Death sentence for animal abuse

[Peefreak99 3,722]

I say yes because the bastard that hurts something inocent no matter if it's a dog,cat or a kid has no value left. I mean if a person can beat a puppy to death what could he/she do to you? Animal abusers is one of the worst things i know i just wanna rip their heads off. What do you think?

[F.W 5,734]

Whats this in relation to?

I agree,if someone can kill an animal,for any other than to eat it,or wear its skin,and do it humanely as possible of course,then they are scum.

Im referring to hunting,shooting etc.Most animals that are hunted these days,are merely killed for "sport".Whatever that "sport" is i dont know.

We must have meat,and other animal products,so im no veggie,but killing for fun should be banned.

[Peefreak99 3,722]

52 minutes ago, F.W said:

Whats this in relation to?

I agree,if someone can kill an animal,for any other than to eat it,or wear its skin,and do it humanely as possible of course,then they are scum.

Im referring to hunting,shooting etc.Most animals that are hunted these days,are merely killed for "sport".Whatever that "sport" is i dont know.

We must have meat,and other animal products,so im no veggie,but killing for fun should be banned.

Hunting is ok if you do it right i love meat. But what i meant is cunts killing dogs for no reasson or hiting them etc.

[gldenwetgoose 21,487]

 

I'm guessing @Peefreak99 that the topic has arisen because of some occurrence - either somebody has hurt you, or something you've seen.

Out of context it does raise the question of whether crimes should have differing levels of punishment.  Is animal abuse worse than mistreating an elderly resident in a care home?  Is driving a car whilst drunk and killing someone more forgivable than being a school shooter?   At the point where we question whether the death penalty would be justified is I guess where we decide that some crimes are more severe than others and deserve a stricter punishment.  If animal abuse is to be punishable by death, then surely every other crime that takes a life is too?

We then get to the scenario that, to enforce the death penalty we have to be very sure of guilt (and potentially motive) - rehabilitation is out of the question of course after the death penalty.   What about manslaughter by negligence? does that deserve the death penalty too?  Diminished responsibility?   The domestic abuse victim who finally strikes back and in one moment kills their abuser?  Would you sit on the jury and condemn these people to death, then go home and sleep soundly?

No answers I'm afraid - just more questions.

[steve25805 126,021]

MOD NOTICE

@2prnot2p, if you disagree with someone do it in a friendly manner and do not infer madness or craziness or stupidity. It is unnecessarily unfriendly and provocative. And @Peefreak99, responding to such provocation in an aggressive and insulting way instead of merely reporting it is also unacceptable. 

I have deleted the offending posts. 

Please bear in my that this site values it's reputation for friendliness, and we all have a part to play in maintaining that.

[steve25805 126,021]

Posting as an ordinary member now.

I as a carnivore accept the necessity of killing animals for food though it should be done humanely.

But wanton cruelty to animals either for sadistic fun or just out of pure meanness is unacceptable.

I think - certainly here in the UK - the sentences handed out for such cruelty are often utterly derisory.

I would like to see stiff prison sentences involving many years behind bars for the worst offenders.

But a death sentence is going too far. I oppose death sentences anyway for a whole variety of reasons but that's another topic all on its own

[F.W 5,734]

14 hours ago, Peefreak99 said:

Hunting is ok if you do it right i love meat. But what i meant is cunts killing dogs for no reasson or hiting them etc.

I disagree.I think hunting is wrong altogether.In the modern world WHO NEEDS to hunt to eat meat?Theres meat 24/7 in supermarkets etc.Obviously in the jungle etc,then the tribes there of course hunt for their lives,and that was our own heritage thousands of years ago...Im not a dog lover myself,so whilst i disapprove of all cruelty per se,their fate gives me no nightmares,its wildlife i care about,the casual destruction of wildlife for fun and profit,like grouse shooting etc,done not because the shooters like it,but because it HAS to be done for the good of the birds.OR SO THEY TELL US.....

Yes i do agree there should be stiff sentences for animal cruelty,simply because by that token,they are also likely to be able to commit violence against people,and in some cases this has been borne out in truth.Recently some freak was jailed for life for murdering a young kid,and he also used to capture mice and enjoyed killing them.

 

But as i say,any cruelty to anything is wrong.

[Peefreak99 3,722]

30 minutes ago, steve25805 said:

MOD NOTICE

@2prnot2p, if you disagree with someone do it in a friendly manner and do not infer madness or craziness. It is unnecessarily unfriendly and provocative. And @Peefreak99, responding to such provocation in an aggressive and insulting way instead of merely reporting it is also unacceptable. 

I have deleted the offending posts. 

Please bear in my that this site values it's reputation for friendliness, and we all have a part to play in maintaining that.

Yes im sorry but i would not have replied that way if he had not been rude to me first calling me insane and stupid etc 

[steve25805 126,021]

4 minutes ago, Peefreak99 said:

Yes im sorry but i would not have replied that way if he had not been rude to me first calling me insane and stupid etc 

I understand but please in future just quietly report it and it will be dealt with.

[steve25805 126,021]

1 hour ago, F.W said:

I think hunting is wrong altogether.In the modern world WHO NEEDS to hunt to eat meat?

I agree. We no longer live as hunter gatherers. Hunting to eat is utterly unnecessary. Hunting is usually done for "sport". But what the fuck is sporting about shooting animals with guns just for fun, or still worse chasing it on horses and with packs of hounds so it can be ripped to bits for the dubious "pleasure" of sick fuck upper class participants?

I'd happily see hunting banned.

[Peefreak99 3,722]

Many seem to think i mean hunting. Hunting for me is ok I LOVE MEAT as long as it's done in a good way. What i mean with animal abuse is cruelty to pets, hiting a dog etc 

[Peefreak99 3,722]

1 hour ago, gldenwetgoose said:

 

I'm guessing @Peefreak99 that the topic has arisen because of some occurrence - either somebody has hurt you, or something you've seen.

Out of context it does raise the question of whether crimes should have differing levels of punishment.  Is animal abuse worse than mistreating an elderly resident in a care home?  Is driving a car whilst drunk and killing someone more forgivable than being a school shooter?   At the point where we question whether the death penalty would be justified is I guess where we decide that some crimes are more severe than others and deserve a stricter punishment.  If animal abuse is to be punishable by death, then surely every other crime that takes a life is too?

We then get to the scenario that, to enforce the death penalty we have to be very sure of guilt (and potentially motive) - rehabilitation is out of the question of course after the death penalty.   What about manslaughter by negligence? does that deserve the death penalty too?  Diminished responsibility?   The domestic abuse victim who finally strikes back and in one moment kills their abuser?  Would you sit on the jury and condemn these people to death, then go home and sleep soundly?

No answers I'm afraid - just more questions.

That's some great questions. For the domestic thing i would say no you are ofc alowed to defend yourself with anything you can. But the drunk driver that kills someone should get the death penalty. He or she know they were drunk and drving was not a good idea then. Im in a rush right now so my answer might not be that good 

[kinkydom 203]

Let the punishment fit the crime. An eye for an eye!

[steve25805 126,021]

2 hours ago, Peefreak99 said:

Many seem to think i mean hunting. Hunting for me is ok I LOVE MEAT as long as it's done in a good way. What i mean with animal abuse is cruelty to pets, hiting a dog etc 

I think animal cruelty - whilst it includes cruelty to pets, hitting a dog, etc - also encompasses hunting, which should also be illegal. Cruelty to wild animals is no more acceptable than cruelty to tame ones in my book. We do not after all hunt for meat or need not anymore. Most meat we eat is reared domestically on farms.

[likesToLick 10,216]

4 hours ago, steve25805 said:

I agree. We no longer live as hunter gatherers. Hunting to eat is utterly unnecessary.

Something that you may not know Steve, is that in Australia a significant amount of meat sold in shops is actually hunted.  In particular there is a large kangaroo meat industry, but there are no kangaroo farms.

Since European settlement, a lot of water bores have been installed to supply cattle troughs, and also many crops have been planted.  This has led to an absolute explosion of the kangaroo population, since limited water and feed kept the population down in the past.  Of course, if the kangaroo population is allowed to grow unchecked,  the sheep and cattle will starve and the farmers will go broke. (The human population might get pretty hungry too, if all the crops are eaten before they can be harvested.)

There is actually a problem with finding enough hunters to cope with the number of kangaroos that breed each year. 

Hunters are also licensed to shoot other animals and birds, usually because they are damaging crops or orchards.

There are a lot of rules to hopefully ensure that the animals and birds are killed as humanely as possible.

 

[Peefreak99 3,722]

5 hours ago, steve25805 said:

I think animal cruelty - whilst it includes cruelty to pets, hitting a dog, etc - also encompasses hunting, which should also be illegal. Cruelty to wild animals is no more acceptable than cruelty to tame ones in my book. We do not after all hunt for meat or need not anymore. Most meat we eat is reared domestically on farms.

Ofc no animal should be abused. Btw do you think fishing is ok?

[gldenwetgoose 21,487]

I've often thought about the fishing argument - people opposed to cooking live lobster in boiling water, yet ok with fish being hauled out of water and effectively suffocating on land?

That said, it's not something I've got enough of a conscience about to stop me eating it - not that I'm a big fish eater though. 

