Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Kitten stabbed to death in drunken attack

24567

Comments

  • #32
    pookie82
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,217 ✭✭✭pookie82


    Mairt wrote: »
    When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.


    Eh, how the f*ck has he dug himself a hole????:rolleyes:


  • #33
    Dave147
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭Dave147


    Find it sickening what he did, I hate cats but I would never do anything like this. Story doesn't particularly upset me, it would if it was a dog however.


  • #34
    bronte
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,331 ✭✭✭✭bronte


    Wish I hadn't read this :(


  • #35
    nacho libre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,652 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    The article is full of black humor and anthropomorphic phrases, i still don't find it funny though. I fail to see the humour in someone displaying psychopathic behaviour. Anyone who can take an iron bar to a donkey and beat it to death or do what this man did to the kitten is obviously a loathsome and disturbed individual. Perphaps the scribe is actuely aware of this hence the dramatic tone.


  • #36
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Reminds me of one of the many page 1 leads in The Simpsons: "Dog kills cat, self" :D

    I wouldn't be so sure it was psychopathic behaviour though, just drunken aggression. It's unbelievable how even perfectly reasonable individuals turn into complete headcases when drunk.

    There is nothing funny about the behaviour whatsoever, the OP is focusing purely on the way the report is written.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    barnacle
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 238 ✭✭barnacle


    That story was grrrrrrrrr-eat!

    Puts the ow in miaow!


  • #38
    kraggy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,414 ✭✭✭kraggy


    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    1) The fact that the killing of a cat makes it into a national broadsheet

    2) The way it's a copy and paste job of a real murder story

    3) The fact that the kitten was "rushed" to hospital

    4) The fact that someone stabbed a kitten

    5) The juxtaposition of the words "Brutal" and "Fifi".

    1. Not funny considering there's a direct correlation between animal abuse and violence against humans.

    2. Prove it.

    3. They were hardly going to take their time now, were they?

    4. What's funny about that you juvenile twat.

    5. How about "Maddie" and "Missing" or "Scared"? That suit you better?

    Imbicile.


  • #39
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    But it reads like it's about a human... thus making it very surreal - that's all the OP's saying. He doesn't mean it's literally a copy and paste job of a real murder story, but it reads word for word like one.

    It's as if the OP is saying cruelty to animals is funny when that's not what he's saying at all... surely it's not that difficult to grasp?


  • #40
    kraggy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,414 ✭✭✭kraggy


    keepherlit wrote: »
    Terrible act? YES
    Is it really front page material? NO
    I think there are more pressing issues in the town itself never mind across the rest of the world.
    lock him up though and name and shame him.

    Which is why animal abuse is so prevalent in society.

    They're not deemed as important as human animals. Why, I don't know. Some are more intelligent than others, but intelligence should not be the datum against which we judge whether or not a being deserves respect. They feel pain like the rest of us.


  • #41
    kwikksilva
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 44 ✭kwikksilva


    All these people who think that cat/animal lovers are sad, let me say this, it is you who shows yourself up as being insensitive, and not us for think ing its terrible.

    Its the same guys who say "oh domestic pets have no emotions and we shouldn't care about them", that when they get to look after their friends dog for a week, they don't want to give it back.

    If you consider domestic pets to be in the same basket as pigs,rats and cattle, then you are a clown.

    Its different, and they don't deserve to be knifed for no reason.

    Its the likes of you and me that domesticised them in the first place for mankinds enjoyment so that it probably didn't even run away from the prick.

    As for the OP, i can see the point, i would not expect this in a broadsheet.

    But as for some of the followups from others...


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Karoma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,396 ✭✭✭✭Karoma


    kraggy wrote: »
    ...
    4. What's funny about that you juvenile twat.

    5. How about "Maddie" and "Missing" or "Scared"? That suit you better?

    Imbicile.
    Infracted. Do it again and you're banned.


  • #43
    dsmythy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,560 ✭✭✭✭dsmythy


    kraggy wrote: »
    Which is why animal abuse is so prevalent in society.

    They're not deemed as important as human animals. Why, I don't know. Some are more intelligent than others, but intelligence should not be the datum against which we judge whether or not a being deserves respect. They feel pain like the rest of us.

    You've never killed a poor innocent rat then no? Fair play if you havn't. One of the few.


  • #44
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    kraggy wrote: »
    5. How about "Maddie" and "Missing" or "Scared"? That suit you better?
    Well yeah, that's more of a big deal.


  • #45
    kraggy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,414 ✭✭✭kraggy


    Dudess wrote: »
    Well yeah, that's more of a big deal.

    My point is that what's so ridiculous about having the kitten's name and the word brutal in the same passage?

    Why is it so hilarious when a horrendous act has been carried out against an innocent creature.


  • #46
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    It's not - not even remotely.

    It's the style of how the article was written though - it seems so serious that it reads like a case involving a person... yet it's a kitten.


  • #47
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    1) The fact that the killing of a cat makes it into a national broadsheet

    2) The way it's a copy and paste job of a real murder story

    3) The fact that the kitten was "rushed" to hospital

    4) The fact that someone stabbed a kitten

    5) The juxtaposition of the words "Brutal" and "Fifi".

    Point one, the news is whatever people are interested in. People like their pets and this is a fairly outstanding story of a very unpleasant event.

    Point two, it read to me like standard broadsheet journalistic style. All of the articles read similarly, regardless of subject matter. The same turns of phrase tend to get recycled a lot. Maybe it's a house style. Maybe it's the editor. I don't care. That's "funny", if you're into really boring facts.

    For point three, pretty much anyone would rush a beloved pet to a veterinary clinic if it were injured. So, not funny.

    If you really do find point 4 funny you are displaying a pretty disturbing lack of empathy.

    I'll give you point 5 as being vaguely funny.


  • #48
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    AtomicHorror wrote: »
    Point one, the news is whatever people are interested in. People like their pets and this is a fairly outstanding story of a very unpleasant event.
    I'd say it's more a case of it being a slow news day.
    Point two, it read to me like standard broadsheet journalistic style. All of the articles read similarly, regardless of subject matter. The same turns of phrase tend to get recycled a lot.
    ... in reference to people, using such language in reference to a small animal is borderline hysterical. Actually I'm amazed it's in the Indo (rag that it is) and not the Star or Sun or Herald.
    For point three, pretty much anyone would rush a beloved pet to a veterinary clinic if it were injured. So, not funny.
    I think it's the language that's being referred to again though.

    I can't even watch RSPCA ads yet I understand what the OP is saying. Although it didn't make me laugh or anything, his point that the language is ridiculous and inappropriate is absolutely correct.


  • #49
    Harpy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,894 ✭✭✭Harpy


    i read about this alright its absolutely disgusting.. aw the poor little kitten.


  • #50
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    dsmythy wrote: »
    Difference between a kitten and a rat?

    Oh, did you miss that day in school? Let me help. Rats are rodents, kittens are felines. A rat observed out in the open is probably wild, untrusting of humans and perhaps aggressive towards humans if cornered. Most kittens are tame and entirely non-threatening to anything larger than a butterfly, and often not even to them. You can typically assume that a rat is unlikely to be owned and loved by somebody, at least not if you see one in the street. Rats in the wild and particularly in urban settings are associated with disease, and not unjustifiably. Kittens don't usually carry Weil's disease and are rarely a source of contamination resulting in disease or death in humans.

    But there is a point in which they are not that different. If you would pick up a rat, stab it repeatedly and throw it against a wall to die, you're still a total psycho and it's still not funny. The only difference here being that you actually have to have some stones to try and pick up a wild rat, and none at all to do so with a kitten.


  • #51
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    Dudess wrote: »
    Although it didn't make me laugh or anything, his point that the language is ridiculous and inappropriate is absolutely correct.

    I do get the point, but if it didn't make you laugh and it didn't make most of the people on the thread laugh, then I guess we can call it ridiculous and inappropriate but not really funny.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,568 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    kraggy wrote: »
    1. Not funny considering there's a direct correlation between animal abuse and violence against humans.

    Not that I've ever heard of, and it sounds like a pretty strange scientific inquiry for someone to embark upon.
    kraggy wrote: »
    2. Prove it.

    It was a term of art, Dudess has already addressed this.
    kraggy wrote: »
    3. They were hardly going to take their time now, were they?

    You mean they have kitty ambulances, and there is a big problem with overcrowding of the hospital baskets? Instead of morphine, do they give catnip?
    kraggy wrote: »
    4. What's funny about that you juvenile twat.

    It conjures up a ridiculous picture of a struggle between man and...kitten. Also, you have no evidence upon which to base your assertion that I am juvenile, or a twat.
    kraggy wrote: »
    5. How about "Maddie" and "Missing" or "Scared"? That suit you better?

    That's not a juxtaposition, but in any case if I were to say that the newspaper stories about Maddie McCann are ridiculous and overblown that does not mean that I think that child disappearance is ridiculous and overblown.
    kraggy wrote: »
    Imbicile.

    Why?


  • #53
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    Not that I've ever heard of, and it sounds like a pretty strange scientific inquiry for someone to embark upon.

