Cat abuse - Kenny Glenn

Nitefly · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:24

Energize said:
Eating meat = killing, which is worse than assault.

Chimerical said:
Basically what he's learnt for future reference is that he can still abuse animals but just not upload a video of it.

So all this outrage is pointless.

This thread has some odd reasoning. I can't get my head around either of these posts.

steve-h · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:24

Nitefly said:
This thread has some odd reasoning.

indeed.

Energize · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:25

Moley said:
The cow is going to be well fed and well looked after up until the 'ZAP' which it is unlikely to see coming.

So you could argue that whilst the cow has been killed in the end it has lived a happy life up until that point and has probably not suffered. The cat on the other hand has been cruelly mistreated and suffered a nasty assault at the hands of those who are supposed to care for it - and from whom it would only be expecting loving treatment.

The cat will die eventually as well of course, but if it's life is miserable and the cows is happy - which would you say has been treated better?

Tbh I still consider killing worse, empathy with animals is somewhat difficult however, if the cat had been living a life of torture than I would consider that worse, however many people here will no doubt be eating battery chickens at kfc at the weekend and the cheapest beef available from the supermarket, which I do find strange for animal lovers. I'm not saying people shouldn't be angry at this incident though.

Nitefly said:
This thread has some odd reasoning. I can't get my head around either of these posts.

It's called logic.

Durzel · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:25

EddScott said:
How is hegemon an idiot - he's right. Maybe not the KB warrior (of which OCUK appears to have far more than its fair share) comment but the staged bit is correct.

If you really slam a cat against the wall your going to break its bones and punching it your going to break bones and do damage. There doesn't seem to be any physical damage to the cat.

And before the aforementioned warriors have a pop, watching the video angered me more than I can express for scaring the cat like that but it was staged.

My point is while it's obviously staged in the sense that it is a video that was recorded deliberately for Youtube (i.e. not "caught on CCTV" or whatever) the cat isn't in on it. As far as the cat is concerned it's being attacked, and it's patently obvious from its demeanor that this isn't the first time its been treated like that. It's clear that it has learnt to be totally submissive from other occasions that weren't videoed for Youtube, staged or whatever you want to call it.

Also it's an argument over semantics really as to whether or not it constitutes abuse. Whilst he wasn't punching or smacking it against the wall with the intent/force to kill it - it's still very malicious.

Someone with that sort of attitude towards animal cruelty needs to be dealt with before he starts upping his game and seeing just how much punishment the cat could take.

Frankly keyboard warrioring aside I'd quite happily give him a good kicking on the strength of that video and I don't consider myself a violent person in the least.

chrisd · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:26

Nitefly said:
This thread has some odd reasoning. I can't get my head around either of these posts.

I was hoping that Energize was just trolling.

4p · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:26

Yea thread is taking a rather unexpected course tbh.

Dusty is the topic at hand here, now gtfo

Chimerical · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:27

Nitefly said:
This thread has some odd reasoning.

Why? What will any of this internet rage actually amount to?

So he's learnt not to video himself abusing an animal next time. So what? Doesn't stop him from doing those acts in the future.

Nitefly · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:31

Chimerical said:
Why? What will any of this internet rage actually amount to?

So he's learnt not to video himself abusing an animal next time. So what? Doesn't stop him from doing those acts in the future.

That's like saying 'prison is pointless because all it teaches is that people shouldn't get caught' :/

gazzamcg · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:32

Energize said:

Sorry, where did I say anything like that? I said the exact opposite in my first post.

Click to expand...

Energize said:
Eating meat = killing, which is worse than assault.

Energize said:
It means that while it doesn't make you a physco like the kid in the video because you are shielded from the act of killing, what you are buying results in the killing of animals, which is worse than what he did. Well if you consider killing to be worse than assault anyway, which I do..

Your last sentence is pathetic and has no relation to this story.

Chimerical · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:33

Nitefly said:
That's like saying 'prison is pointless because all it teaches is that people shouldn't get caught' :/

Prison and the retribution of a few skinny keyboard warriors are two different things.

This teenager isn't going to prison and probably doesn't care about some angry youtube comments.

Mat · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:34

I think this has all got a bit out of hand :/

Energize · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:34

gazzamcg said:

energize said:
Doesn't mean that people shouldn't be going mental about it though.

I never said that it was right or wrong in those posts, just that it was worse than assault, ergo hypocritical, upto you to decide whether that is right or wrong.

platinum87 · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:34

essentially he is under 18.. or whatever..

isnt it illegal to have his name and address all over the internet?

or something similar?

matt_fsr · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:36

platinum87 said:
essentially he is under 18.. or whatever..

isnt it illegal to have his name and address all over the internet?

or something similar?

Under what law? Remember.... he chose to post his name and address in other places - just so happens that /b/ linked them all up....

Nitefly · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:38

Chimerical said:
Prison and the retribution of a few skinny keyboard warriors are two different things.

This teenager isn't going to prison and probably doesn't care about some angry youtube comments.

Firstly, we don't know if he is going to go to prison or not.

Secondly, he has commited a crime. It will go down on his records I imagine.

The incident has increased the awareness of animal cruelty and perhaps some organisations such as the RSPCA will get more support as a result.

I'm not really sure what your point it. Are you complaining at the over the top remarks stating that the man should be hanged? They are passing comments which are about as moot as the point I think you are making.

platinum87 · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:43

matt_fsr said:
Under what law? Remember.... he chose to post his name and address in other places - just so happens that /b/ linked them all up....

my post assumed that his details were obtained by some sort of hacking etc etc.

its still not morally right, im not the one who is shouting kill the kid or beat him up etc etc and spamming his name/address on the internet, and you all then have the nerve to say im insane etc when i say similar things to other groups of people. surely someone must agree with me?

Cuchulain · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:47

LOL at the backlash, some of you are worse than the boy in the video.

Funniest bit for me was:

Various internet groups and communities have pronounced February 15'th an international "Dusty Day" (02.15.2008)

Nitefly · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:49

Cuchulain said:
LOL at the backlash, some of you are worse than the boy in the video.

Saying something isn't as bad as doing it.

A man that merely says 'Mr. X should die in the face' isn't even in the same league as someone who draws a gun on Mr. X and shoots him.

So no. Not really.

Chimerical · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:50

Nitefly said:
I'm not really sure what your point it. Are you complaining at the over the top remarks stating that the man should be hanged?

You've misinterpreted me then. That is not the point that I'm making.

mrk · 16 Feb 2009 at 14:51

Knubje said:
I saw the first few seconds of the video where the guy/kid has his hand around the cats neck and I stopped watching because I knew I wasn't going to like what I saw (I have two cats, love animals and really can't stomach cruelty to animals).

In short, the person is low life scum. I'd happily kick him in the nuts for what he has done and I think he needs professional help and dealing with by the Police/RCPSA.

However, things like this (and much, much worse) happen daily. No outrage from the masses. I'm not sure what the punishment is for this type of animal cruelty in the states, but I can bet it's going to be a lot more lenient than what he is about to receive from the bandwagon jumping e-vigilantes/keyboard warriors.

I think what he has done is bad, but what others are doing in return can be seen as much worse. Surely the correct thing to do is have him dealt with by the proper authorities and let that be it, it sucks and maybe lenient, but that's life.

I see where you're coming from but IMO people like this cannot be helped to become better people. Their lives are already ruined and they deserve to be locked up due to what they will be capable of in the future.

I'd rather see them put away for good or otherwise than read about a human being tortured by them next time round because they got a short term sentence!