It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Felony animal abuse charges for killing Goldfish, This is getting out of hand

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657

originally posted by: Shamrock6
I get your point but let's change the scenario:

Woman kills boyfriend's dog by pouring bleach in its water bowl!

Still no big deal?

Extreme appeal to emotions. Apple's and oranges.


No because it's about intent, not the action itself.

She intended to cause him emotional distress by killing his pets and destroying his belongings. It doesn't matter if it was a fish, a rat, a turtle, or a dog.




posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 01:57 PM
link   

edit on 482015 by AutumnWitch657 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Answer

I don't know. Unless they were very special very expensive fish maybe. But I don't see people forming an emotional bond with goldfish. Dogs yes. But dogs are capable of returning affection while a gold fish won't even respond emotionally to its own offspring.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Probably they look at it like she (i didnt read the article yet) was the care taker and responsible for their well being. In that sense then i can understand if a deliberate act was taken to do them harm. Seems reasonable to me then.

"What about fishermen? Those worms and minnows die a cruel death, Felony!"

No, because these are service organisms and a worm can just be sitting (laying) there in the dirt and a bird can come and swoop down, clamping their sharp beak on the worm. Then the worm, in the mouth and probably still alive, half in mouth, half out is flying through the air and the bird goes to safe place and eats the worm.

I dont eat fish anymore, but thats the way it is.

ETA:

This gets very complicated and can be debated for years. Gold Fish are all captive bred so they are not taken from the wild. I would never buy a fish from the pet shop that was wild caught either. Well it is very hard to tell what is better because life in the ocean has a lot of risks too. I would still look for captive bred or some large scale sustainable breeding operation in natural waters. Not that i own fish myself anyway.

So a felony for a gold fish maybe sends a message that any living creature taken into your charge is to be treated in a satisfactory, natural, un-stressful, un-taxing environment. And i hope the fish was not in a little bowl
edit on 8-4-2015 by Harvin because: Adding



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nyiah
The animal cruelty charge for fish is a bit much, what's next, animal cruelty charges for the kids who feed theirs to the pet cat, or eat one themselves on a dare? Or what about eating a worm on a dare? Charge the kids who take a magnifying glass to an ant hill?

She definitely deserves charges for destruction of property, that's indisputable.





Cruelty is cruelty.......Were would you draw the line? See this is the real issue at what point is life not valued? Personally I respect all life and truth be told will walk around worms on the ground after the rain.


And I wanted to add as long as life is respected I am alright with eating meat,hunting,feeding pets other animals....ETC.




edit on 8-4-2015 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krakatoa
a reply to: Shamrock6
Here, fixed that for ya, to be more accurate.



Aw thanks dude! I'm glad you think I'm worth so much effort



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:13 PM
link   
I'm going to agree that in this case it was "intent". The vandalism and killing of pets was premeditated and the action of a person who needs to be dealt with harshly so she get's why this was so wrong. It deserves felony status, but I'd imagine it will end with a slap on the hands, a fine and restitution for the damages.

In the end maybe it will sober her up and save her from herself.

I don't think this is actually a Posse Comitatus type story here. More just an interesting story about yet another sad person in need of help.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: Answer

I don't know. Unless they were very special very expensive fish maybe. But I don't see people forming an emotional bond with goldfish. Dogs yes. But dogs are capable of returning affection while a gold fish won't even respond emotionally to its own offspring.
Animal Abuse is animal abuse. She killed a man's pets. What right do we have to assign higher value to a dog, or even a "more expensive fish"? Killing a person's pet is wrong, no matter how small. She could have thrown his ant colony in the dumpster and I'd still agree with the charges.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Harvin

You should read the article. It is clearly a case of a woman going off her rocker and destroying a bunch of stuff including murdering the fish.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

Eliminate 80% of the laws on the books. It's neither free nor brave to live live this. The legal system as it stands, is illegitimate.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:34 PM
link   
I'm sure that charge will be dropped. As others have stated, she was charged with anything she could be. More than likely so something would stick.

And really, I doubt she killed the fish, just to kill them, she killed them to hurt the boyfriend. Meaning she really doesn't appear to have any compassion.

How many women have damaged the ex's stuff? But how many of those women would actually hurt a living thing, (besides another woman
) to hurt him?

Not many I would think.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:38 PM
link   
this was a DELIBERATE act, not accidental
She deserves what she gets



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:39 PM
link   
The charges fit. We had a man charged with felony animal abuse because he shot his dog. There was nothing cruel here, the dog had health issues and the vet wanted to do about a $4,000 operation instead of putting the dog down.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

Just curious, but wondering to myself out of all the people supporting this women being labeled a "felon" for killing goldfish, support abortion............?

Just trying to put his in perspective to those who support a rule of law who think putting a human being in jail for killing gold fish is actually a worthy cause?



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:44 PM
link   
She did it to cause pain..she is a sick piece of crap and should be treated accordingly.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:44 PM
link   
I'm all for it. Fish are pets no different then how you feel for your dog, cat, or any other living thing. I say good on these charges.
These were pets even if they were just Goldfish.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963

I normally agree with you, but do you really believe they put her in jail for the fish? You don't think they were throwing stuff at her so something would stick?


I just don't think she is a very good person, if she thinks it's ok to kill something, just to hurt someone else. A different scenario than your comparison?



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963
Freedom of choice. Better to abort then mistreat an unwanted.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: butcherguy
I think we need to start indicting veterinarians on murder charges then.
Kervorkian wasn't allowed to even assist a suicide, why should they be getting off scot free?


It's just slightly different in this case.

Okay then, how about the egg hatching operations that grind male chicks up while they are alive? They get away with that.


But the company also noted that "instantaneous euthanasia" – a reference to killing of male chicks by the grinder – is a standard practice supported by the animal veterinary and scientific community.

Huffington Post
edit on b000000302015-04-08T14:53:17-05:0002America/ChicagoWed, 08 Apr 2015 14:53:17 -0500200000015 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: chiefsmom
a reply to: seeker1963

I normally agree with you, but do you really believe they put her in jail for the fish? You don't think they were throwing stuff at her so something would stick?


I just don't think she is a very good person, if she thinks it's ok to kill something, just to hurt someone else. A different scenario than your comparison?


Not at all! I was just addressing the outrage of a person killing some goldfish and the support that she should be labeled a "felon" for it!


Not going to argue she is a nasty human being she is, but it was something that made me go "hmmmmmm" while reading some of the responses of how cruel it was to kill gold fish?



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join