User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 105

Thread: Couple shoots their dog to kill it because they couldn't afford it.

  1. #11
    Points: 41,437, Level: 49
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 413
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    Recommendation Second ClassSocial25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Lummy's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    6307
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    12,618
    Points
    41,437
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    4,948
    Thanked 6,307x in 4,359 Posts
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    First they should be charged under the state's animal cruelty laws. People do not have the right to abuse their pets. Second, they need a mental evaluation: they decided killing the dog was the best option, and they actually believed the pellet gun would work.
    Generally, animal cruelty can be divided into two categories: neglect and intentional cruelty.
    Examples of intentional cruelty include, among others, overt abuse, when an individual purposely inflicts physical harm or injury on an animal ... https://definitions.uslegal.com/a/animal-cruelty

    So, if they had succeeded in killing the animal, then no animal cruelty? The cruelty stems from their failure to succeed, but there is no criminality in being stupid. Their intent must weigh in here, it seems, and there apparently was no other motive than to put the dog down.

    Drop the charges.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Lummy For This Useful Post:

    donttread (10-15-2018)

  3. #12
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,042, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496580
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,693
    Points
    859,042
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,220
    Thanked 147,590x in 94,419 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Lummy View Post
    So, if they had succeeded in killing the animal, then no animal cruelty? The cruelty stems from their failure to succeed, but there is no criminality in being stupid. Their intent must weigh in here, it seems, and there apparently was no other motive than to put the dog down.

    Drop the charges.
    Bolded 1. No, odd conclusion.

    Bolded 2. Prosecute to the fullest extent.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Peter1469 For This Useful Post:

    Standing Wolf (10-14-2018)

  5. #13
    Points: 64,730, Level: 62
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 1,820
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    The Xl's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    196597
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    27,967
    Points
    64,730
    Level
    62
    Thanks Given
    6,255
    Thanked 19,792x in 11,974 Posts
    Mentioned
    433 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The couple are either completely retarded or pieces of $#@!. I hope very bad things happen to them either way.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to The Xl For This Useful Post:

    ODB (10-14-2018)

  7. #14
    Points: 92,612, Level: 74
    Level completed: 15%, Points required for next Level: 2,138
    Overall activity: 3.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Common Sense's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    931196
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    41,841
    Points
    92,612
    Level
    74
    Thanks Given
    14,236
    Thanked 16,117x in 11,350 Posts
    Mentioned
    544 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Prosecute to the full extent of the law.

  8. #15
    Points: 41,437, Level: 49
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 413
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    Recommendation Second ClassSocial25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Lummy's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    6307
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    12,618
    Points
    41,437
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    4,948
    Thanked 6,307x in 4,359 Posts
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    Bolded 1. No, odd conclusion.

    Bolded 2. Prosecute to the fullest extent.
    Oh? Then all slaughter of animals for food is "animal cruelty".

    No way am I going there.

  9. #16
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,042, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496580
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,693
    Points
    859,042
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,220
    Thanked 147,590x in 94,419 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Lummy View Post
    Oh? Then all slaughter of animals for food is "animal cruelty".

    No way am I going there.
    Not sure what your post has to do with the topic of animal cruelty done by a dog owner who tried to kill his dog for selfish reasons.

    Farm animals are not pets and many are breed for human food. And slaughter houses humanely kill the animals. They don't shoot the animal 6 times with a pellet gun (which didn't kill the dog in the OP). What is it that you are attempting to avoid in this thread?

    Do you believe that pets are property and the owner can do anything that they wish with their property?
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  10. #17
    Points: 41,437, Level: 49
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 413
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    Recommendation Second ClassSocial25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Lummy's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    6307
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    12,618
    Points
    41,437
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    4,948
    Thanked 6,307x in 4,359 Posts
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    Not sure what your post has to do with the topic of animal cruelty done by a dog owner who tried to kill his dog for selfish reasons.

    Farm animals are not pets and many are breed for human food. And slaughter houses humanely kill the animals. They don't shoot the animal 6 times with a pellet gun (which didn't kill the dog in the OP). What is it that you are attempting to avoid in this thread?

    Do you believe that pets are property and the owner can do anything that they wish with their property?
    What am I "attempting to avoid"? What's that suppose to mean?

    He tried to kill his dog because he couldn't afford him. I believe pets are the property of the owner(s), of course. I've already answered your last question. If you didn't get it, I don't see how repeating myself will suddenly make you understand.

    And that would be the only thing in this thread that's being avoided -- by you.

  11. #18
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,042, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496580
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,693
    Points
    859,042
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,220
    Thanked 147,590x in 94,419 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Lummy View Post
    What am I "attempting to avoid"? What's that suppose to mean?

    He tried to kill his dog because he couldn't afford him. I believe pets are the property of the owner(s), of course. I've already answered your last question. If you didn't get it, I don't see how repeating myself will suddenly make you understand.

    And that would be the only thing in this thread that's being avoided -- by you.
    OK, so you believe pet owners have the right to do what they wish to their pets.

    I don't.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  12. #19
    Points: 41,437, Level: 49
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 413
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    Recommendation Second ClassSocial25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Lummy's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    6307
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    12,618
    Points
    41,437
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    4,948
    Thanked 6,307x in 4,359 Posts
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You have no moral justification for your position, really, other than most people would find his act objectionable.

    What you would seem to want, Peter, is a written contract, like a dating contract you already said doesn't work, deliniating what is and isn't acceptable behavior by the dog owner.

  13. #20
    Points: 41,437, Level: 49
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 413
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    Recommendation Second ClassSocial25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Lummy's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    6307
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    12,618
    Points
    41,437
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    4,948
    Thanked 6,307x in 4,359 Posts
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    OK, so you believe pet owners have the right to do what they wish to their pets.

    I don't.
    I didn't say that. Reread my posts. Don't put words into other peoples' mouths. Thanks.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts