Michael Vick
-
well thrash, thats 2 times ive pointed out its a felony, and 2 times you danced around it.
please dont ask why I think it should be a felony. I dont even care about the dogs, i dont mourn their deaths every day. I feel bad for them, but I dont stop my day to say a prayor for them.
But still, it's a felony, the guys going to federal court...what more do you need?
-
(fwiw, I like this thrash guy, he puts up a good fight)
-
Chuck a typical 2 year old could make this argument. 'Why should dogs be let off easy when humans kill ants every day'
lol wow. its a pretty dumb argument.
-
but he is asking where/how to draw the line and why animals have the rights they do....I like being able to answer the same question 100 different ways, all saying the same thing...why do you think I like to argue about Bush so much?
-
Im not sure who this thrash guy is, but i'm actually getting pissed off reading the shit that he is saying. Im sorry but dogs shouldnt be tortured. There is no fucking justification. Vick should be locked the fuck up. Then he can see what it is like to be tortured when hes in prison getting his fucking ass kicked...and violated.
-
STiSchucky;177889 wrote:
well thrash, thats 2 times ive pointed out its a felony, and 2 times you danced around it.That's because what the law says is irrelevant regarding what is moral, ethical, or just. It's nice when they intersect, but you shouldn't take for granted that they do. Without getting into it, i think we can all agree that just because something is legal or illegal today, doesn't mean that's what the law should say or that it's the right law.
please dont ask why I think it should be a felony.
But that's the whole point of my questions!! Obviously the easy answer to "why should he go to jail?" is "because he broke the law". Duh. But why is that the law in the first place? That's the question I'm trying to get people to talk about.
-
D S ohM;177896 wrote:
Im not sure who this thrash guy is,I'm and old fart with libertarian / quasi-anarchistic political leanings. I think we have too many laws and rules in society, and am willing to question any of them, even if i generally agree with what they're trying to accomplish.
but i'm actually getting pissed off reading the shit that he is saying.
That's not my intent. Please see above. I can separate my own feelings from what should or shoult not be law for the purposes of discussion.
Im sorry but dogs shouldnt be tortured.
Agreed. Which is a big reason why I don't torture them.
There is no fucking justification.
Agreed. But, does everything in life have to be justified? There's no justification for us driving most of the cars we drive...(thankfully its not illegal yet)
Vick should be locked the fuck up
Why? You and I agree that dogs shouldn't be tortured. What I'm wondering is, if its not your dog or my dog, why does that mean we're going to tell other people not to torture dogs either? Why aren't our feelings on this matter simply limited to us not torturing our own dogs? Why do our beleifs about dog torture usurp the property rights of dog owners?
Then he can see what it is like to be tortured when hes in prison getting his fucking ass kicked...and violated.
Wishing torture and who knows what else on a person because of what he did to his own dogs sort of weakens the moral purity of your position
-
all youre going to get from me is that its an inhumane, sick, cruel act to what is considered a domestic, house held animal. If they werent domestic they wouldnt have laws made for them. There are hunting laws I know, but their made for animals that aren't considered pets, another thing you dont seem to grasp.
Btw, I've never heard of anyone drowning, electrocuting or hanging a deer to death, have you?
-
STiSchucky;177899 wrote:
Btw, I've never heard of anyone drowning, electrocuting or hanging a deer to death, have you?electrocuting or hanging a deer would release too much lactic acid making the meat hard to eat...drowning...well, those fuckers are tough, good luck holding ones head under water long enough :icon_geek:
-
Thrash.
Dogs are domesticated, and are animals that are very loyal to humans.
There is a big difference in killing an animal that will devote it's life to please it's owner in the blink of an eye, than an octopus that could give two shits about a human. Dogs and humans have a long lasting connection that have been this way for THOUSANDS of year, and to a lot of dogs are considered family.
Killing IN GENERAL should only be done if it serves a purpose (food, clothing, sick animal). Torturing any animal is wrong. Torturing an animal that is a companion, not just pets of humans, in Americas eyes is very wrong.
I am confused as to why this is so hard for you to see. If you argue it in the sense that they are just animals, I could go as far as to say what is wrong with killing humans? They are animals too! You of course will say "Hey now, you can't go around killing humans!" Which, I agree with, because a line needs to be drawn somewhere.
Why not draw it for dogs? For most people, they are considered family.
This is where you say "These dogs aren't part of YOUR family, so it shouldn't matter!"
True, but just because a human has no family or life doesn't mean they should be thrown into death matches.
Point is, in America, we treasure dogs, pure and simple. If you don't like that, there are other countries out there.
Oh, and on a side note of someone who raises/raised various predatory fish, people do fight them, and people have got into a lot of trouble for doing so.
-
I agree with thrash. I have taken a few classes which dedicate a lot of time to arguments exactly like these and I enjoy them. Having said that, this is what was written on the board the first day of class..
There are cartoons depicting children burning ants with magnifying glasses. Burning a person alive is about as cruel as you can get but the value placed on an ant's life is nill. Now if you are going to say that there is no evidence an ant has a "life" and can formulate thoughts, opinions, share feelings etc then you will agree that it is perfectly fine jab a rusty hanger around until a "child" has been aborted since it is proven that their capacity for rational thought does not exist until it has begun development.
those of you who have replied with "he is a sick fucker who should fry" have probably not thought very long and hard about the value placed on creatures lives, the reason certain creatures are protected, and the pathetic excuses wrapped in day time soaps and teary eyed emotions that defend them. I agree a dog should not be tortured. The dog did not harm anyone. Ants do not harm anyone either but we destroy them by the millions for the simple fact we do not enjoy having them around. I dont enjoy my neighbors but i dont have them offed because I do not enjoy their company. Now you could argue that those ants are trespassing on private property and may be removed with necessary force... but if it were a human necessary force may very well land you in prison. I know this is random and fragmented but im in a hurry and id like to hear his response to this.
-
I've already responded to this to some degree Mitch...ants (any varmint/insect/other) that is causing property damage, potentially hurting you (bees, wasps, hornets...all of which I am allergic to) or are in some way potentially spreading disease (rats, mice, mosquitoes, etc..) should be exceptions to the "don't kill/harm animals" mentality. I'll openly admit to being a hypocrite about the killing of insects for no reason vs the killing of mammals (heck, I don't even care about fish/snakes all that much...lizards/turtle on the other hand...)
To answer your question as to why it is illegal.....politicians, who were elected by the people of this country, passed legislation prohibiting the willful harming of animals as well as pitting dogs against one another, etc... To my knowledge no one has attempted (successfully) to overturn this ruling. The legislation was based on the principles and morals of the constituents of the politicians....much like EVERY law on the books is. What makes this country great is that we have the ability to appeal/overturn laws and to challenge them in a court of law.
IOW if we got rid of EVERY moral based law, there would be very few laws on the books at all and our very constitution and bill of rights/amendments would all become null and void.
-
im just going to throw this out there, in some countries people eat dogs, so what makes it right to tell "us" (people in the US) what can and cant be done to animals, i am not trying to justify this i still think its wrong! but just saying i dont believe the consequence fits the crime by any means whatsoever
-
killer69penguin;177934 wrote:
im just going to throw this out there, in some countries people eat dogs, so what makes it right to tell "us" (people in the US) what can and cant be done to animals, i am not trying to justify this i still think its wrong! but just saying i dont believe the consequence fits the crime by any means whatsoevertjamz;177733 wrote:
I'd have had no problems with him eating his dogs, if they were killed humanely (quick w/o torture/combat first).Basically, I have no problem with killing for food or varmint/insect/etc.. control, but for sport I find it to be cruel. Maybe I'm a hypocrite, but so be it.
That about sums it up.
-
yes i know just thought i would say it one more time, animal rights people have no right to anything they do, i know there was a discussion about deer earlier, deer are no better then dogs, again morally i disagree with my own statement because i love dogs and hunt deer, but there should not be any fine line drawn about what is right for each they are all animals
-
tjamz;177930 wrote:
I've already responded to this to some degree Mitch...ants (any varmint/insect/other) that is causing property damage, potentially hurting you (bees, wasps, hornets...all of which I am allergic to) or are in some way potentially spreading disease (rats, mice, mosquitoes, etc..) should be exceptions to the "don't kill/harm animals" mentality. I'll openly admit to being a hypocrite about the killing of insects for no reason vs the killing of mammals (heck, I don't even care about fish/snakes all that much...lizards/turtle on the other hand...)To answer your question as to why it is illegal.....politicians, who were elected by the people of this country, passed legislation prohibiting the willful harming of animals as well as pitting dogs against one another, etc... To my knowledge no one has attempted (successfully) to overturn this ruling. The legislation was based on the principles and morals of the constituents of the politicians....much like EVERY law on the books is. What makes this country great is that we have the ability to appeal/overturn laws and to challenge them in a court of law.
IOW if we got rid of EVERY moral based law, there would be very few laws on the books at all and our very constitution and bill of rights/amendments would all become null and void.
i wasnt so much interested in the law as the reasons people have for putting one creature's life above another.
-
Heres an aftermath pic of a dog after a fight.
Yea, if you do this for the sole purpose of joy and making money to a creature, you should be locked up
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login