Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cat's Beating Death Triggers Protest (man killed cat after it scratched him)
Boston Channel ^

Posted on 07/01/2009 7:11:49 PM PDT by Chet 99

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-133 last
To: DieHard the Hunter

Yeah....people need to see the big picture here. The man who killed this PET has a serious psychological malfunctions — is out of control and should be punished, medicated and taken off the streets. He’s dangerous.


101 posted on 07/04/2009 8:56:29 AM PDT by Fawn (Rush Limbaugh---> America's pinata)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Fawn
There is a difference between PETS and animals raised for food.

I suppose it all depends on how hungry you get. Ever read any Jack London? The more hungry, the less difference.

That doesn't have a lot to do with this story either way, however. This guy was obviously not killing the cat to eat it.

On the other hand people can lose perspective and get overly emotional about their pets. Someone who kicks their cat does NOT deserve to be gutted and have their entrails spread down the street, or whatever miserable outcome they wish on them.

I sometimes think people would be harsher on someone who abused their cat than their children. A child molester should go to prison, but someone who kicks a cat ought to be hung from a tree and skinned alive.

102 posted on 07/04/2009 9:17:49 AM PDT by seowulf (Petraeus, cross the Rubicon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: seowulf
No you're wrong. There is no such thing as getting 'over emotional' about ones pet or child.
The mindset of a monster who beats a helpless animal to death, isn't going to have a different mindset when it comes to people (he just may be more careful)....
and the animal doesn't have a voice like a child does. That's why it's so much worse (IMO).
103 posted on 07/04/2009 12:46:12 PM PDT by Fawn (Rush Limbaugh---> America's pinata)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Chet 99
"...[the cat] charged Foley's dog and scratched Foley several days earlier on Dupuis Avenue."

"...at least one adult and four horrified children saw Foley beat the cat to death..."

Sorry all you defenders of this insane piece of garbage, but this time I'm definitely on the side of severe punishment for this contemptible deed.

104 posted on 07/04/2009 1:11:42 PM PDT by TheOldLady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

And by the way, cats have a reputation for having nine lives because they are hard to kill. Beating it to death is a particularly long and painful way to die for a cat.

As I have said many times before, killing an animal for whatever reason is one thing, but torturing it to death for any reason is despicable.


105 posted on 07/04/2009 1:26:27 PM PDT by TheOldLady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

Someone who tortures or brutally kills an animal clearly have some psychological issue with anger and it can be an indicator that they will be a danger to society.

Someone who shows such an extreme attachment to an animal that they would value the animals life over that of another human being are also showing a kind of misanthropic behavior and it too can indicate that they may become a danger to society.

For example, the extreme views of animal rights and the unhealthy emotional attachments held by the Animal Liberation Front members lead them to commit acts of terrorism that has lead to the death of innocent people.

They value the life of animals over that of human beings and are a danger to everyone.

Obviously most people who cannot control their anger will never become mass murderers, just as most people who hold unhealthy attachments to animals will not kill a human being to save an animal.

However, both should examine their behaviors and correct the problem for their own and everyone’s good.


106 posted on 07/04/2009 2:37:09 PM PDT by seowulf (Petraeus, cross the Rubicon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: seowulf
Someone who tortures or brutally kills an animal clearly have some psychological issue with anger and it can be an indicator that they will be a danger to society.
Definitely.

Someone who shows such an extreme attachment to an animal that they would value the animals life over that of another human being are also showing a kind of misanthropic behavior and it too can indicate that they may become a danger to society.
I would bet that most people would say their pets life is more important than Saddam Hussien or Osama Bin Laden. First of all this is not about putting the monster to death. It's about him being a psycho that is out of control and a danger--and punishing him/getting him serious help. Unfortunately for you, people become very attached to their animals, and if you decided to go next door and abuse your neighbors dog for no reason, I'm sure your neighbor would have no problem justifying killing you--and not because you trespassed.

For example, the extreme views of animal rights and the unhealthy emotional attachments held by the Animal Liberation Front members lead them to commit acts of terrorism that has lead to the death of innocent people. They value the life of animals over that of human beings and are a danger to everyone.
Yes, they are nutjob extremists...no body can argue against that...but why are you bringing them up in this case? Perhaps you feel the need to digress to save yourself.

Obviously most people who cannot control their anger will never become mass murderers, just as most people who hold unhealthy attachments to animals will not kill a human being to save an animal. However, both should examine their behaviors and correct the problem for their own and everyone’s good.
Losing control of your anger like punching a hole in the wall, is different from beating a 'life' to 'death'..and in front of kids.....you need to separate that.

~~~

I conclude that you are mad that some people in your life like their animals over you...

107 posted on 07/04/2009 4:45:22 PM PDT by Fawn (Rush Limbaugh---> America's pinata)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: seowulf; Fawn

> Someone who shows such an extreme attachment to an animal that they would value the animals life over that of another human being are also showing a kind of misanthropic behavior and it too can indicate that they may become a danger to society.

My pets — like my family members — are under my Protection and are entitled to be Protected by me.

I value the lives of my pets over the life of any sociopath who might decide to harm or kill my pets. That isn’t even a difficult moral equation for me at all. That’s good pet ownership.

The slimeball who kicked that cat to death: his life is worth nothing at all. Ten years in the slammer would be a lenient penalty: it would be more efficient to string him up by the nuts, granted. He might rehabilitate after 10 years of porridge, so the Law in its majesty ought to extend him the benefit of the doubt and spare his life.


108 posted on 07/05/2009 12:00:01 AM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter

You summed it up nicely. :)


109 posted on 07/05/2009 7:36:57 AM PDT by Fawn (Rush Limbaugh---> America's pinata)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

(grin!) good teamwork!


110 posted on 07/05/2009 7:38:15 AM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Chet 99

Throw the guy in the klink.


111 posted on 07/05/2009 7:40:27 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fawn
Fawn, You are clearly stretching now to make your point.

1. I never said that the cat's killing was justified. I specifically said just the opposite in my first post that you responded to. Either you forgot or didn't read it.

2. We aren't talking about a 4th generation feral cat. We are talking about someone's alleged "pet" that was running around outside for whatever reason.

The ultimate responsibility lies with the pet owner. If my cat or dog runs out the door because I wasn't careful enough walking in or out and they are hit by a car or attacked by another animal or human....it's my fault ultimately. That doesn't absolve anyone else from their actions if they are criminal but the fact that my pet was loose and therefore at risk of injury or attack IS my responsibility.

112 posted on 07/05/2009 8:14:14 AM PDT by TNdandelion (This should be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter; Fawn

There is a popular piece of propaganda from animal rights groups that says a mouse is a dog is a child.

I have a question for you two that can answer whether your pet attachments are unhealthy.

What would you do if you found your child beating a cat to death? Would you want to put him in jail for 10 years in your benevolence or maybe castrate him? Some other torture you’re willing to engage in?


113 posted on 07/05/2009 10:52:05 AM PDT by seowulf (Petraeus, cross the Rubicon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: seowulf

> I have a question for you two that can answer whether your pet attachments are unhealthy.

I’m not convinced your question will demonstrate anything of the sort, but give it your best shot.

> What would you do if you found your child beating a cat to death?

My children would never beat a cat to death because they have been brought up properly. If, however, I saw one of them mistreating an animal I would give the child a dam’n good spanking and a lesson on why we don’t mistreat animals. The offense would never be repeated.

> Would you want to put him in jail for 10 years in your benevolence or maybe castrate him? Some other torture you’re willing to engage in?

No, just normal parental disciplinary measures would be fine. They have not failed to work properly in the past and they would certainly work in this instance too.

Children have diminished responsibility by dint of their age, and parents have the responsibility to ensure that they learn right from wrong.

Adult sociopaths who kick or beat animals to death have no such diminished responsibility: true, their parents share their blame because they probably didn’t raise them right. But they are adults and ought to be given an adult punishment befitting of a low and contemptible bully that beats cats to death. Stringing the offender up by the nuts sounds about right.

There is no fair moral comparison between what children do when they misbehave and what adult sociopaths do because they are adult sociopaths. Your attempt to equate the two is quite frankly bizarre.


114 posted on 07/05/2009 12:23:05 PM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter

You mentioned spanking your child...would you ever beat/spank you pet?


115 posted on 07/06/2009 12:46:06 AM PDT by TNdandelion (This should be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: TNdandelion

you = your


116 posted on 07/06/2009 12:46:23 AM PDT by TNdandelion (This should be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: seowulf
I would put my child into the most rigorous health treatment available and keep praying to God that he didn't deliver the devil to me. But, we're not talking about a 'child' in the article are we.

Tell me, why did God give us cats and dogs?

117 posted on 07/06/2009 5:20:38 AM PDT by Fawn (Rush Limbaugh---> America's pinata)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

The guy is a total loser. Grandpa or no Grandpa, family man or not..who cares? He killed a pet in front of kids for no reason! Someone should beat his face with a stick!!!!!


118 posted on 07/06/2009 5:42:22 PM PDT by bensmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: TNdandelion

> You mentioned spanking your child...would you ever beat/spank you pet?

No. I would never consider doing either to a pet.

For the record, beating and spanking are two different things.


119 posted on 07/06/2009 8:43:08 PM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter

So, you’d hit your child but not a pet. Ok.


120 posted on 07/06/2009 9:56:12 PM PDT by TNdandelion (This should be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: TNdandelion

> So, you’d hit your child but not a pet. Ok.

Yes, I would correct my child with physical discipline, but not my pet. Do you have a problem with that?


121 posted on 07/06/2009 11:41:09 PM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter
I do think it's inconsistent that you'd never hit your pet but you'd give your child...(what was it you said?)...a "damn good spanking" for hitting an animal.

I wouldn't strike either, personally and I think it's odd that you appear to show more restraint for your animal than your child.

"A damn good spanking..." you say? Maybe I misunderstood. A lot of times people use really outrageous terminology to describe how they correct their children.

Fortunately for me, I trained them when they were young and whippings have never been necessary.

122 posted on 07/06/2009 11:57:35 PM PDT by TNdandelion (This should be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: TNdandelion

> I do think it’s inconsistent that you’d never hit your pet but you’d give your child...(what was it you said?)...a “damn good spanking” for hitting an animal.

How is that inconsistent? I don’t hit animals and I require that my children don’t hit animals — perfect consistency.

And if my children do hit animals, they may receive physical punishment — a form of discipline which people understand and respond to, but which animals do not.

Surely you aren’t suggesting I should treat my children the same as my animals, for the sake of “consistency”? My children would not enjoy sleeping outside and eating one meal of dogfood per day and drinking clean cold water out of a bowl.

> I wouldn’t strike either, personally

As a pet owner and parent, that of course is your choice. I’m glad you don’t strike your pets, and if you are able to raise your kids without physical discipline, more power to ya.

> and I think it’s odd that you appear to show more restraint for your animal than your child.

Disciplining your children is not a loss of “restraint”. Quite the contrary. It is an orderly re-establishment of the rule of Law: something that always requires restraint.

Recall that I said there was a difference between “spanking” and “hitting”. Spanking as a punishment is never done in anger but always under complete self-control.

Hitting isn’t. I would never “hit” my children.

> “A damn good spanking...” you say? Maybe I misunderstood. A lot of times people use really outrageous terminology to describe how they correct their children.

A “dam’n good spanking” involves between six or twelve of the best, with an open hand across the backside, with an explanation before and after about what was happening and why.

It only works up to a certain age, and then other disciplinary measures work much better. But of course you know all this.

> Fortunately for me, I trained them when they were young and whippings have never been necessary.

“whippings” are never necessary. I don’t believe we need weapons (whips, belts, canes &tc) to discipline our kids, ever. If we do, then we as parents are doing it wrong.


123 posted on 07/07/2009 12:15:19 AM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter
In order to "spank", you must strike (hit) your child. And I'm sorry, but hitting them 6-12 times is outrageous...controlled or not.

Well...at least your pets are safe from that kind of treatment.

124 posted on 07/08/2009 1:47:59 AM PDT by TNdandelion (This should be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter

What’s the difference between your hand and any other tool? Do you really think the child (or animal) cares what they are getting hit with?


125 posted on 07/08/2009 1:49:56 AM PDT by TNdandelion (This should be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: TNdandelion

> What’s the difference between your hand and any other tool?

My hand is attached to me, and it provides direct bio-feedback on the amount of force being applied. Any other tool or weapon (eg belt, switch, stick, wooden spoon, whip, cane, &tc) does not provide this bio-feedback and is therefore dangerous.

> Do you really think the child (or animal) cares what they are getting hit with?

I suspect the child would rather not be hit with anything — and if the child doesn’t misbehave then it certainly never shall. And I suspect the child would far rather be struck with the hand (you know, the hand with built-in bio-feedback to make sure it doesn’t strike too hard) than with a tool or weapon like a belt or cane.


126 posted on 07/08/2009 3:09:58 AM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: TNdandelion

> In order to “spank”, you must strike (hit) your child. And I’m sorry, but hitting them 6-12 times is outrageous...controlled or not.

In your opinion. To my experience it works extremely well.

> Well...at least your pets are safe from that kind of treatment.

My pets are also safe from ever having to be productive, law-abiding, contributing members to our Society, whereas my children aren’t.

It is my job as a parent to ensure that they survive childhood and adolescence and develop into responsible adults having a good moral foundation and strong personal ethic and disciplined behaviors, and for me to deliver them safely at the end of their upbringing to being productive and decent members of our Society.

One of the tools that my wife and I have elected to use to achieve that end is physical discipline. It is perfectly safe and delivered firmly and out of a loving concern for their long-term welfare. It is not the only technique we use, but it is one of many that we keep available for use when and as appropriate.

You may or may not agree with that methodology of raising children: if you are or have been a parent then you are entitled to your informed viewpoints and parental practises as I am to mine. If you haven’t raised kids then your opinion on this matter is interesting but not overly informed and thus not overly useful.


127 posted on 07/08/2009 3:20:27 AM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter
I've been a stay at home mother for the last 12 years to both of my children. You are correct, it is a matter of opinion and I would probably add parental experience. Spanking is the easy way out and any lesson that can children learn from it is extremely limited.

Ah...so if it hurts YOUR hand, you know you're hitting too hard. Again, spanking is a tool used by parents with limited skills and probably limited time. Good luck with it.

128 posted on 07/12/2009 1:57:03 PM PDT by TNdandelion (This should be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: TNdandelion

> You are correct, it is a matter of opinion and I would probably add parental experience.

Yup, and in this case our parental experience is about equal.

> Spanking is the easy way out

Not if it is done properly it isn’t. It is a punishment of last resort, to be used when all else has failed. It should never be entered into lightly.

> and any lesson that can children learn from it is extremely limited.

Such as “never do that again or else” — which is precisely the lesson that is needed.

> Ah...so if it hurts YOUR hand, you know you’re hitting too hard.

Not at all. I can break boards and bricks with my hand, so I would be silly and unwise to spank my kids hard enough to hurt myself. I do, however, use the tactile biofeedback to adjust the effort I am using to an appropriate level. The objective is never to injure your children, but merely to correct them. But you knew that already and were only arguing to be perverse, ay.

> Again, spanking is a tool used by parents with limited skills and probably limited time.

In your opinion. However, if you do not feel safe spanking your kids for fear of hurting them, I encourage you not to. If you cannot do it properly you are best to resort to other methods of correction that do not require using force: this is safer for your children and safer for you.

> Good luck with it.

Likewise.


129 posted on 07/13/2009 12:34:12 PM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter
I hope I never get to the point of using the "punishment of last resort." I prefer to do it "right" the first time so that it doesn't escalate to where I'd ever need to strike my child.

But I would give you some advise...stop telling folks you are hitting your kids up to 12 times. Not a good idea. If that's how you have to discipline, you are probably better off keeping that to yourself.

130 posted on 07/13/2009 1:26:02 PM PDT by TNdandelion (This should be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: TNdandelion

> I hope I never get to the point of using the “punishment of last resort.” I prefer to do it “right” the first time so that it doesn’t escalate to where I’d ever need to strike my child.

You’re welcome to raise your children the way you want to, and I will continue to raise mine as best I feel appropriate.

> But I would give you some advise...stop telling folks you are hitting your kids up to 12 times. Not a good idea. If that’s how you have to discipline, you are probably better off keeping that to yourself.

Why? Should I be afraid that somebody’s going to “tell” on me?


131 posted on 07/13/2009 1:35:42 PM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter

It wouldn’t be me, but just look around the forum a bit, Hunter. You think Freepers don’t have enemies willing to do whatever necessary to hurt us? It was advice...not a threat.


132 posted on 07/13/2009 1:39:58 PM PDT by TNdandelion (This should be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: TNdandelion

> It wouldn’t be me, but just look around the forum a bit, Hunter. You think Freepers don’t have enemies willing to do whatever necessary to hurt us? It was advice...not a threat.

Noted. Luckily in my country we have Due Process.


133 posted on 07/13/2009 1:45:43 PM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-133 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson