Comments on: Are Dead Animals Still Animals? http://www.framingbusiness.net/archives/149 Writings of Gavin C. Schmitt Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:54:53 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Carsten http://www.framingbusiness.net/archives/149/comment-page-1#comment-158 Carsten Fri, 15 Dec 2006 08:47:42 +0000 http://framingbusin.setupmyblog.com/2006/are-dead-animals-still-animals/#comment-158 I agree with your line of reasoning concerning animal-carcasses. Law should protect citizens from aggressions and punish the offender for causing suffering or loss. In this case: 1) Has Hathaway himself suffered? Oh no! 2) Has the carcass suffered? No Conclusion : No suffering caused, no punishment necessary But the judge has another goal: punishing not acceptable behavior. And here my line of defense would be (probably in vain as the need of some people to deem others is VERY strong): Again: Law should protect citizens from aggressions and punish the offender for causing suffering or loss. The only suffering Hathaway is blamed for is obviously in the head of some people because THEY do consider his doing as not acceptable. But it is not even he who caused this suffering because it is of those peoples own making: It is their own resentment which they are suffering from. Is it really possible to send Hathaway to jail only because he did something which disturbed the mind of others? Should we then not be send to jail altogether because we at least once a day annoy somebody with our doing or not doing ? Is such a law a constructive tool to build a free country? I agree with your line of reasoning concerning animal-carcasses.

Law should protect citizens from aggressions and punish the offender for causing suffering or loss.

In this case:
1) Has Hathaway himself suffered? Oh no!
2) Has the carcass suffered? No
Conclusion : No suffering caused, no punishment necessary

But the judge has another goal: punishing not acceptable behavior.
And here my line of defense would be (probably in vain as the need of some people to deem others is VERY strong):

Again: Law should protect citizens from aggressions and punish the offender for causing suffering or loss.
The only suffering Hathaway is blamed for is obviously in the head of some people because THEY do consider his doing as not acceptable.
But it is not even he who caused this suffering because it is of those peoples own making: It is their own resentment which they are suffering from.
Is it really possible to send Hathaway to jail only because he did something which disturbed the mind of others? Should we then not be send to jail altogether because we at least once a day annoy somebody with our doing or not doing ? Is such a law a constructive tool to build a free country?

]]>