    I think that's a reference to the finding that most psychopaths begin to push the boundaries of their deadened empathy by torturing and killing animals before they proceed to kill humans. The connection isn't at all as clear as the cop shows would have us believe. If I understand rightly, it's more an indicator of a pre-existing condition (lack of empathy) than a causative factor itself. Meaning that killing animals doesn't make you kill people, it just means that you may be lacking the emotional barriers that should stop you doing either.


  • #54
    kraggy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,414 ✭✭✭kraggy


    FFS

    How do you break up a persons post so that you can individually quote sentences? Should know this by now..


  • #55
    smemon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,467 ✭✭✭smemon


    Reading it again, i don't see what's wrong with the language... you guys are implying it's 'just a kitten' and doesn't deserve such respect or coverage...

    The language is appropriate for the situation... had the kitten sprung out of nowhere and slayed the guy you could understand... but when this guy deliberately sets out to kill the kitten and leaves it for dead, carries on his way and boasts about it later - this guys deserves to be taken down and named & shamed.

    Had this been your pet as a kid or your child's pet... you wouldn't just write this off as slow news... you'd want this guy locked up, heavily fined or forced to work with animals.


  • #56
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    In my opinion, it doesn't warrant such a style of story or to be located in the main national news - a brief in the local paper if there's room for it, and that's about it.

    Damn straight I'd want the bastard punished though.


  • #57
    nacho libre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,652 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    AtomicHorror wrote: »
    I think that's a reference to the finding that most psychopaths begin to push the boundaries of their deadened empathy by torturing and killing animals before they proceed to kill humans. The connection isn't at all as clear as the cop shows would have us believe. If I understand rightly, it's more an indicator of a pre-existing condition (lack of empathy) than a causative factor itself. Meaning that killing animals doesn't make you kill people, it just means that you may be lacking the emotional barriers that should stop you doing either.

    That's pretty much it.
    This alone is why the item is newsworthy in my opinion. It's not just someone displaying drunken agression. Most people who are agressive with drink towards other humans wouldn't dream of torturing an animal for kicks.
    With that in mind the sooner this person is caught the better as far as i'm concerned.


  • #58
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    kraggy wrote: »
    FFS

    How do you break up a persons post so that you can individually quote sentences? Should know this by now..

    I just do it by copying and pasting the quote codes. That said I did once accidentally attribute something Hitler said to a boardsie by using that method carelessly.


  • #59
    kraggy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,414 ✭✭✭kraggy


    AtomicHorror wrote: »
    I just do it by copying and pasting the quote codes. That said I did once accidentally attribute something Hitler said to a boardsie by using that method carelessly.

    Was it "I'm vegetarian. I don't kill kitties, I just kill Jews"?.

    Thanks by the way.


  • #60
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    nacho libre wrote: »
    Most people who are agressive with drink towards other humans wouldn't dream of torturing an animal for kicks.
    How do you know that though? And how do you know the guy wouldn't have done it if he was sober? Not trying to minimise how horrible it was, but we've no way of knowing it wasn't purely alcohol induced.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    EamonnKeane
    Closed Accounts Posts: 950 ✭✭✭EamonnKeane


    kwikksilva wrote: »
    Its the same guys who say "oh domestic pets have no emotions and we shouldn't care about them", that when they get to look after their friends dog for a week, they don't want to give it back.
    Because they enjoy the feeling it gives them, not because they love and respect it. A study published a while ago showed that people use pets to act out things they cannot with humans: positive desires such as to love and be loved, but also negative desires such as to control others.
    kraggy wrote: »
    My point is that what's so ridiculous about having the kitten's name and the word brutal in the same passage?

    Why is it so hilarious when a horrendous act has been carried out against an innocent creature.
    "Innocent" implies the potential for guilt which implies the ability to make moral decisions. You might as well write "E. coli found guilty of murder."
    AtomicHorror wrote: »
    Oh, did you miss that day in school? Let me help. Rats are rodents, kittens are felines. A rat observed out in the open is probably wild, untrusting of humans and perhaps aggressive towards humans if cornered. Most kittens are tame and entirely non-threatening to anything larger than a butterfly, and often not even to them. You can typically assume that a rat is unlikely to be owned and loved by somebody, at least not if you see one in the street. Rats in the wild and particularly in urban settings are associated with disease, and not unjustifiably. Kittens don't usually carry Weil's disease and are rarely a source of contamination resulting in disease or death in humans.
    Again with the humans! So pets are servants, then: good if they are nice to us. A rat is right not to trust humans. It is not its fault that it carries diseases; and cats cause allergies in many people. Kittens are tame because at that age their mother nurtures them. Cats are menaces to other animals, killing rodents, birds, rabbits, etc. Rats are mostly vegetarians or carrion feeders.


Advertisement