The Limited Grasp of the Law

[Nuala]

Another video depicting human cruelty towards animals has shown up online. This time it's a Croatian woman throwing newly born puppies into a river. How does everyone feel about this? Regular posters on the 4chan image board are out for her blood. 4chan has identified pedophiles posting on it's website, and several animal abusers. They're being good citizens and human beings by helping locating these criminals, and yet some say they are going too far.

The video of the Croatian girl throwing puppies can be found here. Please don't click it if you are sensitive to animal cruelty or violence. 18 years or older only please..

My question to all of you is this: Do the users of 4chan have a right to identify and report these monsters, or are they going too far? Do you feel that the law is too good for some people? Speak your mind.

 

[Half-n-Half]

I feel that this is a bit of a tricky question. As long as they are not trying to go above the law or do anything that would break the law I see it as no different than reporting a crime. However, I do disagree with them trying to seek out personal vengeance.

 

[Nuala]

I feel that this is a bit of a tricky question. As long as they are not trying to go above the law or do anything that would break the law I see it as no different than reporting a crime. However, I do disagree with them trying to seek out personal vengeance.

I don't really think it's wrong that they send death threats to these monsters, Half-n-Half. Consider that for a moment, for the number of idiots posting videos of their animal abuse, how many acts of animal cruelty do you think occur not recorded on video and not posted on the internet?

Too many, and it makes me very sad. We domesticated the cat and dog, and they depend on us, and there are those among us who abuse them. I find it so disgusting..

 

[Half-n-Half]

This is where our opinions differ I suppose. I myself love dogs, grew up with them, and would feel an emotional tug if I saw something like that video, so that's why I didn't watch it. It would be dishonest of me to say I wouldn't feel some sort of anger towards the culprit.

But we have laws for a reason. It's certainly not perfect, but it's better than allowing any offended person to seek out their own personal vengeance. I'm not saying that you do, but I personally do not believe in "an eye for an eye".

 

[Nuala]

This is where our opinions differ I suppose. I myself love dogs, grew up with them, and would feel an emotional tug if I saw something like that video, so that's why I didn't watch it. It would be dishonest of me to say I wouldn't feel some sort of anger towards the culprit.

But we have laws for a reason. It's certainly not perfect, but it's better than allowing any offended person to seek out their own personal vengeance. I'm not saying that you do, but I personally do not believe in "an eye for an eye".

It wouldn't even be an eye for an eye, Half-n-Half. I doubt very much anybody is gonna go to Croatia and kill the girl, regardless of whether or not she deserves it. There was also a case of this older woman in Britain throwing a cat into a garbage can as she walked down the street. It walked up to her, she pet it, picked it up, and threw it in the can. 4chan users identified her, contacted her work, and contacted the police. Sure, death threats ensued, but can you blame the people that sent them?

There's no explanation for their actions, they do it out of malice or lack of regard for the animals they abuse. They're really no different than child molesters. It tends to happen once, and then the behavior is repeated, and it becomes a habit.

 

[Half-n-Half]

It wouldn't even be an eye for an eye, Half-n-Half. I doubt very much anybody is gonna go to Croatia and kill the girl, regardless of whether or not she deserves it.

I also doubt it, but who's to say one of them might not do it if given the opportunity? A death threat is exactly that: a threat on someone's life and should be taken seriously as one. You can never know their true intentions. In my mind, it is no different than radical Muslims who call for the deaths of those who they feel offend them. Will they act on it? Probably not, but the conviction is there.

There was also a case of this older woman in Britain throwing a cat into a garbage can as she walked down the street. It walked up to her, she pet it, picked it up, and threw it in the can. 4chan users identified her, contacted her work, and contacted the police.

This is the part I agree with and as long as her identification didn't come to light illegally, they are justified in doing so.

Sure, death threats ensued, but can you blame the people that sent them?

Sure I can, because what they are doing is illegal. This is partly what I meant by an eye for an eye. One illegal action does not warrant another.

 

[Nuala]

I guess we will never agree on this, Half-n-Half. Animal abuse is akin to child abuse. I cannot imagine you'd be saying anything less than what I am saying if that monster was chucking newborn babies into the river. They depend on us, they're innocent, and it's our duty, if not privilege, to raise them and keep them safe.

The love I see in my Siberian Husky's eyes are unmistakable. I am stalwart in the opinion I share with hundreds of thousands of people.

