Notices

Serious Debates & News Debate and discussion about political, moral, philosophical, celebrity and news topics.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 23-05-2015, 05:41 PM #176
joeysteele joeysteele is online now
Remembering Kerry
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: with Mystic Mock
Posts: 40,910

Favourites (more):
BB2023: Jordan
Strictly 2020: HRVY


joeysteele joeysteele is online now
Remembering Kerry
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: with Mystic Mock
Posts: 40,910

Favourites (more):
BB2023: Jordan
Strictly 2020: HRVY


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kazanne View Post
Well THAT is not the actions of someone who 'snapped' is it? seems he really is a heartless twat,that dog must have struggled so much and this cold ,calculated bastard just holds it's head under,there are no words for this pond life except maybe just 'die'.
No other words at all as you say Kazanne, none that are able to be printed on here that is.
joeysteele is online now   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 23-05-2015, 05:45 PM #177
Samuel.'s Avatar
Samuel. Samuel. is offline
.
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nananana
Posts: 9,650

Favourites (more):
BB14: Daley
BB12: Aaron


Samuel. Samuel. is offline
.
Samuel.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nananana
Posts: 9,650

Favourites (more):
BB14: Daley
BB12: Aaron


Default

I almost agree entirely with Toy Soldier

However I think even beyond it being a dog, whether a human being or whatever life is taken, the general attitude we have to instinctively call someone a monster, or call for his life to be taken in response, is incredibly unconstructive and ignorant. We have to focus on what went wrong mentally with the individual to go to such lengths, which nobody in this thread knows. Right and wrong are contructions that forever have been told and built in to us for the benefit of society, and when there is a lapse the reaction is nearly always emotive and hateful with the offender instantly "othered".

It's not being an apoligist, or a sympathiser, words that really mean nothing other than used to disregard an opposing opinion. It's about taking away the instinctive emotions we have for anger and resentment, and objectively approaching situations, like this, with the goal of learning and mending rather than destroying and punishing.

I don't know if I'm being at all clear. I just don't think the way people approach stories like this is helpful to anyone.

Last edited by Samuel.; 23-05-2015 at 05:47 PM.
Samuel. is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 23-05-2015, 05:59 PM #178
Toy Soldier Toy Soldier is offline
-
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 30,350


Toy Soldier Toy Soldier is offline
-
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 30,350


Default

There's literally no new information in that posted article other than an even more emotively biased account from the dog's owners, and the information that he went back to try to remove the chip later rather than doing at at the time which - I'm sorry - really only backs up the fact that it was an impulsive act in the first place. He grabbed it, killed it and dumped it and then realised that he had done something shameful and was panicking about being found out.

Again it isn't about making excuses or saying that it wasn't a terrible thing to happen or for him to do, or even saying that there should be no consequence for him. I agree that he shouldn't be flying, for example, at least for the forseeable future, and he should certainly be in mandatory psychiatric assessment and treatment.

It is however about trying to stay calm and take the time to reasonably and rationally assess human psychology instead of flying into a whirlwind of poor-puppy hysterics and comparing it to murdering another human being. Being quite blunt, it's important to understand that not everyone personifies and humanises pets or prescribe emotions and connections to them that are in fact pure human fantasy. The statement that "if he could do this to a dog, he could do it to a person" is only true if HE HIMSELF considers dogs and humans to be comparible. Not everyone does.
Toy Soldier is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 23-05-2015, 06:19 PM #179
Kizzy's Avatar
Kizzy Kizzy is offline
Likes cars that go boom
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 41,755


Kizzy Kizzy is offline
Likes cars that go boom
Kizzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 41,755


Default

If he was acting so very irrationally and he momentarily snapped how does anyone know that he wouldn't snap at a person in the same manner?
Nobody could hand on heart say that isn't a possibility regardless of anyones relationship with dogs.
__________________
Kizzy is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 23-05-2015, 06:29 PM #180
Redway's Avatar
Redway Redway is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,400


Redway Redway is offline
Senior Member
Redway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 10,400


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by arista View Post
"He said: 'She was only a small dog, it’s not like she was a big loud thing that was causing a lot of noise."

Small or Large Dog
doing nonstop barking is Illegal
FACT
Whereas murdering animals in cold blood and perverting the course of justice is entirely legal? And since when do dogs have the capacity to understand the law? Mate...
Redway is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 23-05-2015, 07:31 PM #181
Toy Soldier Toy Soldier is offline
-
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 30,350


Toy Soldier Toy Soldier is offline
-
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 30,350


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kizzy View Post
If he was acting so very irrationally and he momentarily snapped how does anyone know that he wouldn't snap at a person in the same manner?
Nobody could hand on heart say that isn't a possibility regardless of anyones relationship with dogs.
No one knows that he wouldn't snap at a person, but no one knows that ANY person wouldn't snap and harm another. There are perhaps degrees of likelihood but the fact is, the gentlest of people can end up harming someone without warning.

Like I said before it really comes down to how he perceives dogs as to whether or not it's likely, doesn't it? If he humanises dogs and considers them comparible to humans and yet still did this, then it may be likely that he would also harm a human. If he doesn't think harming a dog is morally comparable to harming a human then it's relatively unlikely.

Then again, deliberately harming animals can be an early indicator of severe mental health issues, but A) that manifests as people actively seeking out animals to harm them rather than doing it for any reason (no matter how dubious that reason might be, i.e. barking) and B) it tends to manifest in childhood or adolescence.
Toy Soldier is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 23-05-2015, 09:45 PM #182
Kizzy's Avatar
Kizzy Kizzy is offline
Likes cars that go boom
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 41,755


Kizzy Kizzy is offline
Likes cars that go boom
Kizzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 41,755


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toy Soldier View Post
No one knows that he wouldn't snap at a person, but no one knows that ANY person wouldn't snap and harm another. There are perhaps degrees of likelihood but the fact is, the gentlest of people can end up harming someone without warning.

Like I said before it really comes down to how he perceives dogs as to whether or not it's likely, doesn't it? If he humanises dogs and considers them comparible to humans and yet still did this, then it may be likely that he would also harm a human. If he doesn't think harming a dog is morally comparable to harming a human then it's relatively unlikely.

Then again, deliberately harming animals can be an early indicator of severe mental health issues, but A) that manifests as people actively seeking out animals to harm them rather than doing it for any reason (no matter how dubious that reason might be, i.e. barking) and B) it tends to manifest in childhood or adolescence.
It has nothing to do with his relationship with dogs it was just something that was annoying him... it could've been anything or anyone couldn't it? He was non compos mentis remember.
__________________
Kizzy is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 23-05-2015, 09:47 PM #183
Kazanne's Avatar
Kazanne Kazanne is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Gerard Butlers Undercrackersx
Posts: 61,531

Favourites (more):
Love Island 4: Eyal
DOI 2018: Alex Beresford


Kazanne Kazanne is offline
Senior Member
Kazanne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Gerard Butlers Undercrackersx
Posts: 61,531

Favourites (more):
Love Island 4: Eyal
DOI 2018: Alex Beresford


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kizzy View Post
It has nothing to do with his relationship with dogs it was just something that was annoying him... it could've been anything or anyone couldn't it? He was non compos mentis remember.
Well said kizzy
__________________


RIP Pyramid, Andyman ,Kerry and Lex xx

https://www.facebook.com/JamesBulgerMT/?fref=photo

"If slaughterhouses had glass walls, most people would be vegetarian"
Kazanne is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 24-05-2015, 06:04 AM #184
Ammi's Avatar
Ammi Ammi is offline
Quand il pleut, il pleut
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 63,155


Ammi Ammi is offline
Quand il pleut, il pleut
Ammi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 63,155


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel. View Post
I almost agree entirely with Toy Soldier

However I think even beyond it being a dog, whether a human being or whatever life is taken, the general attitude we have to instinctively call someone a monster, or call for his life to be taken in response, is incredibly unconstructive and ignorant. We have to focus on what went wrong mentally with the individual to go to such lengths, which nobody in this thread knows. Right and wrong are contructions that forever have been told and built in to us for the benefit of society, and when there is a lapse the reaction is nearly always emotive and hateful with the offender instantly "othered".

It's not being an apoligist, or a sympathiser, words that really mean nothing other than used to disregard an opposing opinion. It's about taking away the instinctive emotions we have for anger and resentment, and objectively approaching situations, like this, with the goal of learning and mending rather than destroying and punishing.

I don't know if I'm being at all clear. I just don't think the way people approach stories like this is helpful to anyone.




