• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

What would you do to this guy?

Started by ksm32, August 29, 2014, 12:26:31 AM

ksm32

http://youtu.be/m8IDb5NXRjk

Even if you're not a "Dog Person". How shall you sentence this specimen of human poop.    ?

Kelt

Nothing.

I'd rather we focused our energies on dealing with people who abuse children.


ksm32

Quote from: Kelt on August 29, 2014, 12:47:41 AM
Nothing.

I'd rather we focused our energies on dealing with people who abuse children.

I would be able to divide my attention to both, and have an opinion on both. What a cold soul you must be. NOTHING.

onan

Show me a person that treats animals cruelly and I will show you a person that also abuses people, usually weaker than the perp.

Kelt

Quote from: ksm32 on August 29, 2014, 01:01:45 AM
I would be able to divide my attention to both, and have an opinion on both. What a cold soul you MUST be. NOTHING.

No, I consider humans to be of more importance than animals, and I understand that there's finite resources and energy that can be devoted to protecting animals and children.

Given, as I mentioned, I consider humans to be more important than animals, I would devote all those resources and energy to protecting children, and if there's any time left over, animals. 

I have no interest in elevating animals to the importance of humans, unlike those who genuinely believe a dog is as important as a child. 

What absolute morons those people MUST be.


Gd5150

Humans that treat animals poorly don't deserve to live. This post isn't about kids, it's about animals.

If you want to discuss child abuse, make a new post with an Alec Baldwin video.

Kelt

This thread is about what you would do to a guy who is a bit of a dick to a dog... my response detailed what I would do, and why.

If that's beyond your grasp then maybe you should start a thread called, "Please explain simple things to me."

Incidentally, we breed, slaughter, and eat animals on an industrial scale... it's safe to say that, unless you're a vegan, you treat animals poorly.  So, given your notion that 'people who treat animals poorly don't deserve to live', I don't know... maybe put a bit more thought into your thoughts.

Anyway, since you like videos, here's one for you.

What would you do to someone who treats cows like this?

http://youtu.be/yaWajdBEuy8

VtaGeezer

Quote from: onan on August 29, 2014, 03:40:28 AM
Show me a person that treats animals cruelly and I will show you a person that also abuses people, usually weaker than the perp.
This ^
It's a power thing. Maybe more PSAs would make the abusing bastards realize they're heads are fucked up. Humane Society ads on TV focus on fund raising; not raising awareness with the perps.  A little "do you realize what an asshole you are?" treatment might  wake some of them up.

Kelt

Quote from: VtaGeezer on August 29, 2014, 12:23:11 PM
This ^
It's a power thing. Maybe more PSAs would make the abusing bastards realize they're heads are fucked up. Humane Society ads on TV focus on fund raising; not raising awareness with the perps.  A little "do you realize what an asshole you are?" treatment might  wake some of them up.

Sadists are going to hurt anyone weaker than themselves, regardless of whether it's a dog, a kid, or a spouse.  That's kinda their thing. The chances are that they know they're douchebags already, and I doubt raising their awareness of this is going to have any effect on their behaviour.

And here's something to consider.

If the guy had simply pulled out a gun and shot the dog in the head would that make him a better or a worse person?

I ask this because there are quite a lot of people who hunt... because it gives them a thrill.

So what's the difference between beating a dog in an elevator for thrills and shooting a deer in a forest for thrills?

The 'sadist' in the elevator is getting the same thrill as the 'hunter' in the forest... the only tangible difference is that the dog isn't dead whereas the deer is.

Would those who want the immediate execution of all dog-beaters also call for the execution of all hunters?

And if that's the case, how about guys in a slaughterhouse who fire steel bolts into the brains of about a hundred cows a day?

They don't even do it for a thrill, they do it for cash rewards.

Should they be executed with the hunters and the sadists, since they're basically paid to be cruel to animals.

I'd like to see the sliding scale of 'execute/do not execute'.  That would be interesting for me to see put down on paper.

I'd like to see how that particular mindset functions.


Quote from: Kelt on August 29, 2014, 01:15:42 PM
beating a dog in an elevator for thrills

Now you're just being hysterical.  The dog did something to upset him.  In between kicking it and yanking the leash, he can be seen talking to, and then bending down and scolding the dog.  I don't condone that kind of disciplinary behaviour, but none of us has any idea what the dog did before that.  Including you.

