Banned From Owning Animals

[Vladimir]

First: A fine would be appropriate. I'm not sure of an amount in Euros as I have little frame of reference when it comes to that. If the critter was harmed a stiff fine and maybe a ban on ownership would be appropriate. That's what I was trying to find out in regards to this recent news story I just came across.

You didn't "just ask" about the law. You made pretty clear that you think it would be inappropriate to punish people for torturing a hamster:


The responses made clear that most patrons who bothered to respond do not share your view on the issue.

I believe I said

Animal cruelty is wrong

and asked:

is this a realistic sentence

The former states that my beliefs are the same as most of those here and the latter clearly addressed the issue of law. I know "torture" is a fashionable word now which to some means "disrespectful" (McCain). You're letting your emotions control you and twisting my statements (not an attack but I can't see how you're making those conclusions). And why did you quote "just ask"? I never wrote that.

[Ser Clegane]

OK, Vladimir - as you seem to believe that I misinterpreted your original statement, let me ask some questions:

Do you believe the guys should receive punishment for this particular "prank"?

Do you think the punishment they received was too harsh or was it not harsh enough?

[Ja'chyra]

Most snake owners don't feed their pets live prey as it easier to keep frozen animals than live ones. Also, there is a very real possibility of injury to the snake if you put a live rat in the tank when the snake isn't hungry.

[Vladimir]

OK, Vladimir - as you seem to believe that I misinterpreted your original statement, let me ask some questions:

Do you believe the guys should receive punishment for this particular "prank"?

Do you think the punishment they received was too harsh or was it not harsh enough?

1: Hell yes! There is no right to be stupid.

2: I think of it in terms of degree: Intent; there appears to be no intent to do harm, Effect; the animal was not harmed, Enforcement; it's not "illegal" if it's unenforceable, I can't think of a good way to go about that in this situation. A moderate fine and public disgrace should be enough in this situation. Maybe some tangent charges for using the government postage system as well. If the effect had been lethal and the intent was to do harm I would support a suspended prison sentence and probation. In that case if they get so much as a speeding ticket they'd land in jail (I believe). Something funny from the AP too:

TOKYO (AP) — Gohan and Aochan make strange bedfellows: one's a 3.5-inch dwarf hamster; the other is a four-foot rat snake. Zookeepers at Tokyo's Mutsugoro Okoku zoo presented the hamster — whose name means "meal" in Japanese — to Aochan as a tasty morsel in October, after the snake refused to eat frozen mice.

But instead of indulging, Aochan decided to make friends with the furry rodent, according to keeper Kazuya Yamamoto. The pair have shared a cage since.

"I've never seen anything like it. Gohan sometimes even climbs onto Aochan to take a nap on his back," Yamamoto said.

Aochan, a 2-year-old male Japanese rat snake, eventually developed an appetite for frozen rodents but has so far shown no signs of gobbling up Gohan — despite her name.

"We named her Gohan as a joke," Yamamoto chuckled. "But I don't think there's any danger. Aochan seems to enjoy Gohan's company very much."

The Tokyo zoo also keeps a range of mostly livestock animals, and promotes "cross-breed interaction," according to Yamamoto.

But Gohan and Aochan's case was "was a complete accident," Yamamoto said.

Can't we all just get along? Oh and if you want some good examples of really wacky law just look at some of the stuff that comes from southern California.

[Tribesman]

is this a realistic sentence

Lucky they were not in Louisiana , they could have ended up with 10 years hard labour and a $25,000 fine .
Daves link

[Devastatin Dave]

is this a realistic sentence

Lucky they were not in Louisiana , they could have ended up with 10 years hard labour and a $25,000 fine .
Daves link

See, i have my uses, rare and far between, but a broke watch is right twice a day.

[Soulforged]

The desicion was fitting. There's nothing unreasonable here. We can discuss the logical force of those laws protecting animals, but not this sentence and not the reason of the law. The law exists only to enforce and create a general moral sense, killing animals for pleasure is repugnant to the general morality, that's all.

[Slyspy]

A fine and a ban on owning animals would be most appropriate if you ask me. Torturing animals is not OK, even if the animal is only a hamster. It suggests a tendency to bully and abuse generally. Interestingly I have in the past ordered aquatic pets (fish and frogs mainly) through the post. The guidelines for such things are very strict and courier services are used.

By the way, any fine would be paid in Pounds Sterling not in Euros since this is Britain not Europe. Thanks.

[Efrem]

I don't believe in animal cruelty laws, they are animals not humans, maybe once 9/10 africans aren't reaching the age of 30 we can worry about animals, until then screw them humans are more important. That said 10 years without being allowed animals seems very fair to me.

hahhaha Hamster through the mail is hilarious. THey should have given it a nice cage and water and stuff to eat though .

