CEO Kicks Dog: Outrage Ensues

[Geilinor]

Wow. That's a workable, mature policy. You're totally not going to be intensely disappointed every single day of your life.

You aren't subjecting laws to referenda (which is frequently problematic anyway), you are apparently intent on subjecting every single legal decision to referenda as well, which is an utter joke.

I'm intent on subjecting laws to referenda, stop setting up a straw-man. A society without rulers is entirely feasible and nobody would have any reason to be disappointed, horizontal organization is one such concept. If you're going to be sarcastic the entire time, you're wasting it.

How can you have rules without people to set them up and enforce them?

[The Tiger Kingdom]

I'm intent on subjecting laws to referenda, stop setting up a straw-man.

Either you're lying, or you literally don't understand what you're saying:

Yes, it should be the democratic decision of his community to decide if whether or not his actions were were wrong.

I want the penalties to be voted upon by the people they should be serving.

It already is the democratic decision: how do you think those laws got there and stay there? All this can possibly mean in this case is that you want to put it to a national vote whenever somebody gets arrested for animal cruelty, or anything else, I guess.
If that's legitimately not what you meant, then frankly, it's on you.

A society without rulers is entirely feasible

Isn't.
Every single one has failed miserably. And quickly, for that matter. And generally quite bloodily, too.

and nobody would have any reason to be disappointed,

I'm saying you'll be disappointed because it'll never happen. You'll never be satisfied, because you've apparently set yourself up for disappointment via impossible and unrealistic expectations.

horizontal organization is one such concept.

That's so general and vague as to be meaningless.

If you're going to be sarcastic the entire time, you're wasting it.

If you're going to be wrong the entire time, you should stop.

[The Black Forrest]

Wow. That's a workable, mature policy. You're totally not going to be intensely disappointed every single day of your life.

You aren't subjecting laws to referenda (which is frequently problematic anyway), you are apparently intent on subjecting every single legal decision to referenda as well, which is an utter joke.

I'm intent on subjecting laws to referenda, stop setting up a straw-man. A society without rulers is entirely feasible and nobody would have any reason to be disappointed, horizontal organization is one such concept. If you're going to be sarcastic the entire time, you're wasting it.

Laws based on a referendum is a rather stupid concept. Law isn't always supposed to be liked.

Society without rulers is not possible. Especially when you consider our history as a species. We are a social animal with a desire for social order. Our ape cousins for example have an alpha......

[The Black Forrest]

I'm intent on subjecting laws to referenda, stop setting up a straw-man. A society without rulers is entirely feasible and nobody would have any reason to be disappointed, horizontal organization is one such concept. If you're going to be sarcastic the entire time, you're wasting it.

How can you have rules without people to set them up and enforce them?

People working together for their selfish needs silly!

[PC World News]

"According to the Vancouver Sun newspaper, after this incident was reported, workers from the Society For the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals checked on the status of the dog and found it in a crate in a puddle of its own urine." - Bay News (click here to see article)

According to this, I think he has more than a little "anger management" problem. I think he should see a psychiatrist. That way if he is found to be mentally incompetent (which very well might be the case), then he will be locked in a mental institution and can no longer hurt animals.

If it turns out that, by chance, he is mentally stable, then I would seriously have to wonder why a SANE man would buy a dog, make it a part of his family, and then proceed to BEAT it in an elevator.

It doesn't make any sense, thus reassuring the idea that he be forced to a mental evaluation.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

This is animal abuse. You don't kick a dog over a "minor frustration"; you kick a dog out of the way only if they come at you trying to bite you, and this is assuming you are fast enough to actually land a good kick without the dog ripping a part of your leg out, and this is assuming a dog will actually approach you in the intent to bite you, which is fairly odd to hear about; and it is also assuming you have nothing to throw at the dog or you don't know that with you just feigning to pick up a stone they'll usually back off.

But a dog that's just there and is not doing anything in an elevator? Yea, no.

[The Black Forrest]

This is animal abuse. You don't kick a dog over a "minor frustration"; you kick a dog out of the way only if they come at you trying to bite you, and this is assuming you are fast enough to actually land a good kick without the dog ripping a part of your leg out, and this is assuming a dog will actually approach you in the intent to bite you, which is fairly odd to hear about.

Even then you don't always have to attack the dog. But that is a another discussion.

I have had crappy days at work involving nasty people. It never occurred to me take it out on my family, pets, neighbors or strangers.

Now, if you ask about my sparing class? Well? They would dish it back

[Soldati Senza Confini]

This is animal abuse. You don't kick a dog over a "minor frustration"; you kick a dog out of the way only if they come at you trying to bite you, and this is assuming you are fast enough to actually land a good kick without the dog ripping a part of your leg out, and this is assuming a dog will actually approach you in the intent to bite you, which is fairly odd to hear about.

Even then you don't always have to attack the dog. But that is a another discussion.

I have had crappy days at work involving nasty people. It never occurred to me take it out on my family, pets, neighbors or strangers.

Now, if you ask about my sparing class? Well? They would dish it back

True. What I find works usually is feigning to pick up a stone or that I have something in my hand to throw at them. They usually back off.

I would never take out on anyone my own frustrations either, that's pretty fucked up.

[Arkolon]

Naming the dog after Marquis de Sade was probably a lead to pounce upon.

[Gauthier]

What i fail to understand is why was the dog just laying there and taking his kicks.

According to the Vancouver Sun newspaper, after this incident was reported, workers from the Society For the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals checked on the status of the dog and found it in a crate in a puddle of its own urine.

