Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    10
    (Original post by Sithius)
    Of course it is. Suppose that a man is about to kill your family and you kill him to protect them. You are not as bad as the man who chooses to go outside and kill whoever wanders by for no particular reason.

    Everything is relevant when it comes to morality.
    At the end of the day, the only thing that has actually happened is that a person has died. That is the cold hard truth of the matter and attaching 'purpose' or 'intent' doesn't change that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by asdalol)
    Me too. Cats are the worst pets ever, dogs ftw!
    T_T they are equally awesome you freak!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    That's disgusting.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Not gonna read the post but I ******* hate humans. 1 year??? ******* 1 year whats that going to do. Its better than a ban from keeping animals which is pointless, but it needs to be more than a ******* year for that ***** to realise she took someones life!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I hope the ***** suffers.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Sick *****.

    People like this, who hurt animals, are likely to go on and hurt another human. That's why custodial sentences are needed in such extreme animal cruelty cases. The idea is, that hopefully the perpetrator will be reformed, and not go on to cause harm to another person.

    Given this sick little cow though, I doubt it will work.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Her sentence is not long enough!!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lefty Leo)
    At the end of the day, the only thing that has actually happened is that a person has died. That is the cold hard truth of the matter and attaching 'purpose' or 'intent' doesn't change that.
    You have a very twisted and strange system of morality then.
    Offline

    2
    Ayear in prison will be nothing like hell forever !
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    So we can eat animals but not burn them?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Sounds fun. I hate cats
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What a sick minded girl. It makes me feel sick. She should be dealt a harsher punishment.
    Offline

    11
    Also the reactions of the people here are so exaggerated. You're making her sound as if she slowly tortured the kitten while masturbating and laughing manically. She stuffed it in an oven and ran away. -_-
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    To be honest I didn't know what Halal meat actually entailed so I have read up about it now.

    There is debate about how long animals can feel the pain, which is caused by a single cut to the throat, with the purpose of eating the animal.

    -

    We elevate cats above chickens (although illegally killing a chicken would still be bad). We elevate a relatively quick (legalised) way of killing above putting still alive animals in to incinerative ovens. That sounds fair to me.

    I don't know why you'd choose this story to try to argue the toss like a lawyer trying to get their client, dagger in hand, off a murder charge . I primarily blame Chris Morris, regardless of some of his cleverness, for encouraging the idea that anything is acceptable to be said as long as the tabloids would especially disapprove.

    If someone kills a pet in such an awful way, there should be no plea bargain. Many years could have been given for trespassing and robbery alone. I sometimes wonder if trying someone for destruction of property (i.e. the pet) would end up with a much longer sentence than 'causing unnecessary suffering to an animal (resulting in death)'. They could have given much more than a year in jail for these combined crimes, regardless of what the maximum sentence for causing unnecessary suffering to an animal is (only 6 months at most in the UK).

    We feel especially sorry for pets, cuddly or not, because they do not have the full means to be aware that they could be in danger and they clearly feel pain and can be heard it express it. Bless that cat - it didn't deserve any cruelty.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Edycal)
    i thought cats had seven lives?

    i really would have hoped she would have stayed in jail for longer because she certainly deserved it for what she did.
    No, it's 9 lives...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paperclip)
    So we can eat animals but not burn them?
    Yes. Somehow I think throwing a kitten into a 500° oven and watching it burn to death is more inhumane than eating a humanely slaughtered animal that actually will have meaning to its death. Don't try to thinly veil your attempts to force your veggie beliefs on others by using such a shocking subject.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    she is evil!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    It would be awesome if someone would burn her alive but sadly it'll probably never happen.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by domino0806)
    Also the reactions of the people here are so exaggerated. You're making her sound as if she slowly tortured the kitten while masturbating and laughing manically. She stuffed it in an oven and ran away. -_-
    How'd you like it if people were talking so casually about a human's death in the same circumstances? It would sound utterly heartless wouldn't it? Now, some pets are treated as well as they can be by humans so it is completely disrepectful to talk in that way.
 
 
 
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.