Attacking a Pet is not a crime, it's the owner's fault!

Terrus · **Posted:** Sun Apr 15, 2012 3:25 am

I have to agree there seems as if there is a lack of consistency here since if you order a pet to attack someone you are responsible by law. On the flip side obviously as demonstrated here if someone attacks a pet it doesn't matter. I think a fair solution to this issue would be to implement a law penalty for attacking someone's pet.

Baldric · **Posted:** Sun Apr 15, 2012 10:20 am

Terrus wrote:

I have to agree there seems as if there is a lack of consistency here since if you order a pet to attack someone you are responsible by law. On the flip side obviously as demonstrated here if someone attacks a pet it doesn't matter. I think a fair solution to this issue would be to implement a law penalty for attacking someone's pet.

I think you might want to double-check your logic there.

Terrus · **Posted:** Sun Apr 15, 2012 4:39 pm

I did, even triple. If it's flawed hook a brother up and explain to me why it is.

Nightwing · **Posted:** Sun Apr 15, 2012 4:52 pm

Terrus wrote:

I have to agree there seems as if there is a lack of consistency here since if you order a pet to attack someone you are responsible by law. On the flip side obviously as demonstrated here if someone attacks a pet it doesn't matter. I think a fair solution to this issue would be to implement a law penalty for attacking someone's pet.

Hooked.

Baldric · **Posted:** Sun Apr 15, 2012 4:58 pm

Yeah if you order your pitt bull to murder someone, you are going to be responsible for killing the guy. You can't be like, "LoL my dog did that."

If someone kills your dog, they won't be charged with homicide. They'd get a lesser charge. The two cases are not analogous.

jhorleb · **Posted:** Sun Apr 15, 2012 9:34 pm

Baldric wrote:

Yeah if you order your pitt bull to murder someone, you are going to be responsible for killing the guy. You can't be like, "LoL my dog did that."

If someone kills your dog, they won't be charged with homicide. They'd get a lesser charge. The two cases are not analogous.

Yup, I was thinking the same. Which means we should probably just have a property damage charge for attacking someone's pet. Theft would do as a substitute.

Terrus · **Posted:** Sun Apr 15, 2012 10:26 pm

Baldric wrote:

Yeah if you order your pitt bull to murder someone, you are going to be responsible for killing the guy. You can't be like, "LoL my dog did that."

If someone kills your dog, they won't be charged with homicide. They'd get a lesser charge. The two cases are not analogous.

Dude of course you won't be charge with homicide, no where did I say that. Where I'm from if you were to kill someone's pet you would be charged for animal cruelty much like Michael Vick. So like...How is my logic flawed? I'm still kinda confused. If you attack someone pets, you should be charged for -something-

Baldric · **Posted:** Mon Apr 16, 2012 5:44 am

Yes you should be charged with something.

The fact that ordering a pet to kill someone is a crime is completely irrelevant to the discussion. There is no asymmetry. You were trying to show that you should be charged with something when you attack a pet. You started with the premise that ordering a pet to kill someone was a crime. It doesn't matter. One doesn't follow from the other. They are different actions.

ninja_ardith · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:21 pm **Posts:** 4452

What do you think that any of the kingdoms in SK are democracies, or that there are PETA-like organizations out there decrying the maltreatment of animals?

Let's not get this topic going because it's only going to end up being horrid.

Baldric · **Posted:** Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:54 am

Well, it should be a crime. Can you name a society at any point in history in which you could walk up and just kill someone's horse for no reason without breaking the law?

Shattered Kingdoms

Attacking a Pet is not a crime, it's the owner's fault!

Who is online