Judge rules your dog IS family.
- By Maggot
- The Bear Pit
- 42 Replies
As much as I'm for the law in general...does that mean we have to legally concede furries are human now? That'd be a bummer.
I knew a guy in Kansas who was more attached to his pet crayfish than most people like their own kids. Someone on Instagram had a pet crab that lived for almost 10 years. Is something that would normally be a wild animal, but that's in human care for whatever reason (medically incapable of being returned to the wild, etc) and has formed a non-normal bond with people (foxes, possums, or even the famous squirrel P'nut) supposed to be considered "less" of a pet?
I don't know that there's a good "yes/no" answer to it, since the level of emotional investment the person has in the animal is more important than what the animal is.
Yessir, that is precisely my point.
There comes a time where you either say "that is a human, and that is an animal (not a human)", or you allow the 58 genders ideology to bleed over into classifying the role and weight of a non-humans into human lives based off of one person's perspective and emotions vs another's.
Where and how does one draw the line?
It is a slippery slope. I think it a good place to allow for the working out of the great American experiment and within reason let the judge, or jury, make the decision.
Why and how was the animal killed. Was it self defense? and accident? or a malicious act?
Pure accident, I see no need for any punishment, civil or criminal. If it was an act of malicious intent, or abject carelessness, then yes, the owner should be entitled to some sort of compensation above the mere value of the animal. Its not about whether its an animal or human, its about the damage, emotional or financial to the owner.
Again, it should be left to a reasonable judge or jury, which is questionable to find.