I genuinely don’t eat seafood. I consider it to be “wrong”. (my own personal belief)

Do you like lobster? (I am not condoning the cooking of cats btw)

BigDummy makes rational and logical points so he is a moron? You may not agree with his point but it is not moronic.

Animals are badly treated everyday in all sorts of horrible ways – from docking tails to farrowing cages to enforced pregnancy and removal of offspring to having noxious substances injected. I used to know someone who made a living out of microwaving dogs for weapons research.

Of course this was wrong – but those of you who think cruelty to animals means that the person who was cruel should be beaten need to have a quiet word with themselves.

An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth leaves us all blind. Gandhi

Im going to waddle in over to the rational side of the ring and shake big dummy’s hand (and I suppose give TJ a shrug of the shoulders of acknowledgement… 🙂 ).

it looks like some out there are confusing Big Dummy’s comparative analysis of the treatment of cats and people with a charter to go ram an inket cartridge up the nearest feline’s anus. That’s rather missing his eloquently put point.

This one didn’t walk free from court http://www.thisisnorthdevon.co.uk/news/Jail-sentence-woman-starved-dogs-death/article-712413-detail/article.html

Was the man Korean?

……Chinese maybe?

I’m not confusing anything Stoner :

A geezer puts a kitten in a microwave. The low-life is a ****. End of.

The usual STW controversials (SFB,BD,etc) come along and want to have an “intellectual” debate about it, just so that they can prove to themselves how clever they are. And yet of course ironically, they come across as complete plonkers. End of.

BD et al havent said that the cat-cooker isnt a low-life ****, only that they are pointing out the hysteria around one epussode which seems rather disproportionate compared to greater “wrongs” (on a comparative, society basis)

am I the only one to notice that he was drunk?
Maybe there is a simple answer.

**** stupid prick. Really you honestly think that’s an acceptable and reasonable way to behave even if out yer face. What a tosser.

Being drunk is not an excuse, you have choice to drink or not.
Aristotle

I used to know someone who made a living out of microwaving dogs for weapons research.

numpty

Half a bottle of Whisky and he does that? Mind boggles. I bet hes had some right nicknames at school, Adams family, Fester, Frankenstein etc

Gary – I think, in Juan’s limited English, his intention was to suggest that banning alcohol would be desireable given what some people do under the influence. Not that being drunk was an excuse.

Can I be the same group as the rational people? The bloke that did this is weird, and it’s wrong. he got punished. I don’t want to beat him up.

Where do you all stand on fishing then? i know someone who thinks fishing is barbaric and should be banned, i was confused by this when i first heard but i understood his argument, afterall everytime a fish is caught its fighting for its life in a painful way and suffers when its out of the water (assuming you believe fish feel pain etc). I think you could agree that when you look at it like that fishing is similar to hurting a kitten for fun. p.s. Dont shout at me, im on no-ones side!

Hmm , I’m quite close to Forfar. Think I’ll get out the balaclava and a flask of boiling chip fat , see how this **** likes being cooked.

Also hope the judge gets caught next time he’s kerb crawling the school gates , **** idiot.

da funk

There are some positives:
1) He lost his job
2) his face has been plastered all over the news – can’t beat a bit of public shaming.
3) He is free – where the lynch mob(s)can get at him.

we’ve all cooked some pretty odd stuff after a night out on the sauce.

ps. nice to see no-one is feeding the rather predictable SFB

I’m proud to be predictably against all forms of violence and cruelty. It’s just a shame I’m in a minority 🙁

Think I’ll get out the balaclava and a flask of boiling chip fat , see how this **** likes being cooked.

that makes you more dangerous than he is 🙁 Even if you carry out your summary ‘justice’ it won’t change what happened and might make him embittered and more badly behaved

It’s just a shame I’m in a minority

The majority are far less rational.

just so that they can prove to themselves how clever they are

it’s not about cleverness but functionality. I’m not sure there’s any evidence punishment ever works. We need something better. Treating him badly isn’t it, that’s just brutalising for everyone involved.

Big Dummy, you live up to your monika. You think you are so special. What makes you think you are any more worthy to walk on this earth than that poor cat. Judging from your whitterings the cat is more worthy than you!

What makes you think you are any more worthy to walk on this earth than that poor cat.

The law of our country agrees with him.

My concern, and I’m leaving it for tonight so feel free to descend to further abuse in my absence, is with consistency, proportion and rationality.

Consistency: it is absurd to pretend that we, as a culture, grant animals and humans equal rights, or that we apply consistent standards that value animal life. We do not. This is nasty, of course it is. But until we take the decision that all animals have the same rights to life as all people do and mean it then getting steamed up to this extent about a specific incident of cat-harming is absurd. Millions of animals are sufffering for our convenience and amusement right now. We are (largely) cool with that. I don’t empathise with cats particularly, or with fish for that matter. I don’t like being harmed personally and grasp that animals feel pain and fear too, if that’s what you mean.

Proportionality: a couple of people have suggested that I ought to die because I regard a community sentence as adequate punishment for the harming of a cat. A few others have fantasized about killing the cat-abuser. No-one except Tinker-belle has yet committed to suggesting that the microwaving of a cat and a baby are essentially the same. If you kill someone for hurting a cat, where do you go for the guys who harm and kill people? Same? More? Worse? On what sensisible basis are you going to creat an equivalence between someone who rapes and kills children and someone who kills cats (the punishment for both should apparently be death) but leave fishing, battery chicken farming etc as legal activities for which you just need a licence?

Rationality: SFB has this pretty well covered. It makes no sense to punish people in ways which are unlikely to influence anyone’s behaviour. It just makes the people doing the punishing look daft. He did a dumb, nasty thing. Hopefully 120 hours community service will teach him a lesson. Hopefully.

G’night

for myself, I’m not concerned by his “human” rights, I hope some animal rights activists with more balls than me find him and **** him up.

Cool. According to SFB and BD it’s fine to commit an animal to senseles torture. After all we eat animals so why not?

This guy is a danger. Anyone capable of putting a kitten in a microwave and pressing the big button has crossed a line.

Still, at least he is free and as such “in play”.

Clydebuilt / coyote

With comments/thoughts like those you are NO better, and indeed significantly more of a danger, than the person convicted.

Well said BD throughout.

According to SFB and BD it’s fine to commit an animal to senseles torture

I never said that. My remarks were addressed to not treating him similarly. If it’s wrong for him to do it then it wrong for anyone else to do it either.

According to SFB and BD it’s fine to commit an animal to senseles torture.

According to loads of others on here it’s fine to beat up or kill somebody who did something stupid.

My concern……………….. is with consistency, proportion and rationality.

And my concern BD, is that you don’t appear to grasp that this an Internet forum, not a court of law.

What better way is there for punters to show their revulsion towards a senseless act of cruelty, other than by expressing a willingness to act in an irrational, disproportionate, and inconsistent manner ?

Or would you have preferred if this thread had been simply ignored by everyone ?

The comments made on here are, imo, harmless and without consequence. And yes of course a kitten’s life is never equal that of a human being, but I find it extraordinarily reassuring that in what often appears to be a callous and cruel world, so many are moved to make (be they rather extreme) comments, in response to a sicking act against something as “insignificant and unimportant” as a mere kitten.

In counter-balance to all that, I find the sadly predictable attempts by some to “intellectualise” the thread, really rather depressing.

And I’m sorry that you feel you’ve been abused BD, but how about not being such a plonker, and not taking the Internet so seriously ? 😉

Nice to# see the usual STW “shoot the messenger”

No one is defending the microwaving idots actions – just some folk like to look at things rationally rather than emotively.

What is the moral difference between what he did and what cosmetics researchers do?

Coyote / cylebuilt / other members of the lynch mob?

but I find it extraordinarily reassuring that in what often appears to be a callous and cruel world, so many are moved to make (be they rather extreme) comments

reassuring that they express a willingness to be cruel and callous ?

I find the sadly predictable attempts by some to “intellectualise” the thread, really rather depressing.

yes, you’re right, it’s far better to thoughtlessly emote

I find it extraordinarily reassuring that in what often appears to be a callous and cruel world, so many are moved to make (be they rather extreme) comments, in response to a sicking act against something as “insignificant and unimportant” as a mere kitten.

Isn’t it all a bit Daily Mail for you though, GG?

erm . . . I was going to make a joke about the kent microwaving the cat when everybody knows cats taste nicer in a stir fry (how many of us have eaten that unbeknown to us?) but I wont erm sorry and erm good night . . . ahem

p.s. Oxboy does not agree with or condone any cruelty to animals in any way shape or form. Do you eat Halal meat? thats bloody cruel!

That poor little cat. That is so nasty. Very upsetting.

Lots of bollocks being spoken on here as usual. I don’t think BD and SFB are advocating animal cruelty, by any means. Animals are harmed unnecessarily all the time, but that don’t make this case any less horrible.

The bloke’s got serious issues. Needs help. I don’t think a good kicking would be amiss, however..

Do you eat Halal meat? thats bloody cruel!

For clarity: A Halal or Kosher slaughter, if carried out in the correct and efficient manner, causes no more suffering to the animal than other forms of killing, such as the bolt through the head technique used in much of animal slaughter in the UK, and considerably less than electrocution. Such sudden blood loss to the brain results in near-instant death.

I’ve witnessed quite a few Halal slaughterings, in my time. Seen a cow killed thusly. Thing was dead virtually a second after the throat was cut.

The bolt in head method is sometimes not successful at despatching the animal instantly, and it can suffer undue pain, even if it’s despatchers are unaware of this.

The only true way of slaughtering an animal such as a cow, sheep or pig, without it feeling any pain, is to completely sever the entire head in one clean cut. Quite a feat, considering the thickness of vertebral bone. A bullet to the head carries the same risks of non-instant death as the bolt method. And involves the issue of firearms ownership and regulation. Certified Halal/Kosher slaughter houses are carefully monitored to ensure the minimal possible suffering is experienced by the animal, Under Islamic law, an animal should be despatched as quickly and humanely as possible. Letting an animal bleed to death, therefore letting it suffer unnecessarily, is considered Haram, forbidden.

erm ok Rude boy,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2977086.stm Halal and Kosher slaughter ‘must end’ The method of animal slaughter used by Jews and Muslims should be banned immediately, according to an independent advisory group. The Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC), which advises the government on how to avoid cruelty to livestock, says the way Kosher and Halal meat is produced causes severe suffering to animals. Both the Jewish and Muslim religions demand that slaughter is carried out with a single cut to the throat, rather than the more widespread method of stunning with a bolt into the head before slaughter. FAWC said it wanted an end to the exemption currently allowed for Kosher and Halal meat from the legal requirement to stun animals first. It says cattle can take up to two minutes to bleed to death – amounting to an abuse of the animals. “This is a major incision into the animal and to say that it doesn’t suffer is quite ridiculous,” said FAWC chairwoman, Dr Judy MacArthur Clark. Compassion in World Farming backed the call, saying: “We believe that the law must be changed to require all animals to be stunned before slaughter.”

The Farm Animal Welfare Council has published on the web an extremely detailed Report on the merits of stunning versus throat-cutting. There is a section starting on page 26 of the report that describes conclusive evidence that animals feel more pain if their throats are cut than if they are pre-stunned. Details as follows: Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing Part 1: Red Meat Animals June 2003 Farm Animal Welfare Council 1A Page Street, London, SW1P 4PQ

Consistency: …

I don’t think people microwave kitten for fun.

Proportionality: …

How do you measure proportionality?

Rationality: …

Why influence others’ behaviour when he is the only one, the one we know from the media so far, acted in such a senseless cruel manner?

😯

RudeBoy –

Lots of bollocks being spoken on here as usual.

The bloke’s got serious issues. Needs help. I don’t think a good kicking would be amiss, however..

Another example of the bollocks. Did it ever occur to anyone that he might have the capacity to change? That he might learn his lesson and not actually harm another animal? Or should we mutilate him anyway…..just incase/

For clarity: A Halal or Kosher slaughter, if carried out in the correct and efficient manner, causes no more suffering to the animal than other forms of killing, such as the bolt through the head technique used in much of animal slaughter in the UK, and considerably less than electrocution. Such sudden blood loss to the brain results in near-instant death.

I’ve witnessed quite a few Halal slaughterings, in my time. Seen a cow killed thusly. Thing was dead virtually a second after the throat was cut.

The bolt in head method is sometimes not successful at despatching the animal instantly, and it can suffer undue pain, even if it’s despatchers are unaware of this.

Dhabihah – what you’re referring to, is almost exactly the same as the normal method of slaughter in killing halls all over the uk, the main difference is that the animal is not stunned. In both cases the arteries are severed. Just ask yourself, if you were going to be on the receiving end, wouldnt you want to be stunned first? I know I would. And before you ask I’ve witnessed both in person many times.

The only true way of slaughtering an animal such as a cow, sheep or pig, without it feeling any pain, is to completely sever the entire head in one clean cut. Quite a feat, considering the thickness of vertebral bone.

What about hypoxia? Quite a lot easier than any of the options you are talking about.

I am pretty suprised by the amount knee jerk reactionary spouting in this thread. I agree with Big Dummy 100%.

Probably safe to assume that those calling for this guy to be mutilated, tortured and even killed would run a mile when presented with the opportunity to actually do it.

I am with you on the subject of slaughtering animals Oxboy. Bloody religion getting in the way of common sense yet again!

“What is the moral difference between what he did and what cosmetics researchers do?“

I don’t subscribe to using animals to test cosmetics. It is wrong. It is also a pretty dumb comparison. It *could* be argued that the scientists are pursuing a scientific purpose. What this guy did was for his own amusement.

“Coyote / cylebuilt / other members of the lynch mob?“

I’m not part of a lynch mob, although I do find it upsetting that someone can inflict such suffering and walk away with little more than a slap on the wrist. I’d be interested to hear what form of punishment the “hug mob” would advocate. A nice sit down and a cup of tea? Primal scream therapy?