[steve25805 126,021]

5 hours ago, Peefreak99 said:

Ofc no animal should be abused. Btw do you think fishing is ok?

Most fish are either thrown back after being caught or taken home to be eaten in the case of anglers whilst industrial fishing with trawlers is for food, so I see little wrong with the concept.

And @likesToLick has given some good examples and arguments where hunting looks pretty acceptable and reasonable so I acknowledge that. It is the hunting and killing of animals for fun that is unacceptable yet which still happens in the UK

[steve25805 126,021]

13 hours ago, Peefreak99 said:

But the drunk driver that kills someone should get the death penalty

I am sorry. But that is manslaughter not murder. He didn't deliberately set out to kill.

I do not approve of death sentences in any case, and certainly not for manslaughter. A stiff prison sentence should be in order instead.

[Peefreak99 3,722]

2 minutes ago, steve25805 said:

I am sorry. But that is manslaughter not murder. He didn't deliberately set out to kill.

I do not approve of death sentences in any case, and certainly not for manslaughter. A stiff prison sentence should be in order instead.

Yes but lets say someone is totaly wasted and can barely wallk and anyway they decide to drive. He/she knows he or she is drunk and that something problaby is going to happen. Lets say that the drunk driver then hits and kills a litle kid because they CHOOSE to drive drunk even tho they knew that it was a bad idea and something like that could happen. Do that person really deserve to live after that? I mean what if you were the kids father and could decide what would happen to the driver what would you do? i think anyone would go for death at that point.

[steve25805 126,021]

1 hour ago, Peefreak99 said:

Yes but lets say someone is totaly wasted and can barely wallk and anyway they decide to drive. He/she knows he or she is drunk and that something problaby is going to happen. Lets say that the drunk driver then hits and kills a litle kid because they CHOOSE to drive drunk even tho they knew that it was a bad idea and something like that could happen. Do that person really deserve to live after that? I mean what if you were the kids father and could decide what would happen to the driver what would you do? i think anyone would go for death at that point.

You can throw all the most emotive examples at me you can imagine. I still believe the death penalty is wrong. And I still believe your example only constitutes manslaughter, even though a severe case of it meriting a long prison sentence. I am certain that legal minds would define it as manslaughter rather than murder too. 

[steve25805 126,021]

12 hours ago, likesToLick said:

Something that you may not know Steve, is that in Australia a significant amount of meat sold in shops is actually hunted.  In particular there is a large kangaroo meat industry, but there are no kangaroo farms.

Since European settlement, a lot of water bores have been installed to supply cattle troughs, and also many crops have been planted.  This has led to an absolute explosion of the kangaroo population, since limited water and feed kept the population down in the past.  Of course, if the kangaroo population is allowed to grow unchecked,  the sheep and cattle will starve and the farmers will go broke. (The human population might get pretty hungry too, if all the crops are eaten before they can be harvested.)

Thank you for that useful information. I never knew that so have learned something.

As such I have modified my original opinion that all hunting is bad and should be banned. Clearly in certain situations hunting can be justified.  Some types of hunting, though, are bad and should be banned.

[steve25805 126,021]

12 hours ago, likesToLick said:

In particular there is a large kangaroo meat industry

What does kangaroo meat taste like? Never seen it for sale here in the UK.

[likesToLick 10,216]

1 minute ago, steve25805 said:

What does kangaroo meat taste like? Never seen it for sale here in the UK.

I've only eaten it a couple of times in pubs.  The fashion seems to be that it must be served very rare.  I like my meat well done,  so for me,  the "under cooked" kangaroo just tasted bloody.   This put me off enough that I didn't bother to try it again, so I can't really answer your question.  I probably should buy a kangaroo steak and try cooking it at home.  

It's considered to be a healthier type of red meat since it is very lean and low in cholesterol.

I have eaten buffalo, which was like a very tender beef steak.  It's also possible to buy camel and crocodile meat in the shops here,  but I have not tried them.

[steve25805 126,021]

1 minute ago, likesToLick said:

I've only eaten it a couple of times in pubs.  The fashion seems to be that it must be served very rare.  I like my meat well done,  so for me,  the "under cooked" kangaroo just tasted bloody.   This put me off enough that I didn't bother to try it again, so I can't really answer your question.  I probably should buy a kangaroo steak and try cooking it at home.  

It's considered to be a healthier type of red meat since it is very lean and low in cholesterol.

I have eaten buffalo, which was like a very tender beef steak.  It's also possible to buy camel and crocodile meat in the shops here,  but I have not tried them.

Am with you totally on the cooking aspect. I like my meat cooked properly, ie well done. If it is oozing with blood it is still half raw in my book and I just wouldn't eat it. I guess I will never try kangaroo meat unless someone is prepared to cook it properly, ie fully.