Home Politics & Debate

Woman who put cat in washing machine escapes jail

1235712

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    carlito wrote: »
    Everyone who posted before about 15:00 today. No other post was made on any other thread, but 4 pages on this.

    You're making rather a lot of silly assumptions.
    carlito wrote: »
    I don't accept the legitimacy of Godwin's law. At any rate, you didn't respond to the other points.

    No, I didn't did I? Maybe its because they were trite and idiotic.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yerascrote wrote: »
    So she deserves prison or psychological help?

    I think that if she does that she is a danger to society, and needs to be locked away from society. If she is so mentally unhinged that she does that then she should be getting a visit from the shrinks too.

    carlito, this thread isn't about other things. I think the price of bread is an abomination- HOW DARE YOU NOT COMMENT ON THAT!!! IT SHOWS YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT THE PRICE OF BREAD!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »

    carlito, you don't see where intent comes into it. That's a shame, because intent is a cornerstone of the English criminal law.

    In a completely different context.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    How did I guess that you would say that.

    Actually, its not in a different context at all. Go and look up the law on, say, indecent assault.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    briggi wrote: »
    Oh, please! Get off your high horse. People can join in with discussions that they feel the need to voice their opinion about, you're sure as hell not going to shoehorn me into debating the issues that YOU deem important and worthwhile. Thanks to the lovely concept of free will, people can join in any discussion they please to agree with what others have said.

    Listen, I never suggested they didn'y have a right to: I was simply offering my observation on their decision.
    Oh, and I'm utterly bewildered that you can't see how all of these cases pivot on the issue of intent. It's not a complex theory

    Firstly, everything is complex.

    Anyway, I'll accept your assumption and ask you to actually comment on the issue of angling.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    carlito wrote: »
    Everyone who posted before about 15:00 today. No other post was made on any other thread, but 4 pages on this.


    I've posted on other threads (though admittedly not at the moment because I've hasd stuff to do).... And so have other people.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »
    How did I guess that you would say that.

    Actually, its not in a different context at all. Go and look up the law on, say, indecent assault.

    "In 1993, the Law Commission revisited the definition of 'intention' proposing that:

    [A] person acts....'intentionally' with respect to a result when:
    (i) it is his purpose to cause it; or
    (ii) although it is not his purpose to cause that result, he knows that it would occur in the ordinary course of events if he were to succeed in his purpose of causing some other result."
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Very glib.

    Shame you're chatting shit, but hey ho, can't have everything.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »
    Very glib.

    Shame you're chatting shit, but hey ho, can't have everything.

    Please, explain to me in my ignorance how it relates to this issue.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    carlito wrote: »
    Listen, I never suggested they didn'y have a right to: I was simply offering my observation on their decision.

    It'd be lovely if you kept such observations to yourself. I'm a little baffled as to why you're still in this thread since you believe there to be so little to discuss and that it holds so little importance in the grand scheme of things.

    I'm not sure why you expect me to comment on angling, or why you feel that in order for my views on animal cruelty to be valid that I'm obliged to comment on something I would readily admit to having very little knowledge of. Do you mean you would like me to explain to you the difference in the psychological profile of someone who fishes for food or even sport, and someone who kills the pet of someone close to them in order to teach them a lesson or exact some kind of revenge for their perceived mistreatment at the hands of said person?

    As for everything being complex, I could argue that everything is simple, or should be. After all, even the most simple of minds could see the gaping chasm of disparity between going fishing and tormenting someone's pet animal. I do wonder why you can't.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    carlito wrote: »
    Listen, I never suggested they didn'y have a right to: I was simply offering my observation on their decision.


    Yes, but its a bit of a rubbish observation when you're on a forum where people discuss all sorts of issues.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    carlito wrote: »

    Anyway, I'll accept your assumption and ask you to actually comment on the issue of angling.


    Well, people don't tend to have emotional relationships with fish. Angling is also pretty much socially accepted as a sport. Personally I have problems with sport fishing - I have no problems with fishing for food.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    carlito wrote: »
    Everyone who posted before about 15:00 today. No other post was made on any other thread, but 4 pages on this.

    You're a piece of work! People don't have any obligation to post on any other threads if they don't feel like it, and they don't have to explain themselves to you. Stop telling us off for posting in this thread! Wise up for fuck's sake, if you think the thread is pointless shite then stop fanning the flames.

    I rarely post in P&D and when I do it's generally on issues relating to women's or animal rights. Does that mean I don't care about anything or anyone else? Of course it doesn't! What a load of tosh. To be honest it's because the majority of topics discussed whoosh way above my head or are concerning issues I'm not familiar with and have no experience of, so I prefer to read and learn rather than wade in with some pointless comment or derailment (much like you have done in this thread, I must say).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If you need to be told why there's a difference in intent between torturing an animal for revenge, and going fishing, I think you need to be joining the nutter woman in the mental hospital.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    briggi wrote: »
    It'd be lovely if you kept such observations to yourself.

    I don't understand...this is a politics and debate forum. Do you not wish to hear opinions critical of your way of thinking?
    I'm a little baffled as to why you're still in this thread since you believe there to be so little to discuss and that it holds so little importance in the grand scheme of things.

    Because I'm interested in why people are so interested in this and what drives them, and why they draw distinctions between different types of animal cruelty. I'm trying to engage in the argument - unfortunately no one else seems willing to do the same.
    I'm not sure why you expect me to comment on angling, or why you feel that in order for my views on animal cruelty to be valid that I'm obliged to comment on something I would readily admit to having very little knowledge of. Do you mean you would like me to explain to you the difference in the psychological profile of someone who fishes for food or even sport, and someone who kills the pet of someone close to them in order to teach them a lesson or exact some kind of revenge for their perceived mistreatment at the hands of said person?

