Burning someone to death is very cruel...

Scroll to see replies

Reply 80

Maxxiv

RamocitoMorales

Why isn't it a "person"?

Why isnt a Cat a person ?

Hmmmmm, is it because its a cat ?

Its only a 'harsh' sentence compared to our british System (which is rubbish)
in the States it pretty fair

Reply 81

bj_945

amjw

tell that to the charred kitty...

it's very easy to say what you have just said when you not actually faced with this situation, but i am pretty certain that at least the vast majority of people would choose the latter than a saw-type torture.

so, using your logic, a human with a painless finger amputation (if such a thing existed i mean i don't know how painful it is) should be receiving FAR FAR more coverage than the cat because since they are human, their futures are just completely ruined by this one disfigurement. gg.

Well basically I would agree with that, yes.

I"m not saying that simple physical pain is not a bad thing to inflict. I am just saying that it causes a lot less suffering than that which is brought about by self-awareness of disfigurement for life...So the cat has suffered a lot of physical pain and therefore suffering.

Depending on the guy's position, job etc. he may suffer more or less than the cat. He will be more aware than the cat of his handicap which will bring with it suffering. If he is a worker of some sort, it may take away his livelihood. It is certainly conceivable that the amputation would cause him more suffering than the cat. In which case, yes I think if one of the two injuries had to occur, the bloke should be left unharmed.

And seriously, are you telling me you would rather have the disfigurement that comes with 4th degree burns for the rest of your life (without any pain) than suffer physical pain (admittedly a lot of it) for 5 minutes but after that walk off unscarred?

Well whatever I can"t speak for you but I just can"t believe many would choose that.

Peace x