Am I the only robot who likes beating his dogs?

Not dogs necessarily. But I've killed a lot of animals, for pleasure.

>>39324281
Dogs, ducks, elderly it doesn't matter to me love that stuff

>>39324281
I kicked my dog all the time. I sometimes want to murder my pets for no particular reason and sometimes i just want to hug them forever.

>>39324306
Which animals, and how? Used to starve my dogs so that when it was attack time they would be extra feisty.

>>39324281
You're in good company, my friend.
It's great fun to break one of their legs and pout their food at the top of the stairs.
Then throw them to the bottom once they finish it.

File: bf41ec97f96d8cae30ff36821c356a67.jpg (119KB, 1112x749px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1112x749px

sage sage sage sage sage sage sage mods delet thread now

I abused a dog and a I hate myself for it. I still cry about it years later.

File: els.jpg (135KB, 741x739px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 741x739px

how do i report all of you to the FBI? thanks

let me guess, you're also the suicidal trap type?

saged

>>39324281
>>39324306
>>39324312
>>39324314
>>39324334
>>39324344
Delete these posts immediately

people who harm the animals which we held a symbiotic relationship with since prehistoric times should be burned on a stake also sage

>>39324371
But you'd do it again, wouldn't you? And I'll bet the next time you'd even let yourself enjoy it.

You all should kill yourselves. Abusing innocent animals is one of the most cowardly things possible. But I guess that makes sense since this board is full of cowards. When you abuse animals it's probably the only time in your lives that you actually fell in control, and that's pathetic.

>>39324421
Would it be better if they were doing this to sentient beings, to their fellow man? Animals are expendable. Basically they are slaves for us to do as we please with. That is the the order of things.

No comment. Gestapo is watching.

>>39324507
You're utterly wrong, but I'll dig a bit to show you why.

Why do you think they're 'slaves'? Their intelligence being lower?

>>39324537
On 2nd thought, you're taking too long to respond, and in the end, I'd be attempting dialogue with someone retarded enough to attempt 'justifying' animal abuse.

Please change your ways, seriously.

Saged.

>>39324537
They are not sentient. Religious types would argue they don't have souls. Scientific minds would say they don't experience the same range of emotions or much of any psychological comprehension of their experiences. Either way, they are lesser forms of life. Their suffering, although not mandated, is also irrelevant. They are here to do as we please with, because humans have dominion over the planet.

Actually kill yourselves you pieces of shit.

>>39324401
this is true. i used to have remorse but i love doing it so much now

>>39324614
>They are not sentient.
https://www.livescience.com/39481-time-to-declare-animal-sentience.html


>They are here to do as we please with, because humans have dominion over the planet.
Humans also have declared that animal abuse
is a crime. Therefore, humans have declared that you should be allowed no freedom outside a cell. So if that's so important to you, then turn yourself in.

>>39324281
When I was a kid we had a cat. I used to kick the shit out of it when I got back from school. Sometimes I could feel it's rib cage when I was kicking it. Felt so powerful and in control when I was doing it but felt really bad afterwards.

>>39324739
humans are stupid. they deserve to be beat just like dogs. kys mutt lover

>>39324421
Just autistic to take this all seriously

today i caught flies barehand and trew em in the backyard spidersweb, love to watch the spiders wrap em up in the sticky and eat em while alive

File: hakuryuu-ren-44718.jpg (30KB, 367x527px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 367x527px

>>39324739
Sort of ridiculous thats its considered a felony when some livestock we consume are even smarter than dogs and cats. Blatant hypocrisy. The counter argument being cows and pigs arent domesticate falls short because they actually are and could even have more personality given the opportunity. They say they want to protect animals while persecuting "criminals" while they hold a cheeseburger on their left hand and a gun on the right. Im not even vegan but the subject is about morality not consumption

>>39324879
Even an animal would kill another animal to survive, though. But I guess your argument would be, "Well, humans already can survive on plants, and meat is just a luxury item." Yeah, I agree that it's hypocritical to a large extent. I personally don't eat any meat.

But, while it's not completely free from hypocrisy, there is definitely still a LARGE moral difference between killing for food and beating/killing for fun.

>>39324739
Those same humans like sausage and eggs. Just look at our agricultural methods. The animals are crammed into little pens and live in conditions that PETAfags would cry about, and probably do. The thing is most people don't care. What might be considered animal abuse is ignored in the name of expediency and it's only natural that by extension of this, there are people who hit their dogs, for instance.
It may not be nice, but our evolutionary superiority gives us the right to do whatever we want with animals, and if aliens conquered this planet I would expect we'd probably receive a similar treatment. The difference is humans would rise up and crush their oppressors because we are intelligent, organized beings. Animals that exist on this planet today can never do this. They are not intelligent no matter what your article says, their feelings and memories are limited, and they are subject to our whims. That's just nature, in which we are the top predators.

>>39324948
Humans are still murdering animals. Period

I already responded some to killing animals for food here >>39324948

>The animals are crammed into little pens and live in conditions that PETAfags would cry about
I agree it's morally wrong.


>The thing is most people don't care.
This is evidence for showing that lots of humans are shitty, rather than evidence for showing that humans should be allowed to beat and torture animals for pleasure.


>>39324952
>gives us the right to do whatever we want with animals
You mean the ability to. Not the right to.

>if aliens conquered this planet I would expect we'd probably receive a similar treatment.
I wouldn't, but let's not bring imaginary aliens into this.


>crush their oppressors because we are intelligent, organized beings.
So basically anything less intelligent and organized is fair game for torturing for fun in your mind? How about babies?

>no matter what your article says
It's not just an article. It's re: the findings of over a thousand studies.

I won't even step on an insect if I can avoid it, and I even treat things like wasps and venomous spiders with mercy. I'd hope that if some creature with dominion over me came across me, it'd be so generous.

File: jerryno.png (177KB, 331x362px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 331x362px

its over guys
the PETA moralfaggots ruined this perfectly good dog punching thread with whiny bullshit and their fee-fees

>>39325088
faggot.

you are a loser

File: m1 carabine.png (258KB, 494x555px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 494x555px

How hard can i sage this stupid piece of shit thread?

>>39325058
Animals are not self-aware, and in my opinion there must be a basic level of consciousness that exists before a being is fundamentally entitled to have rights and be protected. Animals are our slaves, to use as we see fit, even in this century. Babies are exempt because they will grow into human beings. A rabbit for instance, whether a baby or not, will always be a dumbass rabbit. Whether pet, free, or in a stew it is subject to our will and that is the order of things. Animal rights are a joke.

>>39325175
not enough ;3
this is my bump to counter your sage

I don't even like animals that much, but still find this thread pretty gay.I bet you're not the alfa psychopath types irl, but actually just a bunch of NEET faggots

>>39325206
>Animals are not self-aware
Many animals were proven self-aware. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-awareness#Animals

But self-awareness shouldn't be the sole deciding factor of whether or not it's okay to beat it for your pleasure.
The presence of feelings, for example, is crucial (not saying they're identical to humans):

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/canine-corner/201303/which-emotions-do-dogs-actually-experience
> dogs have all of the same brain structures that produce emotions in humans. Dogs also have the same hormones and undergo the same chemical changes that humans do during emotional states. Dogs even have the hormone oxytocin, which, in humans, is involved with feeling love and affection for others.

Besides, it seems to me that if you do actually enjoy harming animals, you do it partially /because/ of their sentience. Otherwise you'd be cutting up rocks and papers with the same sick enjoyment.

>>39325265
Can confirm

>>39325108
I Will kick my dog extra hard because of them

>stop beating what i don't like to beat
it's not like dogs do anything for us anyway except spread disease and leech society's resources
it's time to put the """"man's best friend"""" meme to sleep

>>39324281
t. Michael Vick

>>39324948
>But I guess your argument would be, "Well, humans already can survive on plants, and meat is just a luxury item

I had already told you this wasnt about consumption. My argument is why isn't it a crime for companies to do this to animals? And why don't you hold the consumers who buy these products accountable for the mass murder and daily torture. They are in a sense supporting these so called atrocities? The people who eat meat do it for pleasure, and the people who hit their dogs also do it for pleasure. Both groups are sadistic, there's no difference.

>>39325485
Theyre also fucking our wifes while were wagecucking

>>39325425
Well, I think you're confused about the definition of sentience, but inflicting pain and terror is a component of sadism, if that is indeed what we're talking about. However, it's better for such psychopaths to prey on animals than their fellow human beings don't you agree?

>>39325521
>Both groups are sadistic, there's no difference.
I think the former group (meat-eaters) is *careless* rather than *sadistic*. "Out of sight, out of mind. But this meat tastes good, and that's what I'm getting out of it." 99.9999% of them would refuse to beat an animal themselves, let alone watch someone else do so.
Meanwhile, the latter group is literally focused on the sadism of torturing animals.

>dog is being all cute with his squeak toy, chewing it and making it squeak, rubbing it on my leg wanting me to play with him
>stab him in the snout with a really sharp pencil I just sharpened

Don't recall his reaction, but he was bleeding and he had a pencil graphite scar on his snout for the real of his life.

Remember every time you step on grass or kill a plant, its experiencing the same thing as an animal---bodily death and cell death---except it doesn't have a brain to give it the sensation of pain and it has no mouth to scream.

Vegetarians BTFO

>>39325559

>inflicting pain and terror is a component of sadism
Right. So you're acknowledging the animals have feelings, and that's a requirement for your enjoyment of beating and torturing them in the first place.

Why don't you think feelings are a crucial part of determining whether or not you should have a /right/ to torture something?
I would actually argue that it would be more moral to torture a sentient human without feelings (theoretically) than a nonsentient animal with feelings.

But there are studies I already pointed to that proved sentience in animals, so not even sure where this is going. You say you don't think I understand what sentience is, but hopefully you do think the scientists studying the topic understand what sentience is.

>However, it's better for such psychopaths to prey on animals than their fellow human beings don't you agree?
Both = morally shit behavior. But honestly, an animal is pretty unlikely to do anything deserving of being tortured, whereas humans definitely frequently do things worthy of torture IMO. But yeah, I'd say no torturing of humans or animals is the obvious right way to go, anon, regardless of the dumb 'jollies' it gives you.

Were you unable to connect with animals as a kid or something, out of curiosity?

>>39325575
Just because x isnt doing x doesnt absolve them from their crimes. I thinknthe majority of the citizens know about the slaughter houses by now, but they could careless because their tastebuds are more important than sentient life. We can do this all day, but I have some work to do, and you refuse to see how things actually are.

>they wouldnt beat an animal
But they sure would shoot it in the face to eat it

Goodbye

>>39325781
I'm agreeing both are bad, but I'm just saying the morality of them IS different. It's weird that you aren't acknowledging any difference.

But yes, okay, goodbye!

>>39325854
morals are subjective. and you can't stop me from. beating my dogs.

File: 1490393153006s.jpg (2KB, 125x125px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 125x125px

>>39324281
kys

human fucking trash

>>39325878
>morals are subjective
To an extent, but torturing an animal for fun is pretty clear-cut 'immoral' as we know the definition of the word.
And you know it's immoral and that's probably part of why you enjoy it. Maybe you should stop.

>>39325683
Creativity, self-awareness, and self-determination define whether a being is sentient or not. It would be headline of the New York Times, not an article in Psychology Today if a being other than ourselves developed this level of consciousness. All those articles are saying is that some animal species may have a level of awareness not previously attributed to them. I'm sure we'll all know when dolphins have an underwater LHC and start building Trident Missiles though. Maybe then we should finally be worried about how we're treating animals.

>>39325948
Maybe animals aren't hardwired to care about the things that humans consider it intelligent to care about. That doesn't make them less sentient than humans. You also have the wrong definition of sentient, anyway.

But you've probably gone over in your mind 10,000 times why you're 'justified' in beating animals, just like a child rapist would 'justify' their behavior as well with some other similarly shit philosophy.

This is just who you've decided to be.

>>39324281
Yes, now get the fuck off my board, filthy degenerate

im fucking triggered reeeeee