Pets Why is it illegal to torture a dog or cat, but not an ant, or any animal that is tiny in size?

[Dan26]

I was thinking this when I saw this spider on my wall yesterday. I didn't kill it. I got a glass from my cupboard, and trapped it, and then let it free outside.

Yet if I had killed it, no one would have cared. Yet if I did the same to a dog, I'd be in jail.

Why is it that whales, (even those in huge numbers like Minke Whales) are so revered, yet an ant is not? An ant is just as remarkable as a whale; it just doesn't seem as remarkable because we can barely see them. Ant societies have division of labour, communication between individuals, and an ability to solve complex problems. Surely if an ant was the size of a whale (in which case they would rule the earth, but let's not think of it that way) we'd see them as something we shouldn't kill.

It's almost as if as soon as an animal gets to around a foot in size, it becomes socially unacceptable to torture it, but anything smaller is okay to kill for no reason.

 

[Dan26]

Look at the complexity of this living organism. It has the same DNA building blocks as humans. It just evolved differently hundreds of millions of years ago, into a different evolutionary path.

The micro biology world is just as amazing (perhaps more so) as the macro.

 

[boncer34]

Because an ant wont cuddle up to you.

 

[Dan26]

Because an ant wont cuddle up to you.

The irony is that dogs only do this because we have selectively bred them to be more docile, over the 20,000 years or so that humans have been domesticating and breeding them.

Wolves are the ancestors of Great Danes and Chihuahuas. Wolves were (are) hunters and killers.

 

[Coledinho]

Because they are **** ugly. Treatment is always rated on hotness.

 

[Worldheroxx]

At my school in year 6 a dude got sent home after lunch for putting a drawing pin through a fly

justice was served

 

[Dazb86]

Because they are insects.

Apart from Bees they can **** off really.

 

[THRILLHO]

Because they are **** ugly. Treatment is always rated on hotness.

Exactly.

You dont see men holding doors open for fat ugmos

 

[DREAM TEAM BUFF]

At my school in year 6 a dude got sent home after lunch for putting a drawing pin through a fly

justice was served

Really he got sent home for that

 

[Worldheroxx]

yes
our teacher was a major animal loving tree hugging greenie, this was in primary school when u always had the same teacher for all classes, and sometimes he would replace the hour english or maths block with an hour of tree planting.

when he saw the fly he went skitz and sent the guy to the front office and them his mum came got him early

 

[Dan26]

Whales are ugly.

Our guilt at hurting animals is proportional to the physical size of the animal.

What about mice? They aren't insects - they are mammals like us. They share 99% of the same genetic code we do. They give birth to live young, produce milk, have hair, a backbone and mammary glands. And they look cute. But I'm not going to be prosecuted by the RSPCA if I kill one. Why not? Because it's small, that's why.

Doesn't it have as much right to live as you or I?

 

[Schism]

Because if you went to jail for killing an ant we'd all be sent to jail 50 times a day without even knowing what for ?

 

[THRILLHO]

Whales are ugly.

Our guilt at hurting animals is proportional to the physical size of the animal.

What about mice? They aren't insects - they are mammals like us. They share 99% of the same genetic code we do. They give birth to live young, produce milk, have hair, a backbone and mammary glands. And they look cute. But I'm not going to be prosecuted by the RSPCA if I kill one. Why not? Because it's small, that's why.

Doesn't it have as much right to live as you or I?

How do you explain the culling of kangaroos and camels in rural Australia?

They're both bigger than dogs and cats.

 

[BarneyBent]

Dogs and cats are typically pets. They belong to people, and have a relationship with those people. If you were to kill one, you'd be destroying their property and causing them grief.

If you were to kill somebody's pet spider, you would probably be found liable, if they pressed charges.

On the torture part, a bug's consciousness is not at the same level as a dog or cat. While torturing them is frowned upon, it's not illegal because the animal almost certainly doesn't suffer as much as a dog or cat would. That's the logic, anyway.

 

[Dan26]

On the torture part, a bug's consciousness is not at the same level as a dog or cat. it's not illegal because the animal almost certainly doesn't suffer as much as a dog or cat would. That's the logic, anyway.

On the level of consciousness... surely that's all relative.

There might be an advanced living species on anorther planet who is so far advanced of us, that they might consdier our consciousness to them, is what a bug's consciousness is to us currently.

It's pretty much accepted that there was an original ancestor (probably some primitive form of bacteria.) about 3.5 billion years ago. From this, the tree of life spawned, with natural selection allowing some life forms to evolve totally differently to others.

Any living organism that has a brain, has consciousness. The problem is we only see it as relative to humans. We see any non-human life form as having a level of consciousness below ours. But what is the cut-off point? How "dumb" does a species have to be before it's level of consciousness is deemed okay to kill?

 

[Dan26]

How do you explain the culling of kangaroos and camels in rural Australia?

They're both bigger than dogs and cats.

I suppose because they are seen as pests to humans. But does that mean the particular kangaroo that was killed (it is a mammal like us sharing 99% of our genetic code) didn't have the same right to live as you or I?

I could argue humans are a pest on the planet. Partticualrly in some third world countries like Nigeria where people breed and breed and breed, and the planet is struggling to feed and house them.

Do we kill them? No. We look for other answers such as education, which will ultimately help keep the population lower as the countries become more "first world."

Yet we cull kangaroos.

It's probably eaiser to just kill 50 million Nigerians but we correctly look for the harder, more complicated, long-term method to keep the human population under control.

Maybe such a longer term thought process should be considered with the culling of animals?

 

[Simmonds2Hislop]

I suppose because they are seen as pests to humans. But does that mean the particular kangaroo that was killed (it is a mammal like us sharing 99% of our genetic code) didn't have the same right to live as you or I?

I could argue humans are a pest on the planet. Partticualrly in some third world countries like Nigeria where people breed and breed and breed, and the planet is struggling to feed and house them.

Do we kill them? No. We look for other answers such as education, which will ultimately help keep the population lower as the countries become more "first world."

Yet we cull kangaroos.

It's probably eaiser to just kill 50 million Nigerians but we correctly look for the harder, more complicated, long-term method to keep the human population under control.

Maybe such a longer term thought process should be considered with the culling of animals?

50 million Nigerians would put up a much better fight than some Camels.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

The same reason you do not need ethical clearance to experiment on them; they lack a developed nervous system.

 

[Bourky23]

 

[carn tigez]

I suppose because they are seen as pests to humans. But does that mean the particular kangaroo that was killed (it is a mammal like us sharing 99% of our genetic code) didn't have the same right to live as you or I?

I could argue humans are a pest on the planet. Partticualrly in some third world countries like Nigeria where people breed and breed and breed, and the planet is struggling to feed and house them.

Do we kill them? No. We look for other answers such as education, which will ultimately help keep the population lower as the countries become more "first world."

Yet we cull kangaroos.

It's probably eaiser to just kill 50 million Nigerians but we correctly look for the harder, more complicated, long-term method to keep the human population under control.

Maybe such a longer term thought process should be considered with the culling of animals?

But that's where it comes to the natural instinct of protecting your own before others. We put human life ahead of all else, rightly or wrongly who knows, but as the dominant life form on the planet it is really our choice to make.

 

[Caesar]

NSW law defines an "animal" for purposes of the act as any vertebrate.

Interestingly, the one exception to this rule is that crustaceans are also classed as animals, but only when they are in a location where food is being prepared. Presumably crabs and lobsters become sentient when they enter a restaurant - not unlike my father.

Jokes aside, it is a fairly arbitrary definition but as people note it is one borne out of two things - practicality and identifiability.

Identifiability is simple - it is easier to identify and feel for other vertebrates (e.g. a bird) than it is to identify with a slug.

Practicality - well there's a host of problems. Pursuing legal action for people injuring anything within the animal kingdom ranges from the difficult (how much is it going to cost to prosecute someone for pulling the wings off a fly?) to the impractical (most domestic pest control methods would become inhumane) to the patently impossible (how do you go about prosecuting someone for injuring a placozoa?).

That said it is clearly not a black and white issue and given that social mores are a moving target I'm sure we will see things evolve and change. A hundred years ago very few laws against animal cruelty existed at all. Who knows - perhaps in another hundred years, Leonardo da Vinci will be proved prescient when he said one day the murder of an animal will be regarded as equal to the murder of a human being.

 

[Foot Tickler]

But I'm not going to be prosecuted by the RSPCA if I kill one. Why not? Because it's small, that's why.

Depends on the mouse. If it's someone's pet, you'd be liable for charges. If was a wild mouse pooping in your pantry, and you use a mouse trap - no problem. If you flat out tortured one to death, I'm sure the RSCPA would be interested.

Like in this case. It depends on how you kill it, and for what reason. Even pest animals have basic protection. Reason why insects aren't is because it is assumed they cannot feel pain, but we know mammals like mice, dogs and cats can.

 

[woopedazz]

I suppose because they are seen as pests to humans.

The same outlook many people have on ants and spiders.

But does that mean the particular kangaroo that was killed (it is a mammal like us sharing 99% of our genetic code) didn't have the same right to live as you or I?

Now you are moving away from the legality of killing animals and towards your own personal beliefs.

 

[Foot Tickler]

Now you are moving away from the legality of killing animals and towards your own personal beliefs.

Yeah, whether an animal "deserves" to die or not is an entirely different story. Personally, I don't think any animal "deserves" to die. When other animals get eaten it's just a part of nature, most of the time we kill for convenience or if the animal is bothering us. But if the animal is at the wrong place, at the wrong time - we have our reasons for killing them there but I can't really see the reasoning behind a dumb animal "deserving" something it can't comprehend.

 

[Foot Tickler]

Our guilt at hurting animals is proportional to the physical size of the animal.

Nope. And I can give you two examples - someone hurting a maltease terrier vs someone hurting a fox. Guess which one will tug at people's heartstrings more? Depends on a) how cute the animal is and b) its status in the human world. Size has little to do with it. I think cruelty is cruelty no matter the animal and if people are really going to make distinctions of what is cruel based on arbitrary tags, then they don't really understand the meaning of the word.