do you think an 18 week jail sentence is enough for this?

[FoxEye]

Alternatively, I wouldn't jail him as it costs money and there is no evidence he's a danger to the public.

However, I'd levy a massive fine. £10,000 or so ought to do it. Make him pay £10,000 which could be donated to some animal welfare trust.

Being drunk is *no* excuse.

 

[stephenjt]

the guy is ex army, i dont think been sent to prison is gonna affect him. more like a hoilday camp for cons. if i had been driving pass i would have rammed the ****er into the tarmac.

and no i dont think his sentence of 18mths is acceptable, when i was a teen i got caught been a passager in a stolen car (i didnt know it was stolen) and they gave me 6mths inside, first offence too.

this guy got off lucky, probably because he has served our country.

 

[drunkenmaster]

Anyone in this thread that has ever eaten meat and said he should get a stiffer sentence is a hypocrite. (yes I realise there's a difference, but it amounts to the same thing)

Kick in the head or bolt in the head, which would you prefer?

Reasoning, you don't have it, and it is the measure by which we judge everything.

Translate it to humans, murdering someone in cold blood, murdering someone in self defence and ending someone's life who has terminal illness and is in an extreme amount of pain with no hope.

All amount to the same thing, so all should be regarded the same? Reasoning, such a simple thing that so many people don't use.

Ask yourself this, would you murder someone in cold blood, how angry would you be if a family member was murdered for no reason. Would you kill someone to protect a family member, how angry would you be at someone who killed a family member who was actively trying to kill someone for no reason. Would you end the life of a family member who wished to die who was in agony and had no chance for anything but worse pain before death, would you be angry at someone for doing this for your family member?

An act is MEANINGLESS, intent behind the act gives any particular act meaning. Killing someone is an act, if it was good, bad, understandable, unfortunately, great, terrible, whatever word you want to use is entirely dictated by the intent for the killing not the act itself.

I don't eat meat because I feel morally as I can live without eating it, I really shouldn't. If I didn't have this option, I would eat meat, it moves from a moral to survival choice in my view. While an animal is effectively murdered, there IS a reason behind it, food, survival. I question the particular morality of that but this was an idea inherited from millennia of civilisation not having the choice to not eat animals(realistically).

The man kicked the cat to death for fun, morally this has ALWAYS been wrong. I can understand the reason people eat meat and why animals are killed, none of them are killed for fun. Fox hunting today is done purely for fun and is morally reprehensible, as is killing a cat or human for nothing more than fun/entertainment.

These things aren't comparable so stop trying to compare them.

Intent is EVERYTHING in these situations, in all situations, ignoring this and comparing the acts alone is completely pointless.... nothing short of ignorant.

 

[estebanrey]

I love cats more than is usual but... It is just a cat.

And you're "just" a human, see how easy it is to belittle a lifefors by just putting the words "just a" in front of it?

Guess what, you really aren't any more special than that poor cat just because you happened to be born into the homo species and not a feline one.

Compared to the size of the universe and all the life in it, no single life is really that significant, including that of you or your family.

Conversely, that cat was a mathematical miracle. When you think of all the events that had to happen in order for that particular cat to exist (or any lifeform) it is staggering.

Finally, to many people, especially the older generation who don't have many friends, a pet can be loved and treated as just as much part of the family as anyone else. That is why all pets should be respected and you should never treat someone else's pet any different than you'd treat any the member of their family.

The attitude that unless you're human then you're only marginally more significant than a tree really irks me.

 

[Richdog]

Reasoning, you don't have it, and it is the measure by which we judge everything.

Translate it to humans, murdering someone in cold blood, murdering someone in self defence and ending someone's life who has terminal illness and is in an extreme amount of pain with no hope.

All amount to the same thing, so all should be regarded the same? Reasoning, such a simple thing that so many people don't use.

Ask yourself this, would you murder someone in cold blood, how angry would you be if a family member was murdered for no reason. Would you kill someone to protect a family member, how angry would you be at someone who killed a family member who was actively trying to kill someone for no reason. Would you end the life of a family member who wished to die who was in agony and had no chance for anything but worse pain before death, would you be angry at someone for doing this for your family member?

An act is MEANINGLESS, intent behind the act gives any particular act meaning. Killing someone is an act, if it was good, bad, understandable, unfortunately, great, terrible, whatever word you want to use is entirely dictated by the intent for the killing not the act itself.

I don't eat meat because I feel morally as I can live without eating it, I really shouldn't. If I didn't have this option, I would eat meat, it moves from a moral to survival choice in my view. While an animal is effectively murdered, there IS a reason behind it, food, survival. I question the particular morality of that but this was an idea inherited from millennia of civilisation not having the choice to not eat animals(realistically).

The man kicked the cat to death for fun, morally this has ALWAYS been wrong. I can understand the reason people eat meat and why animals are killed, none of them are killed for fun. Fox hunting today is done purely for fun and is morally reprehensible, as is killing a cat or human for nothing more than fun/entertainment.

These things aren't comparable so stop trying to compare them.

Intent is EVERYTHING in these situations, in all situations, ignoring this and comparing the acts alone is completely pointless.... nothing short of ignorant.

High five to you for taking the time to type the required response into an incredibly logical argument that I just didn't have the will to spend the time typng out.

Realistically though, the person(s) you are saying this to are thinking in much simpler terms.

 

[cm1179]

Finally, to many people, especially the older generation who don't have many friends, a pet can be loved and treated as just as much part of the family as anyone else. That is why all pets should be respected and you should never treat someone else's pet any different than you'd treat any the member of their family.

this is a good point. something like this would destroy an old person if it was owned by an old person or a young child.

 

[Dickyb0b]

what about the guy that killed someone with 1 punch, they only got 4 and half years..

 

[Orionaut]

Finally, to many people, especially the older generation who don't have many friends, a pet can be loved and treated as just as much part of the family as anyone else. That is why all pets should be respected and you should never treat someone else's pet any different than you'd treat any the member of their family.

I have always been frustrated that these types of cases tend to be treated as "Animal Cruelty" issues rather than (If the Animal concerned IS actually somebodies pet) a "Murdering a member of somebodies family" issue!

I would be perfectly happy to see mistreatment of a "Wild/Feral" animal treated differently in law to mistreatment of somebodies pet (With the latter being treated far more harshly!#)


(#ISTR that under Roman law, an assault on somebodies property, which included livestock and Slaves was treated as an assault on that person! There is something in that!)

 

[^TANK^]

This.



You are a freak, and I would suggest if you are serious, that you get some help.

Deadly serious and I'm fine thank you.

 

[Efour]

Irked stuff

Really? Like 100% really?

Ok that's your prerogative but i think you are in an a minority.

I'm not being cold or excessively callous and appreciate the "loved pet" spin.

But i dont remember when my dad died suddenly thinking, " ill nip down petsmart and get a new one" like i did when Tibbles died.

 

[Orionaut]

what about the guy that killed someone with 1 punch, they only got 4 and half years..

He should have got more too!

Especially since he was a career criminal with a history of violent offences!

 

[bitslice]

It is well documented that lack of empathy towards animals is strongly correlated to psychopathic tendencies

Yep,
in every cat thread there are always 10 people that I'm glad I don't live anywhere near.
(and I'm not even claiming any level of normality for myself)

I have always been frustrated that these types of cases tend to be treated as "Animal Cruelty" issues rather than a "Murdering a member of somebodies family" issue!

Good point

 

[cm1179]

what about the guy that killed someone with 1 punch, they only got 4 and half years..

was this in the uk? an equally ****ed up punishment

i got back from oz yesterday. i was in a place called kingscross in sydney for a week. interesting place. there is a new law coming into certain parts of sydney that means alcohol will not be served after 1.30am (kingscross being one of them) because 2 people were killed recently after being punched. they even had a name for the vicous act (though i don't recall what it was)

 

[Richdog]

And you're "just" a human, see how easy it is to belittle a lifefors by just putting the words "just a" in front of it?

Guess what, you really aren't any more special than that poor cat just because you happened to be born into the homo species and not a feline one.

Compared to the size of the universe and all the life in it, no single life is really that significant, including that of you or your family.

Conversely, that cat was a mathematical miracle. When you think of all the events that had to happen in order for that particular cat to exist (or any lifeform) it is staggering.

Finally, to many people, especially the older generation who don't have many friends, a pet can be loved and treated as just as much part of the family as anyone else. That is why all pets should be respected and you should never treat someone else's pet any different than you'd treat any the member of their family.

The attitude that unless you're human then you're only marginally more significant than a tree really irks me.

Fine rhetoric estan, and I agree that all life is to be respected, but ultimately your argument is flawed.

Of course we as human beings value human life more than others... as fully sentient beings we automatically place the life of our own species in all their complexity above other life forms.

We shouldn't cruelly mistreat animals, and we should take steps to reverse the devastation we are doing to the planet and its wildlife, but lets not for a second fool ourselves into thinking all life is inherently equal, or that we should place the survival of all species of life as equal or more important than our own, because that is not only completely impractical, but it's also completely unrealistic. For the human race to survive and progress we are going to have to go through numerous periods of technological, societal and ecological strife... and the first ones we look at protecting when push comes to shove, at the expense of ourselves, are likely not going to be the local flora and fauna.

Sad in many respects, but ultimately true.

 

[Craterloads]

Whilst, like others, disgusted at the story kind of looks like some sort of twisted drunkerdly compassion shown by the man?

Now as long as he wasn't the one who initially injured the cat, I can see how he may have thought he's doing the thing a favour. Has it been established if the cat was injured prior to the kicking or as a result of the kicking?

If already injured, in pain and agony, the men walked over and deemed the animal was too badly injured to survive, perhaps felt sorry for it and not wanting to handle it with his bare hands, breaking neck etc. Decided easiest, non touchy way would be just to step on it or whatever killing it instantly preventing it from further suffering.

Given he has been sentenced probably wasn't the case of twisted compassion though, not much details on link.

 

[bitslice]

Of course we as human beings value human life more than others... as fully sentient beings we automatically place the life of our own species in all their complexity above other life forms.

I'm sure you'd like to think that,
but in house fire I would trample over your face in order to rescue my cat, and trample over your face again as we ran out of the door.

 

[Craterloads]

I'm sure you'd like to think that,
but in house fire I would trample over your face in order to rescue my cat, and trample over your face again as we ran out of the door.

Lol, that was genuinely funny

 

[Richdog]

I'm sure you'd like to think that,
but in house fire I would trample over your face in order to rescue my cat, and trample over your face again as we ran out of the door.

And a choice of a human child, or your cat, if you could only save one?

 

[^TANK^]

Of course we as human beings value human life more than others... as fully sentient beings we automatically place the life of our own species in all their complexity above other life forms.

I sure as **** don't! My thirty one years existence surrounded by my fellow species hasn't been a positive one at all.

And a choice of a human child, or your cat, if you could only save one?

I have thought about this exact scenario a few times and I would go in order of child, cat, adult.

 

[starfighter]

A life is a life at the end of the day. A cat has the same capacity to be happy and sad or to feel or not feel pain. It doesn't really matter that we are more intelligent. The fact that humans have a longer lifespan is a reason to put a human life over an animal. Or obviously if the human if your offspring or a friend etc.