Notices
Results 1 to 57 of 57
Like Tree32Likes
  • 2 Post By Neverfly
  • 2 Post By Harold14370
  • 2 Post By Markus Hanke
  • 2 Post By PhDemon
  • 1 Post By sculptor
  • 1 Post By Tranquille
  • 1 Post By Harold14370
  • 1 Post By Neverfly
  • 1 Post By Lynx_Fox
  • 1 Post By Lynx_Fox
  • 2 Post By jrmonroe
  • 1 Post By Neverfly
  • 1 Post By Harold14370
  • 2 Post By jocular
  • 1 Post By Harold14370
  • 2 Post By KALSTER
  • 1 Post By sculptor
  • 1 Post By sculptor
  • 1 Post By wegs
  • 2 Post By jocular
  • 1 Post By Neverfly
  • 1 Post By Tranquille
  • 1 Post By sculptor
  • 1 Post By jocular

Thread: Bag the dog

  1. #1 Bag the dog 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    So, Mary Snell, a facebook user placed a puppy into a baggie to show its size on Facebook.
    Stupid enough... But not half as stupid as the reaction from Law Enforcement:

    Mary Snell Put A Puppy In A Bag, Posted The Pic To Facebook: Police (PHOTO)

    Poor judgment, yes. But no harm was done. "Harm" is clearly defined and the dog is fine. So, two people are being charged with Felonies. A Warning would have been sufficient, doncha Think?!

    Are these clearly evil people needing felony convictions to prevent them from continuing their Mad Plot to Take Over The World?

    Such over-zealous hammering does society no favors.


    sculptor and mat5592 like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    The cops don't have anything better to do than this?


    sculptor and babe like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    5,609
    Reminds me of this news story from a couple of years ago:

    BBC News - Woman filmed dumping cat in wheelie bin in Coventry

    This woman was getting online death threats and hate mail over this but was only fined £250 for animal cruelty IIRC. There was a big over reaction from the public but it was quiet a low key minor offence as far as the cops were concerned.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Are these clearly evil people needing felony convictions to prevent them from continuing their Mad Plot to Take Over The World?


    Sorry, couldn't resist
    PhDemon and babe like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    5,609
    It's one of my nieces favourite cartoons!

    PINKY AND THE BRAIN theme song - YouTube
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    When the cops and prosecutors are all insane, and the inmates are running the asylum, justice becomes both tragedy and comedy and loses all sense of respect.

    Can idiocracy be far behind?
    jocular likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    So, Mary Snell, a facebook user placed a puppy into a baggie to show its size on Facebook.
    Stupid enough... But not half as stupid as the reaction from Law Enforcement:

    Mary Snell Put A Puppy In A Bag, Posted The Pic To Facebook: Police (PHOTO)

    Poor judgment, yes. But no harm was done. "Harm" is clearly defined and the dog is fine. So, two people are being charged with Felonies. A Warning would have been sufficient, doncha Think?!

    Are these clearly evil people needing felony convictions to prevent them from continuing their Mad Plot to Take Over The World?

    Such over-zealous hammering does society no favors.
    Would your reaction be the same if it was a baby in a plastic bag and the photo taken a joke?

    The way the puppy was sitting in that bag, its nose was right in a corner, with its head forming like a tight little pocket in that corner. We assume the puppy is fine, but we don't know exactly how long the puppy was in there for and whether it lacked oxygen. She is also holding it by the very tips of her fingers. If that puppy moved at all, it could have slipped completely from her grasp. And given her reason for putting the puppy in the bag was because it wouldn't remain still and holding it like that?

    She told reporters that she knew it was wrong, but she couldn't get the little guy to hold still any other way, according to KRQE.
    I understand your point of view. A part of me thinks it's a bit silly to charge her. But then I look at that puppy and I think, what if it was a newborn baby. Would I expect people who put a new born baby in a zip lock bag for a photo, with its face down into the bag and jammed in a corner where it had a very small pocket of air to breathe, to be charged with child endangerment? Yes, I would. Why should that be any different for a defenseless puppy? I don't know. All I can say is that I get why the police reacted as they did.
    Ascended likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post

    Would your reaction be the same if it was a baby in a plastic bag and the photo taken a joke?
    But it wasn't a baby, was it? What is your point?
    The way the puppy was sitting in that bag, its nose was right in a corner, with its head forming like a tight little pocket in that corner. We assume the puppy is fine, but we don't know exactly how long the puppy was in there for and whether it lacked oxygen.
    We don't know, so you are going to assume the worst, and send the cops? Ridiculous. Especially since we know the dog is fine. Did you ever hold your breath for a few seconds? Same thing.
    She is also holding it by the very tips of her fingers. If that puppy moved at all, it could have slipped completely from her grasp. And given her reason for putting the puppy in the bag was because it wouldn't remain still and holding it like that?

    She told reporters that she knew it was wrong, but she couldn't get the little guy to hold still any other way, according to KRQE.
    I understand your point of view. A part of me thinks it's a bit silly to charge her. But then I look at that puppy and I think, what if it was a newborn baby. Would I expect people who put a new born baby in a zip lock bag for a photo, with its face down into the bag and jammed in a corner where it had a very small pocket of air to breathe, to be charged with child endangerment? Yes, I would. Why should that be any different for a defenseless puppy?
    You don't know why we treat babies different than puppies??? Have we lost any vestige of common sense?
    jocular likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Florida Mother Arrested For Photo Of Baby With Plastic Bag Over Her Head
    These may be cases of Post Partum Depression; where the birthing mother lacks any empathy for her child. It may also be control over the father. I don't see that as a "joke" in either of those cases- But I am not finding any references as to what either woman was charged with.

    Above, a 44 year old woman and her 21 year old son are charged with felonies, which seems excessive to me. Simply swinging by the house and having a "Time to grow up" talk seems sufficient.
    I can't help but wonder- out of the three examples given here, now, which receives the most severe punishment?

    Hey, I like puppies as much as anyone. I don't like the idea of putting one in a plastic bag. But No Harm Was Done. People got a little stupid. Cops should just give them a talking to and leave.

    Some prosecutors will be quite content to be a bit weaselly about how to charge you in order to pad his own numbers. They'll even interview you again and again and again, each time using fear to manipulate you into saying something they want you to say and report only that One sentence while ignoring the dozens of times you said it differently.
    Being supportive of such over-zealous Iron Fisted behavior creates a problem for everyone.

    You might agree the next time you are backing up out of your driveway and a prosecutor sees you look down for a moment.
    Because in that moment you looked down, a hoard of rampaging circus clowns might have run up behind your car and you'd have killed them all. Jeez, don't you have any remorse you Felon? You're trying to kill clowns! You're just a clown murderer. Who knows what you might do next, so let's slam you even harder, just in case.
    One cannot help but wonder who is the real bully and bad guy in that kind of nonsense...
    sculptor likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    One cannot help but wonder who is the real bully and bad guy in that kind of nonsense...

    and, here, I had thought that that was obvious
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    But it wasn't a baby, was it? What is your point?
    It was a puppy.

    It's more a case of if you wouldn't do it to a baby, you shouldn't do it to a puppy.


    We don't know, so you are going to assume the worst, and send the cops? Ridiculous. Especially since we know the dog is fine. Did you ever hold your breath for a few seconds? Same thing.
    Did you read the article Neverfly linked? She knew it was wrong, but she figured it was the only way to get the puppy to stay still. Experts say the puppy could have suffered from the lack of oxygen.

    If you see a person putting a baby in a plastic bag for a photo and you see the baby's face jammed into the corner with a small pocket of air, are you going to say it can hold its breath for a few seconds? Is it the same thing? I once saw a guy driving with his little kids standing on the bonnet of the car, like they were surfing. Was on a quiet road and they were all laughing. Were the people who saw it wrong to call the police? Was it ridiculous? We knew the kids were fine. They could have held on for a few seconds, couldn't they?

    I don't need to assume the worst. I can see the worst in that photo. It's called animal cruelty and endangerment. And in most places around the world, it's illegal.

    You don't know why we treat babies different than puppies??? Have we lost any vestige of common sense?
    Why do you treat babies differently?

