Do you think people who commit animal cruelty should go to prison?

Stop making these threads that lead to nothing

Yes. And is that boy molesting Winnie the Pooh?

They lead to you wanting to do that poo.

As if our prisons aren't full enough already.

What about you OP?

i made it obvious in my description that yes they deserve to get the clamps on them!

being an avid animal lover and finishing up college to be a wildlife biologist, i have no tolerance of those that mistreat them. those that do are cowards, imbeciles, and as far as i'm concerned second class citizens.

@Nengo_Flow: Yes I do. My dad did 6 months because I called the police on him after he threw my cat against the wall. I to this day wish he would have at least done a year.

Yes, wait you know what, just like all murderers I actually think they should be hanged. Go on hate me because I believe in the death penalty. I'm not big on all of our tax dollars feeding, and giving hungry murderers entertainment.

They should go to prison and the sentences should be harsh.

No I don't since I'm not a vegetarian.

What so if someone just went around, and starting shooting a bunch of dogs, and/or cats for no reason other than enjoyment you would think they were just fine. Tell you the truth if I saw someone doing this I wouldn't even call the cops, I'd shoot the bastard myself(though I would go to prison myself probably).

Well you clearly are a prick so I'll leave it at that.

PS: Not a vegetarian myself. I've killed a deer, and ate it, but if I killed that deer, and just let it rot I would hate myself.

That's one thing I will never understand, killing an animal is cruel no matter how you spin it. Eating it doesn't justified it as not being cruel. I personally never actually killed an animal in my life or even hurt one, but I'm a meat eater, animal gets kill because we love meat. I never say that I wouldn't rescue animal who are being attack , I already save a bird when I was a kid. If those people should get arrested, than each and every single people who ate meat on purpose should get arrested as well. I don't play favoritism like some do.

At the very least, depending on the state of their mind when they did it, they should be force to stay at an asylum (Or where ever those with mental problems stay to get treated) OR prison for a minimum of 1 year. That's if the act was premeditated. And if after 1 year nothing changes, I think discussions of euthanizing that individual should be made because if they can't get passed that urge to kill something, then perhaps the next best thing is to put them down...

Lock em up and throw away the key

You'll never understand that killing something for a purpose(eating to survive, etc) is better than killing something just for fun(basically killing it for no reason). I don't consider Humans better than animals actually sure humans are smarter, but I would get just as mad at someone for killing a little baby as I would for killing a puppy.

I wasn't there when you killed the deer, but was it 100% necessary? Was it 100% just for food? We don't even need meat to survive that has been proven over and over again. I don't support animal killing, but how relevant can my opinion be when I love eating meat?

No it really wasn't necessary, but I was a kid that grew up with a bunch of hunters in my family, and I kinda felt like I needed to do it(peer pressure), I actually don't hunt anymore myself because I actually felt bad about shooting that deer, and given the fact that there is a bunch of meat on the shelf at the store that was already taken from animals that have been killed to feed us. Even so there is a reason for hunting deer, and that has to do with the overpopulation. If we didn't hunt deer do you even know how many deer there would be(lets just say a lot, you would probably have hit 2 deers with your car by now if not for the hunting of deer).

Also by the way you are right we don't need to eat meat to live, but to get good actual nutrition meat is an extremely good source of food. I've met quite a few Vegans, and Vegetarians, but contrary to what they say. They really do not appear to be very healthy. They appear weak, and fragile.

Like it or not we are actually meant to eat meat, but we don't need to eat meat to survive. Humans are Omnivores we eat meat, and we eat vegetables, fruit, etc. Our diet should be about 20-30% meat, and the other fruits, and vegetables. We are not Carnivores that is for certain, but guess what we can survive just on meat as well, but we will miss out on the nutrients that fruits, and vegetables carry, but meat does not, and vice versa.

PS: No I am not a doctor, but I do not take this lightly, and I like my information to be accurate, and not just some crap that I heard from someone who thinks they know it all like most people usually blurt out about stuff like this.

I so much agree with this. We live in a world in which things such as vegans and vegetarians can exist. We live in a world in which there's an obesity epidemic. For everyone throwing out the "we need meat to survive" argument, I'm calling bull$hit. Even if we accept that we need SOME meat to survive, the vast majority of you know damn well that you eat more meat than you need. That steak you just ordered? You didn't need that, you ordered that because you like steak. You wouldn't have been any worse off if you had ordered a salad instead. This means that a lot of the killing being done in the name of food is killing for enjoyment. So stop f***ing acting as if YOUR killing for enjoyment is okay "because I ate it." The whole foundation of the "it's okay if I eat it" argument consists of NECESSITY. You can't keep on appealing to necessity once it has been established that you didn't f***ing need to eat it. People at least need to stay consistent.

