 100 times out of 100, i'd do it with a second thought.

Hopefully, if and when you do ever have children of your own, you'll begin to understand how offensive your remarks are.

Walter H Price wrote: »

But i will never have to because it's a RIDICULOUS hypothetical.

Yes, I agree with you. Although a long time ago, a neighbour of mine said that if she was driving and she had to make the choice over whether to swerve to avoid a cat or a child, she would swerve to miss the cat and hit the child. So the choice between killing a cat or a child may well be forced upon you at some stage.

Walter H Price wrote: »

When it came down to it with those scumbags and there bb gun and what at that point was a random frightened little kitten ... My choice, my actual in real life choice was to walk away and let it be hurt , maimed , tortured , killed etc... or step in and do whatever needed to be done to stop that, including taking whatever physical action against the "people" needed to be taken, i will never regret that decision not for a second. Though i'm sure those sumbags deeply regretted their's when i was done

Fair play to you. Are you Conor McGregor?

Ms Doubtfire1

Walter H Price wrote: »

I rescuced one of out cats directly from being cornered by a gang of scumbag Youths , it didn't end well for one or two of them , but I felt a huge sense of personal satisfaction.

Lol..I had the same feeling when I pushed the farmer into the river when he was busy drowning kittens...

Ms Doubtfire1

HellSquirrel wrote: »

That's something I've read about too, although I can't give you a link, it was a book on the history of the plague. I have a notion it was called Plague, but I can't recall now. The idea is that cats were blamed for spreading the plague, and people panicked. Bearing in mind that the plague was absolutely terrifying, it's not surprising that there was a mass culling of cats. If it had gone slightly differently, there might have been a culling of "witches" after a few months of it such was the desperation.

As we know now, it wasn't cats (or rats) that spread the plague, but rather the fleas on the rats. The rat population exploded within the city of London in particular and the plague ran rampant.

As far as I know, it's a fairly widely accepted theory, although correlation/causation and all that. Cats would likely not have stopped the plague, but culling so many of them certainly didn't help the situation.

The actual connection is that cats were keeping tabs on the rat population. The killing of cats happened BEFORE the plague struck..it is said that because there were too few cats to kill the rats, the rat population exploded..it's really simple maths...

Walter H Price

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

Hopefully, if and when you do ever have children of your own, you'll begin to understand how offensive your remarks are.



Yes, I agree with you. Although a long time ago, a neighbour of mine said that if she was driving and she had to make the choice over whether to swerve to avoid a cat or a child, she would swerve to miss the cat and hit the child. So the choice between killing a cat or a child may well be forced upon you at some stage.



Fair play to you. Are you Conor McGregor?

at some point mybe after we have kids my cats will fall into second place , behind my kids but never third behind some random child. to be honest as an animal people arnt all that great , were responsible for the literal destruction of the planet , were not the strongest , probilbly not the most inteligent creatures on the planet , oh and were grossly overpopulated. it honestly do'nt care if my views offend you not even in the slightest.

I don't drive and never will due to anxiety issues so that scenario is out too, any others you want to try ???? just while were just keeping the nonsense scenarios rolling here.

i can tell you my answer wont change i don't care one iota for you , you're child or any other random-er on the planet , i will make my choice based on what i care for, every single time. I will protect my own at all cost.

No McGregor is a bell end , but i was a boxer and i am 6"2 , well built , i know ho to handle myself and i would never turn a blind eye to a vulnerable animal or person in need (i'm not sure you'd be able to say the same), i have no issue putting myself and my own body on the line to that end , but i wouldn't put my Kittens or my Fiance or my granny etc ... in harms way for the sake of a stranger, is that really that difficult for you to grasp

Ms Doubtfire1

Walter H Price wrote: »

at some point mybe after we have kids my cats will fall into second place , behind my kids but never third behind some random child. to be honest as an animal people arnt all that great , were responsible for the literal destruction of the planet , were not the strongest , probilbly not the most inteligent creatures on the planet , oh and were grossly overpopulated. it honestly do'nt care if my views offend you not even in the slightest.

I don't drive and never will due to anxiety issues so that scenario is out too, any others you want to try ???? just while were just keeping the nonsense scenarios rolling here.

i can tell you my answer wont change i don't care one iota for you , you're child or any other random-er on the planet , i will make my choice based on what i care for, every single time. I will protect my own at all cost.

