Star One Smart Blog's

Yes, there's this sad story from Hawaii, where a family pet (Caddy) was dog-napped from a golf course shack and eaten by some (hopefully hungry) Filipinos. Dan Collins posted on this tragic event yesterday (as a follow up to Ace's original post) and not surprisingly, much learned commentary resulted, starting with SarahW's agreement with the sentence these misguided individuals received...

"Stealing a pet to kill and eat it is worthy of five years. Get your own dog, fillipino dog feasters."

then JHoward's rejoinder...

"That’s rubbish, SarahW ...

My point is that emoting is where nannyism comes from. Are we aware that striking an animal with our car is, because of this hypersensitive subjectivity, a legal hit and run in increasing numbers of jurisdictions?

What if I think it should be criminally illegal to the tune of 90 or 180 days to key my car and I convince a bunch of other people to agree?

“Just about right” is a mob’s sentiment. In our jail-happy, well-I-think, madly subjective legal climate, it’s an assault on reason. View a couple jury interviews to see just how ungrounded we’ve become."

From there, some excellent discussion, with, at last count, 150 comments.

My comments? Well, we can't really emotionalize the law's penalty phase. But we can't underutilize the penalty eidolon, either. What would be satisfying to me (beating these two dog-hungry mental defectives with a shovel) would be offset by a quickly administered, appropriate penalty.

I doubt these cats will serve 5 years in the pokey. But however long they're in for, lets hope they suffer a dog-eat-dog existence, with few creature comforts.

---

Dan envisioned a nice book coming out of all of this...
;D

---