AWKWARD ZOMBIE

Sorry to hear about your dog. B.C can be a harsh place. I live in Canada...except I'm in Ontario and we just got a whole pile load of snow.

not so awesome, huh admin? maybe try and understand what im saying before jumping to conclusions because you think that my view is completely wrong,

i mean that the only reason a rational person would kill a dog would be if the dog was trying to kill him. Obviously this man isnt quite all there, i think he should be helped, but not forced.


and noone has answered my question earlier. What makes a dog more important than a hamster?

Actually, she's more than just the admin. She's pretty much the reason why the Awkward Zombie forums exist in the first place. But anyway, what you said was "what makes hamsters any better than a dog?" I figured you meant it to be switched, or maybe I read it wrong or something like that. But anyways. Sorry if that sounds assholish, it's not meant to be.

Anyways, you think rational people would only kill the dog in self defense, and since this guy killed the dog for seemingly no reason, he isn't all there. And you agree that he needs help, but he shouldn't be forced. How do you help him then? 99% of the time people believe what they do is right. Sometimes they have to go through some weird rationalizing before they can see it that way, but most people view what they do as right. (these are all just my observations, feel free to rip them apart at your leisure) So this guy probably thinks he was right in killing the dog, whatever unorthodox reasoning led to that conclusion. So I don't really see you convincing him he's insane. Then if you can't convince him he needs help, and he's not able to distinguish between right and wrong, then how do you help him if not forcibly?

Whoah, chillax.

This is what I'm talking about:

No; if he is actually insane, he cannot go about as he pleases. It doesn't matter if he realized it was wrong or not; he's still obviously dangerous.

On the other hand, if it was an honest act of self-defense, that would change things entirely, but we're talking in a hypothetical context.

Edit: vvv Yeah prettymuch this. vvv

From my limited knowledge of mental health, I'm pretty sure that most mentally unstable people do not know that they are mentally unstable. So, if you don't force him into some sort of help program, he'll just go about on his merry way doing what he sees fit. He's being charged with a crime. So, nobhdy, either he is entirely sane and doing it in self defense, which should be easy to prove, or he is proven unstable, and put into rehab or under house arrest or whatever. Allowing him to be unstable and roam the streets is no better than allowing Hannibal from Silence of the Lambs to roam the streets. Sure, it's a dog and a dog isn't a human, but that doesn't mean that he doesn't have the capacity to murder a human, if he is insane.

I guess what I'm saying is that without full documentation of what happened or whatever I really can't say what should be done. Assuming the mane is insane, I don't see why nobhdy would want him roaming the streets after he has shown his capacity to kill. He should obviously be put into care. Not forcing him to be put into rehab is like denying him rehab. He doesn't realize he's sick.

Edit: never mind, Katie posted right before I posted this. She pretty much said what I guess I was saying. >_>

Dogs taste better. Duh.

I wouldn't give a rats booty if it was a dog or a catholic schoolgirl, unless that guy was doing it in self-defense, lock him up. Basketcase or no.

I don't understand the whole self defense thing here. The way I see it, from what Starseed has told us, this guy just walks up to houses, steps onto their property, and looks in. Any dog would be freaked out by that, so it starts barking. I'm not sure about Canada, but in America, if someone steps onto your property uninvited, the law doesn't apply to what you do to him or her. Well, I'm not sure if that's really a law, but I've heard it was.

So let's get back to the dog. Any dog would feel a need to scare off a stranger, to protect its home. I don't know if this particular dog was the barking-at-mailmen type of dog, or if this guy was just giving off some bad vibes, but either way, the dog felt threatened, and the man was tresspassing. This is clear.

There's one final element to be considered, which is that the dog was tied up to its doghouse. The man is in no danger, but he decided it might be a good idea to walk over to the angry barking dog and see what happens. Self-defense doesn't apply when you're putting yourself into a situation like this.

Watch out Nobhdy, I'm coming for you next.

The point of law and punishment, etcetera, is twofold:

1. To deter potential criminals from making these mistakes and getting locked up
2. To keep criminals and other dangerous citizens off the streets, so that they can do no more harm.

Now, let's consider this as if it were a different story. Let's say a dog from across the street got loose, ran across the street, and got into a fight with the dog there. If the dog from across the street ended up killing its opponent, what do you think would happen? The dog would be disowned, put in the pound, put to sleep, any of these. Probably the third option. Is it wrong to put a dog to sleep because it got overexcited and acted on its instincts? Of course it is. The dog is dangerous, it could happen again. Sure, it didn't know any better, but as sure as you are that this dog is innocent, you will find the poor carcass of an innocent dog on your front lawn tomorrow morning.

Now, I know you think this is an invalid comparison, because you wouldn't give a human being the death sentence for doing this, because that's inhumane. But he does deserve to be punished. If anything, he should know better than the hypothetical dog, and yet here we are.

Let's say this man is let go. Here's what happens: He may find his was to another home's property, looking in the window. A resident of that house, feeling threatened, may step outside and ask the man to leave. How do you think this is going to end? I'll give you a hint: Have you ever read Of Mice and Men? Same bark, bigger dog.

Thank you, Water. I was about to scream at everybody for this argument.

If I thought the guy did it in self defense, or wasn't actually aware of his actions, I would not wish physical harm upon him, or want to do so myself. Even with how much he hurt my friend.

I don't believe he's mentally instable. Maybe a tiny bit, but most people have that tiny bit of insanity to them. It's just how we are. But maybe I should've said more of the details of what happened so it wouldn't seem like he was actually in danger.

He does trespass, but it's not like anyone in the neighbourhood has huge signs on their lawns saying to keep off, so nobody could really do anything about that. It was creepy, but he didn't do anything besides stand there and look, so they just had to take it basically. Then tons of other people in the neighbourhood have dogs aswell, multiple ones, and most are outdoor dogs too.

But he set off for my friend's house. I don't know if he actually targetted her dog for some specific reason, but either way; He walks up, and the dog is tied up to it's dog house in the backyard. It barked at him, and instead of being a normal person and say, running away or telling the dog to stop, he went into her backyard.

I wasn't there, so I don't know if the dog attacked him or not on entering the yard, but either way, if he had that much of a warning from the dog, and was now indefinately trespassing, he couldn't call it 'self defense'. Well, I guess he could, but still. HE was the one who went into the backyard, HE was the one who got up close and personal. If he had just ignored the barking, he could have just gone about his business and left.

He shouldn't be considered on the self defense plea. Maybe he could go on the insanity plea, but even then, I think he should be put in an institution, or atleast kept their until he is rehabilitated. If he just goes back to his old neighbourhood, he's not going to be welcome. He doesn't really have anywhere to go except jail or rehab.

their letting him go because he has mental problems? O_o
shouldn't that be a reason to not let him go?

That's exactly what I was saying. -_- He KNOWS what he did. It's not like he thought he'd be able to slit the dogs throat and it'd get back up later and go "WELL, I CERTAINLY LEARNED MY LESSON ABOUT BARKING!" He knew he'd be killing it forever and didn't even care. Why shouldn't he get locked up? Because "Oooh, if we just smack his hand this time, he'll know next time he's not allowed to kill another neighbours yappy dog." Frikkin idiots.

I don't exactly agree. If he's mentally disabled, he may not be completely aware of the ramifications of his actions. I have friends with disabilities and they sometimes act out without realizing how their actions hurt those around them. But, I still don't think they should allow him to just go off with a slap on the wrist. He needs some sort of medical attention, as opposed to criminal punishment.

Everyone seriously doubts he wasn't aware of his actions because, supposedly, he had tried contacting the mayor's office for months, demanding they find a way to silence the dog's barking or make my friend and her family move. After months of no response, he felt he had the right to silence the dog permenantly, and that's when he killed it.

Personally, I think if you're well enough to contact the mayor's office, you're well enough to know you can't get away with killing an animal.

What kinda of arbitrary comparison is that? It seems that a lot of what you're saying is very speculative. You haven't even posted what sorta of disability the man has, and that makes a huge difference.

I don't know him personally, and they haven't revealed what his disability actually IS, which leads to my questioning how serious it is.

What has been proven is: he has a disability of some kind, he slit her dog's throat when they weren't at home, the rest of the neighbourhood is now incredibly on edge and doesn't want him remaining there or not getting any criminal punishment, and that his dad was lying when he said he felt his son's actions were justified. Since that last part was revealed, the case has been pushed back so we're still waiting to see what happens. And yes, we speculate that the defense is trying to come up with more than his disability for their case. BUT since we don't know what their entire case is, that's just a speculation.

But sorry if I'm upset my friend lost her dog and has to deal with this for so long, whereas normally this could have been solved so quickly. My aunt is mental disabled, but she's just as much a normal person as me. If she did this, I'd want her punished too, just like if anyone else did it. So my final speculation is: He can live on his own despite his disablity, he can contact the mayor's office for months, but he should be able to avoid punishment? Get him help if he doesn't already have it, but don't let that be all. That's my opinion.

Now I'm sorry for the ranting and if you still find what I'm saying offensive, then whatever. I'll be offensive. I still want to beat the crap out of the guy myself for doing this, disability or not. I'm a bitch.