This Dog Killer...

I merely responded to the point about the legal standpoint being different due to the age of the offender. The original point is something that I am not qualified to answer aside from saying that ‘arson’ is a very serious offence which carries, in some cases, a life sentence.

 

I always find posts like this rather amusing, and in some cases rather concerning.

Oh this person committed an act so obscene, so abhorrent and inhumane, that what should happen to him is something obscene, abhorrent and inhumane which I was completely against!
It's like folk being locked up in prison and other criminals taking it on themselves to inflict their own justice.

 

Well, well, well.....
I love it when some say they are appalled by the thought of retribution against dog arson murderers.....
but I wonder what they said about the ISIL darlings who chopped off the heads of 3 journalists? "Community service, troubled childhood? Nah, let them off, they're a persecuted minority. You can fake anything on video...it's been Photoshopped."

 

He was named and a photo on social media. I can't remember his name tbh, I just noticed it as I scrolled down. The apparent reason for why he did it stuck with me though.

My opinion on sentence should be up to 10 years in prison, transferring to the adult system when age dictates. But do we know all the facts yet? Agree with Jay. However, if it's proved he did do it for the reason reported, and I presume that has originated from people who know him (which has it's own questions), then he should get the full 10 years. He's a danger to society at the moment, and at his age he knows what he is doing.

I also believe that there should be an offence of 'deliberately causing loss of animal life', they need protecting in law.

 

Either way they are tw*ts.

 

Camels? Dolphins? I bet it's those pesky Gnu, they're always wanting to bomb someone.

 

I do love how people who have the opinion that brutal revenge and violence isn’t the way forward get the blame for those committing violence.

Lets say FB is right (which it may well not be)...Angry boy angry at being attacked by dog kills dogs. Angry people angry at angry boy who killed dogs kill angry boy. And on and on.

Its ace living in a society where the angriest and shoutiest think they have the monopoly on moral outrage.

 

All this outrage over dogs dying what ever next. They eat dogs in china. Part of the food chain.
What about all the cattle sheep pigs horses that get slaughtered each day. Throw in the other species too.
Why is there no anger about that.
At the end of the day every creature that roams this planet is a earthling but yet we as humans pick and choose which animal to favour and which to not.
Suppose its everyone to their own.
But speaking from a vegan point of view i see no difference.
Why do we need to kill its not as if we need to eat meat to survive.
I say everyone to their own, and before anyone asks i choose to be a vegan as everyone can.
Yes i was a big meat eater until i saw the light lol.

 

All this outrage over dogs dying what ever next. They eat dogs in china. Part of the food chain.
What about all the cattle sheep pigs horses that get slaughtered each day. Throw in the other species too.
Why is there no anger about that.
At the end of the day every creature that roams this planet is a earthling but yet we as humans pick and choose which animal to favour and which to not.
Suppose its everyone to their own.
But speaking from a vegan point of view i see no difference.
Why do we need to kill its not as if we need to eat meat to survive.
I say everyone to their own, and before anyone asks i choose to be a vegan as everyone can.
Yes i was a big meat eater until i saw the light lol.

 

We're not in China though. We're in a country where we try and be humane in the way we kill the animals we choose are what we eat. That in no way includes letting dogs burn alive. So I'd say the outrage is suitably placed.

 

It's not the fact that it was dogs. If this was a deliberate act, and I don't know that it was, it wouldn't make any difference to me if it was dogs, cows, pigs or hamsters. It's not the animal that was involved that makes it wrong, it's the fact that he burnt the poor ******* to death. Don't get me wrong, I don't want him strapped up so the **** can be kicked out of him or any of the other vindictive forms of punishment that have been mentioned, but I do think something should be done, although I have no idea what is appropriate.

You'll think I'm a hypocrite as I eat meat, but I trust that those who raise the animals I eat don't torture the poor ******* before they kill them.

 

As far as I am aware we don't kill our cattle, pigs, lambs etc by rounding them up and burning them all to death. It is bad enough that they were in a dogs home to begin with but then for the poor things being burnt alive is beyond the pale. I take your point about China and their barbaric treatment of animals but that is still not comparing like for like. We generally treat our animals humanly and slaughter them humanly so the two subjects are completely different and one can't be used to lessen the outrage of another, it just doesn’t work like that.

 

Alot of people though believe in an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. So he burnt to death dogs so some want his punishment for him to be burned to death. Jihad John is chopping heads off and many if he's caught alive want the same done to him. Just how some folks think.

 

All these inhuman episodes always spark a round of indignation.

"it was so inhumane what he did - I'd string him up and beat him with barbed wire. I'd strip his feet of skin and stand him in a bag of salt. I'd blind him. I'd let hungry dogs eat him. I'd burn him alive."

Ffs.

Let's hope whoever was responsible has been arrested for committing Arson with Intent to Endanger Life (not necessarily those animal lives but the human lives who reside in the vicinity to where the fire could have reasonably spread, those who fought to rescue the animals and those who had to control the fire). It's an indictable only offence for the Crown Court and I have enough faith that the circumstances and national interest will mean that, if found guilty, the offender will meet with a robust and humane punishment.

If he's juvenile he won't go to prison for life. The institution that he goes too will be too comfortable for the Daily Mail to be happy with. He will probably get counselling and therapy. Some effort will be made to help and rehabilitate him. Some folk will just have to get over that.