ChatterBank5 mins ago
Animal rights extremists, why don't do something about this instead?
9 Answers
A family of horsetraders in Buckinghamshire have just been on the news having been found guilty of the "worst case of animal cruelty" the RSPCA has ever seen - they will get a fine and a slap on the wrist and probably do it again in a couple of years (they have a previous conviction for similar offences)
I was just thinking that animal rights extremists would get a lot more sympathy if they "did something" about people like this when the woefully lenient and inadequate law has failed again.
I was just thinking that animal rights extremists would get a lot more sympathy if they "did something" about people like this when the woefully lenient and inadequate law has failed again.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mariner2. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.I suspect that they would answer that animal cruelty in such cases is already illegal and that vivisection is a) legal and b) on a scale far exceeding "civillian" cases Where the RSPCA already have powers to act.
And that the continual practice of it validates it and basically says animal cruelty is OK in some cases.
But I'm not an anti-vivisectionist so I'm just playing devil's advocate
And that the continual practice of it validates it and basically says animal cruelty is OK in some cases.
But I'm not an anti-vivisectionist so I'm just playing devil's advocate
Having just read a story of a man who killed a neighbours dog by hitting it over the head with a hoe and the RSPCA decided not to prosecute because they believed the dog did not suffer, then I would never support the RSPCA again. What about the lady who lost her dog? Had the animal rights heard of this story they would have dealt with it in a way that this rotten man would never hurt an animal again!!!
I'm sorry, but I'm a little unsure of what it means to be an 'animal rights extremist'. If it is objecting to the suffering of animal caused by human meat consumption, the testing of beauty and medical products, or the use killing of animals in the name of sport? Or, is it the same 'extreme' that was used to describe slave trade abolitionists before the civil war? I wonder. Or, perhaps it is simply a term that is used by lazy people to justify their own animal abuse while also convincing themselves of having a clear conscience. Hmmmm. I wonder.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.