    As for everything being complex, I could argue that everything is simple, or should be. After all, even the most simple of minds could see the gaping chasm of disparity between going fishing and tormenting someone's pet animal. I do wonder why you can't

    Ok, well maybe I have less than a simple mind. Perhaps you could help me understand. I want to know why you distinguish with such severity and with such a clear demarcation between torturing an animal to hurt someone you are angry with and torturing an animal for fun?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »
    If you need to be told why there's a difference in intent between torturing an animal for revenge, and going fishing, I think you need to be joining the nutter woman in the mental hospital.

    Well perhaps I do, but to make sure I need to go and commit myself, could you briefly explain the difference between torturing an animal for revenge and torturing an animal for fun?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    carlito wrote: »
    Well perhaps I do, but to make sure I need to go and commit myself, could you briefly explain the difference between torturing an animal for revenge and torturing an animal for fun?

    In what context do you mean "torturing for fun"? Do you mean angling? If so, I've dealt with that.

    Next!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What do you mean "torturing for fun"? I think fox-hunting is despicable too, and you can argue there's a purpose for that. My opinion of angling is about the same as Blagsta's.

    Got anything else to share?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I would have nightmares for years if my horse got killed as brutally as this cat was. I am not exaggerating. I'd feel far better if it received a bullet through its brain. Yes, I do think that a person should be punished for this deed.
    Does that mean that I don't give a fuck if my neighbour is killed or some average Joe I have never met? Not at all. In fact, I'd still want higher sentences for those crimes, but it doesn't let the killer of an animal off the hook.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    carlito wrote: »
    I don't understand...this is a politics and debate forum. Do you not wish to hear opinions critical of your way of thinking?

    I don't wish to be told that the issues I consider important aren't so, and directed by you toward issues that I should be thinking about and debating.
    Because I'm interested in why people are so interested in this and what drives them, and why they draw distinctions between different types of animal cruelty. I'm trying to engage in the argument - unfortunately no one else seems willing to do the same.

    Er, are you bollocks? That might be your story now, but as I have interpreted it your view was that all cruelty to animals is the same and that if someone is upset or angered by the death of a cat at the hands of a deranged girlfriend then they should be as upset and angry about fishing. Or, as Trollborg said, vermin control.
    Ok, well maybe I have less than a simple mind. Perhaps you could help me understand. I want to know why you distinguish with such severity and with such a clear demarcation between torturing an animal to hurt someone you are angry with and torturing an animal for fun?

    I wasn't saying you had a less than simple mind, quite the opposite in fact -- and was implying that maybe you're not actually the better for it. Sometimes issues really aren't complex, but there's no telling some people. I guess in "torturing for fun" you're speaking of fishing for sport? I'm probably not the best person to comment since I've never been fishing in my life or eaten it in the last decade, but I think the main difference is that fishing [even when done for sport] is not done with the specific aim of hurting the fish. Suffering is a by-product, not great but not the same as putting a cat into a piece of electrical machinery with the aim of not only killing it -- but also causing anguish to the owner. I can't say I'm a fan of fishing/angling/whatever, but I can see some difference and a huge part of that is that the mental state of the hundreds (thousands?) of people who go fishing is nothing like that of this woman in question. Or that of many other people who torture and kill animals week in, week out.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whilst i agree that this women is obviously disturbed, and i'm not one for animal cruelty an stuff but at the end of the day it was just a cat. Doesn't really warrant prison time, someone just needs to have a serious look at her head.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lacy wrote: »
    Whilst i agree that this women is obviously disturbed, and i'm not one for animal cruelty an stuff but at the end of the day it was just a cat. Doesn't really warrant prison time, someone just needs to have a serious look at her head.

    What does "just a cat" mean? My cat is not "just a cat", he's a member of my family and much loved. I assume you've never had a pet?
  • Indrid ColdIndrid Cold Warming up? Posts: 16,688
    If people can go to jail for stealing things without physically harming anybody, they should go for killing a pet.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote: »
    What does "just a cat" mean? My cat is not "just a cat", he's a member of my family and much loved. I assume you've never had a pet?

    Well no cos i don't understand this whole my cat is a human thing.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I know someone who got 3 weeks for begging.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lacy wrote: »
    Well no cos i don't understand this whole my cat is a human thing.

    Who said their cat is human? :confused:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote: »
    Who said their cat is human? :confused:

    What i mean is, people that treat their cat like its one of them. Like it's got feelings. It's a cat. They're just animals, they come to you when they want to get fed an stuff.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lacy wrote: »
    Well no cos i don't understand this whole my cat is a human thing.
    Who has said a cat is a human?

    But just because animals are not humans it does not mean cruelty should never mean a custodial sentence.

    You might perhaps argue that the woman needs to be sent to Broadmor for a bit instead of to a prison, but to walk away with a suspended sentence is not on.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lacy wrote: »
    What i mean is, people that treat their cat like its one of them. Like it's got feelings. It's a cat. They're just animals, they come to you when they want to get fed an stuff.

    Cats do have feelings. I seem to recall reading somewhere that they have the emotional capacity of a 2 year old child.

    That's not really the point though - as I said earlier, its about the emotional relationship that humans can have with animals.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lacy wrote: »
    it was just a cat. Doesn't really warrant prison time, someone just needs to have a serious look at her head.

    I have a cat, and whilst I affectionately call him bastard and suggest he leaves home, if anyone so much as laid a finger on him I would seriously damage them. He's a member of my family, and he should be treated and protected accordingly.

    My cat has feelings, not human feelings, but then he's a cat, not a human. He spends all day chasing bits of fluff, but he's still a cognitive being with feelings and emotions.
Sign In or Register to comment.