From: vanetten@unix.cie.rpi.edu (John S. Van Etten)
Subject: Re: What would *you* have done?
Organization: CIE, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 20:31:58 GMT

David Caruso II writes:

>Josh (feinstei@vax.sonoma.edu) writes:
>> My question is: what *should* I have done that would have had a more positive
>> effect for the dog, the boys, and even the man himself? Was there something
>> I could have said or done that would have helped this man realize how fucked
>> up he was acting?
>
>	Hmm ... just remember that the dog is property, and that the owner of 
>said property is within his lawful rights to do whatever he wants to the dog.  
>Any attempt on your part to rescue the dog may result in the man having the 
>lawful right to shoot you.  At least this is the point of view of some hunters.
>Definitely not mine.

Now David, is this either fair or accurate?  Have you ever asked any
of us mean nasty old hunters whether or not we think this chap is
right in beating a dog, or is this just another part of the
beer-guzzling, brain-dead, macho-wanna-be, blood-lusting, killer image
of hunters which you've conjured up in your mind and presented before
in this forum?  I, for one, do not feel that animals should be beaten
for no good reason and have stated so many times.  And I have a slight
suspicion that I'm not alone in such views, among people on this side
of the fence.  Dogs are indeed property, but they are alive and as
such have certain rights that are not given to a block of wood or a
spare tire.


[stuff deleted]
>	If that would have been me, I would have concocted a plan to steal the
>dog, since I do not view animals as property, and because it is obvious that
>the man does not know how to treat the animal under his direct responsibility
>and care.  Yes, I know, such actions would not have been ethical.

Um, whether or not you or Russell Lawrence view a dog as property has
no bearing on the fact that a dog is indeed the property of its owner
under the law.  As such, your actions would not have been legal,
irregardless of whether or not they were ethical.


>But I don't
>care.  In this very specific situation (don't *assume* on any other) I would do
>so.  I would not advise you to do this, however, or anyone else, because you
>may get caught in the act and your life would become more negative.  I realize
>that my actions may cause some level of heartbreak for the family, but it's
>better for the dog, who's right to happiness must be taken into account first
>in this situation.  Humans have definite rights, too, but this man does not
>have the right, in my eyes, to make this animal dependent on him because he
>does not show the proper respect to the animal.  After the dog is safe in my
>custody, I would proceed to find a good home for the animal and leave it at
>that.  All this may be cause certain problems for me, but these problems are 
>worth it.
>	Doing the "proper" thing, and contacting various animal-safety 
>authorities, wouldn't have solved this problem fast enough for the dog's well 
>being, because it would have entangled the problem in the bureaucracy.  And
>that's not good enough.
>	Don't start imagining what you would do to me if you were in the man's 
>situation.  To do so, you must assume that you also had treated the dog in the 
>same manner, and that I am not clever enough to avoid getting caught.  I am.

Do you feel that others should have the right to do things which they
feel are OK, but which are either illegal or unethical?  This is just
a question, David.  I'm not going to say you are a bad person if you
feel this way.  I'm just curious.


John

--
******************************************************************************
               John S. Van Etten     vanetten@unix.cie.rpi.edu
       Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute  1000 MIPS GaAs F-RISC Project
       --"If sand didn't irritate oysters, there would be no pearls"--
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals