Forums Forums Local News Teenager filmed dog attack on fox and cat

No, i said he has a point!
Hmmm
It would be interesting to hear your thoughts on this, what would you do if someone set their dog onto your moggy or any other pet for that matter and filmed it for pleasure

I'd be disgusted the same as anyone. At what point are you going to accept that I don't condone sick behaviour but nor do I accept lynch mobs who don't have enough to "torture" anyone with?

So what would be your preferred method of treatment towards ... like this?

How about if we just got rid of the torture element, and hung them instead?

Ok Matt, you do that and see where it gets you. Rationality needs to be a new curriculum topic I think.

I understand that, they are your views, each to their own, i don`t condone it either but there comes a point when enough is enough, there is only so much people can take and when the law is failing to do get through to them some people take matters into their own hands for justice

We each have our own view don`t we?

The ... walk all over people like you, your too forgiving

Im still eagerly awaiting to hear what you would have done to the ... involved in this?

Not only that, it is the protection the recieve from people like this, that entices them to do these acts in the first place. The fear of getting caught does not exist and has not done so for a very long time.

Make someone petrfied of getting caught carrying out a sick, sadistic act such as this etc, and the chances are they will think twice before they do it. Only the really warped morons with no chance of ever becoming a decent human being, will be stupid enough to do it then, and they deffo deserve to be disposed of, for the sake of humanity.

I find it amazing how many many people agree that when an animal is too dangerous, it should be put to sleep... yet also seem to agree that humans that share the very same traits (in fact its even worse in a human as they are a more intelligent species and have less of an "animal instinct"), should be able to walk free and continue posing a significant risk to others.

I'd wait till they were convicted first then I'd mess with their heads, but till then don't spout off about doing stuff you can't justify. Look up the term "lynch mob" then score yourself 1 to 10. Let me know where you score ok.

Clicky

Looks pretty good that bob, cheers, downloading now

I can justify it fine; ive not seen any compelling argument against it as yet, other than the usual criminals should have rights, and you are advocating violence.

As I say, id never condone any violence towards an innocent, but this kind of ... knows no different, and the only way to ensure somebody this sick in the head, never does anything like this again, is to remove them from the earth.

A life for a life. Regardless of whether the victim was an animal or a human. And though he may not have perpetrated the crime itself (this isnt clear), I would'nt like to think we are willy-nilly allowing people who find sadistic acts like this jolly good entertainment and even record it for second helpings, to walk the streets and pose a danger to everyone else.

Lynching is extrajudicial punishment carried out by a mob, usually by hanging in order to intimidate, control, or otherwise manipulate a population of people, however large or small. It is related to other means of social control that arise in communities, such as charivari, riding the rail, and tarring and feathering. Lynchings were more frequent in times of social and economic tension, and often were means by the politically dominant population to oppress social challenges
from wikipedia

We are not talking about people/groups social challenges etc here... we are not talking about the supression of people who are acting quite legally in whatever it is they are doing; we are talking about crime, and making criminals scared shitless to carry out crimes.

If anyone disagree's with this thinking, they are effectively saying crime and criminals have a place in society, or are a lawyer/judge etc that wants to stay in work.

A deterrent is always the best option. If a criminal is deterred from committing a crime in the first place, then you don't have to pick up the pieces afterwards.

You are straying into policitical population control, which this issue is not about. We live in a stable and intelligent enough society to understand and realise that a deterrent for commiting crimes can only be a good thing, without allowing it to be extended to other area's of life and society.

We already live in a country of deterrent in many other area's anyway... take health for example, everywhere you look there is messages trying to deter people from smoking... I take heed of the warning and choose not to smoke - it won't stop diseases like cancer, but it can help prevent certain types cancer for some people and lower the overall death rate in the long-term - a fact even the Nazi-socialist regime knew and pressed upon its subjects...

Stop putting words in peoples mouthes-your opinion remains your own, don'tbe crass enough to foist it upon anyone else.

Well stop quoting things from Wikipedia, without reading and understanding them first. What you say there, makes out that you feel by deterring crime by using scare-tactics etc, will lead to the government using it in other area's of life.

You have already quoted that you feel dishing out capital punishment to criminals is comparable to some of the acts carried out by the Nazi party and the like. I, and I would think nobody else, on this forum, would condone or want to promote the ways of the Nazi party in their wrongdoings. But I am also sure that people are generally sick to death of criminals constantly being defended by people, being given suspended sentences etc, and on the odd occasion they do go to prison, human rights activists seeing to it that they are looked after and made to feel very comfortable.

Im not overly opposed to human rights (though like most people, I take issue with some elements of it), however I am of the opinion that everyone has a choice to commit a crime, and 99.9% of criminals are intelligent enough to make a decision, and once someone commits a crime, they should have no rights excepts for the basics, access to food, water, excercise, daylight, sanitation etc, and a right not to be treated inappropriately - nothing more. For crimes that are sick and sadistic like this, they should be hanged or face the same fate as Mussolini, dependent on the crime.

Also, this is a discussion forum - if you don't actually want to discuss the subject of the thread and instead just want to sit there nit-picking without actually posting something to counter or agree with the flow of dicsussion, then don't post in it. When you citate a source from Wikipedia and make a point, please have the decency to expand further on what the point is that you are trying to make, otherwise we all have to try and work out (or assume) the point you are trying to make, which may be incorrect.

Haha at least I pleasured you with the honesty of my source. I really can't believe why you've got such a bee in your bonnet. Let's go back a bit and remember what we were whinging about in the first place shall we?

Someone wanted something nasty to happen to a nasty person who did something nasty to an innocent animal-ok something needs doing fine by me but to take the stance of killing them by letting them be torn apart by some killer dogs isnt really a rational approach is it? FFS STOP AND THINK WILL YOU