    My pets are part of my family. Puppies are just as delicate and need to be cared for as much as babies need to be. If it's wrong to put a baby in a plastic bag for a photo, it's wrong to put a puppy in a plastic bag for a photo. The loss of common sense comes when you think it's acceptable to put a puppy in a baggie for a photo and you can tell yourself that it's not like it's a baby. If it was a baby in that bag, no one would bat an eyelid if she was charged. I just don't see why it should be different because it's a puppy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Florida Mother Arrested For Photo Of Baby With Plastic Bag Over Her Head
    These may be cases of Post Partum Depression; where the birthing mother lacks any empathy for her child. It may also be control over the father. I don't see that as a "joke" in either of those cases- But I am not finding any references as to what either woman was charged with.

    Above, a 44 year old woman and her 21 year old son are charged with felonies, which seems excessive to me. Simply swinging by the house and having a "Time to grow up" talk seems sufficient.
    I can't help but wonder- out of the three examples given here, now, which receives the most severe punishment?

    Hey, I like puppies as much as anyone. I don't like the idea of putting one in a plastic bag. But No Harm Was Done. People got a little stupid. Cops should just give them a talking to and leave.

    Some prosecutors will be quite content to be a bit weaselly about how to charge you in order to pad his own numbers. They'll even interview you again and again and again, each time using fear to manipulate you into saying something they want you to say and report only that One sentence while ignoring the dozens of times you said it differently.
    Being supportive of such over-zealous Iron Fisted behavior creates a problem for everyone.

    You might agree the next time you are backing up out of your driveway and a prosecutor sees you look down for a moment.
    Because in that moment you looked down, a hoard of rampaging circus clowns might have run up behind your car and you'd have killed them all. Jeez, don't you have any remorse you Felon? You're trying to kill clowns! You're just a clown murderer. Who knows what you might do next, so let's slam you even harder, just in case.
    One cannot help but wonder who is the real bully and bad guy in that kind of nonsense...
    Why the assumption that she was suffering from PPD? I had linked that article above. There is no evidence or mention in the article that she suffered from it. She clearly said it was just a joke. Should she have been charged? Just because no harm is done does not mean it's acceptable or legal. I can do three times the speed limit past my kid's school in my car just as school lets out and I can be lucky enough to not hit any of the kids coming out of the school. No harm was done, why should I get a ticket or lose my license?

    I just think that attitude is lazy and we would then start seeing people copying it and doing it, because there would be this tacit approval that it's acceptable or okay to do for photos. After all, if you just get a warning, who gives a shit? But you'd think twice if you know if you get caught, it's a felony.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    These may be cases of Post Partum Depression
    Why the assumption that she was suffering from PPD? I had linked that article above.
    What assumption? It clearly says "may be a case of." It's trash like this that had me keep you on ignore. You distort wording in order to get a person riled up- then you can easily sit back and point the finger at the person that finally got fed up with your distortions that lead to inaccurate accusations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Just because no harm is done does not mean it's acceptable or legal. I can do three times the speed limit past my kid's school in my car just as school lets out and I can be lucky enough to not hit any of the kids coming out of the school. No harm was done, why should I get a ticket or lose my license?

    I just think that attitude is lazy and we would then start seeing people copying it and doing it, because there would be this tacit approval that it's acceptable or okay to do for photos. After all, if you just get a warning, who gives a shit? But you'd think twice if you know if you get caught, it's a felony.
    You made my point for me. If you speed past a school You Don't Get Charged With A Felony, Do You?
    You might get a warning or even, a class C ticket if you're a repeat offender or really give the officer a hard time. You don't get arrested and charged with a Felony. You only get that if harm is done.
    So why are you using a reasonable example to justify extreme action?

    Back on ignore you go, by the way...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Ref the baby.

    Anyone doing something like that might say it was a joke, even if it wasn't.

    Even if she really did think it was a joke...that shows some possible psychological problems. What is even remotely funny about showing a suffocating a baby? Nothing. She needs, at a minimum a full workup about her mental state. Probably a parenting class and continuous monitoring for the good of the child. This is not something we just trust her word about.
    Neverfly likes this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Ref the baby.

    Anyone doing something like that might say it was a joke, even if it wasn't.

