http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25797913-661,00.html
Now according to Rothbardians this guy cannot be jailed because he "owned" the puppy.
I want to see the frothing-at-the-mouth lunatics try and defend a puppy having its ears and tail hacked off.
Hopefully there will not be many of you because you are a weight on the shoulders of sane libertarians.
lol
do we get free cheezeburger in socielism?
So you're saying jail is the only available method of punishment?
Maybe you also want to arrest all pet owners that sterilize their pets? Or how about the government owned facilities that routinely kill strays?
If I hear not allowed much oftener; said Sam, I'm going to get angry.
J.R.R.Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings
If you're squeamish about this puppy, don't find out what ranchers do to male calves!
The fallacies of intellectual communism, a compilation - On the nature of power
Who was the owner?
Are you conflating aesthetics/etiquette and morality, Curlz? Why yes, yes you are. Don't do that again.
Natalie:Maybe you also want to arrest all pet owners that sterilize their pets?
No. Why would I want to do that? I'm a veterinary student so i'm likely to be doing those procedures myself.
Natalie:Or how about the government owned facilities that routinely kill strays?
They euthanase strays if they cannot be re-homed. This is preferable to releasing them on the street where they are likely to get hit by cars or starve.
The problem isn't killing. The problem is cruelty. Try and understand the difference.
Knight_of_BAAWA:Are you conflating aesthetics/etiquette and morality, Curlz? Why yes, yes you are. Don't do that again.
No. I'm saying that when a puppy has it's ears and tail hacked off it causes the puppy to agonise. Hence it is deserving of punishment.
And only jail and fines are punishment, hmmmmm? Is that what you're going to say next? Because if you are: you're sorely mistaken. And don't give me "well, that just means you think it's ok to do that to a puppy", because it doesn't.
Now that I've cut off your escape routes, I suggest you start thinking about other options. What else can humans do to punish someone?
Yeah, we libertarians believe that all puppies should be earless... Didn't you know?
"If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion."
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
I suppose killing a dog isn't cruelty. Btw, should we also jail people who crush ants by stepping on them. crush spiders, or mass-kill termites in home-made gas chambers aka fumigation?
To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process. Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!" Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."
Knight_of_BAAWA:And only jail and fines are punishment, hmmmmm?
I'm absolutely open to creative punishments. Instead of jail and fines we could cut the guy's ears off with no anaesthetic and put a device around his ankle which shocks him every time he thinks about animal cruelty.
Daniel:I suppose killing a dog isn't cruelty. Btw, should we also jail people who crush ants by stepping on them. crush spiders, or mass-kill termites in home-made gas chambers aka fumigation?
No. That would be ridiculous.
If you think cutting off a dog's ears and stepping on an ant is the same thing, you lack common sense.
Curlz31:I'm absolutely open to creative punishments. Instead of jail and fines we could cut the guy's ears off with no anaesthetic and put a device around his ankle which shocks him every time he thinks about animal cruelty.
Curlz31:If you think cutting off a dog's ears and stepping on an ant is the same thing, you lack common sense.
True.
So you favor the mass-killing termites, but not the mass-killing of dogs? If so, why?
the pathos is even more effective if the puppy is blind (for future reference).
for a libertarian response. I would choose to live in a community where this sort of behavior was contractually forbidden. the price to pay for breaking certain behaviors (hurting children/animals) would be death. don't want to sign a contract with a death penalty clause? live in a different community.
What is your plan? a righteous crusade? Where you violate people's property and privacy to chek if they are mutilating any puppies? great excuse for a totalitarian state you have there. think of the children.
Knight_of_BAAWA:Replacing one form of sadism with another is not a very good option, don't you think?
Curlz' doublethink is indicative of why nothing changes. You have people more obsessed with the Rothbardian position on the treatment of monkies, than eugenics and genocide against whole swathes of the human population.
Is it any wonder the statists are winning?
Buy the dog if you think it is suffering abuse. Certainly you seem to care for it more then the owner.
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
You guys are missing an easy solution for vice: Just boycott this fellow. Protest his behavior, never trade with him, disassociate from his ilk.
This is apparently a Man Talk Forum: No Women Allowed!