No McGregor is a bell end , but i was a boxer and i am 6"2 , well built , i know ho to handle myself and i would never turn a blind eye to a vulnerable animal or person in need (i'm not sure you'd be able to say the same), i have no issue putting myself and my own body on the line to that end , but i wouldn't put my Kittens or my Fiance or my granny etc ... in harms way for the sake of a stranger, is that really that difficult for you to grasp

I can completely relate to what you are saying. I will protect whats mine with all I have - and in regards to choices? i really really really don't know.it would be a split second decision and it's very hard to predict that

Walter H Price

Ms Doubtfire1 wrote: »

I can completely relate to what you are saying. I will protect whats mine with all I have - and in regards to choices? i really really really don't know.it would be a split second decision and it's very hard to predict that

its a pointless exercise you will never be in that position

Ragnar Lothbrok

Walter H Price wrote: »

at some point mybe after we have kids my cats will fall into second place , behind my kids but never third behind some random child. to be honest as an animal people arnt all that great , were responsible for the literal destruction of the planet , were not the strongest , probilbly not the most inteligent creatures on the planet , oh and were grossly overpopulated. it honestly do'nt care if my views offend you not even in the slightest.

I don't drive and never will due to anxiety issues so that scenario is out too, any others you want to try ???? just while were just keeping the nonsense scenarios rolling here.

i can tell you my answer wont change i don't care one iota for you , you're child or any other random-er on the planet , i will make my choice based on what i care for, every single time. I will protect my own at all cost.

No McGregor is a bell end , but i was a boxer and i am 6"2 , well built , i know ho to handle myself and i would never turn a blind eye to a vulnerable animal or person in need (i'm not sure you'd be able to say the same), i have no issue putting myself and my own body on the line to that end , but i wouldn't put my Kittens or my Fiance or my granny etc ... in harms way for the sake of a stranger, is that really that difficult for you to grasp

Fair enough, Walter. Look, I agree that you did a great thing in protecting those kittens from the vicious thugs that were attacking them. They got what they deserved by the sound of things.

What is difficult for me to grasp is that someone like yourself, who states that you would never turn a blind eye to any person or animal that is vulnerable and in need of help, could seriously choose the life of a kitten over a child.

Would I be right in assuming it's only the lives of YOUR OWN kittens/cats you'd put before the life of a "random" child? If so, perhaps I'm starting to understand exactly what sort of person you are.

OldNotWIse

Walter H Price wrote: »

its a pointless exercise you will never be in that position

I was in a position a number of years ago (not a choice in relation to saving my dog or a child, but in relation to saving my dog and putting my own life at risk or not). She had walked out along a fallen tree trunk that was out on a fast flowing river. I knew it was fast flowing because she fell in and when she resurfaced a second later, she was a good two feet down from where she went in! What I didn't know was that the river was over my head only a foot from the edge. I jumped in to grab her, wearing jeans, wellies, a jumper and a coat. I still had my (destroyed) phone and cards in my pocket when I came out.
Now, objectively when I look back on that event I think what the actual fúck was I doing, this is how people get killed right? (and the dog usually survives!) but I didn't have time to stop and think when it happened. It was a pure reflex, and I was in the water before I had a chance to even register how ridiculous my actions were. I wound up having to hold myself up above the surface with one arm hogging the tree trunk and grabbed the dog by the scruff with the other and then launched her back onto dry land :P

Ms Doubtfire1

Walter H Price wrote: »

its a pointless exercise you will never be in that position

Most certainly NOT with the car i have - it sounds like a stuck chainsaw and anything living will be long gone by the time I arrive with it - including turtles...:D

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Walter H Price wrote: »

where do you draw the line ? if you saw an elderly person be mugged by a bunch of Roma or a junkie would you intervene and do what need to be done to hlep that vulnerable person or would you be too conflicted that the roma /junkies lives were equal to the OAP , i've been in the situation i know what i did and i'm proud of it.

I saw a group of teen chasing a tiny frightened 5 week old kitten with a BB gun, lost scared and on its own , big brave lads they were , until i stepped in. i felt the same rage and anger towards there behavior as i did towards the Roma i saw mug that old woman i took the same course of action i didn't flinch didn't think. Its not niave its my instinct its natural as natural as breathing.

had i walked away i wouldn't have been able to sleep. Those who prey on the weak as victims be they , Kids , the Old , the Disabled , Animals, they are not worthy of any sort of respect or dignity in their treatment. they just need to be shown up for the cowards they are , humiliated, Hurt , i personally would have them killed as they are of little value to society, but at the least they should do hard time.

While the crime is horrendous, and everybody will agree with you on that, the punishment you recommend is just as horrendous. You judge somebodies worth to society based on one incident. That's not right.

Ms Doubtfire1

Avery Sour Cranberry wrote: »

While the crime is horrendous, and everybody will agree with you on that, the punishment you recommend is just as horrendous. You judge somebodies worth to society based on one incident. That's not right.[/QUOTE

Thats actually how many judges will determine the measure of punishment.
A junkie who steals a car could get up to 2 yeas - if that person is a 30 year old healthy individual you'll see they will get less.

Walter H Price

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

Fair enough, Walter. Look, I agree that you did a great thing in protecting those kittens from the vicious thugs that were attacking them. They got what they deserved by the sound of things.

What is difficult for me to grasp is that someone like yourself, who states that you would never turn a blind eye to any person or animal that is vulnerable and in need of help, could seriously choose the life of a kitten over a child.

Would I be right in assuming it's only the lives of YOUR OWN kittens/cats you'd put before the life of a "random" child? If so, perhaps I'm starting to understand exactly what sort of person you are.

I cant say what id do in a situation choosing between a random person or a random animal , its not a likely scenario , it would be a very tough call and to be honest i don't think i could give you a meaningful answer here because honestly i don't know how i would react, thankfully i expect to never be in that situation.

My Kittens over any rando 100% my kittens every time no questions with 100% certainty.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Ms Doubtfire1 wrote: »

Thats actually how many judges will determine the measure of punishment.
A junkie who steals a car could get up to 2 yeas - if that person is a 30 year old healthy individual you'll see they will get less.

I think you misunderstood my point. A judge will look at the incident and past criminality if it exists, if the person contributes to society. They won't look at one incident and judge based on that alone.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Ms Doubtfire1 wrote: »

Thats actually how many judges will determine the measure of punishment.
A junkie who steals a car could get up to 2 yeas - if that person is a 30 year old healthy individual you'll see they will get less.

I think you misunderstood my point. A judge will look at the incident and past criminality if it exists, if the person contributes to society etc. They won't look at one incident and judge based on that alone.

Ms Doubtfire1

Avery Sour Cranberry wrote: »

I think you misunderstood my point. A judge will look at the incident and past criminality if it exists, if the person contributes to society. They won't look at one incident and judge based on that alone.

yes they will. If it's a first offence for both individuals they will judge different for each

Walter H Price

Avery Sour Cranberry wrote: »

I think you misunderstood my point. A judge will look at the incident and past criminality if it exists, if the person contributes to society etc. They won't look at one incident and judge based on that alone.

In my view my personal view , people who abuse animals ( not talking about hunting for food , farming etc) i'm talking about people killing cats and dogs for fun , torturing them , inflicting pain on them for pleasure , dog fighting , feeding kittens to pitbulls, for me personally i don't give a Sh1t who that person is what else they do what family they have ,or what they've done prior.

If a man a middle class well respected man hits his wife or molests his kid , he is judged on that one act i would judge animal abuser the same. Personally i would send the Wife Beater's , Paedos , rapeists , animal abusers all off to the same wall to be shot, but again that's just my personal view., and none of you on here will change that.

Realistically there should be tougher sentencing across the board for crime in Ireland, animal abusers should serve time get criminal conviction and be heavily financially penalized.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Walter H Price wrote: »

In my view my personal view , people who abuse animals ( not talking about hunting for food , farming etc) i'm talking about people killing cats and dogs for fun , torturing them , inflicting pain on them for pleasure , dog fighting , feeding kittens to pitbulls, for me personally i don't give a Sh1t who that person is what else they do what family they have ,or what they've done prior.

If a man a middle class well respected man hits his wife or molests his kid , he is judged on that one act i would judge animal abuser the same. Personally i would send the Wife Beater's , Paedos , rapeists , animal abusers all off to the same wall to be shot, but again that's just my personal view., and none of you on here will change that.

Realistically there should be tougher sentencing across the board for crime in Ireland, animal abusers should serve time get criminal conviction and be heavily financially penalized.

What evidence do you have that tougher sentencing improves society? How does it rehabilitate the offender? Sounds like blood lust to me. What makes you any different from the offenders if you are calling for a death sentence?

You are lumping "Wife Beater's , Paedos , rapeists , animal abusers" together, but their crimes are quite different (similar in some cases, I understand that). The punishment can't be the same, and a death sentence for abusing an animal is incredibly extreme and quite fascist.

