FYI, you inadvertently apply a black market price for killing "cute animals" by applying a fine to it
Living animals are everywhere. I can't go outside for two minutes without seeing a squirrel or a bird somewhere.
Huh, I never thought about that...
I meant more like zoos, animal shelters, pet stores, etc.
That's basically what's happened with illegal drugs throughout history. If you've outlawed a product, you inadvertently increase its black market price exponentially to how stringent you enforce your policies.
I remember that, i think the chinky guy's value was only double digit.
The Korean guy? He seems like the most "normal" of the group by their standards, and his count was actually the highest as well, making it all the more comical that it was still below average. I'm not even trying to make fun of these guys, that's actually dangerous and could have seriously bad effects down the road. I'm not saying you gotta go all He-man on the world or anything but still.
It helps knowing they're often overpopulated and driving songbird species to extinction.
Torturing an animal to death is worse than just killing, so I'd say that should warrant a greater punishment relative to if it was a swift death, so sure, two years is insufficient there. A couple more years would be fine, keep them on parole and mandate therapy. But no, don't torture and kill a human over an animal.
Probably not enough, but I have enough sense to know we should treat even the most heinous animal crimes differently than ones against humans. It shouldn't be legal by any means, but seeing people equate a fucking CAT to a human, even children, is psycho shit, their moral value isn't even close and so therefore the crimes cannot be punished equally either.
It is insufficient even in things like The Felipe the Flying Cat incident. Luka Magnotta killed those cats in a somewhat quick fashion as well. He needs to know what pain and horror is (and yeah I do care more about what he did to those cats than that gay gueer), he needs to get the Reservoir Dogs treatment, with the straight razor and the gasoline and the fucking lighter. Same with that troon who put a fucking cat in a blender.
We have been charging minors as adults for a long time, and this should be no different. What that blackie did is one of the most disturbing things I have read about or seen, and that includes stuff from the videos of people dying thread. That nigger's life is utterly forfeited as far as I am concerned, and if someone were to abduct her and go Hostel on her, I would not condemn it, provided that person was competent in doing so and got away with it. And as far as the life of humans, a single cat is worth more than every single African refugee who tries to cross the Med--that is what I mean and Douglas P means by "all of life's false humanity," a line from a Death in June song. Indeed, might reluctantly sacrifice a cat to obliterate those hordes but that is a hypothetical that will never come to pass so it is dumb talking about. Know also that I value the life of my cats more than your life and more than almost anyone on this planet.
We clearly have different moral standards. You're elevating animals to human status (inconsistently at that).
It's not about whether I like a particular animal or not, it's about a value system in which animals are lower than people. It's that simple.
You're clearly irrational and emotional. If I didn't know any better I'd assume you were a woman. I take back what I said, you're elevating animals above humans, not to their level.
I am stupid, but I'm not insane, so I at least have that going.
It's not that, it's holding humans to a justifiably higher standard. Animals are innocent and blameless, so there is even less of an excuse to be needlessly torturous to them than a human you may have a blood feud (or gambling/drug debt) against. It shows a lack of character that is actively dangerous to the surrounding community, and will often escalate. Nobody is served by being lenient with aggravated animal abusers.
Humans being above animals is accepted, but that also makes them a greater threat, and subject to higher standards. It also means they are held more responsible for their actions. If an animal causes harm outside of its species within the protection of society, it is treated fairly harshly. Humans already get treated more softly, and you advocate for treating them less harshly still.
Not inconsistently. Civilizations have always valued some animals more than others. It is baked in our language and laws. This was explained several times. Livestock versus pet versus vermin or pest.
Also already addressed, several times. People can value animals lower than people or care about less than I do and still punish gratuitous killing and torturing of animals (defenseless, domesticated or captive animals) severely.
They also used to beat children with razor straps and the like, which probably should have happened with this sort of thing to correct that kind of behavior.
Some yes, others no. As for me being emotional, outrages and atrocitites tend to get people emotional, including men. That Italian New Yorker (known as Joe Panz) from Rescue Ink was in recounting Magnotta's sick kitten videos.
Cats in that particular instance are considered a pest and that's different. Doesn't give people carte blanche license to kill cats or other animals writ large.
Depends on what you consider as lenient, would that be not subjecting them to a recreation of Resevoir Dogs for shooting a dog?
I don't remember the details, wasn't he banging up some kid?
I rebutted it several times.
No because it's disproportionate. If they have a lower value then a person shouldn't be treated like they killed a person. This is something you refuse to accept.
The hell is a razor strap?
Yeah, it's different because you say so. It's still a fucking cat, you're still killing it, and you don't strictly need to. But if someone names the cat Mr. Tinkles before killing it then you're going to rape their family and open a portal to hell and slam dunk them into it
No you haven't and I want off this merry go round. I and others can explain the concepts to you but we cannot comprehend them for you. I already stipulated--several tines--that one can disagree that should be a remedy on our justice system and still agree that the sorts of things I and others are talking about are not punished nearly enough.
I agreed that in some instances the punishment isn't severe enough, but you seem to want nothing short of to prosecute them as if their victims were humans.