    Even if she really did think it was a joke...that shows some possible psychological problems. What is even remotely funny about showing a suffocating a baby? Nothing. She needs, at a minimum a full workup about her mental state. Probably a parenting class and continuous monitoring for the good of the child. This is not something we just trust her word about.
    Strong agreement. I didn't want to get into an argument over speculations... But I think just accepting "it was a joke" at face value from someone in deep fear of legal consequences is not very sensible.
    Showing such to the father, even... A lot of speculation to be had, there... But it still should be safe speculation to say that her brain was broken.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    The other issue, particular in the US with its somewhat backwards views on what should happen. No degree of punishment is going to fix her if she has mental problems--it's a mater of court ordered treatments, evaluations and mental health support until the child is an adult, or a decision to separate the child at some point --not a matter of putting her behind bars.
    Neverfly likes this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    These may be cases of Post Partum Depression
    Why the assumption that she was suffering from PPD? I had linked that article above.
    What assumption? It clearly says "may be a case of." It's trash like this that had me keep you on ignore. You distort wording in order to get a person riled up- then you can easily sit back and point the finger at the person that finally got fed up with your distortions that lead to inaccurate accusations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Just because no harm is done does not mean it's acceptable or legal. I can do three times the speed limit past my kid's school in my car just as school lets out and I can be lucky enough to not hit any of the kids coming out of the school. No harm was done, why should I get a ticket or lose my license?

    I just think that attitude is lazy and we would then start seeing people copying it and doing it, because there would be this tacit approval that it's acceptable or okay to do for photos. After all, if you just get a warning, who gives a shit? But you'd think twice if you know if you get caught, it's a felony.
    You made my point for me. If you speed past a school You Don't Get Charged With A Felony, Do You?
    You might get a warning or even, a class C ticket if you're a repeat offender or really give the officer a hard time. You don't get arrested and charged with a Felony. You only get that if harm is done.
    So why are you using a reasonable example to justify extreme action?
    You would be charged with reckless endangerment and end up with a criminal record and could lose your license for life. Same can happen if they catch you drinking and driving, even if no one is hurt. Or driving with your kids strapped to the roof of the car because the kids thought it'd be fun.

    A couple hailing from Fort Wayne, Indiana have been arrested after they were spotted driving with four children strapped to the roof of their car. On Monday night, witnesses called the authorities after they saw the car leave a liquor store parking lot with the kids tied down.
    One witness stated "They were strapped down with one of those straps you crank on a semi to hold down lumber. They were strapped with that thing, wiggling and wobbling down the street".
    The children made a statement to the local news channel, saying they felt riding on the hood of the car would be fun when asked by the parents if they wanted to do it.
    No one was hurt, so what's the harm? Why arrest them and not just give them a warning? All a bit of fun, isn't it?

    It only takes a few seconds.

    Back on ignore you go, by the way...
    Yay!

    \o/

    I'd say thank you, but you can't read it anyway.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Professor jrmonroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,444
    Maybe "misdemeanor animal endangerment" (if such a thing exists), but not felony animal cruelty. Hopefully, at most, she'll be found not guilty or be found guilty of a lesser included misdemeanor.

    Overzealous authorities really don't realize how a felony conviction can ruin a person's life — finding a place to live, obtaining employment, etc. For the rest of her life, she'll need to bring the photo of what she did and explain to prospective landlords, employers and Romeos, "See, this is what I did that resulted in my felony conviction. We snapped a quick pic and I made sure the pup was never in any danger. We had even named it 'Baby'."

    It's odd ... people can purposely mate dogs to form breeds that are cruel in-and-of themselves — St Bernards and Great Danes live much shortened lives, large breeds in general are known for increased chances of chronic, painful hip dysplasia, flat-faced lap dogs can have eyes that can't drain properly, etc. And yet merely forcing these dogs into existence isn't animal cruelty???

    CIDD — Canine Inherited Disorder Database



    As for the woman dumping the cat in Coventry, the British generally show much sensitivity/compassion toward their animals.
    scoobydoo1 and Neverfly like this.
    Grief is the price we pay for love. (CM Parkes) Our postillion has been struck by lightning. (Unknown) War is always the choice of the chosen who will not have to fight. (Bono) The years tell much what the days never knew. (RW Emerson) Reality is not always probable, or likely. (JL Borges)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Masters Degree mat5592's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    601
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Reminds me of this news story from a couple of years ago:

    BBC News - Woman filmed dumping cat in wheelie bin in Coventry

    This woman was getting online death threats and hate mail over this but was only fined £250 for animal cruelty IIRC. There was a big over reaction from the public but it was quiet a low key minor offence as far as the cops were concerned.
    This one was worse than the one in the OP, honestly.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    And see, the thing is, I'm pretty opposed to animal cruelty.

    I'm not all that keen on human cruelty, either, though. (Two wrongs don't make a right... or some cliche nonsense.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Masters Degree mat5592's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    601
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    It's more a case of if you wouldn't do it to a baby, you shouldn't do it to a puppy.
    Well, I certainly wouldn't feed dog food to a baby...or make a baby do its business outside, either. I guess my morals are messed up.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by mat5592 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    It's more a case of if you wouldn't do it to a baby, you shouldn't do it to a puppy.
    Well, I certainly wouldn't feed dog food to a baby...or make a baby do its business outside, either. I guess my morals are messed up.
    Zing!

    But let me ask you this. Would you put a puppy in a plastic bag for a photo? Is it something you'd ever think to do?

    If the answer is no, why wouldn't you?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by mat5592 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    It's more a case of if you wouldn't do it to a baby, you shouldn't do it to a puppy.
    Well, I certainly wouldn't feed dog food to a baby...or make a baby do its business outside, either. I guess my morals are messed up.
    Baby pees on floor- mat5592 gets a rolled up newspaper to swat babys nose with.

    Ah... The joys of parenthood... All the boy really needs is some Discipline.
    mat5592 likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Masters Degree mat5592's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    601
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mat5592 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    It's more a case of if you wouldn't do it to a baby, you shouldn't do it to a puppy.
    Well, I certainly wouldn't feed dog food to a baby...or make a baby do its business outside, either. I guess my morals are messed up.
    Zing!

    But let me ask you this. Would you put a puppy in a plastic bag for a photo? Is it something you'd ever think to do?

    If the answer is no, why wouldn't you?
    I have actually put cats in plastic bags (not zip-lock but more like a wal-mart bag) several times. They like it. Heck, they usually crawl in them by themselves and and play around in them. But no, I would not post a picture of something like in the OP anywhere because I know people like to make a big deal out of things.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by mat5592 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mat5592 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    It's more a case of if you wouldn't do it to a baby, you shouldn't do it to a puppy.
    Well, I certainly wouldn't feed dog food to a baby...or make a baby do its business outside, either. I guess my morals are messed up.
    Zing!

    But let me ask you this. Would you put a puppy in a plastic bag for a photo? Is it something you'd ever think to do?

    If the answer is no, why wouldn't you?
    I have actually put cats in plastic bags (not zip-lock but more like a wal-mart bag) several times. They like it. Heck, they usually crawl in them by themselves and and play around in them. But no, I would not post a picture of something like in the OP anywhere because I know people like to make a big deal out of things.
    I didn't let my kids (when they were babies and toddlers) or pets anywhere near plastic bags. All it takes is a couple of seconds or if they chew of a small piece and it gets stuck in their windpipe.

    Pets die all the time from suffocation because of plastic bags. It's not something I would do because of that. My kids and my pets aren't worth the risk, even if it is for a photo or a joke.

    To each their own I guess.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post

    It's more a case of if you wouldn't do it to a baby, you shouldn't do it to a puppy.
    You already said that.


    Did you read the article Neverfly linked? She knew it was wrong, but she figured it was the only way to get the puppy to stay still. Experts say the puppy could have suffered from the lack of oxygen.
    Sure, if you leave it in there long enough. You need an expert to tell you that?
    If you see a person putting a baby in a plastic bag for a photo and you see the baby's face jammed into the corner with a small pocket of air, are you going to say it can hold its breath for a few seconds? Is it the same thing? I once saw a guy driving with his little kids standing on the bonnet of the car, like they were surfing. Was on a quiet road and they were all laughing. Were the people who saw it wrong to call the police? Was it ridiculous? We knew the kids were fine. They could have held on for a few seconds, couldn't they?
    Yes, but not if it was dogs on the bonnet.
    My pets are part of my family. Puppies are just as delicate and need to be cared for as much as babies need to be. If it's wrong to put a baby in a plastic bag for a photo, it's wrong to put a puppy in a plastic bag for a photo. The loss of common sense comes when you think it's acceptable to put a puppy in a baggie for a photo and you can tell yourself that it's not like it's a baby. If it was a baby in that bag, no one would bat an eyelid if she was charged. I just don't see why it should be different because it's a puppy.
    Because it's a puppy, not a baby.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Whether it's a puppy or a baby, I think is irrelevant.