Ms Doubtfire1

Avery Sour Cranberry wrote: »

What evidence do you have that tougher sentencing improves society? How does it rehabilitate the offender? Sounds like blood lust to me. What makes you any different from the offenders if you are calling for a death sentence?

You are lumping "Wife Beater's , Paedos , rapeists , animal abusers" together, but their crimes are quite different (similar in some cases, I understand that). The punishment can't be the same, and a death sentence for abusing an animal is incredibly extreme and quite fascist.

ahum. Lets see:
If I get my kicks out of torturing that kitten a judge will only fine me 50 quid and tell me I was a bad boy and i should never do it again but he nderstand s because I had a bad childhood.

OR
If I get my kicks out of torturing that kitten the judge will fine me 5,000 euro and send me to jail for 6 month..

what do you think yourself will work better?

Walter H Price

Avery Sour Cranberry wrote: »

What evidence do you have that tougher sentencing improves society? How does it rehabilitate the offender? Sounds like blood lust to me. What makes you any different from the offenders if you are calling for a death sentence?

You are lumping "Wife Beater's , Paedos , rapeists , animal abusers" together, but their crimes are quite different (similar in some cases, I understand that). The punishment can't be the same, and a death sentence for abusing an animal is incredibly extreme and quite fascist.

I don't believe in rehabilitation to be honest id just rater those kind of people were removed from society and i don't really care whats done with them , execution seems the most cost effective option but yeh if you prefer prison will do .

Its a personal view , in my personal opinion crimes against the vulnerable should carry the heaviest sentences , Paedos , Wife Beaters , those who pray on the elderly or torture and kill defenseless animals are only worthy of absolute contempt. the word Fascist has lost all meaning at this stage its thrown around so much, but yes i'm incredibly right leaning in terms of economics and social justice.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Ms Doubtfire1 wrote: »

ahum. Lets see:
If I get my kicks out of torturing that kitten a judge will only fine me 50 quid and tell me I was a bad boy and i should never do it again but he nderstand s because I had a bad childhood.

OR
If I get my kicks out of torturing that kitten the judge will fine me 5,000 euro and send me to jail for 6 month..

what do you think yourself will work better?

Your analogy holds no merit as it's incredibly biased. There's very little logic to it.

Walter H Price wrote: »

I don't believe in rehabilitation to be honest id just rater those kind of people were removed from society and i don't really care whats done with them , execution seems the most cost effective option but yeh if you prefer prison will do .

Its a personal view , in my personal opinion crimes against the vulnerable should carry the heaviest sentences , Paedos , Wife Beaters , those who pray on the elderly or torture and kill defenseless animals are only worthy of absolute contempt. the word Fascist has lost all meaning at this stage its thrown around so much, but yes i'm incredibly right leaning in terms of economics and social justice.

Wow... just wow...

While I understand that you are entitled to your opinion, your opinion is wrong.

Walter H Price

Avery Sour Cranberry wrote: »

Your analogy holds no merit as it's incredibly biased. There's very little logic to it.



Wow... just wow...

While I understand that you are entitled to your opinion, your opinion is wrong.

Its an opinion it cant be wrong , you can disagree with it and dislike it all you want but that dosn't make it wrong.

Its my opinion and there nothing anyone could do , say or show me to change it.

Ms Doubtfire1

Avery Sour Cranberry wrote: »

Your analogy holds no merit as it's incredibly biased. There's very little logic to it.

uhm...

It REALLY can't get any more logical for anyone with at least a microgram of brain.
But hey, i'm straying away from the original threat. So, again - animal abusers punishment?
an eye for an eye..

don't like it? don't vote for me lol.

>leaves the discussion<

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Ms Doubtfire1 wrote: »

uhm...

It REALLY can't get any more logical for anyone with at least a microgram of brain.
But hey, i'm straying away from the original threat. So, again - animal abusers punishment?
an eye for an eye..

don't like it? don't vote for me lol.

>leaves the discussion<

Ad hominem.

Can you provide an example of a case where the following was the outcome?

"If I get my kicks out of torturing that kitten a judge will only fine me 50 quid and tell me I was a bad boy and i should never do it again but he nderstand s because I had a bad childhood."

The later statement you made is closer to the real punishment I would imagine. I'm no pro though. The tougher sentence I referred to was the death penalty.

Either way, what evidence do either of you have which would support tougher sentences? If there's evidence that this route will help society a whole, then I am all for it. We can take the USA as an example, their methods do not work. Tougher prison sentences does not deter crime.