I'm saying the justice system shouldn't hold dogs accountable for dog fighting. Did Pergamos mean to say that the justice system executes dogs for dog fighting? Or that the dog fighters execute them for dog fighting? Because I know the latter is definitely true. The former doesn't make any goddamn sense.
You've seriously never heard of owners being forced by law to put their dog to sleep because it kept mauling other dogs?
Not until now, honestly. But that seems like a preventative measure, not a form of accountability. It is unfortunate, but it seems to be a necessity.
Or otherwise held accountable for their actions, if not by a court of law, then by the higher authority which is the animal whose homes they live in? Never heard of a dog scolded or punished for stealing food or peeing on the furniture?
You can hold a dog responsible for those things to the same extent that the dogs themselves can think about the action. If they stole food, that means they weren't trained. They were simply hungry, and saw an opportunity to eat. If they peed on the floor, then they were either not given a chance to relieve themselves outside, or they were not trained to do so. Behavioral modifications can be made by holding the dog accountable for the simple need it has to have to relieve itself or to eat. You are adapting the dog to its new environment as that is not their natural state.
Do you see dog training as complex enough to be considered a form of accountability?
Maybe I should return to my earlier question. What is "fundamentally different"?
What, to you, constitutes a fundamental difference?
Is it a quality or capacity no other animal has?
Is it a quality or capacity no other animal has to the same degree?
Is it a unique set of qualities and capacities that no other animal has the same permutations of?
Is it some other condition which you can define?
Comparing humans to all the other animals, I would probably argue it is the first one that defines the fundamental difference, and maybe partially the second option in some cases. But that quality or capacity is going to be mostly related to that thing that grants us our consciousness and self-awareness. You can't have responsibility without those things. And of the animals that do have those things that aren't humans, there are few that have it to the degree to be able to be held accountable for their actions in most environments that include humans.
No, dogfighting trainers certainly kill dogs, but it is not out of any sort of accountability. The people who kill dogs for being fighting dogs are called dogcatchers, they work for the government and we generally don't hate them because they are doing what needs to be done. Can't have vicious dog roaming about.
Fair enough. But my point is that humans were responsible for the viciousness of those dogs, and should be punished for it. The killing of dogs that are dangerous is incredibly unfortunate. But as you said, it has to be done. More animals shouldn't have to suffer because some piece of shit ruined a dog's life.
My overall point in this whole discussion is that humans, having the greater impact and potential, should have the most responsibility/accountability of all other animals. They are capable of greatness that no other animal could possibly achieve, and so they should be held to a certain standard of behavior, environment and genetics permitting. And that general responsibility for everything around humans makes them different from other animals.
EDIT: Better?
