Monday, July 7, 2008

Revenge of the Dumpster Puppies

[Animal Cruelty] The tweaker who killed all but one of a litter of 14 pups by abandoning the canines in a dumpster during the dead of winter has been sentenced to 13 years in prison, that fucker.

So, that's that. Now all the pro-animal-cruelty freaks can get up in arms about how animals are not people, and how the sentence is excessive, etc. (Such people rarely see anything wrong with excessive sentences for, say, marijuana convictions.)

Now, obviously, in many cases--especially where the man's judgment has been crippled by his addiction--treatment rather than a draconian prison sentence is likely to be most effective. But sociopaths who willfully inflict suffering on other creatures--human or animal--must be dealt with, and a misdemeanor slap on the wrist is probably an ineffective deterrent to one whose sense of human values has been twisted.

In other news, despite having been named "Precious," the surviving dog is doing well.

(Brandon Burt)


  1. Mother Fucker !

  2. I'm sure the Utah Repubs will want him to run for office!

  3. This syphlitic abortion gets prison time that will likely exceed that the perpetrators of the drive-by shooting that killed a young girl will get.

  4. Turns out he's serving each of the 13 one-year terms concurrently, not consecutively, along with the 5-year drug sentence, so don't worry anonymous. He's basically serving no time for torturing animals. That's justice! (bb)

  5. um 13 years is a bit too long. i take issue with brandon's blind statement that "such people" are pro animal cruelty and rarely have any issue with excessive punishment for marijuana convictions. stereotyping aren't we a bit, brandon? not only do i think 13 years is just a little too long for this (they could have also offered this man treatment), i also think marijuana shouldn't be a crime at all. and no i'm not pro animal cruelty, brandon.

  6. i just posted that last comment and i'd like to add this. There is a huge discrepancy in the fact that a person can get 13 years for felony animal cruelty (they do deserve to be punished, certainly they deserve several years, maybe not 13), but it is only a misdemeanor with no jail time to beat up your wife to the point of nearly killing her. it is a felony to beat up a stranger in utah, but your wife, go ahead, its somehow less aggregious. And, Brandon, to say that if we don't necessarily support such a long sentence for this guy that we are pro-animal cruelty, is like dumb ass president bush calling everyone who questions or is against this war for oil, a non-patriot who doesn't support troops.

  7. Oh, calm down, anonymous. Thirteen years would have been excessive.

    All I was saying is that Utah officials are loath to enforce any animal-cruelty sentences. In this case, there was no penalty for animal cruelty. The five years was for the drug conviction.

    (Yahweh's statement in Genesis about human dominion gets a very broad interpreted here: Some people use it to justify exhausting the Earth's natural resources as quickly as possible--and also think it somehow means we can't punish animal torture. Anybody who thinks animal cruelty laws shouldn't be enforced is de facto pro-cruelty.)

    Obviously, the man was not in his right mind, either because of the speed or other psych issues. He'll be warehoused in prison and receive next to no support or therapy, so when he gets out, he'll likely be in worse shape than before, and it might not be just puppies that get dumped in the trash at that point. (bb)

  8. by your own statement, you contradict yourself. you say he will be in worse shape when he gets out of prison, and will do more harm than before, however you think he should get 13 years. also, someone who supports punishing him, but perhaps not for 13 years is not "de facto, pro animal curelty". don't say calm down, it's patronizing and dismissive of the very fine points i made of your contradictions. i suppose if i dont support the war i am anti-american now?

  9. Come on, anonymous. If you will pay attention, you'll see that I'm basically agreeing with you.

    I've said 14 years is excessive. I was also trying to say that the 5 years he will serve will be for drug use, not animal cruelty.

    Furthermore, imprisonment is probably the least effective way for society to deal with drug addicts. Treatment is a much cheaper, effective and humane solution.

    What I am taking issue with is a state of affairs in which society treats addicts like criminals, but feels that torturing animals is a God-given right.

    The anti-Americanism thing makes me wonder if you know anything about me. Stating your opinion--even if you're disagreeing with me--is as American as apple pie. I would never accuse somebody of anti-Americanism for exercising his or her free-speech rights.

    Not only that, but as far as the war is concerned, the real patriots are those who have verbally opposed it from Day One. If you're one of us, I salute you. (bb)


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.