Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Sandman on July 20, 2007, 12:43:59 AM
-
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/13708685/detail.html?rss=dgo&psp=news
"The cost of his care and medical attention at the shelter would normally cost between $20,000 and $30,000, she said."
Okay, sure... the girls are stupid and cruel, but 20-30K?
When a bullet costs a nickel?
-
The excuse for killing the cat...
"The cost of his care and medical attention at the shelter would normally cost between $20,000 and $30,000, she said."
another sig material I can use, too bad there's no space (5 lines limit)
:rofl
-
Originally posted by 1K3
The excuse for killing her cat...
?
-
Originally posted by Sandman
?
typo
-
I still don't follow.
-
So you applaud the crime these girls committed?
-
Originally posted by 1K3
another sig material I can use, too bad there's no space (5 lines limit)
I dont think that would stop you. Your sig is already 10 lines long.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
When a bullet costs a nickel?
Is the bullet for the girls?
-
:confused:...well i bet mcfarland is happy about this. :noid
poor kitty..:furious
-
That's what it would cost if the average SoCal PETA member brought the cat in. The poor kitty should be put out of it's misery and the girls made to suffer the concequences of their actions.
-
burn the girls
-
this is news in norwegian online papers too. this and some 18 year old boy who was caught torturing a turtle named bob in california
-
Yeah, how about torching the girls hair. Damned sickos.
-
this may be a good way to cool a burning cat down
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJy0QhtUoM8
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
this is news in norwegian online papers too. this and some 18 year old boy who was caught torturing a turtle named bob in california
Must be a slow news day. So the girls were cruel, but so what? It's just a cat.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Must be a slow news day. So the girls were cruel, but so what? It's just a cat.
There is a very strong correlation between cruelty to animals and cruelty to human beings. Sort these girls out asap or we'll be reading about how they drowned their kids in a few years, IMHO.
-
Best guns for killing cats?
-
What did Jeffrey Dahmer, Albert deSalvo (Boston Strangler), David Berkowitz and Ted Bundy have in common as kids?
-
Originally posted by Curval
There is a very strong correlation between cruelty to animals and cruelty to human beings. Sort these girls out asap or we'll be reading about how they drowned their kids in a few years, IMHO.
yes there is
-
Originally posted by myelo
What did Jeffrey Dahmer, Albert deSalvo (Boston Strangler), David Berkowitz and Ted Bundy have in common as kids?
They all tortured animals.
-
Originally posted by Curval
There is a very strong correlation between cruelty to animals and cruelty to human beings. Sort these girls out asap or we'll be reading about how they drowned their kids in a few years, IMHO.
dead on! pardon the pun.:aok
-
Was the cat their cat? That of course would be the critical issue at hand, if the cat was theirs then following prevailing logic they should have the choice to put their own kitten to death however they choose. If it belonged to someone else that would be a different matter. Otherwise we have nothing but silly and arbitrary law. Children are of much greater value than cats and they have the right to kill their own children, so to give them three years in Juvie and scar them for life for killing their own cat, where would the sense be in that?
:confused:
-
They set the cat alight and apparently laughed while doing it. I don't care if they owed it or not..it is just plain wrong and shows that these kids have a propensity for cruelty.
If I own a dog does that give me the right to fight it against other dogs? If so there is a football player in Atlanta that would agree with your logic. I don't.
-
Children are of much greater value than cats and they have the right to kill their own children
Errrrrrrrrrrr...........wasnt aware anyone had the right to kill their own children...........oh well, proves I dont know everything.......or am I reading that wrong?
Wurzel
-
He was referring to cats having the "right" to kill their own children I presume.
-
Hello Curval,
Originally posted by Curval
They set the cat alight and apparently laughed while doing it. I don't care if they owed it or not..it is just plain wrong and shows that these kids have a propensity for cruelty.
If I own a dog does that give me the right to fight it against other dogs? If so there is a football player in Atlanta that would agree with your logic. I don't.
So what you are saying is that I have a right to "assert my own morality" and tell people what they can and can't do with their own puppies and kittens? What if they were going to be terrible pet owners and the kitten was going to grow up with a very poor quality of life? Don't we believe in those circumstances its better for girls to kill their own kittens early on?
-
you don't think that the fan would have cooled the cat down at least a little?
-
There is something wrong with those girls. I'm not a big cat lover but I would never purposley burn one, or any other animal for that matter. If an animal needs to be put down for any reason there are more humane ways than setting it on fire.
I can't belive that there are people on this board defending those girls.
-
Seagoon, I must ask you, are you MAD?
You just don't go around burning kittens alive, whether they are your own or not.
Anyone who does such things is either an idiot or a sadist, - or both.
And you're the religious guy in the forum. Where the hell (HELL) did your ethics go????? Got lost in the old text?
YOU DO NOT TORTURE ANIMALS FOR FUN! I think this is actually in the Bible BTW.
And if you have a day of poor quality, why don't you just toast yourself.:furious
-
Is someone trying to compare this to abortions?
-
oh boy here we go again :D
-
Abortions...another topic.
Toasting a living kitten alive for fun = this topic.
-
Seagoon,
You cannot be serious about this?
If the girls wanted to simply euthanise the kittens that is one thing...burning them alive and laughing while they do so is something COMPLETELY different.
Doing so reveals they are completely devoid of morality.
-
Hi GP,
Originally posted by gpwurzel
Children are of much greater value than cats and they have the right to kill their own children
Errrrrrrrrrrr...........wasnt aware anyone had the right to kill their own children...........oh well, proves I dont know everything.......or am I reading that wrong?
Wurzel
I'm not sure where you live GP, but in Sanoma county, those girls have the legal right to kill their own children until they have been around for 24 weeks and even after that if they can get a doctor to say it was necessary. Cat gestiation is 9 weeks, and the cat was 8 weeks old, so that's 17 weeks total. Yup, well within the acceptable range for children.
Or am I missing something about when we can and cannot impose our morality. I'm confused. So what you are saying is that cats at 17 weeks are more important than humans at 24 weeks?
-
Was anyone here defending abortion ?
You are railing off the topic of sadistic and foolish animal torture.
-
Ah, gotcha, sorry Seagoon, now with it..........and no, but there's no defence for setting fire to a kitten (which btw, was already born).....if its needs euthanising, fair enough, but to set fire to it? and then laugh? Gotta admit there's something just not right there m8...
Wurzel
-
See Rule #2
-
No disrespect intended Seagoon, but the comparision of abortion and what these girls did to that kitten dont match up fella.
Wurzel
-
Originally posted by Angus
Was anyone here defending abortion ?
You are railing off the topic of sadistic and foolish animal torture.
Alright guys, I'll stop. I'm not in favor of animal torture and personally I think what they did was horrible as well. If my own children did it, the state would be the least of their worries.
Forgive me if I confused or offended anyone, I was certain everyone would catch on to the point I was making but if not my point was we get into a righteous dudgeon over cruelty to animals and have no problems "imposing our morality" and saying that only the wicked would assert that it was their choice to burn their cat, and that there is an objective and absolute standard that should prevent such actions regardless of ownership and other circumstances, but we don't apply the same standards to their children, quite the opposite in fact.
Again, my apologies, I'll try to be kinder and more transparent in future.
-
It was an interesting comparison, Seagoon, and your point should have been evident to anyone following the abortion discussion in the other thread. Ignore anyone who thinks you were defending animal torture.
As for these two girls: Someone who does this is either so intellectually damaged that they can't grasp that they are hurting others, or (even worse) they do realize it and simply don't care. Either way, they need to be removed from society.
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Hi GP,
I'm not sure where you live GP, but in Sanoma county, those girls have the legal right to kill their own children until they have been around for 24 weeks and even after that if they can get a doctor to say it was necessary. Cat gestiation is 9 weeks, and the cat was 8 weeks old, so that's 17 weeks total. Yup, well within the acceptable range for children.
Or am I missing something about when we can and cannot impose our morality. I'm confused. So what you are saying is that cats at 17 weeks are more important than humans at 24 weeks?
What degree's do you hold and are any of them in science?
-
I'm not defending what those girls did. It was cruel and unnecessary. However, I am defending their right to do what they did (if indeed they owned the cat). The cat is property, nothing more. In my country we have laws against animal cruelty , but I don't think the USA does. I might be wrong though?
-
Originally posted by Viking
The cat is property, nothing more. In my country we have laws against animal cruelty , but I don't think the USA does. I might be wrong though?
All states in the US have laws against animal cruelty. In many states it's a felony with imprisonment up to 10 years.
Thanks for playing.
-
I completely misunderstood your stance Seagoon, apologies.
On the other hand I'm not about to enter into an abortion debate.
-
Originally posted by myelo
All states in the US have laws against animal cruelty. In many states it's a felony with imprisonment up to 10 years.
Thanks for playing.
It's just not often enforced beyond fines, and very rarely enforced against kids under the age of 18. In most cases, the kids will receive court mandated treatment and therapy... but as that happened in the People Republic of Kalifornia, they might just wad them up in cotton and give them a hug and blame it all on the parents (that's it, jail the folks for this one!).
Best scenario would be the parents can't afford private and quality therapy and the kids are institutionalized in the state run system..... that ought to keep em good and traumatized, and well sedated, for a while.
Pets are often considered "property" in most states, and the owner does often have the right to put the animal down.... but in regards to the animal cruelty laws, how they do so is supposed to be humane, quick, and relatively painless. Dosing with flammables and torching them is not the legal way to euthanize a cat in any state, and not supposed to be a fun game.
And boo to Seagoon's weak hijack attempt of the thread. You need to practice up on that.
-
The girls are definately in need of therapy & the parents are in need of a thorough investigation IMHO. Legal recourse pending psyche determination, but we def need to keep an eye on these "girls"
I read a diff article on this topic & it stated the kitten was farrel & had been trapped in a cage, then doused in flammable liquid & set to blaze. This happened in an apartment complex and a neighbor heard the cat screaming and came to see wtf, saw the girls laughing as the kitten burned, trapped in the cage.
-
RGR Seagoon. So this is a bit of a thread-thread confusion?
And Viking, AFAIK the animal-treatment law, - regarding pets and also animals used i.e. in movies, - in the USA, - are or were the stiffest in the world.
Had I been there though, I would have killed the kitten right away. And then turned on the girls in a bad mood.
Oddly enough, the other day, I was given a kitten. A farm-cat, and adding it to a pool of 2 in the same age. Beautiful little thing.
Anyway, the little bugger had been raised in a very confined environment. So, it didn't mingle with the others, not did it watch it's own step, - where there are cars, horses, riders, bicycles, holes to fall in, and big tractors.
I was getting worried, and told everyone to watch the cat, and tried to get it to stay inside (we have an old cabin, inhabitable, where it could have stayed as a "house" cat).
Little critter still walks around, and I myself had the "honour" of squashing it under a tractor doing roughly 1 mph, only an hour later !!
Little one is mortally wounded, - i.e. a semi-squashed head, no further description needed. So, I after inspecting, I killed it immediately.
I am no particular cat person. And I have killed a lot of animals, probably the highest number is cats. But this one got to me, and I will never forget it.
The silly thing had got out, and chased me to the tractor. It could still walk after being squashed, and me doing unusually careful driving because there were so many kids around, spotted it immediately. I jumped out, and the little thing went straight to me. zig-zag and bleeding etc.
It's just a cat. It was just a cat. I relieved it from it's pain, and it almost broke my heart, it ruined my day, and most of the week for that sake.
Maybe I'm getting old and soft, but I can not at all fathom the mind behind torching a living kitten and laughing about it. A mixture of idiocy and sadism I say again. A good lesson for the girls would be to get burned a bit. But since the media is on it, their burn will be there allright.
All sad really.
-
Originally posted by myelo
All states in the US have laws against animal cruelty. In many states it's a felony with imprisonment up to 10 years.
Thanks for playing.
Rgr that. I was wrong.
-
Hi Skyrock,
Originally posted by SkyRock
What degree's do you hold and are any of them in science?
Well lessee, in kindygarden we dun helped the teacher hatch some chicks and watched a plant grow and did experiments with paste and crayons in order to figure out what they taste like, and I think I grade-i-ated 'cuz next year I was in first grade, so does that count?
Apart from that I have an M.A., and an M.Div. and I'm working on a Th.D. but no, no formal science degrees.
- SEAGOON
-
Originally posted by Viking
Rgr that. I was wrong.
you forgot funny looking
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
make the girls hold their hands over an open flame for 10 seconds, sentence them to community service caring for abused animals and put the poor damned cat out of its misery :mad:
-
I think they should be punished well enough - burn off thier hair, then brand them. What they did was cruel and evil, and in my book, they aren't worth the dirt they walk on. Sounds more like something a Satanic cult would do.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
make the girls hold their hands over an open flame for 10 seconds, sentence them to community service caring for abused animals and put the poor damned cat out of its misery :mad:
Hark...... a voice of reason in a cacophony of overreactions, personal agendas and trolls.
-
Originally posted by storch
you forgot funny looking
I'm funny looking too? :confused:
-
Those girls are lost causes. Anyone who would do something like that has no place in society.
-
See Rule #2
-
Originally posted by Slash27
Is the bullet for the girls?
:rofl Now lets calculate the costs of what tax payers pay for juvenile detention or other institutions.
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
didn't see if the question was answered Seagoon... no it was NOT their kitten. it was in a cage waiting to be spayed / neutered then returned to the farm that "owned" it, along with several others from the same litter.
I was going to post this thread the other day when the story broke, but I expected a lock right quick....
I will hold my tongue about this incident, but I will say this: I have seen a group of people on the internet... rather large, who make a daily habit of posting pictures of incidents like this just for the shock value, and laugh if you are offended by it.
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Sounds like your definition of "extremism" might be anyone who disagrees with you and perhaps has strong feelings or convictions?
Did you bother to read his posts? I think the way he likened a woman's lawful right to a medical procedure to burning a kitten alive is extreme! Do you understand what extreme means? I am sure that after reading his further posts that he meant well, yet it was definitely an extreme comparison, meant to shock and confuse, hence my use of the word extremism.
Mark
-
Originally posted by SkyRock
Did you bother to read his posts? I think the way he likened a woman's lawful right to a medical procedure to burning a kitten alive is extreme! Do you understand what extreme means? I am sure that after reading his further posts that he meant well, yet it was definitely an extreme comparison, meant to shock and confuse, hence my use of the word extremism.
Mark
I think killing unborn babies in the womb in the method he described is much worse than setting fire to a kitten but I think both are hideous.
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rules #2, #5, #4
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Was the cat their cat? That of course would be the critical issue at hand, if the cat was theirs then following prevailing logic they should have the choice to put their own kitten to death however they choose. If it belonged to someone else that would be a different matter. Otherwise we have nothing but silly and arbitrary law. Children are of much greater value than cats and they have the right to kill their own children, so to give them three years in Juvie and scar them for life for killing their own cat, where would the sense be in that?
:confused:
Prevailing logic?:huh
-
Seagoon was making a very valid point in the above post, that killing an unborn human child through abortion was worse than what they did. I agree with Seagoon, what they did was wrong, and what abortion murderers/doctors do is wrong. He was being sort of sarcastic/sordid to show a point.
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Was the cat their cat? That of course would be the critical issue at hand, if the cat was theirs then following prevailing logic they should have the choice to put their own kitten to death however they choose. If it belonged to someone else that would be a different matter. Otherwise we have nothing but silly and arbitrary law. Children are of much greater value than cats and they have the right to kill their own children, so to give them three years in Juvie and scar them for life for killing their own cat, where would the sense be in that?
:confused:
Dude, they poured flammible liquid on a little defenseless kitten and set it ablaze, they're already scarred (in the brain).
Whatever punishment they get they deserve.
Edit: just read the post above mine, so i hope what you said is in some way trying to make a point.
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
I really do not care what happens at other boards, but using any topic to assert another agenda is not acceptable here. If you have no respect for our forum rules, then just do everyone a favor and stay off our board.
-
Really not sure why my last post was edited since I responded to a post that wasn't edited.
Regardless, this thread was hijacked almost from the very start. The original post was about the enormous cost to care for the cat and things rapidly went downhill from there.
Anyways, my apologies Skuzzy, I'll try to do my part to resist the urge to respond to posts that are hijacks in the future.
-
I vote this thread five flaming kitties!
-
Dear Skuzzy,
Originally posted by Skuzzy
I really do not care what happens at other boards, but using any topic to assert another agenda is not acceptable here. If you have no respect for our forum rules, then just do everyone a favor and stay off our board.
Please accept my sincere apologies. I am most responsible for the hijack because I drew the analogy in the first place. If the last line was an indication that as the forum moderator you'd rather I did not post to the BB, I would of course respect your decision.
- SEAGOON
-
Oops!
Sorry Skuzzy. Should have stayed on topic.
Kitten shouldn't have been tortured and the girls should be punished.
Hmmm, first time I been skuzzified.
Mark
-
WOW.... that's the busiest I've seen Skuzzy in a particular thread in a long time.
(http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/2/youshare.gif) (http://www.threadbombing.com/details.php?image_id=1546)