Sickens me to the core...

digipeep said:
Sentencing Christopher Collyer — formerly of Spring Bank Rise, Keighley, now living in Morecambe

Collyer’s parents Mandy Collyer, 47, and Ian Collyer, 56, now of West Byland, Illingworth, Halifax

Is 24 weeks in prison justice enough for that unbelievable act of cruelty?
Click to expand...

To be honest, I'd have strung him up with his feet barely touching the ground the way he did that dog, and had him tell a jury sufficient reasonings why we shouldn't just let him tire out and hang, but hey - I'm beyond asking "why?" when it comes to completely useless sentencing these days.
 
I am not an animal lover, because i hate the smell,hair,fleas,the walking of the dogs the animal food......disgusting, but this is evil incarnate.#
the trouble is this behaviour goes on all over this country, and nowt gets done about it.
Kill or bully an animal, a fine most of the time.

The trouble is, if you have it in you to treat an animal this way, i am sure that you have it in you to treat another human being this way as well.
I bet the bulger killers crushed snails just for a laugh.

PS, they never serve the full sentence anyway, and less so now because we need the prison cells for tv licence dodgers.
 
moremoney said:
I am not an animal lover, because i hate the smell,hair,fleas,the walking of the dogs the animal food......disgusting, but this is evil incarnate.#
the trouble is this behaviour goes on all over this country, and nowt gets done about it.
Kill or bully an animal, a fine most of the time.

The trouble is, if you have it in you to treat an animal this way, i am sure that you have it in you to treat another human being this way as well.
I bet the bulger killers crushed snails just for a laugh.

PS, they never serve the full sentence anyway, and less so now because we need the prison cells for tv licence dodgers.
Click to expand...

It's a fact that most serial killers start off torturing and killing animals. When it comes to this kind of act against a family dog it showcases a complete disconnection from familial relationship. Any normal dog owner will attest that they become a member of the family to you, and seeing them ill or hurt is an absolutely terrible feeling. While I think our dog is little ****, and a burden in a lot of respects, I love him to bits - as does any decent owner.

Someone who can do this type of thing to the family dog would find it a lot easier to do worse to a random, unfamiliar human. It's an a-number-one symptom of sociopathy.
 
Pestilence said:
It's a fact that most serial killers start off torturing and killing animals. When it comes to this kind of act against a family dog it showcases a complete disconnection from familial relationship. Any normal dog owner will attest that they become a member of the family to you, and seeing them ill or hurt is an absolutely terrible feeling. While I think our dog is little ****, and a burden in a lot of respects, I love him to bits - as does any decent owner.

Someone who can do this type of thing to the family dog would find it a lot easier to do worse to a random, unfamiliar human. It's an a-number-one symptom of sociopathy.
Click to expand...

Well we have a dog and i am afraid i do not love it to bits.
But i would never treat it bad either.

I do agree with most of what you said tho.
 
Last edited:
moremoney said:
Well we have a dog and i am afraid i do not love it to bits.
But i would never treat it bad either.

I do agree with most of what you said tho.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that for anyone else it would constitute "love to bits", but when I saw the pictures on that story I looked at our own springer curled up next to me and realised that if I ever saw him in that kind of situation, I'd be bawling my eyes out.

To me, that says "love to bits". Again, he's a little ****er a lot of the time, and going through his puppy stage nearly drove me to madness but still, he's a member of our family now and imaging things without him makes me very sad.
 
Pestilence said:
I'm not sure that for anyone else it would constitute "love to bits", but when I saw the pictures on that story I looked at our own springer curled up next to me and realised that if I ever saw him in that kind of situation, I'd be bawling my eyes out.

To me, that says "love to bits". Again, he's a little ****er a lot of the time, and going through his puppy stage nearly drove me to madness but still, he's a member of our family now and imaging things without him makes me very sad.
Click to expand...

Now i don't wish to sound cruel but this is just not me.
Animals smell, and have fleas,etc lick their balls and arse then you,
're hands and face. yuck.
 
moremoney said:
Now i don't wish to sound cruel but this is just not me.
Animals smell, and have fleas,etc lick their balls and arse then you,
're hands and face. yuck.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. To each his own. :D

You seem kind of mid-way between me and my father-in-law. He also has a springer, however he shows it no affection and keeps it outside 90% of the time. Whenever it's indoors, it is expected to lie beneath his feet, and he only ever strokes it with them. He'll also make it lie under them forcefully if need be, almost stamping on it to put it in the position he wants while he's in his chair. He's pretty deaf as well and recently we had to shout at him as the dog was yelping because he was pushing down on its throat with his foot (he couldn't hear it).