 

[Half-n-Half]

I guess we will never agree on this, Half-n-Half. Animal abuse is akin to child abuse.

You are certainly entitled to that opinion and are justified in believing it. I myself view child abuse as worse than animal abuse. If given the choice between a baby's life/well being and a puppy's life/well being I would always choose the baby.

I cannot imagine you'd be saying anything less than what I am saying if that monster was chucking newborn babies into the river. They depend on us, they're innocent, and it's our duty, if not privilege, to raise them and keep them safe.

I think you're missing the point of what I'm saying. Of course I would be pissed off and outraged but death threats are no way to get justice. My own personal feelings have nothing to do with what should be done. And, seeing as how I view killing babies as more heinous than killing puppies, this is a bit of a moot point, at least for me.

The love I see in my Siberian Husky's eyes are unmistakable. I am stalwart in the opinion I share with hundreds of thousands of people.

I'm glad to hear you love your dog. But an opinion shared by hundreds of thousands doesn't make it right or even credible. It is still just an opinion.

 

[Hezam]

I don't really think it's wrong that they send death threats to these monsters,

Dude,you are bloody wrong...Human being is not comparable to Animals,though i think they should report her without any sort of threating.
She is crzay and sick.

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

That woman seemed to take a sadistic pleasure in her task, and I won't defend sadism.

But really, I bet she was just euthanizing them, not doing it to record an act of sadism. It used to be real common in my father's time to get rid of unwanted litters by drowning them. It was considered a reasonably humane and responsible way to put them down. Irresponsible people just abandoned their unwanted pets in someone else's neighborhood.

That Croatian woman may not have access to vet facilities, or may not have been able to afford a visit if she did. Spaying, adoption, or "putting them to sleep" may not have been an option.

 

[let`s talk]

That Croatian woman may not have access to vet facilities, or may not have been able to afford a visit if she did. Spaying, adoption, or "putting them to sleep" may not have been an option.

And the law is only what is law in that particular country. I am not sure if they have an animal protection law in Croatia to punish her. If they don't, she is not doing anything illegal under the Croatian law. This is how it works.

 

[Haruspex]

I am very much on Thor's side, practically, but for somewhat different reasons.

Firstly, I don't think 4chan users have a right to subject the Croatian woman to attacks causing anguish and anxiety. To maintain that they do have such a right would amount to a claim as to morality. If we are to debate morality here, this thread is quite pointless. If so, it will just be another clash of subjective views disguised as objective, hiding behind the veil of normativity.

Moral uncertainty does not entail legal uncertainty, and as it has been pointed out before me, if the laws of Croatia do no punish her behaviour, then that is that from a legal perspective. If they do, then that's it, they do. Very simple and it has nothing to do with whether 4chan users are entitled to do anything.

The law is not absolute. It is manmade and it is fairly easy to violate it and in some cases to avoid the consequences. The question, then, becomes "Do 4chan users have the necessary conviction to do so?" and they have demonstrated, on several occasions, that they do. The question is not whether they're right, wrong or justified in doing so, but simply whether they do so.

It is their weird sort of guerilla warfare and they target whoever it is that they find to be acting against their aims. It is illegal, but illegality does not automatically entail immorality and similarly, illegality does not entail factual impossibility.

Hezam, humans are an animal species. You made another bold comment with nothing to back it up, I would recommend that you bring academic literature from the pertinent fields distinguishing humans from other animal species.

 

[Half-n-Half]

If we are to debate morality here, this thread is quite pointless. If so, it will just be another clash of subjective views disguised as objective, hiding behind the veil of normativity.

I don't think anyone is debating morality exclusively here, granted it is playing a part. There's nothing wrong with debating something subjective and it is far from pointless. The sharing of ideas and viewpoints is not pointless in my opinion. Even though everyone might have different opinions and no one may be objectively right, this is still a forum where opposing ideas can be shared.

Other than that, I can't say I disagree with your post.

 

[Nuala]

Dude,you are bloody wrong...Human being is not comparable to Animals,though i think they should report her without any sort of threating.
She is crzay and sick.

Sorry, Hezam, but we are not the children of God. We are Hominids, and are related to apes. We are so very comparable to animals that it's not even funny to say otherwise, delusions aside.

That woman seemed to take a sadistic pleasure in her task, and I won't defend sadism.

But really, I bet she was just euthanizing them

Yes, that's why she was giggling whilst throwing them in a river. Don't even play devil's advocate on this one. There are quicker and painless ways to put an animal out of it's misery than drowning it. I'm sorry, but she took sadistic pleasure from what she was doing to it. She thought it was so funny that she had it recorded.

And the law is only what is law in that particular country. I am not sure if they have an animal protection law in Croatia to punish her. If they don't, she is not doing anything illegal under the Croatian law. This is how it works.

This is not how it works, let's talk. We know better than to be sadistic to innocent animals. If you saw a child being beaten to death, you would be outraged, regardless of whether or not the law permits child murder or abuse.

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

"There are quicker and painless ways to put an animal out of it's misery than drowning it."

Such as? Those pups hit the water hard enough to be knocked out before they drowned.

Not that she was throwing them either for humane or sadistic reasons. Looked to me that she had to wing them out there to clear a fallen tree/brush in the foreground.

And they weren't being put out of their misery. An owner was culling unwanted animals. (Or so it seems to me.) Animal owners in rural areas have to cull excess animals all the time, even in the West.

 

[Nuala]

Such as? Those pups hit the water hard enough to be knocked out before they drowned.

I'm not sure I particularly enjoy your advocation of harming an animal. Your argument lies in the idea that she had to kill them due to the inability to care for them. This has not been proven whatsoever.

You've ignored the following question, so please answer it.

She was recorded by a friend or acquaintance that accompanied her to the river. Why was the video even recorded in the first place if she only meant to put them out of misery? Why was she laughing?



Was, uh, this woman just putting that kitten in a safe place so it wouldn't wander into the street and get hit by a car? Or, tell you what, noyhauser, just to sum this post up, please take a look through the following link, it's a gallery of abused animals, and tell me if you think that cruelty is acceptable.

Seriously, do not click the below link if you cannot handle animal abuse and cruelty. If you do click it, you agree that I, Thor, did not force you to click the link, and that you did so of your own free will, and with understanding that it is not meant for anybody, especially those under the age of 18 years old.

Don't click here, seeing how I wish I hadn't. It's just too goddamn cruel. Let me repeat, do not click on that link if you are sensitive to gore, and animal abuse. So, either it's okay to chuck puppies into a river, torture animals, and so forth, or it's not. That's the matter at hand. Please tell me otherwise?

Do not click the above link if you cannot handle animal abuse and cruelty. If you do click it, you agree that I, Thor, did not force you to click the link, and that you did so of your own free will, and with understanding that it is not meant for anybody, especially those under the age of 18 years old.

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

I'm not surprised that you've managed to misread my words again. A tactic which makes any meaningful debate or discourse impossible.

You seem addicted to the horror of these scenes. It's as if you are one of the crowd, waiting and watching in morbid fascination as someone jumps from a bridge or building to certain death. And then screaming later, "Why didn't someone DO something?"

 

[Nuala]

I'm not surprised that you've managed to misread my words again. A tactic which makes any meaningful debate or discourse impossible.

No, I think you're delusional. That in itself would make discourse impossible.

Such as? Those pups hit the water hard enough to be knocked out before they drowned.

Whether or not this is true, it doesn't matter, they're being THROWN INTO A RIVER FOR NO APPARENT REASON.

Looked to me that she had to wing them out there to clear a fallen tree/brush in the foreground.

I'm not even going to discuss the other options she had at her disposal "if" she were actually killing them out of "mercy". You want to know why? That remains to be proven, and the fact that it was recorded is a huge stain on that theory. Utter nonsense.

Animal owners in rural areas have to cull excess animals all the time, even in the West.

True enough, but guess what we do to people who throw puppies into a body of water? We charge them with animal cruelty.

You seem addicted to the horror of these scenes. It's as if you are one of the crowd, waiting and watching in morbid fascination as someone jumps from a bridge or building to certain death. And then screaming later, "Why didn't someone DO something?"

And now you are attacking me for showing you the sheer depravity of actions taken against domesticated animals by humans. You're a real winner, buddy.

 

[Hezam]

I just watched the video !
Seriously i have never seen something like that all my life !!

 

[Half-n-Half]

This thread has majorly derailed. It has gone from:

My question to all of you is this: Do the users of 4chan have a right to identify and report these monsters, or are they going too far? Do you feel that the law is too good for some people? Speak your mind.

To:

So, either it's okay to chuck puppies into a river, torture animals, and so forth, or it's not.

No one here is arguing it is OK for animals to be abused or tortured. We don't need to watch videos of them (which you aren't forcing us to watch, I get it) to understand your point. The question is not, is it OK for this to happen, but what are the appropriate measures that should be taken to bring justice to the offenders.

 

[Nuala]

No one here is arguing it is OK for animals to be abused or tortured.

If they don't, she is not doing anything illegal under the Croatian law. This is how it works.

So, somebody was actually arguing whether or not what the person in the video was doing anything wrong in terms of Croatian laws.

but what are the appropriate measures that should be taken to bring justice to the offenders.

True enough. The question of whether or not the person chucking the puppies was doing it out of malicious intent was brought up, which was uh, pretty goddamn obvious by the very act of chucking puppies into a river, so I responded in kind towards that theory.

Half-n-Half: It is my belief that Man, due to it's domestication of cats and dogs, have an innate responsibility to take care of them. The neglect of that duty is immoral to me. They depend on us too much for it to be moral to take advantage of that and hurt them.

The outrage of the users of 4chan to me is justifiable. I believe that people who hurt animals out of malicious intent deserve the treatment they've received by the community around them, and also the treatment internet users have been giving them. I have found that police departments and local circuit courts can be rather lax about enforcing laws of this nature.

No physical harm has been done to any animal abuser by 4chan users. Financial duress concerning job stability, community ridicule, and legal punishments have all ensued from the many instances of idiots posting their videos of abusing their pets. The woman who dropped that kitten into the garbage can was identified, her work & local police department were notified and linked to the evidence gathered up by 4chan users, and I think that's great.

I'm not big on revenge, so outright murder of someone for the abuse of an animal, human or not, would not sit well with me, but I really could turn a blind eye to anything else happening to them.

 

[Hezam]

 

[Nuala]

Oh, you're quite welcome you adorable little rabbit. Thor is here to protect you!

 

[Half-n-Half]

So, somebody was actually arguing whether or not what the person in the video was doing anything wrong in terms of Croatian laws.

Saying something is legal is different than calling it moral.

True enough. The question of whether or not the person chucking the puppies was doing it out of malicious intent was brought up, which was uh, pretty goddamn obvious by the very act of chucking puppies into a river, so I responded in kind towards that theory.

Half-n-Half: It is my belief that Man, due to it's domestication of cats and dogs, have an innate responsibility to take care of them. The neglect of that duty is immoral to me. They depend on us too much for it to be moral to take advantage of that and hurt them.

The outrage of the users of 4chan to me is justifiable. I believe that people who hurt animals out of malicious intent deserve the treatment they've received by the community around them, and also the treatment internet users have been giving them. I have found that police departments and local circuit courts can be rather lax about enforcing laws of this nature.

No physical harm has been done to any animal abuser by 4chan users. Financial duress concerning job stability, community ridicule, and legal punishments have all ensued from the many instances of idiots posting their videos of abusing their pets. The woman who dropped that kitten into the garbage can was identified, her work & local police department were notified and linked to the evidence gathered up by 4chan users, and I think that's great.

I'm not big on revenge, so outright murder of someone for the abuse of an animal, human or not, would not sit well with me, but I really could turn a blind eye to anything else happening to them.

I believe I have already said what I have to say, and it appears you have too, seeing as you have basically repeated what you already said, no offense intended.

The only thing I can add is I do not think death threats are an appropriate response seeing as being offended by animal cruelty is a subjective response, whether you admit it or not. Regardless of whether physical harm has been done or not as a result of 4chan (of which you cannot be certain) a death threat is a serious matter. As I have said earlier, and I'm sure all I can do is repeat myself, threatening someone's life for being offended by animal cruelty is tantamount to Muslims calling for the beheading of those who offend Islam.

 

[Hezam]

The only thing I can add is I do not think death threats are an appropriate response seeing as being offended by animal cruelty is a subjective response, whether you admit it or not. Regardless of whether physical harm has been done or not as a result of 4chan (of which you cannot be certain) a death threat is a serious matter. As I have said earlier, and I'm sure all I can do is repeat myself, threatening someone's life for being offended by animal cruelty is tantamount to Muslims calling for the beheading of those who offend Islam.

I agree,Death threating for the two cases above is absolutely wrong...(the second example is good for Thor to understand the first one )