Kelt

Hysterical?

So in one thread I'm accused of both hysteria and coldness.  That's a good one.  I'm like Spock in 'Amok Time'.  Sweet.

You have to try to understand that I'm not the arbiter of fact and not-fact.  It's possible he was scolding the dog and didn't even get a thrill when he was yanking at the dog's leash... he was maybe dying on the inside that he had to act that way.  So when you tell me I don't know, well, you're kind of stating the obvious there.

What I was doing was framing an argument where the guy gets a thrill from hurting dogs (and he might not be getting a thrill, remember), juxtaposed against the thrill hunters get when they blow an animals brains out.  And, hell, maybe hunters don't get a thrill, maybe they're just going through the motions in order to be accepted by their peers, and every time they blow a deer's brains out they die on the inside, like the guy in the elevator.  Or not like the guy on the elevator.

So, no, not being hysterical, simply framing an argument in terms that the other poster will (hopefully) understand and not feel too threatened by.

EDIT: I would argue that demanding the execution of someone for being a bit of a dick to a dog... now that's hysteria.

Quote from: Kelt on August 29, 2014, 01:46:08 PM
You have to try to understand that I'm not the arbiter of fact and not-fact. 

No, you're the guy who called him a sadist and asserted that he was abusing the dog for "thrills."  That's utter bullshit, and I don't mind being the arbiter of that fact.

Again, I don't condone that man's treatment of the dog in any way, but I've seen dogs beaten to death with shovels in the Middle East, and read stories about Michael Vick torturing dogs to death, after torturing them for profit while they were alive.  The reaction to this incident I've been reading (demanding criminal charges or that he be fired) seems overwrought by comparison.  Just about everyone voicing an opinion is exaggerating the significance of this incident.  Including you, at least in those comments.

Kelt

Ah, but you're not. Not at all, despite your seeming need to be so.

If you want me to cover every base possible because there are some posters who need things explained to them to the nth degree then you're shit out of luck here, I'm afraid.

Quote from: Kelt on August 29, 2014, 02:10:58 PM
If you want me to cover every base possible because there are some posters who need things explained to them to the nth degree then you're shit out of luck here, I'm afraid.

"Stop posting bullshit."

How did you manage to transform that into wanting you to "cover every base possible"?  Well, maybe because you got called out and are standing there with your dick in your hand, and saying that other posters are stupid is all you have.

Kelt

Wow, you certainly have a pretty high regard for your own omniscience, knowing what others are thinking and what their intentions are when posting, and whatnot.

Have you always felt you have full knowledge of what others are thinking, or is this a recent manifestation of other problems?

you seem quite frustrated either way.




Kelt

Quote from: DigitalPigSnuggler on August 29, 2014, 02:03:40 PM
No, you're the guy who called him a sadist and asserted that he was abusing the dog for "thrills." 

I'm not sure if you'll handle this well at all, but anyway...

I called him a 'sadist', the inference being that he may or may not be a sadist.

That's kinda fucked your little tirade a bit, eh?

Rhetorical question.

Well, well... look at me having to explain shit to the nth degree.




Quote from: Kelt on August 29, 2014, 02:26:41 PM
That's kinda fucked your little tirade a bit, eh?

Maybe, if you'd posted it straightaway rather than four posts later, when it makes you look like you are grasping for a way out.

My verdict: air ball.  There goes the shoe endorsement deal, LeBron!

Kelt

Why would I post a clarification "straightaway" of a term ('sadist') that I wouldn't use until several posts in?

I used the term 'sadist' the very first time, believing (wrongly, it transpires) that most people would understand the inference connected with placing a word in inverted commas.

Unfortunately I'm not blessed with your (albeit faulty) omniscience, so there was no way I could know that you didn't know that, necessitating pre-clarification of terms I hadn't yet used.

But I do see where communication broke down now, certainly, although I can't promise to accommodate  linguistic clarifications to this sort of degree in future. 

Maybe just open an English textbook or something?




I enjoy these threads.  Stick up compelling facts and arguments, and the thread goes nowhere.  Insult a poster's character and I've got pages of reading material.

