Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2-pound dog used for deadly place kick

Sorry, one more thing. This wasn't simply animal abuse and it wasn't hunting or farming or any other funtion of our existence. This was cold blooded, malicious murder for fun. Abuse is assault. They took the animals life. It's murder.

RD
 
rocketdog said:
I know it is one opinion that my response is irrational. the truth is that this guy kicked someones pet, companion, property...whatever you want to call it...it was a living thing that is capable of love and affection. He kicked it as though it were nothing more than an empty soda can laying on the ground. Actually, he kicked it while his buddy held the animal like he was teeing it up for a football game. I don't think it's irrational at all to say that the two of them should be put to down. Would you want them living in your neighborhood after only a year in prison? I suspect not. And I certainly don't want my tax dollars paying for their three hots and a cot. If they got ass raped everyday and twice on Sundays it still would not be enough. For what they did, as uprovoked as it was, they should forfeit their lives. Like it or not that is rational.
RD
Click to expand...

The thing is, I believe that every species, does and should, hold the welfare of its own over the welfare of other species. I'm not saying that it should be heavily one way or anything like that. But I think it's clear that, all things being equal, we should never kill one of our own for their having killed a member of another species. When I say, all things being equal, I acknowledge that if another species is going extinct, a member of it might be more valuable then a human, since there are billions of us.

But, in the case of a dog and a human, where bother are plentiful, then I think we'd be showing a form of excess and decadence to prioritise the dog over the human. Just as many rich westerners choose to have pets instead of children, but one step further.
 
MarkCollette said:
But, in the case of a dog and a human, where bother are plentiful, then I think we'd be showing a form of excess and decadence to prioritise the dog over the human. Just as many rich westerners choose to have pets instead of children, but one step further.
Click to expand...


I have to disagree, there are some humans that are certianly not even as valuable as a rock much less a dog. Of course a death penalty for killing a pet would be a bit extreme but a few years in prison wouldn't be.
 
MarkCollette said:
The thing is, I believe that every species, does and should, hold the welfare of its own over the welfare of other species. I'm not saying that it should be heavily one way or anything like that. But I think it's clear that, all things being equal, we should never kill one of our own for their having killed a member of another species. When I say, all things being equal, I acknowledge that if another species is going extinct, a member of it might be more valuable then a human, since there are billions of us.

But, in the case of a dog and a human, where bother are plentiful, then I think we'd be showing a form of excess and decadence to prioritise the dog over the human. Just as many rich westerners choose to have pets instead of children, but one step further.
Click to expand...

Maybe other species can play that, but we are the dominant species on this planet so there are some of us who feel a moral obligation to protect those that can't protect themselves. I am not saying that if my family and my pets were trapped in a burning building I would rescue my pets first. I would get my family out and then go back for my pets. However, if my pets and that worthless f**k who kicked the dog were trapped in a burning building, I would rescue my pets and then get some gas for the blaze and roast marshmellows. Hell I would even rescue someone elses pets before him. Or even a pair of really comfortable shoes! He should be put to death. It's not a matter of whether or not a human is worth more than a dog, it's because he isn't worth any animal. This is a case by case basis. You shouldn't get a free pass just for being human.

RD
 
rocketdog said:
You shouldn't get a free pass just for being human.
Click to expand...

That's a great quote!

I think that sums up this whole thread.
Some people just aren't capable/willing to live in a civilized society.
 
Dippo said:
I have to disagree, there are some humans that are certianly not even as valuable as a rock much less a dog. Of course a death penalty for killing a pet would be a bit extreme but a few years in prison wouldn't be.
Click to expand...

I'm was alluding to that any arbitrary human should be more valuable than any arbitrary dog. But, I agree, if a specific human has proven their worthlessness, then that is a different matter (by definition, else why call them worthless?). Hell many of us might value an inanimate object over a person who has proven themselves worthless.

Like the guy says about the fire, what if you're the warden at a prison, and you wake to it burning down, will you choose to save the death row inmates, who have been condemned by the courts for their crimes, or do you try to save your stamp collection? Hehehe, I know what I'd do. Maybe that's why no one would ever make me a warden... :)
 
rocketdog said:
Maybe other species can play that, but we are the dominant species on this planet so there are some of us who feel a moral obligation to protect those that can't protect themselves. I am not saying that if my family and my pets were trapped in a burning building I would rescue my pets first. I would get my family out and then go back for my pets. However, if my pets and that worthless f**k who kicked the dog were trapped in a burning building, I would rescue my pets and then get some gas for the blaze and roast marshmellows. Hell I would even rescue someone elses pets before him. Or even a pair of really comfortable shoes! He should be put to death. It's not a matter of whether or not a human is worth more than a dog, it's because he isn't worth any animal. This is a case by case basis. You shouldn't get a free pass just for being human.
RD
Click to expand...

I understand your point, but it's a little tainted because they're your own posessions. Most people save all their own posessions before they lift a finger for other people, whether or not they're criminals or granny next door. That's why we call people "hero" who do bother to set aside their own needs for another.
 
Karma for the dog beater.

The Video Link (not too graphic, but will be disturbing to most)

and the update
San Angelo, Texas
Tuesday, December 14, 2004

A state district judge convicted Jonathan Benjamin Johnson on Monday of felony cruelty to animals and sentenced him to probation, ending a trial where attorneys sparred over whether Johnson was guilty of torturing the dog he beat with a skateboard.

Johnson, 18, remained expressionless as Judge Ben Woodward declared that Johnson did torture the stray dog in a downtown San Angelo parking garage March 1.,

Rather than order jail time, as prosecutors had requested, Woodward sentenced Johnson to two years of probation, with a one-year suspended sentence and a $500 fine. As part of his probation, Johnson must perform 60 hours of community service and avoid contact with his co-defendant, Kevin Ward Wright, 18.

''You made a mistake,'' Woodward said. ''And now it's time to pay the consequences for that.''

Because state law allows an enhanced charge for torturing an animal but provides no definition of torture, Woodward, prosecutor John Best and defense attorney Kirk Hawkins debated whether the beating - one blow delivered by Johnson - warranted the felony charge.

Cruelty to animals is a Class A misdemeanor, but a finding of torture enhances the charge to a state-jail felony, punishable by as many as two years in prison.

The case attracted national attention when Johnson and Wright sent the video they made of the beating to friends through e-mail and instant messaging, according to court documents. Animal-rights Web sites posted the video and formed letter-writing campaigns to Best and state district judges.

In an interview after the trial, Johnson said he regretted his actions.

''It was like a spur-of-the-moment thing,'' he said. ''There's not a day that goes by when I don't think of it four or five times and wish I could erase it and start over.''

Johnson was beaten up by a group of boys at a local skate park after the video became public, he said, a reiteration of statements he made during a videotaped confession played in court.

The trial turned emotional as Best played a video of the beating. Two people - the mothers who initially called police when they saw the video sent to their children in March - left the courtroom in tears.

The video shows the dog lying in a corner next to a vending machine in the Twohig Street parking garage when Johnson lunges forward, smashing a skateboard with two hands into the side of the dog's head.

The dog, after first jumping and barking, begins to stagger against the machine as one boy yells, ''You whacked it good!'' followed by laughter.

As the dog tries to turn away into the corner, another blow with the skateboard is delivered to its neck. The dog then curls into the corner.

Wright is scheduled to appear at a pre-trial hearing at 9 a.m. today. He also is charged with cruelty to animals with a torture enhancement, as well as felony criminal mischief in an unrelated case.

The felony conviction was important, Best said, because it set a precedent that will make cruelty-torture charges easier to prosecute.

''In all the case law, I didn't find any cases that had facts similar to this,'' he said. ''In that sense, it's good for other prosecutors prosecuting these types of cases.''

Best argued that a dictionary definition of torture as ''mental or physical anguish'' fit Johnson's actions, as did a body of state-court decisions that never ruled out such actions as torture.

Hawkins in turn argued that other cases where judges found torture was committed involved far worse crimes, such as poisoning, cooking and drowning animals.

Johnson, as a first offender, did not deserve jail time, regardless of public opinion, he said.

''He's suffered the wrath of the community,'' Hawkins said. ''This is a good kid who's never been in trouble before.''

According to testimony, San Angelo Animal Services picked up the dog, a red chow-German shepherd mix with a red collar, several blocks away less than a week later. The dog later was euthanized after no one adopted it.

Only a handful of people watched the trial. Bill Lockett, a city animal services board member, said the violence of the beating deserved the harsher charge.

''I'm glad there was a conviction,'' he said, ''and I'm glad it was a felony offense.''
Click to expand...
 
The video link isn't working, it kept transferring me to AOL.html.

That was a terrible ruling by the judge. Hardly even a slap on the wrist. That wasn't sending a message of deterrence. I wonder what the judge will do when he commits a more horrendous crime. But of course he lives in a Ivory Tower. :eek:
 
Mechcozmo said:
For the unenlightened?

I wouldn't recommend the death penalty, but probation is kinda weak...
Click to expand...
Yeah, the dog had to be put down; he obviously wasn't beaten nearly hard enough by the skater gang.

I mean, being a prison bitch might be just as good, but for justice to be poetic, he should have had his head smashed in with a skateboard. Preferably whilst minding his own business.

Sickening.
 
wdlove said:
The video link isn't working, it kept transferring me to AOL.html.

That was a terrible ruling by the judge. Hardly even a slap on the wrist. That wasn't sending a message of deterrence. I wonder what the judge will do when he commits a more horrendous crime. But of course he lives in a Ivory Tower. :eek:
Click to expand...


here's the actual link from that page.

http://70.84.33.122/videos/dog_abuse_skater.wmv
 
wdlove said:
But of course he lives in a Ivory Tower.
Click to expand...

Please explain. While I am appalled by what this kid did, I think a felony conviction is pretty severe. What would you have done? Prison?

And I'm curious, do you think ALL judges live in ivory towers? And what does it mean to live in an Ivory Tower? (since I'm guessing you don't actually believe he lives in a structure that towers over his neighbors and is made of ivory.)
 
Krizoitz said:
Honestly what kind of sick and twisted person does something like that. Really makes you wonder sometimes.
Click to expand...

That kind of sick, twisted person does this. I have heard theories that people that would do this to a dog will have no qualms about killing a person. This reminds me of the story of the little puppy that got its eyes gouged out in a Texas town a few years ago. It is amazing the incredible disrespect for life that some people have.
 
parrothead said:
That kind of sick, twisted person does this. I have heard theories that people that would do this to a dog will have no qualms about killing a person. This reminds me of the story of the little puppy that got its eyes gouged out in a Texas town a few years ago. It is amazing the incredible disrespect for life that some people have.
Click to expand...

What really amazes me is the disrespect for life that would cause someone to do this
 
mactastic said:
And how do you feel about the disrespect for life that would cause someone to do this this or this?

(Since you went there.)
Click to expand...


Execution engenders respect for life by acting as a deterrent for those who have no respect for other's lives. (That's aside from the debate on whether they are being administered with appropriate precautions to avoid errors in determining guilt, etc. Because of this, I feel execution should only be used in cases where there are witnesses or a confession was made)

Vivisection is a cruel, unneccessary practice. (Science, acting without morals, can come up with some terrible practices)

And stunning a cow seems a rather humane way to prepare it for slaughter. And if you have a problem with meat in the first place, your rationality is in question. Carnivorous behavior is one of the ways of living creatures. Sharks, bears, lions, tigers, dogs, etc, etc, etc, eat meat. As intelligent creatures, we of course should be concerned that we do not waste animals or treat them inhumanely, but eating meat is how people and other creatures sustain life.
 
Not to derail this thread entirely, but I would argue that abortion entails a respect for life just as much as you claim capital punishment does.
 
Many abortions are performed to get rid of a "problem". That's not respect for life, but selfishly taking another life. If you are suggesting that the quality of life a certain unborn child could expect is not worth their birth, well, I can't see how that is for you, or anyone else, for that matter, to decide. For most, it's about their quality of life with the responsibility of raising a child right. If that's not possible, there's always adoption. And in the case of rape, adoption is another alternative again. (Rape seems to be the only crime in which one of the innocents often gets the death penalty, while the perp often gets just a few years, if that). If abortion were only for when the mother's life was truly in danger, there would be very few abortions indeed. As it is, it's rarely performed to save a life.

As for being off-topic, this thread is already off the original topic about a certain 2 pound dog. I don't feel this is really off the overarching topic, which is sickening cruelty. Read again how babies are killed in the abortion process, and you'll see just how revolting a business it is. You wouldn't wish that stuff on your worst enemy, unless you're a fan of torture and mutilation.
 
Sadly the terrorists that we are currently fighting against, are truly capable of this kind of torture. Remember the children at the school in Russia this Fall. A person that is capable of torturing a dog is also capable of torturing children and adults. It shows a psychological disregard for life. The loss of any moral control within ones self. :(
 
wordmunger said:
Here's what I find a little hard to comprehend: Being a meat eater, owning a pet, and advocating the death penalty for animal cruelty. I can't see how anyone could hold all three views at the same time. Yet apparently a lot of people do.
Click to expand...
I don't see the dissonance between owning a pet and being a meat-eater.

Humans are omnivores. Granted, we probably evolved eating more vegetables and fruits than meat, but meat's our primary source of protein. It can be replaced by nuts and legumes and such, sure, but it takes a lot of nuts and beans to replace a steak. People eating meat is well within the bounds of nature.

That said, there's humane and inhumane ways to accomplish that, and modern society is not at all humane to the animals who sustain us. Force-feeding and tiny pens might be deemed efficient by the food industry, but it's horrible for the animals, and a breeding ground for disease.

Pets are no less property than livestock, but just as with livestock, they're also living creatures. There's a certain amount of respect that should be shown towards all life. Killing for food is one thing. But cruelty, whether to a cow you're anticipating will make great steaks, or to a dog that greets you when you get home from work, should not be tolerated.

Nature does dictate that life feeds on life, but it does not necessitate that life should abuse life. Law, as created by human intelligence, exists beyond nature to prevent the abuse and exploitation of the weak by the strong; in essence it says there are situations in which simple "law of the jungle" should be supplanted by higher ideals.

Sometimes those ideals aren't that clear-cut. Is it right to kill a killer? Should a woman be forced to carry and deliver the product of brutal rape? Some questions just don't have good answers.

I do think this dog-kicking assmunch should be punished for willfull and unecessary cruelty to another living creature. I don't think the punishment should be as severe as if he had murdered a human, and thus I wouldn't advocate the death penalty. But such callous treatment of a living thing shouldn't just get him a fine and a slap on the wrist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back