Cat Microwave Question More Explicitly Stated

[WaimanaloSlim]

How cute is the cat?

[pete fabrizio]

I'd say let his hand go, but not because I'm appealing to some delicate utilitarian balance. It's because my sense of justice says screw the guy. If it were some other scoundrel who had nothing to do with the cat that's about to be fried, then the cat is toast.

[blankoblanco]

This question is way too easy. obv. f*** the guy's hand.

It would be more interesting, although slightly more convoluted, if the guy who would lose his hand was guilty of something less sinister, completely unrelated to the cat, but we still had to choose between taking his hand or letting the cat die. Obviously if he's choosing to do something as screwed up as frying a cat in the microwave, most will think he's a sicko who deserves to lose a hand.

[CalledDownLight]

A finger is worth more than a cat. Looks like a cat is getting fried here. I can't see a cat being worth the pain or suffering to a person.

[Jeff_B]

uhh it seems like even if I arrived late and the cat already died id prob still want to cut of the guys hand..

[Luisgallo]

I analyse this on 2 levels:

1) Under a pure legal point of view whet he is doing is a criminal act and it has to be stopped, he therefore has to be selfconscious of the consequences of his actions against the law.
In the end: yes I will stop him and yes I won't have regrets.

2)On a more subtle level:I assume that if the guy is doing so he, in a certain way, finds pleasure.
Under these circostances I also assume he will do it again.
This is enough for me to stop him.
I can but I dont assume that this vicious pleasure might escalate to humans.

A possible solution would be reporting the guy to police saving his hand and letting the cat die, but I would have been witness of a criminal act, had the chance to stop it with no risk for myself.

I do definitely stop the guy and I don't care of his hand.

[Luisgallo]

[ QUOTE ]
.

However, I would not support a criminal punishment of losing a hand for the crime of torturing an animal.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an intersting point: surely the punishment of losing a hand for for torturing an animal is way out of line, but here you are not punishing the guy, you are stopping his action and doing so he loses his hand.

If we assume that first we have to stop the action because the action is clearly wrong in principle we cannot be responsible for the consequences of doing something which is towards the law.

[Mat Sklansky]

[ QUOTE ]
surely the punishment of losing a hand for for torturing an animal is way out of line

[/ QUOTE ]

why is that out of line?

[WaimanaloSlim]

If it were up to me, he'd lose the hand.

Then his hand, preferably microwaved, will be fed to the cat.

[Luisgallo]

Because is not alligned with our standards of punishments.

In modern western civilization, apart from the deviation of death penalty, there is not any physical act towards the criminal besides reclusion.