    Examples keep getting dished out where danger is possible- avoidable if the act was not committed in the first place- authorities called to the scene by concerned observers... Whatever. The question is does it deserve a Felony?
    The question is not about whether a concerned party might interfere with questionable behavior.
    The question is does concerned interference mean it deserves a Felony?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    If anything, I think it was a felony committed by the cops, and anyone reporting it to the cops, of minding other people's business. If that isn't against the law, it should be.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    If anything, I think it was a felony committed by the cops, and anyone reporting it to the cops, of minding other people's business. If that isn't against the law, it should be.
    They put it on Facebook. Can't blame the cops if people do stupid illegal crap and post it online.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    If anything, I think it was a felony committed by the cops, and anyone reporting it to the cops, of minding other people's business. If that isn't against the law, it should be.
    They put it on Facebook. Can't blame the cops if people do stupid illegal crap and post it online.
    I can and do blame the cops.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    I can and do blame the cops.
    Political Pressure. Cops are as susceptible to it as anyone.
    See, it's not just the cops- but a large volume of people that are, apparently, not only 'ok' with the idea that two people should be felons over this, but actually push for these things to happen.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    When the cops and prosecutors are all insane, and the inmates are running the asylum, justice becomes both tragedy and comedy and loses all sense of respect.

    Can idiocracy be far behind?
    Already present. joc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33 Social Networking Inevitables.... 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Obviously, one of them, this one undesirable. Had the woman showed the photo only to interested folks, friends, family, she (and the dog) would likely be just fine right now. jocular
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,393
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Because it's a puppy, not a baby.
    Why exactly do you feel that is a valid distinction to make?
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Because it's a puppy, not a baby.
    Why exactly do you feel that is a valid distinction to make?
    They are different species. We treat them differently. Why do you feel it is not a valid distinction?
    jocular likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Because it's a puppy, not a baby.
    Why exactly do you feel that is a valid distinction to make?
    They are different species. We treat them differently. Why do you feel it is not a valid distinction?
    Because the consideration of what, exactly, separates human existence from that of lesser-intelligence existence, has become one and the same. In the legal world, a dog run over by a car and killed is an accidental animal death. A kid running out into a busy thoroughfare from between parked cars, giving no driver any chance of an alternative, hit and killed, becomes the object of the most intense of legal and moral consideration, no matter that the driver could have done nothing to alter the chain of events.

    IMO, this is due to the litigenous factor so pervasive today. Lots of hungry lawyers, lots of ridiculously self-centered individuals, loss of respect for others, lack of personal commitment to responsibility, "P.C."-driven attitudes. jocular
    KALSTER and Neverfly like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Tend to agree with you Jocular.

    It's a culture with a deep and fundamental disrespect and under appreciation for life in general, and one in large part based religious-based "people are special according to god" ignorance.

    That being said outside of eating necessary for humans as heterotrophs (which should be done quickly) or in out direct defense, there's really no reason to abuse animals nor accept it as a society.

    Unfortunately there 's probably not other way to get the women the help she problem needs without a felony conviction--a byproduct of our limited and archaic legal system.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    It is a bit hypocritical... We kill a lot of animals not necessarily out of need but convenience, then turn around and charge two people with a felony for making the appearance of danger though the animal was not only not killed but not harmed.

    Society is pretty stupid.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Unfortunately there 's probably not other way to get the women the help she problem needs without a felony conviction--a byproduct of our limited and archaic legal system.
    Not quite understanding what you're saying here. Do you think the woman who put a chihuahua in a baggie needs to be arrested and given psychological help?
    jocular likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,245
    I think this is absolute nonsense. If you have evidence that the dog was actually harmed, sure, do something about it congruent with the severity of the act, but there is no evidence that the puppy was harmed.

    Conflating the lot of humans with that of animals is also a bunch of nonsense. Of course, don't be cruel to animals and punish those who are, but they are not humans. I suppose we should punish people for washing cats or boiling live lobsters now?

    Ridiculous.
    Harold14370 and jocular like this.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    I wonder when children became the property of the state instead of property of the parents?
    jocular likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    I wonder when children became the property of the state instead of property of the parents?
    When children were recognised as having human rights. We do not own our children.

    Not because the child belongs to the State, but because the child has fundamental human rights.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    In archaeological/anthropological studies, infanticide was actually quite common, and still is in parts of Africa. We still have partial birth abortions, and other abortions, but once the child is completely outside the mother, the rules change. This all seems a bit arbitrary to me.

    ..................
    Don't get me wrong, on an emotional level I love the concept of human rights.
    On an intellectual level, my curiosity remains.
    Last edited by sculptor; November 25th, 2013 at 12:13 PM.
    jocular likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Unfortunately there 's probably not other way to get the women the help she problem needs without a felony conviction--a byproduct of our limited and archaic legal system.
    Not quite understanding what you're saying here. Do you think the woman who put a chihuahua in a baggie needs to be arrested and given psychological help?
    Yes
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    ...matter and pixie dust
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,158
    Seems excessive to charge the mom and son with felonies, but a message needs to be crystal clear to the public, as it relates to having a zero tolerance for animal cruelty. Otherwise, situations like this can give sickos out there ideas to do the same or worse, purposely harming animals and posting the pics on Facebook. On another note, some people misuse FB to post all kinds of inappropriate behaviors. I think that is what drives some people to post outrageous pics, because it will get them a lot of "likes." Sad, but true. On another note, yea the dog is fine but think "Baby" deserves a smarter, and more nurturing owner.
    Ascended likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,486
    Perhaps they need to invent a new offence of 'stupid' and charge them with it, a charge carrying a sentence of education regarding the acceptable ways to treat children and pets, oh and how not to put children or pets in plastic bags!!! No but they need to fully understand and be aware of how stupid that was, a shock so they'll learn and remember not be so stupid in the future certainly. Beyond this though I think further punishment is probably going to far, it seems pretty clear there was no malice involved.
    “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.”

    Bertrand Russell
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Beginning with the first Iraq incursion, that continuing, then Afghanistan, America's Leaders were responsible for thousands of human deaths, as well as similar numbers of animal deaths.

    What will the charges brought against those responsible consist of? jocular
    sculptor and Neverfly like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,486
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    Beginning with the first Iraq incursion, that continuing, then Afghanistan, America's Leaders were responsible for thousands of human deaths, as well as similar numbers of animal deaths.

    What will the charges brought against those responsible consist of? jocular
    Perhaps really the acts of sending people to war resulting in their deaths or the deaths of animals is a more of a political debate about either national or international law and thus it possibly shouldn't really be compared in the same way as acts such as this example by individuals.

    But back to the dog in the bag example, to actually get convicted of most crimes the prosecution need to demonstate two elements in law both an actus reus which translates from the Greek as "Action of Guilt" or "Guilty Action", this is the action of doing something that is criminal or the crime for which they have been charged and the second element of mens rea, this translates as "Guilty Mind", basically meaning they were aware of that what they were doing was wrong or a crime.

    Whilst certainly in cases such as this there is certainly evidence to support demonstating an actus reus I seriously doubt they could clearly demonstate mens rea.

    This is why for cases like this particular one perhaps they could have specific laws that deal with such stupid, but none malicious acts.
    “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.”

    Bertrand Russell
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    In other words, Political Authoritive figures are often immune from prosecution unless another military takes over and beheads them.
    jocular likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    But back to the dog in the bag example, to actually get convicted of most crimes the prosecution need to demonstate two elements in law both an actus reus which translates from the Greek as "Action of Guilt" or "Guilty Action", this is the action of doing something that is criminal or the crime for which they have been charged and the second element of mens rea, this translates as "Guilty Mind", basically meaning they were aware of that what they were doing was wrong or a crime.

    Whilst certainly in cases such as this there is certainly evidence to support demonstating an actus reus I seriously doubt they could clearly demonstate mens rea.
    From the article linked by Neverfly in the OP:

    She told reporters that she knew it was wrong, but she couldn't get the little guy to hold still any other way, according to KRQE.
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly
    In other words, Political Authoritive figures are often immune from prosecution unless another military takes over and beheads them.
    That depends. Do you live in a backward country that has no legal system and is corrupt, and requires constant military intervention? Unless you live in such a country, the answer to your question would be no.
    Ascended likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    swaddling clothes
    jocular likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,486
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    But back to the dog in the bag example, to actually get convicted of most crimes the prosecution need to demonstate two elements in law both an actus reus which translates from the Greek as "Action of Guilt" or "Guilty Action", this is the action of doing something that is criminal or the crime for which they have been charged and the second element of mens rea, this translates as "Guilty Mind", basically meaning they were aware of that what they were doing was wrong or a crime.

    Whilst certainly in cases such as this there is certainly evidence to support demonstating an actus reus I seriously doubt they could clearly demonstate mens rea.
    From the article linked by Neverfly in the OP:

    She told reporters that she knew it was wrong, but she couldn't get the little guy to hold still any other way, according to KRQE.
    Cheers, I didn't actually realise they would have been so stupid as to tell the cops they knew it was wrong, but then hey we are talking about people who would put a dog in a bag!
    “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.”

    Bertrand Russell
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Cheers, I didn't actually realise they would have been so stupid as to tell the cops they knew it was wrong, but then hey we are talking about people who would put a dog in a bag!
    I don't put a lot of stock into the articles claims as to what they said.

    When a person is being talked to heavily by police officers threatening them with Felonies and such, they get very liable to say whatever they think will help or whatever they think the officer wants to hear.
    The officer will likely then report in his summary that they said whatever is the most incriminating, while ignoring the rest, even though it's buried "on record."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    swaddling clothes
    Wattles. Close, anyhow. joc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    But back to the dog in the bag example, to actually get convicted of most crimes the prosecution need to demonstate two elements in law both an actus reus which translates from the Greek as "Action of Guilt" or "Guilty Action", this is the action of doing something that is criminal or the crime for which they have been charged and the second element of mens rea, this translates as "Guilty Mind", basically meaning they were aware of that what they were doing was wrong or a crime.

    Whilst certainly in cases such as this there is certainly evidence to support demonstating an actus reus I seriously doubt they could clearly demonstate mens rea.
    From the article linked by Neverfly in the OP:

    She told reporters that she knew it was wrong, but she couldn't get the little guy to hold still any other way, according to KRQE.
    Cheers, I didn't actually realise they would have been so stupid as to tell the cops they knew it was wrong, but then hey we are talking about people who would put a dog in a bag!
    I really feel the "type" of people is not in focus here. Their "type" is typical of the greater bulk of individuals I have known over an entire lifetime! They act without maliciousness, circumstances make them victim, they react honestly after the fact, fearing retribution by those they have feared all their lives. They are typical everyday folks, living the typical "American Dream", experience a sudden puncture in it's tires, and are thrust into a vortex of confusion, fear, and loathing of consequence.

    The really big question here is.... : Will Harold bear me out here? joc
    Neverfly likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    The officer will likely then report in his summary that they said whatever is the most incriminating, while ignoring the rest, even though it's buried "on record."
    Most police are going to file a complete report, not only including what supports their cause for questioning or detention, but also enough so a prosecutor or their supervisor has a comprehensive report to make a good decision about what if anything needs to happen next. They aren't going to ignore anything.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    They act without maliciousness, circumstances make them victim, they react honestly after the fact, fearing retribution by those they have feared all their lives. They are typical everyday folks, living the typical "American Dream", experience a sudden puncture in it's tires, and are thrust into a vortex of confusion, fear, and loathing of consequence.
    Very well said!
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    The officer will likely then report in his summary that they said whatever is the most incriminating, while ignoring the rest, even though it's buried "on record."
    Most police are going to file a complete report, not only including what support their cause for detention, but also enough so a prosecutor or their supervisor has a comprehensive report to make a good decision about what if anything needs to happen next.
    As I said, "Buried on record."
    Not everyone takes the time to read a full boring report when business makes time short and a synopsis or summary works for their needs.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: February 15th, 2013, 10:38 AM
  2. Who is top dog overall.
    By greg858 in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: June 12th, 2007, 03:35 AM
  3. I have this blind dog
    By benign psychosis in forum Biology
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: March 7th, 2007, 01:45 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •