Thugs slaughter animals and vandalise garden centre

Psychopaths are rare. Most acts of cruelty are committed by relatively ordinary people. Chances are, these yobs are not psychopaths.

Which is why you have to check first.

I judged that there is a strong possibility that some or all of the perpetrators are under 18, or may have been bullied into it by a psychopathic leader. In that case, only the ringleader(s) should be executed. No matter what their age. Children can become complete psychopaths from the start. For example, look at the Jamie Bulger killers.

Executing them is both a punishment and a safety measure. Human pondlife killing animal pondlife should be enough of a warning sign that at least one of these monsters could target people in the future.

This isn't to say that human and non-human lives are equal, yet neither are cruelty to animals and cruelty to humans of an entirely different calibre. We must take this wanton mass killing of animals very seriously.

edited 1st Jun '11 1:48:00 PM by Shichibukai

No excuse to go around killing.

(*Insert Slippery Slope Argument Here*)

I agree that some testing on those convicted may prove to be of value. It might turn out that they need some form of treatment.

^^ You can take animal killing seriously, without executing someone. If the only weapons in your arsenal, so to speak, are "primitive melee weapons" and "blow up the planet", you might have to see about procuring something to cover that rather vast gap.

edited 1st Jun '11 1:46:45 PM by pvtnum11

No mortal can punish the dead. Therefore the death penalty is not a punishment.

Would you shoot a dog with rabies?

There is no treatment for a psychopath.

edited 1st Jun '11 1:46:24 PM by annebeeche

Ok, then you won't mind if I just kill you then?

The dog could give me rabies. I can't catch psychopathy. Just keep an eye on these people.

edited 1st Jun '11 1:47:13 PM by inane242

Well, the whole dying in a potentially painful way is a bit of a punishment. As is not getting to live their lives.

The death penalty is a punishment on the living, not the dead.

You are a dangerous person who needs to be put away before you start hurting people.

edited 1st Jun '11 1:48:01 PM by victorinox243

Indeed, nothing can justify the death punishment

edited 1st Jun '11 1:46:53 PM by Delles

Um, yes I will. I like being alive and I am a danger to no one.

Death Penalty is a safety measure only, which also means it should be used very rarely because very rarely is keeping a person alive dangerous.

inane: You would kill the dog because he is a danger to others, and cannot be cured of this danger. That is the case here.

However, not all psychopaths are killers, so I'm not advocating simply killing psychopaths left and right.

edited 1st Jun '11 1:49:37 PM by annebeeche

I am rather disgusted by the thugs in the article, but the overreaction here is a little worrying. Not to mention the slippery slope arguments. Let's kill everybody who kills insects and spiders, soon they'll be moving up to rats and mice and then cats and dogs and people.

Wow this thread is incredibly scary.

They should be punished and their motives looked at without instant death penalty and dehumanising label of complete monster.

I JUST MURDED MILLIONS OF BACTERIA!

YES. THEY MUST ALL DIE, MELLON. FUCKING ALL OF THEM.

But wait I killed small animals (fish, insects, mollusks, and arachnids) when I was little.

...oh dear god no.

DON'T KILL ME D:

edited 1st Jun '11 1:50:04 PM by Aondeug

What was the estimate on damages to the center? Ten grand? Sounds like a starting point for a hefty fine, to me. Slap on some community service shoveling crap and you got yourself a punishment that fits the crime.

Also:

[SLOPE GRADE NOW EXCEEDING 100 PERCENT.]

edited 1st Jun '11 1:51:05 PM by pvtnum11

"Should we also euthanize the entirety of the guards at Guatemala then? And the people who command them?"

Racism, much? Though I guess it's not technically genocide, since the only Guatemalans you're executing are the guards, although that seems oddly specific, come to think of it.

Unless, of course, you're talking about Guantanamo...

EDIT: Why not just have them pay damages to the owners? Or was this place owned by the city?

edited 1st Jun '11 1:50:12 PM by Wanderhome

INORITE 0_0

@ Anne: Well, the death penalty certainly isn't safe for the person on the receiving end.

Oops, wrong Google result. I never get the name right. Well, sorry for the misunderstanding.

edited 1st Jun '11 1:50:59 PM by Delles

I get the feeling there's a certain "opinion critical mass" that appears in threads like this—once a certain number of people said "these people deserve to die," a certain type of thinker went "Oh, right, these people deserve to die," and immediately started posting "they deserve to die" as well. "These people deserve life in prison" would have resulted in that same type of people posting "these people deserve life in prison." I'm unsure what would have happened if a more merciful tack had been tacken.

tl;dr: I just called you all mindless sheep. For what it's worth, I'm willing to acknowledge that I can be pushed to be equally mindless under certain circumstances (though I'm trying to get better at recognizing those circumstances.)

Luckily no corporal punishment here in the UK, it would be a step backward if we started to use them.

Community service and a fine would be a good idea as already mentioned as the park was owned by the city council (I'm pretty sure it is) as well as looking at underlying motives and trying to tackle them.

It's just situationism and/or mob psychology.

edited 1st Jun '11 1:53:26 PM by annebeeche

Am I a cute sheep at least? Oh wait but I didn't go along with everyone...

...so I am a black sheep. Hmm.

@feo: Hey, come now, some of us were shocked and appaled at the reaction from the get go!

I took offense to the perperatrators being called "yobs"!

Although from the sounds of it the Mail may not be good for my blood pressure.

The Mail is good for laughs I hear.