Look, you can find Hasan’s use of his dog as a prop for his streams distasteful. Heck, I’d agree with that sentiment.
But saying someone inflicted animal abuse is a serious accusation that has legal ramifications should it have occurred.
According to one account of a single expert which I provided, Hasan has not committed what I can only assume many in his field would be considered animal abuse.
You can question his credentials, you can question his legitimacy, you can question your own society’s definition of what constitutes animal abuse. Heck, you can even push your lawmakers to change the definition of what constitutes animal abuse.
But as it stands currently, it does not appear, from my admittedly very limited point of view, that Hasan did not commit animal abuse as it is currently defined in the laws surrounding it in the United States.
Look, I am even sympathetic to your argument, but when an expert in dog behavior is telling me this is acceptable forms of disciplining your dog, and I perceive that they are presenting their expertise in good faith, then I simply value their definitively expert opinion over the emotional reactions of overly hyped fans of one side or another in what I consider to be a toxic soup of debate bros accolades.
If you at least cannot see why I might think that, then I don’t know what else I can say to you other than I’m sorry that you feel that way.
Youre delving in too deep of water for me to address it here. I appreciate your point of view but we, as randoms on the internet, do not have to report to have nuanced discussion the law behind this.
The law is very limited in what it has the ability to litigate and honestly, our laws reflect this. We would also have to discuss what constitutes expert testimony. Expert opinion is not science its just relaying heuristics.
I’ve been consistent in my assessment from the get go. If you want nuance and not just moral oral we would need to start with mutual respect. That doesnt just materialize because we exchanged messages online.
Fair enough. And I’ll at least concede its unlikely we’d come to a satisfying meeting of the minds here. Animal Abuse and what constitutes it is admittedly a somewhat complex topic that is still and probably will forever be evolving.
And it’s not like I don’t get the emotional aspect to this. I’ve had life long pets (cats, not dogs), and I hate the thought of abusing any animal. But the debate around what constitutes animal abuse ranges from people wanting to grant human rights to some/all animals all the way to poachers not giving any fucks about any animal’s well being.
This is why I do default to experts. And yeah, its some expert on the internet that I simply perceive as having put in his two cents in good faith, but I just value that opinion over so many in the debate bros space because its just an endless sea of bias in that sphere. Ironically my bias against that corner of the internet means I have a bias towards others outside of that world.
That said, I’ll still stand by my belief that an expert opinion has more value than a non expert, but that doesn’t negate your opinion that an expert’s opinion isn’t consensus and one’s individual conscience shouldn’t be considered in the discussion.
Im not an expert dog trainer. Its also not a very prestigious title. I have loved an animal and have been responsible for their well being. From that perspective, I cant help but feel hurt for Kaya. Do I think the state has any right to intercede, probably not. I also dont have to compromise my beliefs because they shouldn’t act in this situation.
z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml 17 hours ago
Look, you can find Hasan’s use of his dog as a prop for his streams distasteful. Heck, I’d agree with that sentiment.
But saying someone inflicted animal abuse is a serious accusation that has legal ramifications should it have occurred.
According to one account of a single expert which I provided, Hasan has not committed what I can only assume many in his field would be considered animal abuse.
You can question his credentials, you can question his legitimacy, you can question your own society’s definition of what constitutes animal abuse. Heck, you can even push your lawmakers to change the definition of what constitutes animal abuse.
But as it stands currently, it does not appear, from my admittedly very limited point of view, that Hasan did not commit animal abuse as it is currently defined in the laws surrounding it in the United States.
Look, I am even sympathetic to your argument, but when an expert in dog behavior is telling me this is acceptable forms of disciplining your dog, and I perceive that they are presenting their expertise in good faith, then I simply value their definitively expert opinion over the emotional reactions of overly hyped fans of one side or another in what I consider to be a toxic soup of debate bros accolades.
If you at least cannot see why I might think that, then I don’t know what else I can say to you other than I’m sorry that you feel that way.
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 hours ago
Youre delving in too deep of water for me to address it here. I appreciate your point of view but we, as randoms on the internet, do not have to report to have nuanced discussion the law behind this.
The law is very limited in what it has the ability to litigate and honestly, our laws reflect this. We would also have to discuss what constitutes expert testimony. Expert opinion is not science its just relaying heuristics.
I’ve been consistent in my assessment from the get go. If you want nuance and not just moral oral we would need to start with mutual respect. That doesnt just materialize because we exchanged messages online.
z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml 16 hours ago
Fair enough. And I’ll at least concede its unlikely we’d come to a satisfying meeting of the minds here. Animal Abuse and what constitutes it is admittedly a somewhat complex topic that is still and probably will forever be evolving.
And it’s not like I don’t get the emotional aspect to this. I’ve had life long pets (cats, not dogs), and I hate the thought of abusing any animal. But the debate around what constitutes animal abuse ranges from people wanting to grant human rights to some/all animals all the way to poachers not giving any fucks about any animal’s well being.
This is why I do default to experts. And yeah, its some expert on the internet that I simply perceive as having put in his two cents in good faith, but I just value that opinion over so many in the debate bros space because its just an endless sea of bias in that sphere. Ironically my bias against that corner of the internet means I have a bias towards others outside of that world.
That said, I’ll still stand by my belief that an expert opinion has more value than a non expert, but that doesn’t negate your opinion that an expert’s opinion isn’t consensus and one’s individual conscience shouldn’t be considered in the discussion.
Again, all fair enough.
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 hours ago
Im not an expert dog trainer. Its also not a very prestigious title. I have loved an animal and have been responsible for their well being. From that perspective, I cant help but feel hurt for Kaya. Do I think the state has any right to intercede, probably not. I also dont have to compromise my beliefs because they shouldn’t act in this situation.