Author Topic: That is taking parental responsebility serious  (Read 2488 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Covergaard

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 484
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://www.carstenovergaard.dk
That is taking parental responsebility serious
« on: September 22, 2006, 04:50:48 AM »
Yesterday a court in Denmark sentenced a father to 10 days in jail because he failed to discipline his two children of a age 5 and 6, when they mistreathed a cat.

The boys took the cat by its tail and swung it to the ground. The cat did hurt a tooth.

The father stood nearby and did not interfere. That send him to jail.

How would it have ended in the States? Would it be the boys that would have been punished in court instead?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Antigen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12992
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://wwf.Fornits.com/
That is taking parental responsebility serious
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2006, 11:30:10 AM »
It's really hard to say. Remember the old addage, the more corrupt the state the more numerous the laws? Well that is the case here. It would just depend on who decided to intervene, if anyone did. They could enforce the child neglect laws or the animal cruelty laws. They might combine the two, diagnose the kiddies instead of punish them, and start that whole nightmare scenareo. Or if a PETA zealot were involved, they might have the whole family under some kind of coercion. But more than likely, nothing would happen. Here in the states we tolerate cat people but we generally think they're a little strange. We really like our dogs.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
"Don\'t let the past remind us of what we are not now."
~ Crosby Stills Nash & Young, Sweet Judy Blue Eyes

Offline TimeBomb

  • Posts: 124
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
That is taking parental responsebility serious
« Reply #2 on: September 22, 2006, 11:37:24 AM »


Here in the US, we like to skin our cats.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
ick, tick.

Offline Antigen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12992
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://wwf.Fornits.com/
That is taking parental responsebility serious
« Reply #3 on: September 22, 2006, 09:45:51 PM »
:rofl:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
"Don\'t let the past remind us of what we are not now."
~ Crosby Stills Nash & Young, Sweet Judy Blue Eyes

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
That is taking parental responsebility serious
« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2006, 06:11:01 PM »
That's seriousLY.... sheesh.

At least get the friggin' topic right....
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline TimeBomb

  • Posts: 124
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
That is taking parental responsebility serious
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2006, 07:34:39 PM »
Quote from: ""Guest""
That's seriousLY.... sheesh.

At least get the friggin' topic right....


Awww... but hairless cats are so cute!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
ick, tick.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
That is taking parental responsebility serious
« Reply #6 on: September 23, 2006, 07:42:56 PM »
Geez, Denmark sounds like such a wonderfully tolerant country -- not!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Dr Phil

  • Posts: 169
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
That is taking parental responsebility serious
« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2006, 01:51:34 AM »
The cat only hurt a tooth? And the guy got 10 days in a cage? :rofl:

This guy I kinda new, he worked at a restaurant as a busboy that I also worked at. A couple years after I worked at that place I was the local news and they were talking about this guy who threw his girlfriends dog off their apartment balcony when they were fighting, killing the dog. He got arrested and charged with a crime, and I am pretty sure he got some jail time, like a year... I can't remember exactly.



Kids sometimes play a little rough with animals... news at 11!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
It\'s time to get real!?

Offline Covergaard

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 484
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://www.carstenovergaard.dk
Yes kids are rough and who is going to correct them
« Reply #8 on: September 24, 2006, 11:25:20 AM »
Kids can be rough on animals. Sometime they forget that a even a cat is a living animal instead of some electronic gadget and a living animal needs comfort and care.

Who has the assignment of telling them to care about living things. Us! - Their parents. And if we don't interfere, what would it tell them?

That is i Ok to hurt living things and perhaps some day that living thing is a human being.

He would not even have got a slap on his wrist from anyone if he had stepped in and stopped their play. The judge was very clear on that. He was not convicted because his kids did hurt the cat. He was convicted of not doing his job as a parent.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »