It's one thing to make a contraversial post. But at least compare apples with apples.
It is a like for like comparison, as it's comparing two cases of violence against animals.
If we went around punching a pig for no reason then you'd have a point.
Pigs are handled roughly in the farming trade, if it doesn't want to get out of it's crate on the way to the slaughter house, do you think they just leave it there or let it go? Maybe pat the good boy and give him a carrot? No, they grab it, kick it and maybe cattle prod it until it's moving in the direction they want. In many cases the only reason the workers sign up for it is because they actually enjoy "persuading" the animals to walk to their death.
I'm not going to comment on the rest of your post because I think its an obvious point that physically lashing out at anyone just because you don't like something they did, especially when that is an animal or a vulnerable person, is wrong.
I didn't express an opinion on whether it's wrong, but if I would, it'd be this. The good is not in consequences of an action only the action itself. I firmly believe that violence "because you felt like it" and violence "because someone wants to some-day eat the animal" is irrelevant. Outside managed explicit consent (boxing) and self-defence; it's deeply hypocritical to believe that violence can be justifiable by the motive of the attacker. What the man did was no worse than what happens to cases of farm animal abuse, and should be punished consistently - with a slap on the wrist.
To also make things clear, I'm not saying this because I'm a vegan, or an animal abuser. I just feel obliged to point out the obvious cognitive dissonance on display when people go into a rage about someone kicking a dog.
Sadly at the moment he's not living free but at the taxpayer's expense. Bring the birch back!
