OT - Cat Torturer Gets 4 Months

[Lee]

Lets face it, this is highly unlikely to be his first offence.

what a sad sad thing to say, your the one i feel sorry for.

I feel sorry the ones foolish enough to stand up for scum like this. Of course its likely to be his first offence- people throw cats off buildings every day where you live do they?

Is that at me Ariston? First offence as in committing a crime, in that people who do things like this are hardly model citizens and have more than likely (not definitely) fractured a few other laws.

[thetank]

The bible says an eye for an eye.

Urghhh, lets not get into biblical references too heavily. Last time I looked, the government and not the church ran the criminal justice system.

Let's not forget that the bible also says that working on the sabbath and wearing cloths made from two different threads are punishable by death.

That's all old testament doctrine. Right-wing evangelical types selectively take stuff from the book of Laws to support whatever they happen to believe.

They forget that Jeesie Chressie said

"May he who is without sin, cast the first stone"

[Trace]

Has the forum got PMT?

[Sark79]

If he went to prison for an equivalent amount of years that he had cut short of the cats, i think it would be just.

Lets face it, this is highly unlikely to be his first offence and hey he can do it all again in 4 months - what a joke. Most important thing to society is that his genetics are not passed into any offspring. Scumbags breed scumbags i'm afraid and they need stopping at source.

are we related?    I want a DNA test  .   

[ariston]

no it was aimed at bolt who seems to be defending the scum and saying he feels sorry for you generalising it wasnt a first offence. People who do this sort of thing are not mentally stable and need dealing with at an early age. If you go into psychological studies of serial killers you will find almost every one of them tortured animals when they were young- now I'm not saying these idiots will turn out to be Charles Manson etc but anyone who would do this to cat isn't wired right and needs more than 4 months in a detention centre.

[mikkyT]

If he went to prison for an equivalent amount of years that he had cut short of the cats, i think it would be just.

Lets face it, this is highly unlikely to be his first offence and hey he can do it all again in 4 months - what a joke. Most important thing to society is that his genetics are not passed into any offspring. Scumbags breed scumbags i'm afraid and they need stopping at source.

TWO MONTHS. You only serve half your sentence, remember...

[Lee]

Sark - i hope not you're mad!!!!

Tank - i follow no religion whatsoever, it seems to do more harm than good, so i stay clear.

I was trying to relay views from varying views, the religious, the PCers and the people whose stomach this story sends into knots and feel that something far worse than 4 months should be done here.

[Sark79]

lol. ok mate, it's just we have the same thought processes.  Now there is something to make you worry 

[Lee]

Sark, i've been thinking the same myself over the past few weeks. It has tickled me that you have also.

Sark is my forum twin, anyone else got a twin?

Sark, start a new thread about forum twins.

[thetank]

I don't think bolt was defending him, rather he was speaking in a broad context.

I'd like to think society is enlightened enough for individuals to be able to condemn actions and express disgust, without having to be dishing out hypothetcal punishments.

It's ok to do that of course, call for harsher sentences. Just because someone else isn't though, doesn't mean they think the crime was any less morally reprehensible than you do.

[Lee]

I don't think bolt was defending him, rather he was speaking in a broad context.

I'd like to think society is enlightened enough for individuals to be able to condemn actions and express disgust, without having to be dishing out hypothetcal punishments.

It's ok to do that of course, call for harsher sentences. Just because someone else isn't though, doesn't mean they think the crime was any less morally reprehensible than you might.

Hypothetical punishments are the way in which some of us express our disgust, we are all different. It also helps ease the twisted knot you get in your stomach when you read stories of this nature, cos if in your mind they have been and should be punished further it helps ease the feeling of asolute disgrace that one of our race could do this to an animal.

[Sark79]

leehack 

[thetank]

Hypothetical punishments are the way in which some of us express our disgust, we are all different. It also helps ease the twisted knot you get in your stomach when you read stories of this nature, cos if in your mind they have been and should be punished further it helps ease the feeling of asolute disgrace that one of our race could do this to an animal.

 

I just resent the whole notion that the retribution called for is directly proportional to ones disgust at the crime commited.

Lets say there's a burglary. They catch the culprit and convict him.

Person A wants him to get 6 months in prison

Person B wants him to get 6 years in prison

Person C wants him to get his hands chopped off.

Person D wants him hung by the neck untill dead.

The casual observer might think that Person D thinks bulglary is much worse crime than Person A. Personally, I think this is not necessary the case.

I'm Person E, happy that's it's not my job to choose.

[Lee]

I agree, certain things get some people more than others. I have 4 cats so this hit me hard.

Imagine if one million rounded people were sent a survey with 100 crimes listed and they had to mark each one with a punishment on a scale of 1-20. Each on this scale had a set punishment and whatever the majority chose would be the punishment for that crime.

I fail to see that 80-90% of punishments wouldnt be much harsher than criminals currently receive. If these were all listed for the public to see and criminals were fully aware, there could never be any unhappiness.

There is nothing worse than seeing on the news that the 16 year old criminal has just received his 256th caution. Parents here are often to blame. However, this person is very likely to bring up children with the same outlook on life as himself and we are then stuck in a vicious circle which does not improve.

[Claw75]

I think he should get 4 months in a juvenile detention centre.

   Seems like a pretty fair sentence to me, as far as these things are ever fair.