Fuark

On r/c, yes I am the biggest, strongest whiteknight you will ever meet but only to those who deserve it, if a girl is being a stupid bish I wouldn't have a problem letting them know it. I usually pay no attention to them anyways but carry on, don't want to get off topic. If the dog was in dire straits, if he did all he could to inform the owner of the situation, if the owner gave consent, if the neighbor didn't have a gun or was able to euthanize it in a more humane manner, then MAYBE it would have been acceptable for the neighbor to do what he did.

ok. the anecdotal evidence I was referring to was your statement that you'd seen dogs hit in traffic and get killed. Cause I've seen dogs get hit and survive. so anecdotal evidence doesn't mean much.

As I said in an earlier post, the owner wasn't there until after everything happened, and his quote was along the lines of "blood around the head, stomach was just skin and flesh" which you summarized as road rash. Pitbulls typically have very short hair, so even a mild amount of road rash would leave nothing but skin and flesh, and is it not possible the blood around the head was caused after the sledgehammer hits? For all we know the dog may have just had a broken leg.

RE: the rabbit punch...he's using a sledgehammer. if his intent was to kill it, I would think he would go overboard, rather than hold back. Even so, proper use of the sledgehammer would dictate you swing it down onto the ground, not in a golf-club like motion. Sure, it may not read as malicious, but is that the point? This wasn't his dog to decide what to do with, or even on his property.

The claim I was referring to was in your original post that the only mercy this doc received was the 2 blows, which I strongly disagree with.

No, no one knows if the dog could have been saved. But also, no one knows the dog couldn't have been saved. Thanks to this guy's actions, they won't be able to find out.

So I ask you again, please explain to me exactly what right and/or justification did this guy have to "put the dog out of it's misery", considering he was not a licensed veterinarian capable of determining exactly what was wrong, nor was he the owner of the property in question (the dog)?

I haven't read past the first post, but i can imagine the heated discussion from the number of pages.

A long time ago i did the same thing as this guy. I killed an animal with a shovel. srs

I had some pet ferrets that i used to hunt rabbits with.

Anyway i had around 5 of them, but one was different, he wasn't vicious like the rest, he was extremely gentle, friendly, and might i even say loving for a ferret. srs

Maybe he was smarter, i don't know.

One day i opened his cage and he jumped up all happy and wanting to be picked up, the cages lid opened up like a lid and it was a windy day. The wind caught the top of the door/lid and blew it shut at a ridiculous force and it hit him square on the nose/head at a ridiculously high force.

he started to bleed from his nose and squirm around making a horrible noise. At that split moment i had no choice but to do the worst thing i could ever want to do.... put him out of his misery.

I took a shovel and hit him on the head and killed him, it killed me inside, but seeing him suffer was worse. I buried him at my home in my garden and felt bad about it for a long time... i still feel bad about it.

Sometimes when you see an animal suffering the best thing to do is put them out of their misery.

A living creature suffering in extreme pain is a horrendous thing to witness.

If i was in some place with no laws and repercussions and i came across you lying in the road with no legs after being mowed down by a truck and you asked me to end it for you, i would. I'd live with the regret every day of my life wondering if i did the right thing, but i'd still do it.

There is no black & white, right or wrong with this and we can argue the morals all day long, but what would you do? Who are you? What are your beliefs? This is what it comes down to.

I also had a cat once, i have had 3 cats in my life since i was a kid.

He was also the gentlest cat I've ever had, i got him from a rescue shelter he had been abused by some dude and starved and ended up eating bin bags he was so hungry. He loved me a lot, i gave him a good home. srs

My gf and me got a dog, a puppy rottweiler that grew up with my cat, my cat was always loving to him when he was a puppy, but as the female rottweiler got older she started playing rougher and rougher with him until he was scared of her. I tried everything and thought about rehoming him, but i never got the chance as she killed him.

She had a high prey drive and was a dog that liked to kill for sport. I found this out too late.

I think this dude with the sledgehammer was trying to do the right thing, and he is probably feeling chit about it, and even worse once he sees the wrath of the internet.

I'm not sure of the point i'm trying to make, but everything is easier in hindsight.

What would you do if you saw this? Would you let the dog squirm about howling in pain.

isn't this the same mentality that if i was walking down the street and someone was beating the chit out of you i'd say "none of my business mane.. not my problem" ?

RE: Bold, so I guess you wouldn't encourage a family member to undergo chemotherapy for a chance to live?

RE: Underlined, that shouldn't even be a question ITT. And the only justification as to why they shouldn't IMO is overpopulation, but that's a different debate.

RE: Italicized, so would you want to be euthanized if you suffered some severe kidney stones?

Newsflash: There's nothing to imply the dog was beyond saving besides the testimony of the dude who killed it. Are you just saying that creature in pain should be killed then? If so then we'll just agree to disagree. But there are so many variables unknown in this story that the only retards ITT are the ones saying the dude was unequivocally justified in killing the dog, or the ones wishing death on him.

he's a psycho for wanting to end the dogs suffering as quick as possible?

Don't mind him, he's a salty pitbull owner who is easily rustled.

youve probably never had a dog or seen animal suffer. this man did a good deed.

I mean he probably only did it to put the dog out of its misery. I can understand that pov. Still...not his call to make, and a sledgehammer wtf? Couldn't he have used a gun or something I mean jesus.

I think he owes the owner restitution for the dog. It wasn't his right to euthanize it.

Whys this thread 8 pages srs

Pics of what the dog looked like? I can only imagine what the dog looked like after being hit by 2 cars.

Sleep tight pupper

another difference being that it was HIS ferret, not a neighbor's?

you should probably just make another account, cuz being confident isn't working too well for you

lmao strong edit

brb never abiding by red lights, they're making me late
brb never abiding by lane lines, they box me in behind slow drivers
brb might as well rob this bank, they keep charging me fees, i swear I'll just take what I'm owed because I can't pay rent otherwise

see how terrible your argument is

Damn, poor dog.

now thats an ironic statement.

Sounds like the execution was pretty public to me.

We could go back and forth on anecdotal evidence all night, but I think most people would agree that something of flesh and bone hit by a car is probably going to die. Those odds go up more if after sustaining the first set of injuries, that may have been survivable, getting hit again by another vehicle makes the outcome slim at best.

As I mentioned earlier people have been dispatching dogs and deer on the sides of roads since we had cars and people have been killing them with whatever was on hand whether it sounded like they gave the animal an honorable death with a pen knife to the throat or not with a rock nearby or positioning the animals head under a tire.

The same reason you are arguing in this thread about this is because you have a moral reaction and outrage to this event and thats fine, this guy also had a moral reaction to the event and he acted on them. Was what he did wrong? No because initially he was not charged. They later got him on animal laws which anyone can get roped up on which should indicate they didn't have anything to really stick on him.This. People are arguing that the owner would have been better served letting the animal suffer and bleed out in what was probably horrific pain just so the owner could be the one to end the dogs life. That dog got hit by 2 cars, 1 car is bad enough. 2 cars and that dog was probably hemorraging internally and its way out.

No wonder you stopped posting. See you in 6 more years.

Dogs are slaughtered by the millions with wooden poles in some places of the world, doesnt take much to kill them with a whack on the top of head

[QUOTE=GirthKwake post_id=1491817761]Jessie Garcia was out with his family last Sunday when they pulled into the driveway and saw several people standing around their dog. Their beloved pit bull, Beau, was lying on the front porch with blood all around.

“There was blood around her head and her side was mostly skin and flesh,” said Garcia.

Just a few minutes earlier, Beau was hit by two cars trying to cross the road. The dog was able to make it to the front porch before collapsing.

What Garcia would soon find out is that his neighbor, Ivan Lawrence, took a sledgehammer and hit Beau in the back of the head two times after she was run over by the cars.

“That was not his choice," Garcia said. "It’s not his dog."

According to Garcia, another neighbor wanted to take Beau to a nearby veterinarian but Lawrence decided the dog was in extreme pain so he killed her.

[URL=http://www.12news.com/news/local/valley/man-kills-neighbors-dog-with-sledgehammer-after-it-was-hit-by-two-cars/432665792]http://www.12news.com/news/local/val...cars/432665792[/URL]

[img]http://i.imgur.com/tkuMkBj.png[/
[qoute[/QUOTE]





Pitbull was all I needed to see. We don't need pitbulls in homes. The fact we accept them is a crime itself

Died at Sledgebrah

caught 4 negs in this thread from pupper hating fgits.

the issue was not how the dog got out, what breed it was, etc. the point is that tradie had no right to euthanize their pupper/thread

fuk you pittie hating fgits

lol ok...you didn't bother responding to a single one of my points. Legally, yes what he did was wrong. or he wouldn't have been arrested. period. If someone kills somebody, and doesn't get arrested for murder until a year later, does that mean they're justified? I don't see why you assume the animal is beyond saving, when it's reported in the article that other neighbors thought it should be taken to the vet. Plenty of humans, dog, and other animals survive car collisions. The dog was clearly fit enough to limp back to the porch, not paralyzed and bleeding out on the ground

Yes, people dispatch wild animals and strays all the time on the side of the road. that's different. those are do not belong to anyone. Still don't see how you don't understand this. If your car broke down and you couldn't drive it for a few days, then your roommate/parents decided to scrap it when it might have been fixed for cheap, would that not bother you? Or would you be glad because they did you the mercy of taking care of it for you? If it's the latter we can just agree to disagree and stop posting.

For what it's worth, I think many people would agree with me that the common moral reaction to an injured animal would not be to immediately put it out of its misery, especially when others nearby think it can be saved. But who knows, I could be wrong

Wasn’t ignoring you, I thought the thread died so I didn’t give a better/longer reply.

There are 2 sets of laws here at play, I kind of indicated it earlier but looking back see I didn’t flesh it out. City and social laws vary greatly from wildlife management/animal laws. Legally what he did wasn’t wrong, the original investigating officers didn’t suggest charges on him for anything, this chap seems to have been caught up on animal abuse laws which are wholly different and much easier to charge someone with, often for really really minor stuff but that comes with a really really heavy penalty. He also wasn’t his best witness with his statements and actions right after the event so he kind of buried himself.

I don’t think this amounts to the example you gave of killing someone and time passing, if someone kills something or someone and there is cause to be found that it was against the law that person will be prosecuted.

As far as the other neighbors giving witness to the animal’s ability to be saved, it’s just as doubtful as his telling of the events if he is not to be believed. If it could have been saved why were they all standing around the animal, more so standing there with their kids watching the animal dying on the porch? From the way the article was written it sounds like a bunch of people were trespassing on the porch at the same time. And out of all the trespassers this guy was the only one that made a decision. People are harping on the rights of the owner, what if the woman who wanted to take the dog to the vet did that and the vet suggested the dog be put down? Would she get the same level of vitriol as this guy? She was attempting to take someone else’s property and start a medical procedure that she likely wasn’t authorized to give permission for and may not have been financially responsible for.

Yes plenty of people and animals survive car collisions but normally a one time hit and it’s often not survivable depending on the speed of the vehicle, but we are talking about a dog who is low enough to the ground that it’s taking all that energy from the bumper of a vehicle. It then survives the first hit, just to get hit a second time. Odds are that the dog was in shock and doing as most grievously injured animals do, going someplace to die. Just because we live in cities doesn’t mean nature won’t still run it’s course. We don’t know if the dog was fit, not paralyzed, or what condition the animal was in other than people were staring at it on the ground and someone thought it needed to be mercy killed which sounds like an indicator that it wasn’t a pretty scene.

Wild animals and strays on the side of the road are the Kings animals, dispatch one in front of a Ranger and you’ll do time for it, someone owns all of the animals individual or collective.

I don’t get the car example, if my car died and was on it’s last legs and I abandoned it and someone else took it or pushed it off a cliff I wouldn’t care. I think I’m not getting that example sorry.

I think you earned those negs because you were being a dck on the 1st page. Still it's chicken spit to neg someone for having an opinion, repped you.

hes doing the dog a favor. Did you even read the article? half the body was skinned off. Would you prefer the dog to slowly bleed out on the front porch?

I can't tell people what they can and cannot own but if you are going to own a potentially DEADLY animal, especially to kids, you better keep that fuking beast locked up, not running around freely where kids are. In b4 pics with babies and pits.

At this point these miscers are more about control than love for the puppets.

RE: the 2 sets of laws, i won't comment on that since I don't know much about wildlife laws OR city laws pertaining to the euthanasia of an injured animal, pet or not, owned or not.

Okay, instead of killing lets do tinterrogation, since that has been a thing in the past. There are humane ways to interrogate, and there are inhumane ways, as seen in Guantanamo Bay. If someone is given a pass to torture, then found guilty years down the line, does that mean their actions themselves were not incorrect, and they are just a victim of a legal system? If so, does that mean you believe that the legal system is not representative of our morals?

RE the neighbors standing around...yes it is just as doubtful. that's my point, that we don't know how much damage, but a lot of people ITT, yourself and myself included are assuming lots of facts one way or another. As far as whether someone who took the dog to the vet would get the same vitriol, the answer is no. The vet would be the one determining the dog should be put down, and since he is licensed, he has the authority to make that decision. The owner taking the dog vs a stranger would not have yielded a different outcome. She would be attempting to save property, not destroy it.

RE: surviving collisions. sure, it's fair to assume the dog might have been irreparably injured by 2 car collisions. but it's just an assumption. Like i said, the dog was able to limp back to the porch, so clearly it was still somewhat alive and responsive, not just bleeding out unconscious. And if we're assuming, who's to assume the collisions didn't happen in a small neighborhood where the cars might have been driving 15mph or less? Like you said, we don't know what condition the dog was in. So to write it off as a loss would be ridiculous.

IDK what you mean by Kings animals...I don't think owned by anyone unless they're living on a reserve/national park/government owned land.

As far as the car example...I'll give you a real world one that happened to me. I had a manual VW, a bushing in the shifter broke and I couldn't shift into first or second gear, but 3rd, 4th, and 5th worked fine. It sat in my driveway like this for about 3 months, before I finally got it fixed. During that time, I considered scrapping it, but didn't. During this time, my landlord knew the car couldn't be driven, and knew I'd be leaving it parked in the driveway immobile and was okay with it. Now, if he'd decided during this time to scrap my car for me with just the knowledge that it couldn't drive, I could see how he would think he's justified. But I would still be livid if he had done that, considering it 1) wasn't his car, 2) he didn't know what it would cost to fix/what it meant to me, and 3) it only took $75 and 1 hour of work to repair. But with his knowledge, he had a hunk of scrap metal sitting in his driveway.

The point is that it's really not up to anyone but the owner to decide what to do. I wouldn't have been upset if a vet did this, because they would at least have the knowledge to know when a dog would be beyond saving. Does that make sense?

if an animal is morally wounded sometimes it does need its head smashed to be put out of its misery, have had to hit a few birds and mice that cats were killing with hammers to finish them off.


just read a news story on it though this went way past a dog being injured badly and him killing it.


"By this time two children were standing nearby from the neighborhood pleading with Ivan to refrain from hitting the dog with a sledgehammer"

RIP in peace



i do know that if you call in for an injured animal like a deer, police will show up and kill it, even if its injuries arent potentially life threatening. fwiw. human.. deer.. dog...