Having said that, I'm fine with certain METHODS of killing being off-limits. If we accept that an animal is okay to kill (for whatever reason), then I'm fine with laws being in place to ensure that it is killed in the most humane manner that is reasonable or practical. And I'm fine with certain animals being off-limits for reasons of conservation of the species. But "hey, I ate it" isn't some magical wild card that lets you kill animals for fun without being just as much of a dick as the people you're pointing the finger at.

yes

What silly logic....

That finger is boldly going where no finger has gone before.

Finally someone gets it.

This.

Personally I think they should be executed if the crime is severe enough.

I think the punishment should correspond to the intelligence level of the animal in question. Killing a dog should warrant a harsher penalty than killing a cat, since dogs are smarter, especially certain breeds of dogs.

Why not also apply this logic not only between species but between human races?

yup. living human is no different then a living cat,dog, horse or whatever. if I totally agree causing you no harm then leave it alone. if its your pet and you sony want it no more then put it on craigslist. or let it outisde

@themajormayor said:

@BluRayHiDef said:

I think the punishment should correspond to the intelligence level of the animal in question. Killing a dog should warrant a harsher penalty than killing a cat, since dogs are smarter, especially certain breeds of dogs.

Why not also apply this logic not only between species but between human races?

The penalty would correspond to the base level intelligence of the species. Besides, a base-level intelligent Human is still sapient (i.e. still uniquely intelligent compared to non-Humans), and that's all that matters.

no, I think people should just have their crimes tattooed on their face

People who does animal cruelty or kill one without needing it for food should be spend sometime in jail. Those who abuse animals is an early sign they are willing to abuse people. While they are in jail, they need to be evaluated to see if the person have kind of mental or psychological problems.

Yeah probably... depends on the severity. Maybe we should ask Michael Vick?

The fact is you can and probably will if you get caught.

Here is a good reference for specifics.

http://www.aspca.org/fight-cruelty/advocacy-center/state-animal-cruelty-laws

@BluRayHiDef said:

@themajormayor said:

@BluRayHiDef said:

I think the punishment should correspond to the intelligence level of the animal in question. Killing a dog should warrant a harsher penalty than killing a cat, since dogs are smarter, especially certain breeds of dogs.

Why not also apply this logic not only between species but between human races?

The penalty would correspond to the base level intelligence of the species. Besides, a base-level intelligent Human is still sapient (i.e. still uniquely intelligent compared to non-Humans), and that's all that matters.

And why not the base-level intelligence between human races?

Why is that all that matters?

Try to act like an adult with normal intelligence instead of a numbskull.

OK, but try to act like an adult with normal intelligence anyway.

I have been for many consecutive years. Don't blame me for you inability to act like a socially competent poster.

So why did you stop? I'm not trolling you but your immature behavior is causing discomfort with a lot of posters here and it needs stop.

They should only go to prison if the animal is somebody else's property.

Then why are you not acting like an adult? I am not trolling. WTF are you on about?

@themajormayor:

@themajormayor said:

@BluRayHiDef said:

I think the punishment should correspond to the intelligence level of the animal in question. Killing a dog should warrant a harsher penalty than killing a cat, since dogs are smarter, especially certain breeds of dogs.

Why not also apply this logic not only between species but between human races?

What exactly is an hispanic? Is it colonial Spanish mixed with Black and Native American?

Surely even if this graph is true it is based on education levels amongst the different races rather than mental capacity?

@PresidentLogan said:

@themajormayor:

@themajormayor said:

@BluRayHiDef said:

I think the punishment should correspond to the intelligence level of the animal in question. Killing a dog should warrant a harsher penalty than killing a cat, since dogs are smarter, especially certain breeds of dogs.

Why not also apply this logic not only between species but between human races?

What exactly is an hispanic? Is it colonial Spanish mixed with Black and Native American?

Surely even if this graph is true it is based on education levels amongst the different races rather than mental capacity?

Don't know tbh. Probably someone of Spanish descent.

It's based on results on IQ tests I would reckon.

You are not acting like an adult. WTF are you on about? You seem to be very confused. You cannot remind another post of anything as posts doesn't have any cognitive ability.