Posted on 04/26/2017 4:39:30 PM PDT by BlackVeil
An Army veteran was thrown behind bars Tuesday for allegedly tying her PTSD therapy dog to a tree and shooting him five times at close range — killing the poor pup for no apparent reason while a soldier filmed it.
...
Court documents obtained by the Fayetteville Observer describe how she teamed up with her boyfriend, Jarren Heng, 25, for the seemingly random killing earlier this month.
The couple allegedly led the white and gray pit bull to a wooded area before tying him to a tree and taking his life. ... ultimately was shot five times with a rifle as Rollins and Heng, who is still enlisted and stationed at Fort Bragg, took turns filming him.
“Let me hit him once,” Heng can be heard saying in the video.
Throughout the disturbing clip, he and Rollins both laugh and joke about the dog’s brutal death ...
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Is there *any* chance at *all*, that you will cease your attempts to justify your words?
/doubt it
“The dog still died very quickly in the video.”
Oh, well.
Hell.
That changes everything.
No big deal, then.
What do I have to justify? My analysis of the method of killing appears to have been correct.
You do not even attempt to dispute it.
Killing is not the same as cruelty.
From Salamander, post 137 :
“People who watched the video have described it blow by blow, as it were, and said the poor, trusting, loving dog laid there, looking up at those grinning demons, wagging his tail as he died.”
From Salamander, post 139:
“Maybe it “looked sick” because it was effing terrified, sensing that something was horribly wrong, in the extreme?”
You cannot have it both ways.
I have work to do.
At 9:08, I was made aware of the thread.
I did not explore it any further, other than to express my general disgust at the comments, thus far, , as I knew where it was going to go, based solely on the breed of dog, and frankly, I really, *really* didn’t want to know the gory details.
[it’s a side effect of my accursed, evil empathy, you know]
After answering a couple pings about snakes at WalMart, I left to go out to the shop to retrieve some things I just bought for a project I’m doing, got busy with something else, and was not on the thread from roughly 10pm until 12 am.
At 12:13, you decided to get up in my face, when I had, in no way shape or form, even remotely addressed you, personally.
[enter the shade of Lady MacBeth]
A few minutes after reading that, at 12:41, I had already, after a mere 2 minute search, found the truth of the murder...I mean matter.
You, on the other, had been busily shooting off rapid fire stupidity, the entire length of the thread.
In two minutes, I discovered what you had blithely missed for almost 4 hours, while yet roundly pontificating.
You, marktwain, simply blow my mind.
No matter what facts are laid before you, regardless of your own inability to sleuth the reality for yourself, you *still* attempt to self justify.
I might be impressed by your relentless tenacity to remain “right”, were it not for such a horrid cause.
You’re a wiz at throwing out logical fallacies, self serving semantics and deflection, I’ll give you that.
I will no longer waste my time, trying to ferret out what tiny vestige of humanity I thought must surely still dwell within you.
Have a nice day.
Yes, you certainly *do* “have a lot of work to do”.
I sincerely doubt you ever will, though.
As a long time dog owner I’m not buying your sanctimonious virture-signalling, snowflake. It’s a moral-selfie which no one else participates in or wants to witness. Some FReepers you’ve disparaged here made valid, rational and well-supported reasoning for putting a dog down. It was just their misfortune or misjudgement to proffer such reasoning before all the facts were known. Taunting and praddling on about the facts supporting your argument is of no credit to the discussion and it maligns reasonable posters who simply did not have all the facts.
Having gotten that out of the way the woman is clearly suffering from bi-polar disorder. I don’t think schizophrenia just for the fact her actions exhibit a pattern of consistent reasoning and decision making. A life lived in highs and lows with no control or responsibility over either is bipolar.
I pity the dog. He seems like innocent little chap caught up in the vagaries of instability and vice. The orignal owner who is the protagonist here only had the dog for two weeks, and that was two years ago.
I’m fairly confident the law will address this adequately. Her illness will likely be disclosed during psych eval and she’ll need to develop a course of treatment pursuant to her parole. The male accomplice may carry around a felony conviction.
As for slandering ‘victorian era values’ that is as revisionist as it is incorrect. Using animal fighting for entertainment pre-dates the historical record. It stands as yet another inappropriate, rude and predatious comment on your part. You bend reality and employ demagoguery in order to exploit history for your own self-aggrandizement while maligning posters who made a mis-judgement of fact. Very bad behavior.
drivel
by projecting your own bias to the dog, you go a bridge or two too far.
you know nothing of the dog’s state of mind
“This crime indicates sadism.”
I was not aware that it is a crime to put down a dog.
As for your diagnosis, yes, it could be the psycho-sexual disorder of sadism. Or it could be something else.
I wonder if you are a veteran.
“They planned it out over quite a span of time. Does not sound like a sudden freak out, to me.”
Well it’s not really ‘snapping’ or anything- the only thing sudden about sudden onset schizophrenia is how it initially seems to come out of nowhere. But once afflicted, planning something pointlessly evil is not out of the question. Being crazy doesn’t make her actions any better, it just may help explain it.
I figure the boyfriend was just going on with the plan rather than cooking it up.
#76: Lets see, ya don’t know why the lady with the AR tattooed across her chest, who was drinking and then decided to tie her dog to a tree and shoot it to death all while broadcasting this? Then you come out in support of these a$$holes and feel this is all perfectly legitimate behavior? Amazing.
And I'll repeat what I said at #133:
#133 No surprise this seems to be a spiteful revenge killing. My question is how could anyone capable of critical thought read this report regarding their behavior and not suspect these people were flat-out cold and ruthless? (That was you twain).
Then ya come back here still attempting to justify yourself. You have extremely bad judgement twain and this thread proves it.
“and shoot it 5 times”
It has been said that the first shot killed the dog.
That means that the dog was shot once. Subsequent shots caused no suffering.
That had zip to do with my comments here. Read the thread and try and keep up.
“That had zip to do with my comments here.”
Insofar as you repeated that the dog was shot “five times,” it most certainly does.
Saying that it was shot “five times” implies unnecessary suffering. It implies cruelty or incompetence. It is a very difficult thing from killing the dog quickly with the first shot.
“Read the thread and try and keep up.”
Live a few more decades and try to catch up.
You’re cherry picking here. Read the thread slick.
It’s a chicken or egg kind of thing. Did drug use trigger schizophrenia or did the schizophrenic use drugs to self medicate.
I don’t know that this behavior of shooting the dog is more a bizarre behavior (in the mental health sense) rather than debauched behavior in the drug and alcohol fueled loss of reason and moral capacity sense.
My experience with schizophrenics (either as family or clients) is that they are usually only dangerous when they feel threatened or cornered and they can’t plan their way out of a wet paper bag. This shooting was too organized and has elements of depraved thought rather than disorganized or confused thought.
One other thing, I had these people pegged from the moment I finished the article, as did others. Only a couple on this entire thread were so damn naive they were actually here attempting to justify their psychotic sicko actions. And you pop in here and want to debate me?
Gezuz...Ya best read the thread before making an azz out of yourself.
“Gezuz...Ya best read the thread before making an azz out of yourself.”
I read the thread before I posted, and the one thing I found conspicuously absent was rational thought on your part.
“One other thing, I had these people pegged from the moment I finished the article”
Another way to put that would be, “I read one article and swallowed the narrative hook line and sinker, without reflection or further investigation.”
“And you pop in here and want to debate me?”
So, you are outraged that anyone would dare dispute your infinite wisdom. Sounds mighty liberal to me. Swanning about in high dudgeon doesn’t change a thing.
I don’t know for sure what happened in that place and time, but of one thing I am confident: if the dog was killed cleanly with the first shot, there is no offense.
People are allowed to kill animals. Sorry if that twists your skivvies into a knot, but that’s how it is.
See the tag line.
I’d be perfectly happy to put down pit-bull haters (and ALL animal abusers)in exactly the same manner.
No you idiot, I read the article and based on that it was easy to determine these were a couple of violent sadistic dings. It turns out I was 100% correct. No?
You having a problem with that is flat out bizarre and puts you on the same level as a couple of others here who were defending these violent spiteful idiots.
Pull your head out.
Oh, dear God....yet another one enamored with textbook logical fallacy tactics.
I have not time to pick all of them apart so I’ll just address my favorite one, warped Victorians and blood sports.
*If* you had been paying attention to the discussion, you would have noticed that the specific point being made was a direct reply to whether “pit bulls” were ‘created as fighting dogs’ or not.
The Victorians did indeed first exploit bully breeds for their own deranged amusement.
Like it or not, that is fact and not “slander”.
For all your projections of “sanctimonious virtue-signalling”, you also carefully avoided the core issue, which is not that some people were initially “mistaken” about what went down, but that they, after finding out the truth, *continued* to defend their ‘mistakes’, and in extreme cases, expand upon them and double down.
The people who came onto the thread and postulated a ‘reasonable’ defense for the crazy bitch and her blood thirsty dude, for the most part, also openly expressed their ‘anti-pit” sentiments.
That alone showed ulterior motive, prejudice and no desire to even learn the truth, anyway.
If that is not so, where are those posters, now?
If we are addressing bad behavior, I would put intellectual dishonesty right at the top of the list.
Sorry, but you have offered nothing more than those before you.
It is becoming brutally apparent that some have had their consciences seared and no amount of appealing to their ‘better nature’ will have any effect.
When the killing of the dog becomes merely incidental, and the argument devolves into did the dog suffer or not, you know it’s lost.
As long as it was a quick clean death, the death matters not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.