Having just read a sickening story in the paper over here in the uk, I just had to create a thread for the poor bird.

 

`A father killed his sons pet budgie during a drunken rage by throwing it against a wall over & over again untill the bird was dead`

 

Apparently, in this mans defense, he said he wouldn't have done it had he not been drunk, as if that's any kind of bloody defence for carrying out such an act of cruelty! He's due to be sentenced later, no doubt he'll get off with a slap on the wrist, he should go to prison for what he did.

 

Animal cruelty sentences are always too light, as is human cruelty. Judges are out of touch with society.

This is such a sad thing to hear about. Isn't it a shame what the drink can do to a person. And no doubt he will get off without the penalty deserved. It so bad thinking of the pain this bird had to go through... I can only hope that the poor thing's neck broke on the first throw and he felt nothing from that point on. RIP little one. So sad!!!

Edited March 6, 200916 yr by chrissy0705

Awww

What a horrible thing. I agree that animal cruelty needs to be penalised much stronger. They need better animal police and CSI's to properly investigate situations and prosecute the persons responsible. Persons who commit animal cruelty are far more likely to commit human injury and murder too

 

That mad man, may have killed "just a little bird" but next time when he is feeling raged and wants to lash out, will it be the dog next, or perhaps even his son??

It's very sad and I agree, people who commit animal cruelty should get a worse punishment.

l have nothing nice to say about this.

 

Poor budgie

Well, if he says he wouldn't have done it if he wasn't drunk, perhaps he should be banned from drinking.

 

Furthermore, perhaps he ought to spend the rest of his life cleaning up animal poop in a zoo or wildlife centre (under supervision obviously) for his crimes rather than being given a free ride in prison at taxpayers expense.

 

Perhaps it is time to re-think the justice system, because clearly spending time in prison is not a productive use of time.

Put these individuals who do these things to work somehow, to correct the damage they have caused by their crimes in so far as is possible, if not for that individual budgie, for other animals.

Awww

What a horrible thing. I agree that animal cruelty needs to be penalised much stronger. They need better animal police and CSI's to properly investigate situations and prosecute the persons responsible. Persons who commit animal cruelty are far more likely to commit human injury and murder too

 

That mad man, may have killed "just a little bird" but next time when he is feeling raged and wants to lash out, will it be the dog next, or perhaps even his son??

 

It's disgusting that people can be allowed to get away with such terrible acts. I do believe things are changing though and animal cruelty is being treated more seriously. Maybe society is becoming more aware of the link (which you pointed out) between animal cruelty and cruelty to other humans as well.

 

You may not have seen this story since you are not in Melbourne, but I was glad to see that even though someone was under severe stress at the time of harming an animal, they were still held to account for their actions.

 

http://www.theage.com.au/national/pigeon-p...81009-4xbp.html

 

The one thing that annoys me in the outcome of the story is that the animal was treated at the Lort Smith Hospital but the judge sentenced him to make a donation to the RSPCA. Lort Smith is an absolutely wonderful animal charity and is terribly overlooked. I can't understand why he was not made to donate to Lort Smith instead.

Lort Smith also go money out of this. He had to pay a $500 fine to the RSPCA but also had to pay the Bill for treating the Animal at the Lort Smith.

 

It's normal for people to get fined and have to pay the RSPCA but if they also have to pay for the treatment then this goes to which ever clinic treated the animal. The article does not read well and first time I read it I thought that he only had to give money to the RSPCA I know a lady who works for the Lort Smith and she told me that he has to pay the birds medical expenses.

No sorry I didn't go into detail about that because it was in the article. But Lort Smith didn't actually make anything out of the incident as they were only compensated for the cost of euthanasia. My son has had one of his budgies euthanased there and they charge a lot less than a local vet AND they have a couple of absolutely awesome vets who have avian specialisation.

 

It's only *my* personal opinion, but I think since they are the organisation that treated the injured bird and they are a struggling charity, it would have been more appropriate to order that the $500 went to them. JMHO

Oh I agree whoever treated the bird should get the compo payout. But most Judges and the like do not know that place like Lort Smith and Lost Dogs Home and the 100s of other not for profit shelter need the compo as much as the RSPCA.