missing dog found beheaded :(

I am certain that the word terrorism has never been used pre... pre 9/11 when referring to that kind of despicable act.
Terrorism has a very precise definition and it does not include unknown persons torturing pets for unknown purposes. Terrorist acts have an ideological or a political motive behind them. They're not irrational.

The fact that some people are now willing to use the word as soon as something bad happens says a lot about how paranoiac and paralayzed by fear our society has become - in a sense, exactly what the terrorists were trying to achieve, even though I was a bit tongue-in-cheek when saying the terrorists have won, given how corny that sentence now is.

The definition of terrorism is:
Dictionary.com said:
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.

The 'esp' means especially or usually but not always. I don't find myself paralyzed by fear when the term terrorism applied when someone terrorizes another. I do, however, like the word intimidation. Maybe we should use that instead of terrorism for domestic matters.

But remember: If everything is now called intimidation then the intimidators have won.
 
I am certain that the word terrorism has never been used pre... pre 9/11 when referring to that kind of despicable act.
[...]
I bet you're wrong, but I'm not going to do the work to prove it.

The fact that some people are now willing to use the word as soon as something bad happens says a lot about how paranoiac and paralayzed by fear our society has become - in a sense, exactly what the terrorists were trying to achieve, even though I was a bit tongue-in-cheek when saying the terrorists have won, given how corny that sentence now is.

Or the opposite. Society sees and names it for what it is, without reserving "terrorism" for the same kind of "ism" as say fascism or nihilism, but rather the kind of ism like obstructionism. Terrorism regards acts meant to terrorize. Terrorism is not an idealogy in of itself. Instead of making terrorism the end all, be all of evils, its becoming just another motivation or even classification for crimes.
 
But remember: If everything is now called intimidation then the intimidators have won.

:lol: true :)

I bet you're wrong, but I'm not going to do the work to prove it.

Well the FEMA's list do not include that kind of act.
http://www.fema.gov/hazard/terrorism/index.shtm

yeah, I know. FEMA.


Or the opposite. Society sees and names it for what it is, without reserving "terrorism" for the same kind of "ism" as say fascism or nihilism, but rather the kind of ism like obstructionism. Terrorism regards acts meant to terrorize. Terrorism is not an idealogy in of itself. Instead of making terrorism the end all, be all of evils, its becoming just another motivation or even classification for crimes.

Makes sense. But I wouldn't give anybody the benefit of the doubt in this particular time and age.
 
I read this this morning. It disturbed me a bit, and the guy is really ****ed up.
 
An act such as this was meant to terrorize the girl. What it was meant to say to her is, "Here is what I did to your dog. You're next." Of course, we don't know who killed the dog, or what his relationship to the girl is (it must be somebody who knows her, since the note was addressed to her by name).

This needs to be taken seriously, not only for the sake of the dog, but because people who commit such heinous acts often graduate to murdering humans.
 
Lets do the math:

Plane + World Trade Center = Terror

Terror + dead people = Cry

Dead dog + girl crying = Terrorism


See it all makes perfect sense...
 
I am feeling something mixed about this.
On one hand i would agree that decapitating a dog is not exactly an action worthy of praise. On the other hand, though, i am wondering how life could be for a person who focuses so much on a dog, and feels great loss if it is killed. In the end it is just one dog, not as worthy as a human being, and ussually just an object of projected emotions for its keeper.
In my own view, which is not very zoophilic, violence against animals should be regarded in the same way that 'violence' against one's possesions is; it should be understood only in regards to the suffering it may cause to the person who owns them.
 
I am feeling something mixed about this.
On one hand i would agree that decapitating a dog is not exactly an action worthy of praise. On the other hand, though, i am wondering how life could be for a person who focuses so much on a dog, and feels great loss if it is killed. In the end it is just one dog, not as worthy as a human being, and ussually just an object of projected emotions for its keeper.
In my own view, which is not very zoophilic, violence against animals should be regarded in the same way that 'violence' against one's possesions is; it should be understood only in regards to the suffering it may cause to the person who owns them.

It may not be human, but a dog is a living creature, and violence against living beings who mean no harm is a sign of cruelty. This is only magnified by the fact that this dog was this girl's friend. Whoever did this was sick, there really is no question about that.
 
This is the kind of thing that would cause me to take law into my own hands. Call me a dangerous citizen or whatever, but you mess with my dog, and you're dead.

I have no clue what some peoples' relationships to their pets are, but my dog is literally my best and closest friend, and my family member. You fudge with my family, and you better be half-way across the country.
 
This is the kind of thing that would cause me to take law into my own hands. Call me a dangerous citizen or whatever, but you mess with my dog, and you're dead.
Your dog messing with me means you'll both die. :D
Atlas14 said:
I have no clue what some peoples' relationships to their pets are, but my dog is literally my best and closest friend, and my family member. You fudge with my family, and you better be half-way across the country.
Dangerous citizen. :lol:
 
This is the kind of thing that would cause me to take law into my own hands. Call me a dangerous citizen or whatever, but you mess with my dog, and you're dead.

I have no clue what some peoples' relationships to their pets are, but my dog is literally my best and closest friend, and my family member. You fudge with my family, and you better be half-way across the country.

:clap: Maybe not to your degree, but I definitely agree.
 
Two unconnected comments:

It wasn't in the story posted here but the dog the girls medical aid dog which makes this crime even more sick in my mind.

"Making terroristic threats" has been a crime in most of the US since before the modern definition of terrorism. It means making a threat that is intended to cause fear of personal harm or violence. For example if you threaten to beat up your neighbor and there is a witness they can have you arrested for making terroristic threats.
 
Two unconnected comments:

It wasn't in the story posted here but the dog the girls medical aid dog which makes this crime even more sick in my mind.

"Making terroristic threats" has been a crime in most of the US since before the modern definition of terrorism. It means making a threat that is intended to cause fear of personal harm or violence. For example if you threaten to beat up your neighbor and there is a witness they can have you arrested for making terroristic threats.

QFT

I mean, if someone did that to my dog, I'd flip out...

...no, dogs aren't human and I've seen a lot of crazy things in my life, but it takes a pretty sick and perverted person to do that type of thing...I'd be afraid they wanted to do it to me next...
 
I am feeling something mixed about this.
On one hand i would agree that decapitating a dog is not exactly an action worthy of praise. On the other hand, though, i am wondering how life could be for a person who focuses so much on a dog, and feels great loss if it is killed. In the end it is just one dog, not as worthy as a human being, and ussually just an object of projected emotions for its keeper.
In my own view, which is not very zoophilic, violence against animals should be regarded in the same way that 'violence' against one's possesions is; it should be understood only in regards to the suffering it may cause to the person who owns them.

i agree to a point. I do hate over zealous animal lovers ALOT but jesus, its a f*cking severed dog head. If I found that at my door step (especially a dog that belonged to ME) i'd definately freak out too.
 
Top Bottom