[bmolsson]

Actually, there are a more deep fact with sending animals via mail or undeclared freight. Animal smuggling. It's cruel, common and brings in high profits. It is also a health risk. It's just not ok to send live animals via mail, not only for the sake of cruelty.
When it comes to ownership of animals, I don't think that it should be a common "right" to own animals or pets. You should have proven you are able to do so before you are allowed......

[Sardo]

I don't believe in animal cruelty laws, they are animals not humans, maybe once 9/10 africans aren't reaching the age of 30 we can worry about animals, until then screw them humans are more important.

You don't want 9/10 Africans to reach the age of 30?

Anyway, caring for the wellbeing of animals does not exclude caring about humanitarian issues. This kind of attitude is just plain silly.
I also fail to see what's so hilarious about a hamster in the mail. You take a small, defenseless creature and put it in a traumatizing and life-threatening situation. Even if it is 'only a hamster', that kind of thing reveals a lot about you as a person.
And these guys didn't give it a nice cage and water and stuff to eat.

[GiantMonkeyMan]

that was the wrong thing to do... these people deserve what sentance they've got

it was a little funny though

[Ja'chyra]

I don't believe in animal cruelty laws, they are animals not humans, maybe once 9/10 africans aren't reaching the age of 30 we can worry about animals, until then screw them humans are more important. That said 10 years without being allowed animals seems very fair to me.

hahhaha Hamster through the mail is hilarious. THey should have given it a nice cage and water and stuff to eat though .

I didn't know the two were mutually exclusive?

So humans are more important, don't most religions teach that ALL life is equal? I know christianity teaches that although you are allowed to eat animals they should also be protected, isn't there a saying about sparrows?

[Efrem]

So you suggest we blindly follow the bible? What century are you from?

[Ja'chyra]

So you suggest we blindly follow the bible? What century are you from?

That's quite a leap from what I wrote my friend, or maybe I expressed myself poorly, either way, no that's not what I suggest. I was merely wondering where the thought that animals have no rights comes from?

[Soulforged]

I don't believe in animal cruelty laws, they are animals not humans, maybe once 9/10 africans aren't reaching the age of 30 we can worry about animals, until then screw them humans are more important. That said 10 years without being allowed animals seems very fair to me.

What's your disbelief based upon? What's that final part meant to be, that somehow killing an animal in sheer demonstration of cruelty and pleasure is somehow an unbreakeable freedom that humans have? Why shouldn't I forbid this stupid irrational behavior and also help the africans? And this is even without entering technical facts here.

[Efrem]

Tisn't right, people who do that shouldn't be allowed animals, But we should be focusing on other more important problems.

World Hunger is more important than Animal Cruelty.

Actually I take everything I've said back as I realised last night that as was never really allowed a pet I can't really understand the bond, so yeah I'm sorry.

But I still feel a human life is worth more than an animals life, just the way I was raised I guess.

[Kralizec]

Sure there are worse things then animal cruelty, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't pursue it. The standards by wich we hold pet owners aren't exactly big- as long as you don't do something blatantly stupid like setting your cat on fire, you'll ususally walk away from it. Sending a hamster away on a mail box- where they very well could die slowly from either suffocation or dehydration- is more then enough proof that these pricks aren't responsible enough for keeping animals.

[hellenes]

I agree that the penalty was appropriate and even lenient, for me the animal being a hamster which is a small land Mammal makes all of us feel compassion for it since we are mammals ourselves, now we wouldnt react in the same manner if there was an incect or a reptile, the difference in reaction would be small but noticable...

Hellenes

[Soulforged]

But I still feel a human life is worth more than an animals life, just the way I was raised I guess.

And I agree with you, as well as the judges, since they imposed a fine and a prohibition wich cannot be absolute given the dynamics of social life.

[Slyspy]

Tisn't right, people who do that shouldn't be allowed animals, But we should be focusing on other more important problems.

World Hunger is more important than Animal Cruelty.

Actually I take everything I've said back as I realised last night that as was never really allowed a pet I can't really understand the bond, so yeah I'm sorry.

But I still feel a human life is worth more than an animals life, just the way I was raised I guess.

If they had been executed for animal cruelty then your argument would make more sense. There is no need to choose between animal and human rights. I don't know where you are getting this from. We have a paternal duty to take care of our animals, that is all. Very few, outside of PETA, hold the belief that animals are equal to humans.

[BDC]

Domesticated rats make excellent pets. Easily trained and very lovable. They bite less than hamsters.

Only sometimes. Rats can be evil buggers too.

Too long around humans. They have picked up personalities...