The dog itself is extremely agressive towards human males, but looks for constant affection from females. In a strange way it is also very submissive - we looked after him for a week and our dog walked all over him (being the domineering little **** he is).

Any time the F.I.L even moves quickly or picks up a stick/rolled up paper/long object near the dog it cowers automatically. He's very proud of that, but to me it's an abused animal.

Bloody thing wee'd all over my curtains and house at random intervals too.
 
Your father in law shouldn't have a dog judging by what you just wrote Pestilence, what a complete **** he is! Why on earth haven't you reported him to the RSPCA.:confused:
 
Last edited:
^TANK^ said:
Your father in law shouldn't have a dog judging by what you just wrote Pestilence, what a complete **** he is! Why on earth haven't you reported him to the RSPCA.:confused:
Click to expand...

He lives in rural Ireland and absolutely nothing would be done about it, I'm afraid. If you ask me, that dog is abused, nothing more - it's damaged goods as it is. To him, it's the perfect guard dog - severely agressive when it comes to unfamiliar males. I suppose that's a plus for him, however, for reasons stemming from the Troubles I won't go into in detail here.

I could never dream of treating a pet like that - though to him it isn't a pet, it's a utility.
 
vonhelmet said:
I trust that all the people moaning about animal cruelty are vegetarians btw.
Click to expand...

Do you not think there is a sliding scale of sorts here? I do appreciate the whole "let he without sin..." argument but really you can excuse almost any cruelty if you wish to go down the route of no-one is perfect so no-one has the right to object to other peoples uses and abuses.
 
Yeah, there's a difference. But it's still animal cruelty, and the disgust seems hypocritical when they're happy to eat badly treated animals.
 
I dont get why the person filming it didn't interfere, seems a little calculating, he was no doubt thinking 'I can sell this to the sun'

But still, the kid needs a talking too, to repeatdly kick a dog over and over again is a sign that things are not right in her MIND-BRAIN.
 
vonhelmet said:
Yeah, there's a difference. But it's still animal cruelty, and the disgust seems hypocritical when they're happy to eat badly treated animals.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it is hypocrisy but I would still make a distinction between killing an animal for a purpose (either eating or to prevent it attacking you) and simply abusing an animal for the sake of it. It should also be remembered that animals in Britain raised for food are among the better treated in the World, that isn't to say I'm entirely happy with the treatment or that it could not be improved but as a lesser of several evils approach it isn't that bad comparatively speaking.

The problem for me is that it isn't always clearly delineated what is acceptable and what isn't, it varies with the circumstances so some things will always seem unacceptable - like kicking an animal for no reason but if you kick an animal to prevent it attacking something else then while it may not be entirely excusable according to the circumstances and level of violence but it might be more understandable.
 
Last edited:
vonhelmet said:
I trust that all the people moaning about animal cruelty are vegetarians btw.
Click to expand...

didnt realise we ate dogs in this country. people keep dogs and other pets for years and they are like members of the family. thats why people are "moaning".

other animals are raised for food purposes and are treated well and generally killed humanely in this country and om nom nom.
 
eXor said:
Needless suffering of animals is unfortunate. However, it's just an animal. Humans > animals, with no exceptions. IMO. A little perspective, please.

I glanced at that article and felt nothing but indifference. I guess you have to be a pet person to care. :)
Click to expand...


Suffering is suffering, no matter the target. But it's the reasons behind wanting something to suffer that I am pointing out. Those people in the article had no reason to hurt the animals, they only wanted to cause suffering.
The people here feel sympathy (a pretty important emotion) and want retribution/justice (and are only keyboard warrioring anyway, not actually inflicting any such violence).
These are completely different things, and there is an even bigger gulf between expressing distaste - no matter how angrily - and actually hanging an animal by the neck.

I'm not saying either is OK or right, I'm saying that to consider them "ironic" is to ignore the difference between the motivation for each side.
 
semi-pro waster said:
Do you not think there is a sliding scale of sorts here? I do appreciate the whole "let he without sin..." argument but really you can excuse almost any cruelty if you wish to go down the route of no-one is perfect so no-one has the right to object to other peoples uses and abuses.
Click to expand...

On the sliding scale why is kicking an animal worse than killing an animal? I know which one I would prefer to happen to me...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom