Kitten microwaved to death!

Our cat turned our microwave on once.

It is an old 'dial timer' type that turns on if the door is closed and there is still time on the timer left to go.

We were having dinner and our cats were play fighting. They were chasing each other around the house and did some 'free running' over our work top (GRRR :p ). One crashed into the other, who then crashed into the microwave door, closing it, and the microwave started up.

I am not saying the woman is telling the truth, but cats accidentally turning on microwaves can happen (given the right circumstances).
 
C.R.A.Z.Y said:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/23/kitten-killed-microwave?INTCMP=SRCH

What the hell is wrong with some people :confused:
I can't even comprehend how anyone could think of doing something so abhorrent as this let-alone actually do it!!
Some really selfish messed up people in this world, what the hell did the poor kitten do to this pathetic excuse of a human-being :mad:
Click to expand...

Can't bring myself to read the link, it'd play on my mind, the thread title is enough to make me retch and these ******** need stringing up, I'm sick of hearing animal cruelty cases where the ******** only get fined and a few years ban from keeping animals, the judges really have to start handing down very long prison sentences to these sick individuals as well as life bans from ever having another animal.

Lock the **** in a room and let in the big cats to dish the justice.
 
I do feel Animal Cruelty needs tougher sentences, were getting there slowly but still a long way..At least now they do ban owners from keeping animals for life whereas previously they would only get a few years away from them.

almost goes without saying that if your banned from keeping animals for life, you shouldn't be allowed to breed either.

Disgusting anyway you look at it.
 
Last edited:
neil_g said:
whats your point? you clearly have one.
Click to expand...

Well, if we're happy with punishing putting a kitten in a microwave by, in turn, putting the perpetrator in a microwave, how do we go about assessing other acts of cruelty to animals? And where does it stop?

"Yes definitely" you said. So, you're ok with this stuff: how do you propose we administer other acts of animal cruelty "justice", such as in my examples?

Should be "An eye for an eye", after all.
 
Why do people keep putting cats into microwaves? This must be the umpteenth time I've read such a story.

Such weak sentences too, 5 months for Robbins, 4 months for Delaney, 3 months for Cunliffe.
If that was someone's pet then the punishment does not adequately address the pain caused. Specifically if that was my pet I'd be waiting for them when they got out.

Sentences are supposed to be part punitive, part deterrent, these are neither. It's about time the home secretary had a rethink before people start doing his job for him.
 
Clov!s said:
14 weeks is a joke.
Click to expand...

This.

I'm an unashamed animal lover, but of course if I put in the hypothetical situation where a house was on fire and there was a baby and a kitten and I could only save one I'd save the baby.

It's natural that any species favours their own over other but the value put on animal lives under human ones sickens me. If she'd have put a baby in the microwave and killed it she would have almost certainly got a life term (25 years).

So the judicial system is saying that an animal life (and a highly evolved and intelligent mammal at that) is worth just over 1% of a human which is something that frankly disgusts me.

At the very least, for deliberately killing a dog or cat you should get 50% of what you'd get for killing a human. If I were in charge it would be 90% (22 and half years).
 
This woman is a sorry and disgusting excuse for a human being and got less than she deserves. Never mind mental health issues, to show such callous disregard for another living creature is simply appalling.

I do have a question for the forum: When threads like this surface and people quite rightly express their ire at such a cruel act, why do some posters feel the need to behave as though to police that outrage? After all, no-one is actually collecting pitchforks and torches to march on the castle, despite what they might say (forum rules aside).

People are just venting their disgust, so why do you need to step in and 'correct' them?
All it will earn you is an angry backlash, to which you can then spend pages and pages debating your logical high ground like this is some legal or philosophical exchange.
It serves no purpose.

Some might say it's trolling. I'd say it's arguing for the sake of it. So why do you do it in thread after thread? What do you gain from it :confused:
 
All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing

By allowing these comments to go unchecked, we slip down a slope toward reinforcing those views. This manifests as increasing intolerance of others, as ably demonstrated by the Daily Mail and its army of self righteous acolytes, as well as the many forums and comments sections lurking on the internet.
 
The fact that this woman has been sectioned under the Mental Health Act 20 times - yes, TWENTY times - shows that she, society, and most of all that poor little kitten, have been failed by a system that should have kept her confined for everyone's safety. Seriously - how many times would you, as a hypothetical Mental Health professional, allow somebody to be discharged and sectioned again before you decided (s)he was beyond rehabilitation? I'd be generous saying I'd even let it reach double figures.
 
no_1_dave said:
Someone should put her in a microwave for that length of time to show her what it was like for the kitten.
Click to expand...

This was my original reaction until I realised she'd been sectioned 20 times under the mental health act. Clearly she's "not all there".
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom