They should be nailed themselves (animal cruelty case)

I don’t think psychiatric treatment is going to do any good in these cases, unless it’s aimed at more effectively amplifying fear of punishment as a patch-workaround for the absence of conscience.

starwarsfreek, wishing death on other posters is a violation of the rules of this forum. Please review the forum rules posted in [url=“Revised Forum Rules for the BBQ Pit: read this before posting - The BBQ Pit - Straight Dope Message Board”]this thread,[/ur] this part in particular:

No warning issued.

I realize that you’re going to disregard this, but I also did not say I *wished *they would die. I said they could. Not they should, not I wished they would. Gah.

If you disagree with a moderator warning, the place to discuss it is in ATMB, not here.

I wasn’t disagreeing, I was merely clarifying what I actually said. Since I’ve already done that once tonight, I guess I shouldn’t have bothered. 'Scuse me while I just crawl back into the woodwork where I usually stay.

To what end?

Compared to most crimes, animal cruelty, even in its most disgusting forms, isn’t nearly as bad as most other crimes.

If such small crimes involve that kind of punishment, why not make it mandatory for every crime?

I’m compassionate towards animals and don’t believe on a personal level in bringing about unnecessary suffering in an animal. That’s a personal ethos and I agree with other people who think the same way. However, I also am a guy who hunts and eats meat, so I couldn’t do either of those things if I felt animals had intrinsic rights.

Torturing a dog should be illegal I think just because of how antisocial it is, I feel that it is along the lines of a public order offense and I think such people need to be inside some form of institution if for no other reason than to be subject to a bit of scrutiny.

What I’m saying is causing harm to an animal isn’t reason enough in and of itself for that act to be criminal. Animals are not people and someone who kills an animal isn’t violating the rights of anyone (animals do not and should not ever possess legal rights.)

I don’t see the point of “scrutiny” – once it’s established that these particular people did it. we know all we need to know (i.e. that these particular people are too dangerously sociopathic to allow the rest of us to be subjected to their continued presence, at least until the fear has been put into them sufficiently to force them to act like cililized creatures).

Partly as a matter of public scrutiny. People who torture an animal once might do it again. This allows people to be aware of the possibility.

Second, animal cruelty can be a sign of a propensity to other more serious crimes. Once again, people in the community should be aware of this potential situation.

Third, public shame can act as a deterent.

You’re a disgusting piece of shit.

I don’t see why you would think that. I understand Martin Hyde’s point, and I tend to agree with it. I like animals a lot, and the idea of animal cruelty makes me angry (heck, even this kitten that was put in a garbage bin last year), but I also don’t believe in animal rights. They don’t have rights, we use them for our purposes and always have. However, it should be obvious that causing unnecessary pain to a sentient creature is bad, in the sense that it is antisocial behaviour: it demonstrates a serious lack of empathy. That’s why it’s a crime; so we can detect the people who would do such things and keep an eye on them.

I also don’t agree with this. I don’t think sex offenders should be registered, at least not for life, either. We should punish people who commit crimes, but when they’ve paid for it we should let them get on with their lives.