Video of Girl Throwing Live Puppies into River

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by madanthonywayne, Sep 4, 2010.

  1. wsionynw Master Queef Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,309
    You'd be suprised how many people feel the same way.

    I wish I knew, perhaps she is mentally ill, or maybe her parents have abused her? Perhaps she's just a nasty person?
    I'd love to ask her face to face but I doubt she'd be able to answer me with a mouth full of smashed teeth.

    That last part was a joke.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    What does ugly mean Mummy?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. AJRelic Malformed Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    87
    No. I'm surprised at how many people don't feel that way. I thought that much was obvious...

    Some of the things you mentioned... it seems like reason to pity this girl and find her help rather than (as you put it earlier) to have her "locked up for the rest of their lives", don't you agree?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    She may have been abused, yes, but it doesn't give her the right to harm animals. She still deserves to go to jail.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    If someone flipped out and harmed another human due to trauma from abuse, that wouldn't be okay, no?
     
  8. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,133
    Ah. You have touched on a very important point. Is it learned? Were we taught that harming others and animals is wrong?

    Yes.

    Psychopaths? I don't know if it is that far. But as children we are taught to not hit others (as one example) or hit the dog (as another example)... eg.. Pat the dog gently.. don't pull on its tail.. etc. That is all learned. Children, as toddlers especially, are violent little beasts and yes, we do teach them to be more gentle and not be as violent.

    Ah. But there is the distinction. Wolves, for example, kill to eat or to defend their territory. They normally do not kill for fun in the manner that this girl was killing those dogs, systematically and repeatedly. She did not just throw one puppy in that river. There were quite a few in there and she looked like she was having fun doing it and it seemed quite like an exhibition - doing it for the camera almost. But you bring up an interesting point. Wolves are wild animals that do kill. And yet, they feel compassion for some young children and allow them to live in their pack and offer them protection. And children are not exactly the same species as wolves or wild dogs for that matter.

    Several years ago, there was shock in the media (following shock from marine biologists) because dolphins had been filmed "murdering" other marine life, as well as their own young. It left many baffled as dolphins were meant to be fun and peaceful animals. That they are in fact killing for fun (Some were seen and filmed tossing baby dolphins and baby porpoises up in the air between dolphins for up to 30 minutes) was a bit of a shock. Not what we expected to see from "Flipper".

    When tell-tale teeth-marks were identified, the dolphin - the mammal classified as one of the world's most intelligent, sensitive and sociable creatures - became the official suspect.

    Confirmation of the murders came by way of two shocking films shot by holidaymakers.

    The first was initially believed to show a dolphin fishing for salmon - until closer examination revealed a relentless attack on a porpoise, its body spinning round with such force that its back was broken and its soft tissue shattered.

    Marine experts now believe that these displays of attacks on non-rival, non-predatory, peace-loving porpoises and, more shockingly, of dolphin infanticide, may have always taken place.

    It is only now, with dolphins' more human-friendly behaviour taking them closer to tourist boats and beaches, that the violence is being witnessed first hand. Until the shocking realisation, dolphin-watchers in America had believed they were watching the mammals at play with their young.

    Four years ago, members of Scots charity the Cetacean Research and Rescue Unit discovered a lifeless porpoise near the harbour at Whitehills, near Banff.

    The team described the mammals' injuries as "perhaps the worst example of inter-specific aggression any of us had ever seen. This young female had literally had the life beaten out of her."

    Inspection showed multiple lacerations and puncture wounds all over the body which could not have been caused by any other attacker than a bottle-nosed dolphin.



    (Source)


    But our belief that dolphins are peaceful animals has to come from somewhere. They are normally friendly and social creatures, except when the go on "murderous" rampages against other marine mammals and their own young for fun.

    Quite interesting, isn't it? Wolves, the animal viewed as being violent by most, do sho compassion and help protect the young of other animal species (human children for example) while dolphins, the supposedly more peaceful and friendly animals, torture and kill other marine mammals and their own young for pure fun. Young teenage girls are not meant to be psycho's who take a bucket of live puppies to the river and throw each puppy into the river while being filmed by a friend as she does it. Yet there she was and there was the friend filming the whole thing and then posting it on the net. Are all teenage girls like that? No. As with the dolphins, such behaviour has only been observed in two areas of the world. And her behaviour is not something that we have seen in teenage girls around the world, at least to our knowledge.

    No idea.

    Maybe she, like the young dolphins who kill for fun and pleasure, are showing off (with it being filmed and posted online for fame).

    Or maybe she's just a psychopath.
     
  9. madanthonywayne Morning in America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    The example you gave was pretty extreme (self defense/defense of loved one) and would even justify killing a human.

    But suppose you had rats in your house, would you set traps to catch/kill them? Set out poison? Or would you try to catch them alive and set them free?
     
  10. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    What point are you trying to make? That it's no big deal because countless other animals suffer a similar or worse fate every day?
    You are presenting these alternative situations as if there's nothing wrong with them.
     
  11. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    Yes I'd try to catch them alive and dump them out in some woodlands.
     
  12. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Speak for yourself!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I'm perfectly happy to have a rat tucked into my pockets!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. AJRelic Malformed Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    87
    That, to euthanize animals is little different than what this girl did and to include a criteria (that there's no pain or fear) is odd since the result is the same... I thought my point was pretty obvious.
     
  14. AJRelic Malformed Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    87
    You did realize the sarcasm in my post, yes? Anyways...cute mouse

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. wsionynw Master Queef Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,309
    You're right, vets get a kick out of giving animals a lethal injection. I'm amazed they don't post videos of themselves on Youtube so we can all enjoy watching animals die.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It's also strange that they even bother to use a lethal injection, why not just have a bucket of water close by and hold the animal under until it stops thrashing around?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. AJRelic Malformed Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    87
    How does the fact that the vet doesn't enjoy the act change the fact that the animal dies, many times just because it's simply unwanted? And who's to say he/she didn't get a kick out of it? Or are you now speaking for all the vets of the world?

    Yes that does seem to be the question. Why not indeed? Drowning is much cheaper, we could use the extra money on the animals that are still alive. Oh that's right... according to you it's bad because the thing feels pain and fear. So why not just take a gun and shoot it in the head instead. That should be acceptable by your decretum...

    Hey look I'm repeating myself again, got to love going in circles. Why not just address my point the first time I said it?
     
  17. wsionynw Master Queef Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,309
    Make a sensible point and maybe I'll provide a sensible reply. I'm sure you're capable of answering your own inane questions, or maybe you're not (that would be scary).
     
  18. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Previously, drowning was the preferred method of euthanasia even by vets.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2748292/

    Anyway I am not certain that lethal injections are painless. For example, one of the lethal injections used by vets is succinylcholine, a paralytic depolarizing the neuro-muscular junction, resulting in an agonizing terrifying death by suffocation via paralysis of the diaphragm. That doesn't sound painless to me.

    My bad, we need a sarcasm smiley

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    <-- like that

    Its not a mouse, its a rat, a Wistar male.
     
  19. wsionynw Master Queef Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,309
    I'm sure all sorts of terrible methods have been used on animals, including humans.

    I suppose the point is that the reasons behind animal euthanasia do not (or at the very least should not) include pleasure in causing death or entertainment derived from inflicting pain and suffering. Hence the abolition of blood sports.

    My local vet uses pentobarbital (or similar) through an intravenous, sadly I've observed this several times and it didn't appear to cause any additional pain. Rather in most cases I've seen it was used to stop pain.
     
  20. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    My vet used an anesthetic overdose, I forget what the actual anesthetic was, but I'm assuming it doesn't work via suffocation??
     
  21. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Most lethal injections work by producing an anesthetic effect followed by either cardiac arrest or asphyxiation, if the animal is even remotely conscious and cannot feel pain what do you think the process of suffocation will be like? They cannot even guarantee the death is without suffering for people when using lethal injections, forget about animals.

    http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040156

    Personally I prefer methods where the animal is knocked out and then decapitated. Even assuming a 13 second space of "awareness" [based on average findings] following decapitation, knocking out the animal will make it irrelevant. Or the decapitation could be done over liquid nitrogen freezing the head instantly. However human beings are more concerned with appearances than reducing suffering to the animal.
     
  22. wsionynw Master Queef Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,309
    I don't know of a method that could be considered 100% pain free, since pain is subjective. It's possible my cat closed its eyes and died but felt great pain for a few seconds even though you couldn't possibly tell from looking at him. I'd still rather that then he be left to slowly die from his injuries.

    It's an interesting point that could be explored in another thread. We've all heard the stories of people that seem to be anesthesized but can feel every cut the surgeon makes.

    So SAM, choose which way your own pet cat dies....thrown in a river or put to sleep by a vet?
     
  23. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    I had my cat put to sleep which is why I don't believe that lethal injections are painless. I think I'd prefer to knock them off and do it myself, using a catheter.
     

Share This Page