Ducks deliberately mowed down

[Catherine]

This is a shocking pieces of animal cruelty. The man on a riding mower deliberately ran the baby ducks over.
For this he gets a one year sentence. He is unlikely to serve the full year. So at most he will spend a month in jail for each life he so cruelly destroyed.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/davidmack/florid....toBxqv04a
The landscaping company he worked for makes excuses for him. Of course they hired him in the first place.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...mower.html

It is disturbing that there are people like that out there who are willing to commit horrific acts. I wouldn't want him living on my street.

[Tobi]

Oh how very very sad and unnecessary. And yet another sorry example of some peoples' psychosis. Poor little creatures. It is such a pity the innocent have to bear the brunt of human craziness. I am just so grateful that there are many caring people in the world.

[Catherine]

I hope there is more of us than there is of them.
I think there always was cruelty. We just hear about it now and we can react to it. That is a good thing. We can boycott companies that condone cruelty. The company that hired him should have reacted differently.
The courts that barely sentenced him will be under pressure to do better. The politicians will be under pressure to create better laws.

We can't save these baby ducks, but they will not be forgotten. They will be come part of a growing pressure to treat animal cruelty seriously.

[LPC]

(08-02-2015, 05:20 PM)Catherine Wrote: The company that hired him should have reacted differently.

Indeed. The company even distorted the truth by saying that the man couldn't see the ducks in the long grass. But witnesses saw the man smile and laugh before deliberately running them over, and even reversing back to get some more.

The court, in sentencing him, clearly believed the act to be deliberate, so why did the company try to say otherwise? The man is clearly seriously ill mentally, and a long stretch in a mental hospital should have followed the prison sentence. But the company still tried to mislead people by saying that the crime wasn't intentional - even when the man himself admitted doing it deliberately.

Perhaps the company is trying to protect its reputation (for which word read "profits" $$$$). If I lived near, I certainly wouldn't use them for any gardening work!

[Catherine]

The company would have protected its reputation more if they had acted as upset as everyone else. (I do mean acted because I doubt if they would have been sincere) Minimally they could have said they would investigate and would determine if their lawn mowing procedures were at fault.

By saying he couldn't see the ducks they are saying that the fault is in their lawn mowing practices and therefore we should expect it to happen again...and they don't care anyhow.

If the man did it deliberately it was an act of intentional cruelty and not the employers fault. They could state that no other worker has ever hurt an animal.

Maybe this has happened before, but this is the first time there were witnesses. How often has the mower come back with blood on it.

In the end the company will cost itself more by their behavior. It could have been a family pet or a small child in the grass. I think many people will not trust them to do the work safely. I don't like their attitude.