Telpeurion's Disliked Person of the Week: David Kramer
Telpeurion:You guys are missing an easy solution for vice: Just boycott this fellow. Protest his behavior, never trade with him, disassociate from his ilk.
There is also that. Make a publication that announces who this man is then dog dealers know they are selling their dogs to an abusive owner.
"People often say to me: Professor Rothbard, how do you know that business cycles are caused by fiat currency and other intervention in the market by governments? I tell them that I don't really know. But that the only other cause is probably puppies. Aggregate demand goes down because all of those damn dogs people have distract them from their consumption habits with their big brown eyes! If only we could find a way to buy puppies but also make them less distracting aesthetically! Of course, if this is true, I have to go back to being a statist. But no one must know this side of me. Did I just write this outloud! Dang!"
- Murray Rothbard (What has the Capitalism Done to Our Dogs? pp. 12039)
You suggested alternative punishments. I gave you some. Why are you now accusing me of sadism? Are reparations not acceptable to you?
Reparations to whom?
the article could be fake.
the 'owner' of the dog could have done this or someone else could have done this to an unowned animal.
animals are capable of rather startling acts of pain an cruelty to each other.
for some, human to animal 'violence' is particulary disturbing - i guess especially among domesticated animals.
i personally dont believe a human can judge or should punish another human for animal cruelty - especially if the animal isnt property. if thats the case then humans should seek redress in some way for property damage.
for me...i would be curious about why a human, outside of hunting or religious cermony, would just harm beasts.
maybe they have emotional or human problems that could be tended to, who knows? maybe they are just weird or different but wouldnt harm anythig else?
this should be an advocacy issue rather than a government penal or the aforementioned punishment issue.
if teh DDT issue of years past was true alleged eagle egg thinning was of great concern but a million plus abortions in the us was freedom to choose.
Knight_of_BAAWA:Reparations to whom?
Nice try.
Veterinary bills for a start. And how about the costs of looking after the dog for the rest of it's life.
If a father bashes his baby and then goes to prison, who are the reparations for?
The reparations are for the sane and moral people who find this behavior sickening and abhorrent.
What was done to this dog is a terrible thing, and a good example of Man's capacity for indifference to suffering, which is one of the big problems faced by our species. Libertarian philosophy, however, does not support punishing the perpetrator, because no rights have been violated. The puppy is property, not a being with rights, per se (a dog cannot enter into a contract, social or otherwise).
However, libertarian philosophy is what it is because it values reason over emotion when it comes to using coercion (the law) to limit human behavior. Indifference to cruelty, as much as it may incense a decent person, isn't something that can be fixed by coercion. You cannot awaken empathy with a fine. Fortunately for us, as well as others made to suffer, the respect for reason that would govern a libertarian society's thinking would probably have more effectiveness in propagating an attitude of respect for the well-being of animals. Compassion is, ultimately, the fruit of reflection.
The Rev
Lifes a piece of shit, when you look at it
Life's a laugh and death's a joke, it's true
Just remember it's all a show, keep em laughing as you go
Just remember that the last laugh is on you
sthomper: animals are capable of rather startling acts of pain an cruelty to each other. for some, human to animal 'violence' is particulary disturbing - i guess especially among domesticated animals.
You are making the mistake of an artificial distiction between cruetly that occurs in so-called "nature" and that which occurs in human civilisation.
I make no such distiction. Humans evolved like any other animal. Every object, act and living thing on this earth is nature. But within nature, there is right and wrong. There is good and evil.
I don't accept any form of cruelty, whether it occurs in the humanless jungles of subsaharan africa or on the streets of the Melbourne suburbs.
I reject environmentalism as illogical lunacy. And in this way you can see how environmentalism and animal rights are diametrically opposed.
Curlz31:Nice try.
Curlz31: Knight_of_BAAWA:Reparations to whom? Nice try. Veterinary bills for a start. And how about the costs of looking after the dog for the rest of it's life.
This seems to imply that the reparation is to the victim (the owner) for the damage done to the property (the dog).
And you'd be right in implying this.
Irish Liberty Forum
Curlz31: Nice try. Veterinary bills for a start. And how about the costs of looking after the dog for the rest of it's life. If a father bashes his baby and then goes to prison, who are the reparations for? The reparations are for the sane and moral people who find this behavior sickening and abhorrent.
You don't know what the word "reparation" means.
reparation |ˌrepəˈrā sh ən|noun1 the making of amends for a wrong one has done, by paying money toor otherwise helping those who have been wronged : the courts required a convicted offender to make financial reparation to his victim.• ( reparations) the compensation for war damage paid by adefeated state.2 archaic the action of repairing something : the old hall was pulled down to avoid the cost of reparation.
If you are saying that society-as-a-whole has been wronged, then you are stretching words to a ridiculous extent, and are a rather collectivist "libertarian" to boot.
The Rev: Indifference to cruelty, as much as it may incense a decent person, isn't something that can be fixed by coercion.
So magically, coercion is useful if a mentally retarded human has their ears cut off, but its not for a puppy.
The Rev:libertarian philosophy is what it is because it values reason over emotion
Not all libertarians think the abstract homo-sapien-exclusive non-agression-axiom constitutes anything based on reason.
It is an abstract flight from reality. True philosophy should be based in reality.
Animals evolved as we evolved. Hence you cannot ASSUME differences. You can only ASSUME similarities based on the existence of a common ancestor.
Differences must be objectively proven via observation and experiment, and that includes all interaction with animals, not just men in white lab coats. Emotions draw from the observations of normal people. They are not subjective unlike the homo-sapien-exclusive non-agression axiom.
Curlz31:You suggested alternative punishments. I gave you some. Why are you now accusing me of sadism? Are reparations not acceptable to you?
I totally agree with you, the dog deserves reparations!
Curlz31: It is an abstract flight from reality. True philosophy should be based in reality. Animals evolved as we evolved. Hence you cannot ASSUME differences. You can only ASSUME similarities based on the existence of a common ancestor. Differences must be objectively proven via observation and experiment, and that includes all interaction with animals, not just men in white lab coats. Emotions draw from the observations of normal people. They are not subjective unlike the homo-sapien-exclusive non-agression axiom.
Does the family of a murdered ant deserve reparations as well? That would be quite expensive considering the size of ant colonies....
Esuric:I totally agree with you, the dog deserves reparations!
Puppy justice!
4 legs good!
Curlz31: Knight_of_BAAWA:Replacing one form of sadism with another is not a very good option, don't you think? You suggested alternative punishments. I gave you some. Why are you now accusing me of sadism? Are reparations not acceptable to you?
If his behavior bothers you and others like you, don't talk or deal with him, and then encourage others to do the same.
Curlz31: The Rev: Indifference to cruelty, as much as it may incense a decent person, isn't something that can be fixed by coercion. So magically, coercion is useful if a mentally retarded human has their ears cut off, but its not for a puppy.
Yes. Humans are indowded with rights by their highly emotional and rational nature. Dogs are not. Nice try.
Curlz31: Not all libertarians think the abstract homo-sapien-exclusive non-agression-axiom constitutes anything based on reason.
All libertarians do. It's just that not everyone who calls themselves a libertarian actually is one (hint, hint).
Curlz31:It is an abstract flight from reality. True philosophy should be based in reality.
Analogy: Damn that Pythagoras! In creating these abstract theorems he is involved in a flight from reality. True geometry should be based in reality.
See how meaningless the drivel you're spewing is?
Curlz31:Animals evolved as we evolved. Hence you cannot ASSUME differences. You can only ASSUME similarities based on the existence of a common ancestor.
Curlz31:Differences must be objectively proven via observation and experiment, and that includes all interaction with animals, not just men in white lab coats. Emotions draw from the observations of normal people. They are not subjective unlike the homo-sapien-exclusive non-agression axiom.
Esuric:Does the family of a murdered ant deserve reparations as well? That would be quite expensive considering the size of ant colonies....
Forget ants. How can we get justice for dogs attacked by other dogs? PUPPY JUSTICE!
Lilburne:You don't know what the word "reparation" means.
So you are saying that a murderer going to prison doesn't constitute 'reparations' in some way because you cannot possibly make amends to someone who is already dead?