Kitten kills game, guy kills kitten.

[Effluo]

Poor kitty. I hope he ends up in jail with a cat lover named Bubba. My cats have reset/unplugged damn near everything, chewed through cords, jumped on me at bad times, and I've never wanted or even thought of throwing them.

[Day]

fuck cats

[Tonka]

Virginia's laws are pretty harsh, however if it's just misdemeanor animal cruelty, the max he could get is 180 days and a $2000 fine. If the ADA is smart he'll plead out the Disorderly since it's hard as hell to get that charge to stick and can range from 30 - 260 days in prison with a $3000 fine and they'll most likely drop the animal cruelty charge. Stuff like this can go bad quickly if they publicize this (too late lol) and PETA gets wind of it. Political pressure from PETA can cause the ADA to seek higher charges like Felony Animal Cruelty which carries a 5 year prison sentence with a $10,000 fine. He'll probably end up with the max on any charge since he's a violator. Such harsh behavior doesn't bode well with juries.

No seriously. What's he looking at? Them some crazy eyes.

[Yabby]

The crime he committed was throwing an animal against a wall at such a velocity that the animal died. So by that logic we should throw him against a wall at such a velocity that he dies?

That would be funny IMO.

[Maguspk]

It's just a kitten. lol

[Priran]

oh look, a first world problems thread

[Tekoa]

Granted it's a pain when your animals chew/unplug/reset shit involving your video games, but for fucks sake there was no need for that.

[drwaffles]

This is pretty bullshit. The psychological problems are painfully apparent when you're murdering animals in a fit of rage. There is absolutely no reason he shouldn't be placed in anger management/therapy/etc for this, because people with violent tendencies tend to be violent. If he can't control his anger at a clueless creature over a completely trivial matter, yes he deserves much more than the standard punishment. You can't be dismissive of "slippery slope" arguments when they are backed up by mountains of hard data and just plain common sense.

Except I didn't say that I didn't think him exhibiting violent behavior was an indication of having violent tendencies, I said that it was a dumb idea to punish him more severely based solely on his potential to commit similar offences in future. Anger management doesn't constitute 'punishment' in my book, and that was the term used in the OP - that he should be more 'severely punished'. Do I think he should be referred for psychiatric treatment? Of course I do. I just don't think it's policy in most democratic nations to punish people for crimes they might commit.

Incoming two pages of people arguing against something I didn't say, which is exactly what I expected when I posted. It is the norm on this site, after all. Oops, incoming two further pages of people telling me to 'stop crying'.

[Chun Liroy]

fuck cats

 

[Keria]

When I was like 12 I slapped a bitch because she unplugged my Gameboy link cable.

Mind you she did deserve it, a) she unplugged it because she wanted me to do her maths homework and b) she wasn't a kitten

[Aurara]

The fuck is wrong with people?

[antihero]

I'd throw a puppy for fucking up a game I was playing, but not a kitten

[Sepukku]

I'd throw a puppy for fucking up a game I was playing, but not a kitten

I'd electrocute a dog for not winning a fight...

Spoiler: show

...against Mike Tyson on Mike Tyson Punch Out

[D44kpunk]

are cats dumb as fuck or something? i've never had one but i've always had a dog and it's never turned off anything

[zoobernut]

are cats dumb as fuck or something? i've never had one but i've always had a dog and it's never turned off anything

Holy shit lol. I am not sure how "dumb" cats are but you sure are dumb as fuck.

[Therin]

I don't really understand the charges. He should be charged with destruction of property, I think, since he killed his girlfriend's cat. Really, not all that different from breaking something else (like a lamp or TV) on purpose.

I don't really think this should be a "omg he killed an animal, crucify him" case, because it might set a precedent which animal rights advocates will attempt to abuse in the future. If the charges stick, loonies could try getting all sorts of people on trial for killing all sorts of animals that might otherwise be perfectly legal and reasonable (hunting, accidentally hitting a dog with a car, etc.). Sounds to me like these people are approaching this entirely wrong.

Also, I agree with Waffles. Killing animals might point to possible violent crime in the future but we can't go shoving everyone who does in a psychiatric ward just because most serial killers happened to get off on killing animals prior to killing humans (it's only because it's easier to kill animals than humans so they did that first, no other reason, really).

[Eaglestrike]

I once threw a cat across a room because I was hungover, and the fucker was in heat and wouldn't shut the fuck up so I could sleep. To be fair though, this was at my friend's house, and he lived in a shitty trailer park and there was a bunch of stray cats running around everywhere. Also, I totally shooed it away like nine times. It was warned.

Throwing a cat across the room and throwing a cat against a wall are very different things. Cats are acrobatic little buggers, they'll most likely land perfectly fine with a throw in an open area. Against a wall, unless they have Tifa-like skills, they won't be able to react and are in high danger of being hurt.

If this was truly a kitten (and that isn't just an embellishment by the article) that was tiny and just exploring like all young creatures (hell even older ones in new areas) and happened to hit a button while walking about that guy should just...get murder 2 or some shit. I'm not usually huge on anime rights and all that but seriously, fucked up shit.

[zoobernut]

I don't really understand the charges. He should be charged with destruction of property, I think, since he killed his girlfriend's cat. Really, not all that different from breaking something else (like a lamp or TV) on purpose.

I don't really think this should be a "omg he killed an animal, crucify him" case, because it might set a precedent which animal rights advocates will attempt to abuse in the future. If the charges stick, loonies could try getting all sorts of people on trial for killing all sorts of animals that might otherwise be perfectly legal and reasonable (hunting, accidentally hitting a dog with a car, etc.). Sounds to me like these people are approaching this entirely wrong.

Yes because another living animal is exactly the same as an inanimate object. Brb buying a lamp at the pet store.

I also don't see how in any way shape or form charging him with killing an animal would give loonies any more ground or ammo. This case would not set any precedent this is not a new thing it has happened in the past and people have been convicted of animal cruelty for it. Intent is a big deal to the law that is why there are different degrees of murder. If you hit a dog accidentally on the road you might get a small punishment but if you purposely kill a cat or another animal in a rage for no reason then the punishment is more severe. Also there are strict laws and regulations regarding hunting and that is a completely different situation than this.

[antihero]

Yes because another living animal is exactly the same as an inanimate object. Brb buying a lamp at the pet store.

pretty sure he was trolling. it is therin, after all

[zoobernut]

pretty sure he was trolling. it is therin, after all

I would hope so. But in threads like this it is hard to tell because for every 1 troll there are 5 retards who can't tell the difference between hating an animal and not wanting to be around it and torturing/killing said animal.