..you put it beautifully and are being perfectly clear Samuel...and I do agree with you in that I don’t believe humans are ‘monsters’, what some do/their actions may be extremely horrific and be hard to fathom and maybe described as 'monstrous'..?../impossible to get into the mind-set of with someone who has a ‘rational’ and healthy mind..it’s like these moral dilemma type things, what we think we would do, we’re thinking with a clear and unstressed mind and not one of chaos and panic but in reality, actually faced with something, some extraordinary situation etc we don’t really know what we would do and could do the exact opposite to what we think...obviously those are extreme situations/dilemmas but even in less extreme things you would have to know ‘a life’...the life of the person who did awful things and what would make them do them...and I think that even if someone hurt one of my family..(which has happened..)...my instinct would never be to want them to be hurt back because that wouldn’t change anything that had happened but just cause another mother/parent to experience the pain that I was feeling...and why would I want to do that, why would I want someone to go through the same pain that I was feeling, it's not something that I would wish on anyone because what could be gained from it/how would that 'heal my family'...?..and it wouldn't change anything that had happened.. but I do think though that yes, you're right and an instinct reaction and quite 'human' as well...especially with awful stuff that happens, people do have instinct feelings which may and do often change when more thought is given...

..I do think though also that there is not always a psychology to these things, that some people just do things out of meanness of spirit because they’re just generally not people of good character..maybe they just see someone in the street, decide they’re going to hit them or something and they just do it, no real reason...and that like in this story if something annoys/enrages them then they can become obsessed with it and be calculating in their actions...not really snapping, but just focusing huge anger and frustrations at something or someone..and that's why 'what went wrong' etc as you say would be something that quite often would come later..I mean I think that it would be too much and too unrealistic to expect an instant...hang on, let's think about this a bit first for every awful and shocking story...I tend to overthink things in general but I guess with awful stuff and people who harm others in any way it's to try to understand them because hurting someone or taking a life is a little beyond my understanding in some cases...I mean I understand an act of passion, why someone would do that or self defence or defence of others that maybe wasn't meant to end in someone losing their life but just did etc...but to deliberately harm someone I always have to try and gain and understanding....hmmm, I'm not putting this very well, I think that you're much better than I am at that....but I guess to always think..monster, monster, monster etc in every situation could be described as an extreme..?...(although I don't think it's literally meant but just a reaction thing to something unfathomable to that person..)...but to always try to gain an understanding and look at the psychology in every situation I also think is an extreme and no extremes are a good thing..whether positive or negative etc...it's a balance..and also I don't think that it always applies because nothing also always applies/always in itself would be an extreme..and there really are just people who 'mindlessly' do things, type thing..I mean maybe there is a 'reason'/their thought processes but that doesn't necessarily mean any 'damage' I don't think..because like there are really good people, there are also really crumby ones, just quite mean spirited people it's just that we don't have a tendency to analyse 'acts of kindness' etc, we just accept them for what they are...anyway it would be too exhausting to think deeply about everything in life and none of do that... I think with this story it's one where I don't really want to overthink or analyse to much other than I'm glad that he isn't flying anymore and I feel very sad for the family who have had to go through the loss of a child, a pain which is a parent's worst fear and a grief that may or may not have resulted in not having so much time for Meg because of things like depression etc and yeah, grief obviously ..I think that if any 'positive' was applied to this then that would be it...I'm sure that he was stressed, feeling low and not 'himself' etc...and somehow his focus became the dog who was the cause of it so he would 'rid' the cause because all that had happened to him had spiralled his life down...but was that ridding of it an 'instinct' reaction or more planned, which to me would indicate less of a 'troubled mind' and more a bitter 'blame seeking' one...a lack of acceptance of things in his own life that were no one's fault, they just were and they just happened, which is often the case..well I guess that we can only go on what we have been told of the story and from the perspective of the family and that he has not countered 'their story'....so to me the 'scenario' that I feel is more 'truth' atm is that it's more of a bitter mind and he's just really not a great person at all...

..what's interesting as well with psychology I think, is that whatever thought processes, there will still be a lack of empathy or a lack of 'seeing/understanding' somewhere so whether it's the 'assumption/instinct reaction' of a bad person because of what he did or the assumption/reaction etc of a neglectful dog owner because of apparent barking etc...there will never be a complete understanding of any situation, otherwise we would always drive ourselves crazy and spend our lives in mind conflict turmoil....


..anyway I think that I have completely gone off topic for the most part but you put your post beautifully Samuel....
Ammi is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 24-05-2015, 12:09 PM #185
Kizzy's Avatar
Kizzy Kizzy is offline
Likes cars that go boom
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 41,755


Kizzy Kizzy is offline
Likes cars that go boom
Kizzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 41,755


Default

'Alison shows me a number of signed witness statements neighbours provided to the RSPCA stating their opinion that Meg was not a nuisance and did not bark excessively.

And although Woodhouse claimed he had complained to the council about her barking, no evidence of this was produced in court.

Alison shows me an aerial photograph of the two properties in Long Buckby. Far from living cheek-by-jowl, there’s a 120ft paddock separating the Boddingtons’ land from Woodhouse’s home and garden.'

I have to say as much as it will be unpopular I think it was his position that save him from a prison sentence.
__________________
Kizzy is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 24-05-2015, 12:33 PM #186
Kazanne's Avatar
Kazanne Kazanne is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Gerard Butlers Undercrackersx
Posts: 61,531

Favourites (more):
Love Island 4: Eyal
DOI 2018: Alex Beresford


Kazanne Kazanne is offline
Senior Member
Kazanne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Gerard Butlers Undercrackersx
Posts: 61,531

Favourites (more):
Love Island 4: Eyal
DOI 2018: Alex Beresford


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kizzy View Post
'Alison shows me a number of signed witness statements neighbours provided to the RSPCA stating their opinion that Meg was not a nuisance and did not bark excessively.

And although Woodhouse claimed he had complained to the council about her barking, no evidence of this was produced in court.

Alison shows me an aerial photograph of the two properties in Long Buckby. Far from living cheek-by-jowl, there’s a 120ft paddock separating the Boddingtons’ land from Woodhouse’s home and garden.'

I have to say as much as it will be unpopular I think it was his position that save him from a prison sentence.
I agree Kizzy,but he really should not, imo,be flying passengers,I do think the judges are far too easy on anyone who is cruel to animals though.
__________________


RIP Pyramid, Andyman ,Kerry and Lex xx

https://www.facebook.com/JamesBulgerMT/?fref=photo

"If slaughterhouses had glass walls, most people would be vegetarian"
Kazanne is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 24-05-2015, 12:40 PM #187
arista's Avatar
arista arista is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 165,061
arista arista is offline
Senior Member
arista's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 165,061
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redway View Post
Whereas murdering animals in cold blood and perverting the course of justice is entirely legal? And since when do dogs have the capacity to understand the law? Mate...

No that was wrong
and Extreme.


But He got off
That Is Our Law

The owners failed the dog
letting him non stop bark
arista is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 24-05-2015, 12:46 PM #188
Kizzy's Avatar
Kizzy Kizzy is offline
Likes cars that go boom
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 41,755


Kizzy Kizzy is offline
Likes cars that go boom
Kizzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 41,755


Default

Like psychology the law doesn't appear to be an exact science either. The owners did not fail their pet, someone removed it from their property and killed it.
__________________
Kizzy is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 26-05-2015, 03:07 PM #189
Samuel.'s Avatar
Samuel. Samuel. is offline
.
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nananana
Posts: 9,650

Favourites (more):
BB14: Daley
BB12: Aaron


Samuel. Samuel. is offline
.
Samuel.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nananana
Posts: 9,650

Favourites (more):
BB14: Daley
BB12: Aaron


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ammi View Post
..you put it beautifully and are being perfectly clear Samuel...and I do agree with you in that I don’t believe humans are ‘monsters’, what some do/their actions may be extremely horrific and be hard to fathom and maybe described as 'monstrous'..?../impossible to get into the mind-set of with someone who has a ‘rational’ and healthy mind..it’s like these moral dilemma type things, what we think we would do, we’re thinking with a clear and unstressed mind and not one of chaos and panic but in reality, actually faced with something, some extraordinary situation etc we don’t really know what we would do and could do the exact opposite to what we think...obviously those are extreme situations/dilemmas but even in less extreme things you would have to know ‘a life’...the life of the person who did awful things and what would make them do them...and I think that even if someone hurt one of my family..(which has happened..)...my instinct would never be to want them to be hurt back because that wouldn’t change anything that had happened but just cause another mother/parent to experience the pain that I was feeling...and why would I want to do that, why would I want someone to go through the same pain that I was feeling, it's not something that I would wish on anyone because what could be gained from it/how would that 'heal my family'...?..and it wouldn't change anything that had happened.. but I do think though that yes, you're right and an instinct reaction and quite 'human' as well...especially with awful stuff that happens, people do have instinct feelings which may and do often change when more thought is given...

..I do think though also that there is not always a psychology to these things, that some people just do things out of meanness of spirit because they’re just generally not people of good character..maybe they just see someone in the street, decide they’re going to hit them or something and they just do it, no real reason...and that like in this story if something annoys/enrages them then they can become obsessed with it and be calculating in their actions...not really snapping, but just focusing huge anger and frustrations at something or someone..and that's why 'what went wrong' etc as you say would be something that quite often would come later..I mean I think that it would be too much and too unrealistic to expect an instant...hang on, let's think about this a bit first for every awful and shocking story...I tend to overthink things in general but I guess with awful stuff and people who harm others in any way it's to try to understand them because hurting someone or taking a life is a little beyond my understanding in some cases...I mean I understand an act of passion, why someone would do that or self defence or defence of others that maybe wasn't meant to end in someone losing their life but just did etc...but to deliberately harm someone I always have to try and gain and understanding....hmmm, I'm not putting this very well, I think that you're much better than I am at that....but I guess to always think..monster, monster, monster etc in every situation could be described as an extreme..?...(although I don't think it's literally meant but just a reaction thing to something unfathomable to that person..)...but to always try to gain an understanding and look at the psychology in every situation I also think is an extreme and no extremes are a good thing..whether positive or negative etc...it's a balance..and also I don't think that it always applies because nothing also always applies/always in itself would be an extreme..and there really are just people who 'mindlessly' do things, type thing..I mean maybe there is a 'reason'/their thought processes but that doesn't necessarily mean any 'damage' I don't think..because like there are really good people, there are also really crumby ones, just quite mean spirited people it's just that we don't have a tendency to analyse 'acts of kindness' etc, we just accept them for what they are...anyway it would be too exhausting to think deeply about everything in life and none of do that... I think with this story it's one where I don't really want to overthink or analyse to much other than I'm glad that he isn't flying anymore and I feel very sad for the family who have had to go through the loss of a child, a pain which is a parent's worst fear and a grief that may or may not have resulted in not having so much time for Meg because of things like depression etc and yeah, grief obviously ..I think that if any 'positive' was applied to this then that would be it...I'm sure that he was stressed, feeling low and not 'himself' etc...and somehow his focus became the dog who was the cause of it so he would 'rid' the cause because all that had happened to him had spiralled his life down...but was that ridding of it an 'instinct' reaction or more planned, which to me would indicate less of a 'troubled mind' and more a bitter 'blame seeking' one...a lack of acceptance of things in his own life that were no one's fault, they just were and they just happened, which is often the case..well I guess that we can only go on what we have been told of the story and from the perspective of the family and that he has not countered 'their story'....so to me the 'scenario' that I feel is more 'truth' atm is that it's more of a bitter mind and he's just really not a great person at all...

..what's interesting as well with psychology I think, is that whatever thought processes, there will still be a lack of empathy or a lack of 'seeing/understanding' somewhere so whether it's the 'assumption/instinct reaction' of a bad person because of what he did or the assumption/reaction etc of a neglectful dog owner because of apparent barking etc...there will never be a complete understanding of any situation, otherwise we would always drive ourselves crazy and spend our lives in mind conflict turmoil....


..anyway I think that I have completely gone off topic for the most part but you put your post beautifully Samuel....
Great post, Ammi. As you say, we'll never completely understand the full story of anything like this, I think because there are so many variables in play, especially in the minds of those in question. Attempting to understand how someone is able to do something so harmful that you could never imagine doing yourself, it becomes a hard consideration to make, and I think it's only natural to then have purely negative responses to it yourself. I also think it's hard for people to accept that anybody is capable of doing things like this, they don't want a reality like that - it goes in the face of any faith they have in society, so it becomes easy to dismiss the action as something only a "monster" could do.
Samuel. is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Reply

Bookmark/share this topic

Tags
barking, bucket, dog, drowning, jail, man, neighbour, spared, stop

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
 

About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

"Big Brother and UK Television Forum. Est. 2001"

 

© 2023
no new posts