[John O]

Technically he should be charged for theft of another's property. Unless of course the cats did not really belong to the inmate and ownership cannot be assigned to anyone. In which case the guard can claim them as his own and as his property he can do what he wishes with them.

In any event I think 1 year is pretty excessive. Restitution in cases of theft of this type works better.

Pretty poor way of disposing of excess property but you can't expect everyone to be good stewards.

God Save America (Please)

[SarahW]

He wasn't charged with a property crime, idiot, he was charged with cruelty to animals. I guess you figure there is no such thing. Glad not to know you.

[steve-b]

Actually, in addition to the aggrivated cruelty of animals, he should have been charged with making a terroristic threat -- this depraved act was obviously meant to convey a willingness to kill anyone and anything on the slightest provocation.

[CasearianDaoist]

Animal abuse is criminalized in the state of New York, as it should be everywhere. There is actually an ASPCA unit in the NYPD with radio cars, uniforms and even guns.

[neutrino]

Restitution in cases of theft of this type works better.

Very well. If and when he can bring those kittens back to life, I'll consider that option.

[Lazamataz]

In which case the guard can claim them as his own and as his property he can do what he wishes with them.

No you can't. You cannot torture or cruelly kill even your own pets.

In any event I think 1 year is pretty excessive. Restitution in cases of theft of this type works better.

I am in favor of any sentence over one year, even by a day, since that falls into felony category and will prevent the person from owning a firearm legally. And this prevention is something I wish to see, inasmuch as the guard has shown a certain depraved indifference to living things and their welfare.

And it's not about theft, it's about cruelly killing animals for no good reason.

[MississippiMan]

Technically he should be charged for theft of another's property.

Realistically he behaved more like an animal than a human and I think he got off light. I'm ashamed that I share humanity with such people.

MM

[stands2reason]

Wow. Kittens are "property." God, I'm glad you don't live in my neighborhood.

[Conservative til I die]

What an ass you are. Most free-market lovers can tell the difference between living property like a pet and inanimate property like a toaster oven.

[gg188]

he should be charged for theft of another's property.

Absolutely correct. This is the first time I believe I have ever seen what is a tenet of libertarianism ever stated outside of drug threads. In his natural state, among man's rights are dominion over animals (given him by his Creator, though lots of atheists are onboard with this as well), of course. Animals have no rights (except to animal worshippers, which we become when we start treating them like people and like gods.)

This isn't an argument for animal cruelty. This is merely a statement of an aspect of political philosophy.

I personally am not libertarian. I hope that some libertarians here haven't fired up a blunt yet this morning and will come and cogently argue the conservative side of this issue based upon property- and natural rights.

(It's a separate issue, but human nature can't help but consider the utter insanity of a one year sentence for this man's cruelty, while rapists and all variety of human vermin routinely roam free, rewarded, even INCENTED in crime. We have become a nation that gets more outraged at the death of an animal than the murder in a clinic of a human baby, legal, even ritual. We institutionalize the worship of NATURE. We've had threads like this before, and we see the results of the left's takeover of education and academia in the last forty years. Common sense humanity morphs into literal state-defined "sacred cows."

You can see how we got where we are, and where we are going.