you are right about what was written in these posts ...BUT the premise remains...most d-bags that harm humans ..start on animals...argue that point all you want...peace..may the farce be with you
1,000 fish killed at walmart
- Thread starter divemaster99
- Start date
Funny how we value the life of certain animals over fish (dogs, cats, mammals in general...I mean I do). But crazy how having a less intelligent life form...say in this case, a fish...like a snakehead...will potentially get the higher life-form (human) some jail time. And why, because it can be detrimental to other lower life forms if released. Basically, if owning a fish can get you locked up here in the USA, why doesn't killing 1000 deserve the same punishment. Are some fish more important than others? Here is another one to think about? Say a sick a**hole shoots and kills a dog - And say another sick a**hole shoots and kills a fish. According to most of us it is clearly a no brainer. The sicko who killed the dog deserves a greater punishment than the guy who killed the fish, RIGHT? I mean we value a dog, cat whatever...more than a fish. BUT, what if this fish was a big fish...say a Whale Shark...a big fish indeed, but nevertheless a fish. Is killing the dog still worse than killing the Whale Shark (Fish). It all has to do with semantics, technicalities and relativeness. Basically, what something's value is to who and what.
good points one and all..the argument made by several people on here seems to be that human worship is the only acceptable thought we should have .. and intelligence rather than usefulness sets up the order for the animal kingdom... horse rustlers that got lynched in the old west found out those people valued horses more than humans...and they(the lynchers) did ok in the long run...so to each his own when it comes to value...BUT GETTING BACK ON TRACK....society ,imo, is going to be better off seeing these guys that poisoned a bunch of fish get plenty of motivation to not do it again.....anybody disagree?
....society ,imo, is going to be better off seeing these guys that poisoned a bunch of fish get plenty of motivation to not do it again.....anybody disagree?
100% Right
well, we all are in agreement then. I can dance around all I want and still come to the same statement, or I can just say it straight forward. sometimes I don't see a point in beating around the bush, rather just get to the point. again, either way i'll be making the same statement. it's not an easy dismissal. and it's not for the sake of argument. just being straight forward
I think discussions would go a lot more smoothly if everyone learned how to do that more often don't you think? although I have been entertained many times due to people spouting out the first thing that comes to mind
again, we don't have actual stats or studies to back up our statements but I disagree. I don't believe most humans that harm other humans start on animals. I actually believe the opposite. most humans that hurt others may have never tortured any bunnies or kittens. a small percentage probably started on animals.
but I agree that these guys need major motivation to never do something like this again
if the farce is with us, then master yoda you are
good points one and all..the argument made by several people on here seems to be that human worship is the only acceptable thought we should have .. and intelligence rather than usefulness sets up the order for the animal kingdom... horse rustlers that got lynched in the old west found out those people valued horses more than humans...and they(the lynchers) did ok in the long run...so to each his own when it comes to value...BUT GETTING BACK ON TRACK....society ,imo, is going to be better off seeing these guys that poisoned a bunch of fish get plenty of motivation to not do it again.....anybody disagree?
Lee, WTH? really just fabricate things apart from historical facts.
The thieves put people's very lives at risk. There were no buses to jump on out in the middle of uncivilized country, and no welfare to feed family or children when people were deprived of ability to plow their fields.
It was the thieves who had already disregarded human lives, not their victims.
Lest you think I'm making things up, I copy & paste below.
;-]
"......... in the United States during the 19th century. During that time the Great Plains states, Texas, and other western states were sparsely populated and negligibly policed. As farmers tilled the land and migrants headed west through the Great Plains, their horses became subject to theft. Since these farmers and migrants depended on their horses, horse thieves garnered a particularly pernicious reputation because they left their victims helpless or greatly handicapped by the loss of their horses. The victims needed their horses for transportation and farming. Such depredation led to the use of the term horse thief as an insult, one that conveys the impression of the insulted person as one lacking any shred of moral decency."
that is actually still ON topic, just for realistic balance:
fishkeepers already feed other fish to their own pet fish. no way killing fish will be weighed on the same scale as torturing other animals by the judicial system. most likely the property value/loss would be prosecuted.
and TBH, a swift kill of fish is not on the "sociopathic scale" of torturing animals for sadistic pleasure (no matter how much you insist so), like psychos slowly carving cats up, setting dogs on fire or other such things. wack jobs enjoy that suffering.
Not everyone who kills something has the psycho-social makeup to move up the scale.
There is much imbalance in society now as to the "normative" views of what is acceptable, bad, and the worst end of the scale for people to do. and more so, for what others feel self-righteous being outraged about.
IMO.
I agree, it's one thing to torture an animal but another if you quickly kill it and make use of it. That's why we are all here after all guys, humans along with every other living thing on earth exist to reproduce and to be food for each other. As high up as we "think" we are, we serve the same purpose as every other living thing.
back on topic, a few years in jail is pretty merciful because they tortured the fish not kill them instantly.
back on topic, a few years in jail is pretty merciful because they tortured the fish not kill them instantly.
That's a pretty dangerous way to look at things, the world. It's also a logical extension of the attitude that has put the environment in the peril it's in today. There is nothing that puts humans on the top of the evolutionary ladder, and there is nothing that puts bugs at the bottom. In fact, there is no evolutionary ladder, every organism is evolved to do what it does, there is no hierarchy, and the life of one animal is no more valuable than the life of another.
Killing anything you dont need to kill is pretty evil, dont you think?
That's why I have no problem joining the "lynch them!" crowd for cases like this. The world and the creatures that inhabit it are not your toys to play with, to pull a dominance play over. They're animals that lead a life completely separate from your own, and you dont get to do whatever you want with them.
If they think it's okay to kill a bunch of fish, why not puppies? Why not kids?
I'm an extremist when it comes to things like this, yes. But I dont believe I'm wrong. Consideration for living things is a virtue that so many people these days lack, and it's sickening.
Do you think those responsible will ever see the error in their ways? No, of course not. Just the error in getting caught. The idea of people who like to torture animals out there mingling with society makes my skin crawl. Some people deal only in violence and that's the language that they speak. Luckily for them, society and the legal system tends to be a bit more merciful. But if we hear about these fellas a few years down the road shooting nail guns at neighborhood dogs, people are gonna wish they'd ended up behind bars for this.
Carrying your logic through, you will be jailing people who uses roach bombs at home.
Killing other people's fish is not okay; the penalty should be more than a slap on the wrist, but it does not rise to things like child abuse.
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Killing other people's fish is not okay; the penalty should be more than a slap on the wrist, but it does not rise to things like child abuse.
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
