[Closed] Man who microwaved cat walks free

Its a cat, in some countrys they do this for breakfast.

what a mindless ****wit, I dont even like cats buts thats very wrong

Throw him to the lions and then see who the pussy is.

I knew that was going to upset me, but I had to read it.

What can you do with 'people' like that? And I use that term very loosely.

A horrified friend rescued the kitten, which was convulsing and struggling to walk but it had to be put down by vets.

shocking. they should take a couple of fingers for that.

am I the only one to notice that he was drunk?
Maybe there is a simple answer.

Being drunk is no excuse. Not even a little bit.

I didn't mean to run him over your Honour but I was drunk...

Well in my experience people do very silly stuff when drunk, totally unacceptable and silly stuff...

[url= http://www.qwerf.com/?p=418 ]Lots of cat haterzzzz out there...[/url]

Psycopaths are often found to have tortured animals in their younger days. If I was him I'd be worrying about some of the more aggressive animal rights lot.

Shouldn't be too difficult for some of the more radical 'hands-on' members of animal protection groups to find where he lives and pay a visit. Might be a little more effective than the slap on the wrist given by the court.

That is pretty nasty alright. To those suggesting some form of capital punishment, would you have the balls to do it to him? Some peta nutter just might.

Yes, cooking food and then not eating it is definitely a crime.

Twunt.

Walked out of our office this morning over the Bridge over the canal, only to be greeted by the Comerant that normaly sits on the canal bank having been beaten to death and just left on the walkway..

surely this is quite benign compared to typical factory farming methods ?

Bottom line, it's a cat. It doesn't matter. It has no soul and no rights. It is a slave creature that we use for our amusement. It isn't even a useful resource.

The only problem with microwaving it is that it demonstrates a lack of ordinary sensitivity on the part of the person doing the microwaving. He is a silly, and probably thoroughly unpleasant, man. But if we started demanding an eye for a cat and a tooth for a sheep we would quickly be vegan and naked.

😐

well they are both cruel Simon but was he planning to eat the cat and Even the veggies accept that the slaughter house is a little better than being cooked alive surely?[ wel lthis one does
I was also worried by this in the report

"The vet said recovery would take too long and would involve too much suffering."

so it would have recovered but it would have hurt so they killed it VERY ODD

Knew I should never had read that, don't care how drunk you are that is just beyond awful.

What if he'd decided to put a baby in the microwave would they still have let him off? Should never ever be allowed to own a pet again, not a piddley 7 years!

It has no soul

And you do? Can you explain please what you mean by the cat not having a "soul"?

tinker-belle - Member

What if he'd decided to put a baby in the microwave would they still have let him off? Should never ever be allowed to own a pet again, not a piddley 7 years!

It's hardly the same thing though is it? What about rat traps? They are a cruel and inhumane way of killing rats, should people go to jail for using them?

The guy should be banned for life from owning pets and possibly given some very in depth psych evalution but other that I think people need some perspective. Thousands if not hundreds of thousands of kittens and pups get drowned in sacks every year, ....no one is up in arms about it because it doesnt make the news it's just part of rural life.

For some reason I get far more upset by news of violence or the mis treatment of animals than i do of humans tbh.

When i was young i caught a guy i went to school with having just swung a kitten by its tail into a wall as hard as he could, repeatedly, back and forth.

I lost it and luckily someone pulled me off him, but i wouldnt have stopped, complete unconscious rage.

My mate used to kill feral cats on his farm but putting them in a bag and running them over. Some country folk see things differently to most townies....

Bottom line, it's a cat. It doesn't matter. It has no soul and no rights. It is a slave creature that we use for our amusement. It isn't even a useful resource.

I'm sorry, I'm not one to pick personal arguments normally but you are (or certainly come across as) a complete moron. I'd use stronger language but I'd like to remain un-banned. It has as much "soul" as your or I, we are just animals ourselves, and the only rights of which you talk are legal ones that WE create for our own good, it doesnt mean anything not protected can be hurt or injured with impunity. If you can't see what is wrong with your thinking I suggest you have your head examined professionally. Anyone who can just say "ah well, its only a cat" when it's been microwaved (ever seen what that does to an animal?) has serious issues. I can honestly only hope you're trolling and I've taken the bait.

Another reason for all chavs to be shot.

sick f*ck. (I thought they deep-fried everything in Scotland?)

sick bastard - I'd enjoy smashing his face in

I'd enjoy smashing his face in

also sick 🙁

Another reason for all chavs to be shot

and presumably this is meant to be ironic, as bad behaviour by one person can hardly be a justification for ethnic cleansing...

Must admit I'd have no problems whatsoever in "dealing" with him, as per an earlier post. I struggle to care a jot for people who display no respect for other living creatures, be they human or animal.

Some country folk see things differently to most townies...

.............no, there are morons in both areas.

Agreed Coffeeking

ps. nice to see no-one is feeding the rather predictable SFB

Coffeeking, please refrain from calling me a moron, and I'll refrain from calling you an irrational hysteric. 🙂

In my mind, there is a difference between people and other animals. I eat animals, I do not eat people. I condone the castration of dogs, I object to the enforced sterilisation of proles. I accept that old racehorses can be shot, I do not much care for the same treatment of pensioners. I endorse the forcible shaving of enslaved sheep to make my clothing, I oppose the enslavement and forcible shaving of people for any purpose.

Animals are things we use, for amusement, for food, to do work that is too tiresome for people to do etc etc etc. The cat is admittedly not a very useful animal, but people apparently like having them around, and they alarm some sorts of vermin. But they are not people. (that is all, incidentally, I mean by cats not having souls. I have no idea whether they do or not. I believe the catholic church thinks they do not.)

I agree, we have drawn a series of arbitrary lines around what can and cannot be done to animals and for what reasons. Putting a cat in a microwave is clearly pointless and absurd cruelty. It serves no useful purpose. (If it did we would permit it. As Simon says, animals of equal sentience are treated equally badly as long as we intend to eat them). We protect people from being put in microwaves because they are people, they are assumed to have equal worth based on their common humanity and they have the right to life, protected by the state. We protect cats from being put in the microwave because we dislike the idea that cats are being put in microwaves, not because they are people.

This chap did a bad thing. He accepts he did a bad thing, and has pleaded guilty to animal cruelty charges. He has been given a substantial community sentence, and has been banned from owning pets (although not as far as I can see from owning a farm). Justice, in its small way has been done. Justice would be well over-done, to the point of not being justice, if stupid young men who killed cats were themselves put to death.

If he had put a baby in the microwave for the purpose of seeing it die that would, to my mind, be worse than putting a cat in a microwave. Anyone seriously disagree with that statement? 😯

I think he's obviously got some severe mental health issues. He should have been subjected to pretty extensive psycho analisis as a matter of course. Drunk or not, nuking a cat shows a worrying degree of disturbed behaviour.

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." - Gandhi.

Not irrational at all BD - you show no compassion towards the animal that has suffered serious cruelty. Animals killed for food are done so (relatively) humanely, certainly as humanely as possible and for a reason.

Senseless cruelty is utterly wrong, regardless of the animal it is applied to - if I saw someone running along in a field of cows hacking at their legs with an axe I'd not think "oh, its an animal for eating, it doesnt matter". Likewise just because the animal has no apparent use to you (animals provide plenty of uses, companionship and entertainment being just two) it does not mean you can dismiss this cruelty with "so, its only a cat".

Your "argument" doesnt really make any sense at all - one minute youre writing that it doesnt matter, its only a cat, then the next you're saying what happend was cruel and pointless. Make up your mind, if its "only a cat" you shouldnt care about the cruel pointlessness and it would just be entertainment in your eyes.

In my mind there is no difference between a baby or a cat in a microwave, both have equal right to life, both have equal right to remain unharmed. I accept euthanasia of old animals only when their lives are painful and it is cruel leaving them struggling on and I am quite happy for human euthanasia to be acceptable in the same situation (we already do accept that people with cancer have a predictable ending and we dont fight to save them beyond a certain point).

It's a living animal, you're not likely to eat a human (as its not really a good idea and there's a reason its socially unacceptable, not just a legal reasoning) so if you're not going to eat whatever it is you're killing, dont kill it. And if you're going to kill it, do it without pain.

I dont care if he was drunk, or if he claims to be sorry. I suspect he holds the same view as you, "its only a cat", but doesnt want to be seen to say that in court. No person who has an ounce of decency (or, dare I say it, humanity) in them would microwave a cat, drunk or not. As far as I'm concerned he has just sacrificed his right to be considered as human by anything other than species name.

I believe there's substantial evidence that today's animal torturers are tomorrow's psychopaths, serial killers and violent offenders. So, I'd hope that someone is keeping an eye on this sadist.

[Sidles up to coffeeking, pats him on the back and says "you just said everything I needed to say"]

Hear hear!!

Coffeeking, please refrain from calling me a moron, and I'll refrain from calling you an irrational hysteric

I agree BD, 'moron' probably isn't the appropriate term to describe you. After your last post, 'complete tw4t' sounds far more appropriate.

But please don't refrain from calling me 'an irrational hysteric'.

I'm fine with that.

we have just got a kitten , and i cannot imagien hurting it , its just so sad,there is no excuse.

timdrayton - Member
For some reason I get far more upset by news of violence or the mis treatment of animals than i do of humans tbh.

When i was young i caught a guy i went to school with having just swung a kitten by its tail into a wall as hard as he could, repeatedly, back and forth.

I lost it and luckily someone pulled me off him, but i wouldnt have stopped, complete unconscious rage.

I'm excaly the same! Seeing an animal being hurt makes me so so sad!

I genuinely don't eat seafood. I consider it to be "wrong". (my own personal belief)

Do you like lobster? (I am not condoning the cooking of cats btw)

BigDummy makes rational and logical points so he is a moron? You may not agree with his point but it is not moronic.

Animals are badly treated everyday in all sorts of horrible ways - from docking tails to farrowing cages to enforced pregnancy and removal of offspring to having noxious substances injected. I used to know someone who made a living out of microwaving dogs for weapons research.

Of course this was wrong - but those of you who think cruelty to animals means that the person who was cruel should be beaten need to have a quiet word with themselves.

An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth leaves us all blind. Gandhi

Im going to waddle in over to the rational side of the ring and shake big dummy's hand (and I suppose give TJ a shrug of the shoulders of acknowledgement... 🙂 ).

it looks like some out there are confusing Big Dummy's comparative analysis of the treatment of cats and people with a charter to go ram an inket cartridge up the nearest feline's anus. That's rather missing his eloquently put point.

This one didn't walk free from court http://www.thisisnorthdevon.co.uk/news/Jail-sentence-woman-starved-dogs-death/article-712413-detail/article.html

Was the man Korean?

......Chinese maybe?

I'm not confusing anything Stoner :

A geezer puts a kitten in a microwave. The low-life is a ****. End of.

The usual STW controversials (SFB,BD,etc) come along and want to have an "intellectual" debate about it, just so that they can prove to themselves how clever they are. And yet of course ironically, they come across as complete plonkers. End of.

BD et al havent said that the cat-cooker [u]isnt[/u] a low-life ****, only that they are pointing out the hysteria around one epussode which seems rather disproportionate compared to greater "wrongs" (on a comparative, society basis)

[i]am I the only one to notice that he was drunk?
Maybe there is a simple answer. [/i]

****ing stupid prick. Really you honestly think that's an acceptable and reasonable way to behave even if out yer face. What a tosser.

Being drunk is not an excuse, you have choice to drink or not.
Aristotle

I used to know someone who made a living out of microwaving dogs for weapons research.

numpty

Half a bottle of Whisky and he does that? Mind boggles. I bet hes had some right nicknames at school, Adams family, Fester, Frankenstein etc

Gary - I think, in Juan's limited English, his intention was to suggest that banning alcohol would be desireable given what some people do under the influence. Not that being drunk was an excuse.

Can I be the same group as the rational people? The bloke that did this is weird, and it's wrong. he got punished. I don't want to beat him up.

Where do you all stand on fishing then? i know someone who thinks fishing is barbaric and should be banned, i was confused by this when i first heard but i understood his argument, afterall everytime a fish is caught its fighting for its life in a painful way and suffers when its out of the water (assuming you believe fish feel pain etc). I think you could agree that when you look at it like that fishing is similar to hurting a kitten for fun. p.s. Dont shout at me, im on no-ones side!

Hmm , I'm quite close to Forfar. Think I'll get out the balaclava and a flask of boiling chip fat , see how this ****er likes being cooked.

Also hope the judge gets caught next time he's kerb crawling the school gates , ****in idiot.

da funk

There are some positives:
1) He lost his job
2) his face has been plastered all over the news - can't beat a bit of public shaming.
3) He is free - where the lynch mob(s)can get at him.

we've all cooked some pretty odd stuff after a night out on the sauce.

ps. nice to see no-one is feeding the rather predictable SFB

I'm proud to be predictably against all forms of violence and cruelty. It's just a shame I'm in a minority 🙁

Think I'll get out the balaclava and a flask of boiling chip fat , see how this **** likes being cooked.

that makes you more dangerous than he is 🙁 Even if you carry out your summary 'justice' it won't change what happened and might make him embittered and more badly behaved

It's just a shame I'm in a minority

just so that they can prove to themselves how clever they are

it's not about cleverness but functionality. I'm not sure there's any evidence punishment ever works. We need something better. Treating him badly isn't it, that's just brutalising for everyone involved.

Big Dummy, you live up to your monika. You think you are so special. What makes you think you are any more worthy to walk on this earth than that poor cat. Judging from your whitterings the cat is more worthy than you!

What makes you think you are any more worthy to walk on this earth than that poor cat.

My concern, and I'm leaving it for tonight so feel free to descend to further abuse in my absence, is with consistency, proportion and rationality.

Consistency: it is absurd to pretend that we, as a culture, grant animals and humans equal rights, or that we apply consistent standards that value animal life. We do not. This is nasty, of course it is. But until we take the decision that all animals have the same rights to life as all people do and mean it then getting steamed up to this extent about a specific incident of cat-harming is absurd. Millions of animals are sufffering for our convenience and amusement right now. We are (largely) cool with that. I don't empathise with cats particularly, or with fish for that matter. I don't like being harmed personally and grasp that animals feel pain and fear too, if that's what you mean.

Proportionality: a couple of people have suggested that I ought to die because I regard a community sentence as adequate punishment for the harming of a cat. A few others have fantasized about killing the cat-abuser. No-one except Tinker-belle has yet committed to suggesting that the microwaving of a cat and a baby are essentially the same. If you kill someone for hurting a cat, where do you go for the guys who harm and kill people? Same? More? Worse? On what sensisible basis are you going to creat an equivalence between someone who rapes and kills children and someone who kills cats (the punishment for both should apparently be death) but leave fishing, battery chicken farming etc as legal activities for which you just need a licence?

Rationality: SFB has this pretty well covered. It makes no sense to punish people in ways which are unlikely to influence anyone's behaviour. It just makes the people doing the punishing look daft. He did a dumb, nasty thing. Hopefully 120 hours community service will teach him a lesson. Hopefully.

G'night

for myself, I'm not concerned by his "human" rights, I hope some animal rights activists with more balls than me find him and **** him up.

Cool. According to SFB and BD it's fine to commit an animal to senseles torture. After all we eat animals so why not?

This guy is a danger. Anyone capable of putting a kitten in a microwave and pressing the big button has crossed a line.

Still, at least he is free and as such "in play".

Clydebuilt / coyote

With comments/thoughts like those you are NO better, and indeed significantly more of a danger, than the person convicted.

Well said BD throughout.

According to SFB and BD it's fine to commit an animal to senseles torture

I never said that. My remarks were addressed to not treating him similarly. If it's wrong for him to do it then it wrong for anyone else to do it either.

According to SFB and BD it's fine to commit an animal to senseles torture.

My concern.................... is with consistency, proportion and rationality.

And my concern BD, is that you don't appear to grasp that this an Internet forum, not a court of law.

What better way is there for punters to show their revulsion towards a senseless act of cruelty, other than by expressing a willingness to act in an irrational, disproportionate, and inconsistent manner ?

Or would you have preferred if this thread had been simply ignored by everyone ?

The comments made on here are, imo, harmless and without consequence. And yes of course a kitten's life is never equal that of a human being, but I find it extraordinarily reassuring that in what often appears to be a callous and cruel world, so many are moved to make (be they rather extreme) comments, in response to a sicking act against something as "insignificant and unimportant" as a mere kitten.

In counter-balance to all that, I find the sadly predictable attempts by some to "intellectualise" the thread, really rather depressing.

And I'm sorry that you feel you've been abused BD, but how about not being such a plonker, and not taking the Internet so seriously ? 😉

Nice to# see the usual STW "shoot the messenger"

No one is defending the microwaving idots actions - just some folk like to look at things rationally rather than emotively.

What is the moral difference between what he did and what cosmetics researchers do?

Coyote / cylebuilt / other members of the lynch mob?

but I find it extraordinarily reassuring that in what often appears to be a callous and cruel world, so many are moved to make (be they rather extreme) comments

reassuring that they express a willingness to be cruel and callous ?

I find the sadly predictable attempts by some to "intellectualise" the thread, really rather depressing.

yes, you're right, it's far better to thoughtlessly emote

I find it extraordinarily reassuring that in what often appears to be a callous and cruel world, so many are moved to make (be they rather extreme) comments, in response to a sicking act against something as "insignificant and unimportant" as a mere kitten.

erm . . . I was going to make a joke about the kent microwaving the cat when everybody knows cats taste nicer in a stir fry (how many of us have eaten that unbeknown to us?) but I wont erm sorry and erm good night . . . ahem

p.s. Oxboy does not agree with or condone any cruelty to animals in any way shape or form. Do you eat Halal meat? thats bloody cruel!

That poor little cat. That is so nasty. Very upsetting.

Lots of bollocks being spoken on here as usual. I don't think BD and SFB are advocating animal cruelty, by any means. Animals are harmed unnecessarily all the time, but that don't make this case any less horrible.

The bloke's got serious issues. Needs help. I don't think a good kicking would be amiss, however..

Do you eat Halal meat? thats bloody cruel!

For clarity: A Halal or Kosher slaughter, if carried out in the correct and efficient manner, causes no more suffering to the animal than other forms of killing, such as the bolt through the head technique used in much of animal slaughter in the UK, and considerably less than electrocution. Such sudden blood loss to the brain results in near-instant death.

I've witnessed quite a few Halal slaughterings, in my time. Seen a cow killed thusly. Thing was dead virtually a second after the throat was cut.

The bolt in head method is sometimes not successful at despatching the animal instantly, and it can suffer undue pain, even if it's despatchers are unaware of this.

The only true way of slaughtering an animal such as a cow, sheep or pig, without it feeling any pain, is to completely sever the entire head in one clean cut. Quite a feat, considering the thickness of vertebral bone. A bullet to the head carries the same risks of non-instant death as the bolt method. And involves the issue of firearms ownership and regulation. Certified Halal/Kosher slaughter houses are carefully monitored to ensure the minimal possible suffering is experienced by the animal, Under Islamic law, an animal should be despatched as quickly and humanely as possible. Letting an animal bleed to death, therefore letting it suffer unnecessarily, is considered Haram, forbidden.

erm ok Rude boy,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2977086.stm Halal and Kosher slaughter 'must end' The method of animal slaughter used by Jews and Muslims should be banned immediately, according to an independent advisory group. The Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC), which advises the government on how to avoid cruelty to livestock, says the way Kosher and Halal meat is produced causes severe suffering to animals. Both the Jewish and Muslim religions demand that slaughter is carried out with a single cut to the throat, rather than the more widespread method of stunning with a bolt into the head before slaughter. FAWC said it wanted an end to the exemption currently allowed for Kosher and Halal meat from the legal requirement to stun animals first. It says cattle can take up to two minutes to bleed to death - amounting to an abuse of the animals. "This is a major incision into the animal and to say that it doesn't suffer is quite ridiculous," said FAWC chairwoman, Dr Judy MacArthur Clark. Compassion in World Farming backed the call, saying: "We believe that the law must be changed to require all animals to be stunned before slaughter."

The Farm Animal Welfare Council has published on the web an extremely detailed Report on the merits of stunning versus throat-cutting. There is a section starting on page 26 of the report that describes conclusive evidence that animals feel more pain if their throats are cut than if they are pre-stunned. Details as follows: Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing Part 1: Red Meat Animals June 2003 Farm Animal Welfare Council 1A Page Street, London, SW1P 4PQ

Consistency: ...

I don't think people microwave kitten for fun.

Proportionality: ...

How do you measure proportionality?

Rationality: ...

Why influence others' behaviour when he is the only one, the one we know from the media so far, acted in such a senseless cruel manner?

😯

RudeBoy -

Lots of bollocks being spoken on here as usual.

The bloke's got serious issues. Needs help. I don't think a good kicking would be amiss, however..

Another example of the bollocks. Did it ever occur to anyone that he might have the capacity to change? That he might learn his lesson and not actually harm another animal? Or should we mutilate him anyway.....just incase/

For clarity: A Halal or Kosher slaughter, if carried out in the correct and efficient manner, causes no more suffering to the animal than other forms of killing, such as the bolt through the head technique used in much of animal slaughter in the UK, and considerably less than electrocution. Such sudden blood loss to the brain results in near-instant death.

I've witnessed quite a few Halal slaughterings, in my time. Seen a cow killed thusly. Thing was dead virtually a second after the throat was cut.

The bolt in head method is sometimes not successful at despatching the animal instantly, and it can suffer undue pain, even if it's despatchers are unaware of this.

Dhabihah - what you're referring to, is almost exactly the same as the normal method of slaughter in killing halls all over the uk, the main difference is that the animal is not stunned. In both cases the arteries are severed. Just ask yourself, if you were going to be on the receiving end, wouldnt you want to be stunned first? I know I would. And before you ask I've witnessed both in person many times.

The only true way of slaughtering an animal such as a cow, sheep or pig, without it feeling any pain, is to completely sever the entire head in one clean cut. Quite a feat, considering the thickness of vertebral bone.

What about hypoxia? Quite a lot easier than any of the options you are talking about.

I am pretty suprised by the amount knee jerk reactionary spouting in this thread. I agree with Big Dummy 100%.

Probably safe to assume that those calling for this guy to be mutilated, tortured and even killed would run a mile when presented with the opportunity to actually do it.

I am with you on the subject of slaughtering animals Oxboy. Bloody religion getting in the way of common sense yet again!

"[i]What is the moral difference between what he did and what cosmetics researchers do?[/i]"

I don't subscribe to using animals to test cosmetics. It is wrong. It is also a pretty dumb comparison. It *could* be argued that the scientists are pursuing a scientific purpose. What this guy did was for his own amusement.

"[i]Coyote / cylebuilt / other members of the lynch mob?[/i]"

I'm not part of a lynch mob, although I do find it upsetting that someone can inflict such suffering and walk away with little more than a slap on the wrist. I'd be interested to hear what form of punishment the "hug mob" would advocate. A nice sit down and a cup of tea? Primal scream therapy?