Kelt

Quote from: Georgie For President 2216 on August 29, 2014, 02:44:11 PM
I enjoy these threads.  Stick up compelling facts and arguments, and the thread goes nowhere.  Insult a poster's character and I've got pages of reading material.

Whoa, whoa, whoa... did you run these 'facts'* by DPS?

He'll decide what are and aren't facts, thanks, sunshine :)



* **(disclaimer) the inverted commas suggest these facts may not be facts.



** Asterisks donate footnotes at the end of the text


Quote from: Kelt on August 29, 2014, 02:40:26 PM
Why would I post a clarification "straightaway" of a term ('sadist') that I wouldn't use until several posts in?

Your problems in communicating coherently to everyone are not my responsibility.  Consider that the comment element in those problems is you.  Now, why would THAT be? 

Kelt

Quote from: DigitalPigSnuggler on August 29, 2014, 02:55:04 PM
Your problems in communicating coherently are not my responsibility.  Consider that the comment element in those problems is you.  Now, why would THAT be?

I'm sorry, I don't know what a comment element is, so I can't give it any consideration.

Anyway, you were saying something about "communicating coherently"?

Do go on.

Quote from: Kelt on August 29, 2014, 02:57:14 PM
I'm sorry, I don't know what a comment element is, so I can't give it any consideration.

No interest in self-reflection and personal improvement?  I'm shocked.  Fuckin shocked, I tell you.

Did you write this?


Kelt

Quote from: DigitalPigSnuggler on August 29, 2014, 03:10:01 PM
No interest in self-reflection and personal improvement?  I'm shocked.  Fuckin shocked, I tell you.

Did you write this?



Currently I'm more interested in discovering what a "comment element" might be.

That I might give it due consideration, you understand.

Always the proactive go-getter, I Googled "comment element" and it transpires this is an html tag which allows one to hide text from IE (3+) until said tag is closed.

Well, now... that doesn't seem particularly relevant to the discussion.

Quote from: onan on August 29, 2014, 03:40:28 AM
Show me a person that treats animals cruelly and I will show you a person that also abuses people, usually weaker than the perp.


Yes.

And don't people abusing animals as kids go on to abuse people?

Quote from: Kelt on August 29, 2014, 03:12:56 PM
Currently I'm more interested in discovering what a "comment element" might be.

Well, do enjoy being interested, and let us know if you ever rouse yourself to actually finding out what it means.

Meanwhile, suck an extra crispy bag of [EDIT: sorry, forgot that this thread is in the moderated section].

Quote from: Paper*Boy on August 29, 2014, 03:12:58 PM

Yes.

And don't people abusing animals as kids go on to abuse people?

So, you're saying that we can presume that Kelt abused animals as a kid?

onan

In the video, the man kicks the dog and at one point chokes the dog by lifting it off the floor by the leash. Neither of those behaviors are effective in training a dog for anything other than teaching mistrust.

To leash train a dog, all that is needed is to learn to give a quick snap of the wrist to mildly jostle the collar or harness.

What that guy did was react to his own frustration, no matter what the dog had done prior, his attempt to train was ignorant at best, and at worst a personality disorder.

Is the guy evil incarnate? I dunno. I do know he needs some anger management training.

Shooting an animal for trophy is wrong in my opinion. Shooting an animal for food or protection of livestock is appropriate. I would shoot Old Yellow. ;)

Quote from: onan on August 29, 2014, 03:43:10 PM
What that guy did was react to his own frustration, no matter what the dog had done prior, his attempt to train was ignorant at best, and at worst a personality disorder.

That's how I see it too.

Quote from: onan on August 29, 2014, 03:43:10 PM
I would shoot Old Yellow.

You mean Old Yeller?  Reported.


Kelt

Quote from: DigitalPigSnuggler on August 29, 2014, 03:21:40 PM
Well, do enjoy being interested, and let us know if you ever rouse yourself to actually finding out what it means.

Meanwhile, suck an extra crispy bag of [EDIT: sorry, forgot that this thread is in the moderated section].

I'm always happy to learn new stuff, it's great... I'd recommend it in fact.

So what is a comment element?

You should be able to explain it inside of one, brief sentence what with your 'advanced' communication skills and all.


Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod