yesterday against better advice i watched mainstream tv - a show called dateline on nbc. they had this cop in a small town in georgia (if i remember right) whose girl went to play with the neighbour's dog in the yard, and got bitten. the neighbour made plans to euthanize the dog. animal control took some time to respond to the cop's complaints. one day he drives back home (10 days or so after the attack), finds the neighbour's dog chained to a tree in the backyard. his family is not even home - they are out of town. however, he perceives an imminent threat, goes inside his house, picks up a gun and shoots the dog to death. he is brought to trial, is not only found not guilty by the jury (and by the viewers of NBC who voted online 76% to 24% that he was justified in his act) but this mockery ends with the jury pontificating to the neighbour and animal control about their guilt.
this post started out as an animal rights vent, but i would appreciate if anyone could help me make sense of this stuff, for i am beginning to lose faith in humankind.
sorry for the venting,
--ravi
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- man is said to be a rational animal. i do not know why he has not been defined as an affective or feeling animal. more often i have seen a cat reason than laugh or weep. perhaps it weeps or laughs inwardly - but then perhaps, also inwardly, the crab resolves equations of the 2nd degree. -- alasdair macintyre.