What a fucked up world

[tigertim20]

given this a little thought.
ok. so given the animal welfare act,wilful assaults against an animal can result in up to five years in Jail, reckless assaults a maximum of three years.
see here.
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/...%40rn_25_a&p=4

For assaults on a human, like common assault the maximim period of imprisonment is one year in jail
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p...%40rn_25_a&p=6

for an aggravated assault against another human, the maximum sentence is three years in Jail.
see here http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p...%40rn_25_a&p=6

Ok. SO we can see that clearly, in NZ we draw parallels between the treatment of animals, and the treatment of human beings right?
Ok. so it seems that we apply the same rights of respect, dignity, and fair treatment to animals and humans alike.

So why is it then, that if you have an animal that is suffering, and you DONT end its life humanely, you can be charged with an offence for prolonging its suffering
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p...%40rn_25_a&p=4
which comes with a penalty of up to a year for NOT ending the suffering
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p...%40rn_25_a&p=4

but with a human, we are legally obligated to continue the suffering of the person, and ending it is likely to result in prosecution?

[willytheekid]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/...icklinson-dies

"One of his daughters said on her father's Twitter account that he died "peacefully this morning of natural causes." His family said later that he died of pneumonia.

Police said they would not be investigating Nicklinson's death. "We can confirm he passed away," a police spokesman said on customary condition of anonymity. "His death certificate has been signed by a doctor, so it is not a matter for Wiltshire Police or the coroner."


R.I.P Tony
So glad this guy went peacefully with his family close by...and that the local police etc will not be investigating and placing further hardship on his family (, good on them!)

[Edbear]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/...icklinson-dies

"One of his daughters said on her father's Twitter account that he died "peacefully this morning of natural causes." His family said later that he died of pneumonia.

Police said they would not be investigating Nicklinson's death. "We can confirm he passed away," a police spokesman said on customary condition of anonymity. "His death certificate has been signed by a doctor, so it is not a matter for Wiltshire Police or the coroner."


R.I.P Tony
So glad this guy went peacefully with his family close by...and that the local police etc will not be investigating and placing further hardship on his family (, good on them!)

+1. A sad situation for all.

[Edbear]

given this a little thought.
ok. so given the animal welfare act,wilful assaults against an animal can result in up to five years in Jail, reckless assaults a maximum of three years.
see here.
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/...%40rn_25_a&p=4

For assaults on a human, like common assault the maximim period of imprisonment is one year in jail
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p...%40rn_25_a&p=6

for an aggravated assault against another human, the maximum sentence is three years in Jail.
see here http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p...%40rn_25_a&p=6

Ok. SO we can see that clearly, in NZ we draw parallels between the treatment of animals, and the treatment of human beings right?
Ok. so it seems that we apply the same rights of respect, dignity, and fair treatment to animals and humans alike.

So why is it then, that if you have an animal that is suffering, and you DONT end its life humanely, you can be charged with an offence for prolonging its suffering
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p...%40rn_25_a&p=4
which comes with a penalty of up to a year for NOT ending the suffering
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p...%40rn_25_a&p=4

but with a human, we are legally obligated to continue the suffering of the person, and ending it is likely to result in prosecution?

I don't think it's a case of being legally obligated to continue the suffering but that murder is illegal in this country. So the issue is what is murder in the case of the terminally ill?

[Paul in NZ]

The difference is that murder is taking someones life without their consent....

[Katman]

+1. A sad situation for all.

Flip, flop....

[oneofsix]

The difference is that murder is taking someones life without their consent....

and torture is to force someone to suffer pain.

What is the differentiation of harm? as in first do no harm.

If you are going to die anyhow, and apart from modern medicine would have already done so why not, providing the patient agrees, enable the passing to be as pain free and dignified as possible.

[Paul in NZ]

John Key has come out in broad support of euthanasia and I actually respect him for that.

Logically - if you leave religion out of it - it makes no sense to needlessly prolong life in certain situations. In fact assisting nature along is the decent and humane thing to do and the argument that people will be hurried along too quickly by rapacious grandkids etc is untried scaremongering. Where it get scary is when someone is faced with (say) loosing their legs and initially they think their quality of life is so diminished that they don't want to continue despite others leading productive lives with the same limitations. Obviously there needs to be some kind of test applied...

What I find utterly repulsive about all of this is that Governments (or at least politicians) who will not embrace debate on it will support wars and research into new weapons. Churches are worse - almost every army thats gone into battle has managed to find a Padre to assure them that 'God's on our side' despite it meaning the deaths of many innocents... How can we support institutional violence on one hand yet with hold some poor tortured soul the right to die on the other.... Its a case of its OK for us to kill lots of people but we won't let you die because all life is sacred.... Probably discussed over a nice steak dinner....

Its wrong....

Anyway - I'm glad his suffering has ended and no one is investigating it.... I'm sad for his needless pain and his families grief...

[Edbear]

The difference is that murder is taking someones life without their consent....

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p...DLM329311.html

[oneofsix]

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p...DLM329311.html

Ian Powell, director of the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists, which represents senior doctors, said he did not think euthanasia was happening in hospitals the way Mr Key made it out to be.

"The situation is much more complex than that . . . Sometimes continuing a treatment can prolong the agony for a patient, and not even keep the patient alive.

"By not prolonging the agony . . . even though the intent is not for the patient to die, it is sometimes a consequence."

By your snippet of legislation it is but then again that doesn't tell the whole story does it otherwise lawyers would go broke.

[Edbear]

By your snippet of legislation it is but then again that doesn't tell the whole story does it otherwise lawyers would go broke.

Hence the dilemma facing Drs. It should be a rare case that there is nothing they can do though and perhaps this case was one of those. In my father's. Add they offered to withdraw the anti-biotic drip that was the only thing keeping him alive. But despite being a literal skeleton and do weak breathing exhausted him he wanted them to keep it going. He died three days later.

[Drew]

Who cares, as long as we dont let those faggots get married our moral fibre is upheld!

I admit to suppressing a sob when I watched that vid, bloody awful it were.

The guy has already lost his dignity as near as I can see, let him have some fucking peace!

[mashman]

I wonder if anyone has asked the insurance company's what their stance on assisted suicide is?

[Drew]

I wonder if anyone has asked the insurance company's what their stance on assisted suicide is?

Go check your policy, no pay out for murder is common I think.

Might be wrong, was pretty drunk when the brainy types were talking about it.

[James Deuce]

There's no dilemma facing Drs, they kill people every day, they refuse to treat people who do not conform to a standard diagnostic process and they placebo the fuck out of people who are going to die anyway. They go great guns with cancer treatment because every cancer case is a live experiment allowing the collection of more data based on genotype, height, weight, age, background, social circumstances etc.

Likewise transplant technology. Every case is just an experiment for the Asperger's ridden surgeon to play with a victim and the pharmaceutical company to try out ever more expensive anti-rejection drugs.