Thursday, January 28, 2010

ZenTiger Breeding Dangerous Animals [Updated]

Is it the animal, or the breeder that is to blame? We were discussing dog attacks on the previous post. The points about overly aggressive breeds are well noted. There's another angle to this debate as well though that has me fuming. I think this stems from the surge in stories of cruel and evil owners, and how they contribute to the problem. It doesn't just happen with animals though, which makes it all the more sickening. Have a read of this and think:

LONDON (AP) — A pair of British children who lured two other youngsters to a secluded area and subjected them to a horrifying catalog of near-fatal abuse were sentenced to at least five years in custody Friday.

The attackers, 10 and 11 at the time, were convicted of robbing, beating, and stabbing their victims with sticks and bricks. One child, 10, had a sink thrown onto his head, while his nephew, 9, was forced to eat nettles. The violence included sexual degradation, Justice Brian Keith said during the sentencing.

and this:

The younger brother, now 11, was told in his police interview what his brother had said. Asked why he had also stopped the attack, he responded: "My arms were hurting."

Campbell read out the next exchange, saying: "If your arms hadn't been hurting, would you have carried on?" to which the reply was: "Yeah."

On being played the mobile footage, seen by the court yesterday, the younger brother was asked how he felt. He replied: "All right," but then added that he felt bad.

Asked why, he answered: "Because I didn't know [my brother] were recording it."

And here's the reason:

The attackers suffered from a “toxic home life,” according to Peter Kelson, who represents the eldest brother. Kelson said his client watched ultra-violent films like the “Saw” series, had access to pornographic DVDs, drank cider, had 10 cigarettes a day and smoked cannabis grown on his father’s plot from the age of 9.

And also this:

Kelsen's mitigation statement noted that the older brother had viewed pornographic and violent films, smoked his father's home-grown cannabis and regularly drank vodka and cider. The court was told of a series of violent incidents involving the brothers in the two years before the attack.

The older boy attacked a younger child, punched and kicked two teachers, and punched a mother with infant children on a local street. His sibling hit one teacher, a woman, and headbutted another, the court heard.

And would banning smacking really make a difference? Look at the other indicators and the effectiveness of Social Services:

A serious case review, to be published after the trial but leaked to the BBC, concluded that Doncaster social services had missed dozens of chances to intervene with the boys' natural family and thus prevent the attack.

I have young sons who could not comprehend that others there own age might be capable of such evil. It's a chilling thought that they might be set upon by wild, rabid animals. It's an incredibly sad thought that these boys are simply the product of their environment, because such an environment is totally unnecessary. But why did it become inevitable?

And one last thought. Why are the parents not sentenced for criminal acts. They've broken so many in adopting the training regime they did.

Would micro-chipping really help?

Think of the children - the victims and the perpetrators

0 comment(s):

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.