Man Accused Of Tossing Son's Puppy Off 5th Floor Balcony

WFTV ^ | 8/2/05 | WFTV

[demkicker]

Compassion one thing blubbering for an extended period of time over a dog is another. So if this kid witnesses a murder ( which he did not in this case by definition ) instead of maintaining his bearing and maybe assisting or witnessing to the police he should just start crying and keep on doing so for several hours

A police officer found Sanon's 16-year-old son Steve screaming and crying in the parking lot of their apartment

You are one sick dude and your attempt at trying to appear macho is feeble. You've exaggerated the son's reaction to the point that you have ZERO credibility. If the wording would have been changed to "the boy was found screaming and cursing his father", which is likely the case (along with shedding some tears), it would probably still make no difference to you. It was his tears that sickened you and for that you've exposed your underbelly. I feel very sorry for your kids. Wake up. They're definitely afraid of you, Pops.

[Conservative til I die]

In short: revile the dog killer, shun him, view him with a jaundiced eye - but jail him today, and you'll be jailing meat lovers tomorrow. And PETA will rejoice...

Then it's our responsibility to hold the line and make sure that laws against meat eating are not passed in the future. We don't not punish one wrong because of a theoretical law that might be passed in the future.

[beezdotcom]

It has almost everything to do with the pain and suffering caused to the animal.

Based on?

And a person beaten to death is just as dead as the 80-year old that passes a way in their sleep. The ends do not justify the means.

Nice strawman, but you know darn well there's a difference between dying, and dying at the hands of another. I'm talking about the case where the ends are similar, the means are similarly tortuous, but we seek to punish what was in their HEART. Sounds like "hate crime" legislation to me.

(And before you spout off about the "self defense" defense as an example of this, it's not. Responding to the actions of another is not the same as killing an animal that's "minding it's own business". In fact, bringing that argument into play, you could better justify killing the dog.)

[beezdotcom]

We don't not punish one wrong because of a theoretical law that might be passed in the future.

I see - so the only way to punish this type of wrong is to create "animal cruelty" laws. Just like the only way to punish the killing of gays is to create "hate crime" legislation.

There are plenty of property statutes that could be used to prosecute animal killings - just like Al Capone was caught for 'tax evasion'. Humanizing animals and creating laws to punish someone just doesn't seem to make good legal precedent (in my opinion). For that matter, I don't even think it's Biblical.

[Conservative til I die]

It has almost everything to do with the pain and suffering caused to the animal.

Based on?

Common sense? Animals feel pain. For that reason, our culture creates and enforces laws that discourage humans from treating animals in a non-humane fashion.

And a person beaten to death is just as dead as the 80-year old that passes a way in their sleep. The ends do not justify the means.

Nice strawman, but you know darn well there's a difference between dying, and dying at the hands of another.

My whole point (and it's not a strawman). The means of killing/dying are what defines the action involved as bad or good. It's the difference between an animal being killed for a "good" reason (to create food and other products) and in a fashion that meets local and federal regulations vs. being killed for no good reason and in a non-humane fashion.

Our culture and society has made a conscious decision to encourage humane treatment of animals and discourage non-humane treatment of animals. It also has chosen to divide how we view animals based on their value to us. So you have livestock vs. vermin vs. pets.

[SunnySide]

Dude, seriously you have issues big time.

Detached sociopath much?

[SunnySide]

"My point is we have had pets die not just dogs but horses and such and once my boys were over about 13-14 they didn't bat an eye."

Your point is twisted since you are incapable of making the distinction between sick abusive behavior and normal natural pet death.

[Conservative til I die]

I see - so the only way to punish this type of wrong is to create "animal cruelty" laws. Just like the only way to punish the killing of gays is to create "hate crime" legislation.

Nice logical leap. No one is calling for "hate crime" legislation here and the two are not the same.

We live in a society based on reality and practicality, not the abstract. Our society chooses to differentiate between pets and livestock.There are plenty of property statutes that could be used to prosecute animal killings - just like Al Capone was caught for 'tax evasion'.

Not even remotely relevant to anything we are discussing here. Capone was busted on tax evasion charges because they couldn't get im on anything else.

Humanizing animals and creating laws to punish someone just doesn't seem to make good legal precedent (in my opinion).

But these aren't laws humanizing animals. No one is prosecuted for "murdering" an animal. They are prosecuted for "animal cruelty" which is an entirely different category.

[beezdotcom]

Disclaimer: despite my arguments, I do not think that "torturing Fido" makes for a better world, so please don't construe my response as seeking to make THAT case.

My whole point (and it's not a strawman). The means of killing/dying are what defines the action involved as bad or good. It's the difference between an animal being killed for a "good" reason (to create food and other products) and in a fashion that meets local and federal regulations vs. being killed for no good reason and in a non-humane fashion.

"Good reason" is awfully subjective, and great subjectivity often helps to make for bad law. Sportsmen often kill fish and deer for the "sport" of it - and they are currently at the front lines of the "animal cruelty" arguments. I'm pessimistic enough to believe it won't stop there - I wish I could share your optimism, but I think the criminalization of animal cruelty is a slippery slope, much as drug criminalization has been a slippery slope at times. I guess I'm too libertarian to trust that prohibition of undesirable acts is always the best solution.

Besides, you're not really talking about the _means_ of killing (as you said above) but the _motive_. If I slit a dog's throat and let it bleed, even if I'm on a farm, I will probably be charged with animal cruelty, according to what I see in the news - since it'll be hard for someone to come up with a "good" reason. If I slit a hog's throat, while on the same farm, nobody (ecept PETA) will bat an eyelash.

(As an aside - what if the people killing your bacon actually take sick PLEASURE in killing the hog? Should THEY be charged?)

Our culture and society has made a conscious decision to encourage humane treatment of animals and discourage non-humane treatment of animals.

Yes, but I wouldn't hang my hat completely on what "our culture and society" has decided should be legislated, since that encompasses a NUMBER of issues which divide conservatives and liberals (and libertarians).

It also has chosen to divide how we view animals based on their value to us. So you have livestock vs. vermin vs. pets.

So, am I just to pipe down, and preserve "the settled law of the land"? I certainly HOPE not.

Look, before we spiral off into disagreement, I think animal cruelty is reprehensible - but I don't think that EVERYTHING that is reprehensible should be illegal. I tend to draw that line when it has a direct impact on another human being.

I actually think in THIS case, you might even go so far to make a charge of "terroristic threatening", since a good prosecutor could probably make a reasonable case the the child feared for his OWN safety in such a circumstance. I just think that, from a legal standpoint, it's better to treat animals as property, and leave the discouragement of more EMOTIONAL forms of animal killing to other forms of societal pressure. Sadly, things like shame, scorn, shunning, etc. have become rather passé in our current world - they used to be quite effective.