Friday, September 07, 2007

ST (7-9-07)

An interesting letter in today's Straits Times forum :-

Send animal abusers to IMH for treatment

It's something I know we've talked about on this blog before - the need for medical counselling and intervention for animal abusers. If we can somehow extend it to people who hoard animals too, that would be wonderful.

Labels: ,

13 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Isnt this the same guy who said that pigeons and crows are pests that should be eradicated...for some reason i was under the impression that nelson quah doesnt like animals

7/9/07 11:17 AM  
Blogger Dawn said...

Someone pointed that out to me as well - maybe he's had a change of mindset? :)

7/9/07 11:26 AM  
Anonymous apple said...

send all animals abusers to jail,no need IMH.And they should be cane too.Fineing them is no use.

7/9/07 1:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

7/9/07 2:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

what imh? (nelson quah no change of mindset, he just yakadeeyakadeeyakyakyakcxxk) i agree with apple. Animal abusers must be caned then go straight to jail. wong geng tong is a beast. similar beast like wong, do we really think that they go to imh will modify them into human beings? let's be realistic because to be realistic is to be truthful, positive and practical. our animals need us to be, they are suffering.

7/9/07 2:28 PM  
Blogger Dawn said...

Anonymous I am removing the comment about the cats being killed because I believe there was no evidence to link the cases to the perpetrator and hence may be potentially defamatory. A suspicion obviously is not good enough - hard evidence is needed.

Anonymous - I DO think that counselling may help. What's the point of caning someone who may not be able to understand the full implications of what they do? Jail time has already shown to be not very useful in the case of David Hooi. Proper medical help may be the best thing to do.

7/9/07 2:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

hi dawn, i disgree - especially if we are talking about caning for cruel acts. caning is physically painful and barbaric, so that IS the point. caning inflicts pain in the hope that the pain will act as a deterrent based on the memory of the cruel abuser. so that the next time he/she wants to burn a kitten, he/she remembers the pain from caning and may just be scared enough to perhaps, stop cruel act. counseling does NOT work on evil. and i don't know why my tax money was spent to feed david hooi in jail. the money should be spent on buying a damn good cane to whack the daylights out of him. no need to counsel and no panadol for these beasts! what medication? any scarce resources should go to deserving organisations such as cws and asd.

7/9/07 3:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

also, cruel beasts like hooi and wong - they don't need to be able to understand the full implications of whatever. the only way to protect the ones that we love from barbaric acts is to make them realize that there are higher forces. very unfortunate indeed.

7/9/07 3:28 PM  
Blogger Dawn said...

Anonymous - I'm not sure that would work either. You might cane them, and they might remember the pain, but STILL go out and do it. We're assuming that they think the way most people do - ie that pain is bad, and therefore we must try and avoid it. I'm not a psychiatrist, but I can imagine that some people might dissociate the two events and not really link one to another. After all the caning will happen months after the abuse so if it's a Pavlov's dog scenario we're trying to teach, I'm not sure that will work either.

7/9/07 5:29 PM  
Blogger budak said...

People who are mentally ill may not be aware that what they doing is wrong. What's the use of punishing them with caning instead of medical/psychiatric measures to treat them as well as prevent (or at least minimise the risk) them from harming others and themselves in the future? There's a world of difference (in the reasons and the response needed) between those who inflict harm as a result of their own mental issues and those who do so out of ignorance/prejudice/hate/selfishness.

7/9/07 7:25 PM  
Blogger Dawn said...

Well said Budak.

7/9/07 11:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

most cruel abusers are NOT mentally ill-ill. we wish only. many are more clear minded, plotting, smart and less inflicted than us. they are just plain cruel. they do not harm themselves, they do others in - women, kids, animals. they just are plain cruel. if i could choose, i will not hesitate to have them punished through caning and jailed as long as possible. i say cane. cane them hard. i wish i could cane hooi, wong and their so-called mental gang till their flesh tear, just like how i can imagine the defenseless cats were being tortured. but well, just too bad for me and my very wishful thoughts.....

8/9/07 12:03 AM  
Blogger Dawn said...

Anonymous I wouldn't know about 'most' animal abusers as I don't know many of them but I do know David Hooi has a history of mental illness. I don't think being in jail is particularly fun either - and it obviously did nothing to stop him from abusing again.

The question is whether punishment should be rehabilitative or seeks to punish the person, or both. As Budak said though, if the person is mentally ill, you can cane all you like - it may not stop them from coming out and doing the same thing again. The question then is whether it is about vengence or trying to stop such acts from occuring.

8/9/07 1:07 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home