The SPCA has taken the dog under its care.

Seems the douchenozzle has abused the dog before.

---

A poetic punishment would be to have this douchenozzle and Michael Vick fight it out in a gladiator match with dogs watching.

[Infected Mushroom]

Can this entire corporation just get shut down and nationalized already?

One CEO kicks a dog.

Then you have a whole bunch of other CEOs threatening to fire him unless he donates 100,000 USD and performs a thousand hours of community service (what is this nonsense)?

What the hell...

Hague might as well try to sue these other self-righteous power-playing owners just to complete the drama. I'm pretty sure there is something in American tort law you can use...

[Monkeykind]

Oh, so if someone murdered someone it should be the decision of the community to decide if they are punished?

If and only if the results of their decision applies universally.

SERIOUSLY?! You think there might be a chance for murderers to get away with murder even if they are found to have murdered someone?!

[The Sotoan Union]

I don't see a problem here. He broke the law. The long term point of his punishment was to punish him for breaking the law. I don't see how it failed its long term goal.

[Soselo]

If and only if the results of their decision applies universally.

SERIOUSLY?! You think there might be a chance for murderers to get away with murder even if they are found to have murdered someone?!

When moral universalism isn't applied, murder will happen again and again.

[Imperializt Russia]

SERIOUSLY?! You think there might be a chance for murderers to get away with murder even if they are found to have murdered someone?!

Not if the people are aware that if they decide to not punish him, murder will happen again and again.

The brothers Grimm wrote a story about this.
Children were playing at butcher. One boy butchered another child as others held her down.
He was asked to pick one of two items, to decide his fate. One was an apple, the other a coin. If he picked the apple, he would live. He did, with a laugh.
http://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/primary-sources/113

[Soselo]

Not if the people are aware that if they decide to not punish him, murder will happen again and again.

The brothers Grimm wrote a story about this.
Children were playing at butcher. One boy butchered another child as others held her down.
He was asked to pick one of two items, to decide his fate. One was an apple, the other a coin. If he picked the apple, he would live. He did, with a laugh.
http://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/primary-sources/113

If the principle of picking the coin were universal, murder would continuously happen.

[Dyakovo]

The company released a statement saying as a condition of his continued employment with Centerplate, Hague will donate $100,000 towards the establishment of the Sade Foundation in honor of the dog he mistreated. He also will serve 1,000 hours of community service in support of an organization that serves to protect the welfare and safety of animals.[/spoiler]

I think the punishment he received was pointless on in regards to ending animal abuse. I think this story being covered was rather pointless, though kicking a dog that isn't yours is somewhat cruel.

I want you to discuss whether or not he should've been punished, whether or not the punishment was right, and if the kicks were as severe as the source would have you believe.

He should serve jail time, preferably on top of what Centerplate is putting as a condition of continued employment. Also, people should certainly refuse to do business with Centerplate as long as he is CEO.

[Soselo]

Can this entire corporation just get shut down and nationalized already?

One CEO kicks a dog.

Then you have a whole bunch of other CEOs threatening to fire him unless he donates 100,000 USD and performs a thousand hours of community service (what is this nonsense)?

What the hell...

Hague might as well try to sue these other self-righteous power-playing owners just to complete the drama. I'm pretty sure there is something in American tort law you can use...

He put his family under the tram.

[Monkeykind]

The company released a statement saying as a condition of his continued employment with Centerplate, Hague will donate $100,000 towards the establishment of the Sade Foundation in honor of the dog he mistreated. He also will serve 1,000 hours of community service in support of an organization that serves to protect the welfare and safety of animals.[/spoiler]

I think the punishment he received was pointless on in regards to ending animal abuse. I think this story being covered was rather pointless, though kicking a dog that isn't yours is somewhat cruel.

I want you to discuss whether or not he should've been punished, whether or not the punishment was right, and if the kicks were as severe as the source would have you believe.

He should serve jail time, preferably on top of what Centerplate is putting as a condition of continued employment. Also, people should certainly refuse to do business with Centerplate as long as he is CEO.

The company should fire him.

[Hindenburgia]

...Okay, what? This is like something out of a cartoon.

No, really - TVTropes literally refers to needless acts of cruelty designed specifically to get the audience to dislike a character as "Kick[ing] the Dog".

To quote:

Authors make characters kick the dog. When this happens they needlessly commit an offence. The audience then subconsciously grow a dislike for them.
...
It is the fact that it had no other point than to be evil, that puts them on the bad side of the Rule of Empathy.
...
This trope is common in horror-based Monster of the Week shows, often to set up the Asshole Victim for the Karmic Twist Ending. Anthologies are especially prone to this, as they have to set up their villains really quickly, since they only have one episode to tell their story. ... At the very least, it is designed to let you know who is going to lose at the end.

Generally, if a writer might have a cartoon character take a particular action to tell small children that the character is evil, it's probably not a nice action.

EDIT: You know what, I'm putting this story on TVTropes myself.
EDIT #2: Well, they don't appear to have a "Real Life" section for that particular trope (probably a good idea, frankly), so I dropped it on the discussion page.

[The Black Forrest]

He should serve jail time, preferably on top of what Centerplate is putting as a condition of continued employment. Also, people should certainly refuse to do business with Centerplate as long as he is CEO.

The company should fire him.

They may depending on the publicity damage. There is no justification for kicking a puppy. It's that bully thing people don't like.

He said it was out of character; I will argue that is his character. He is ashamed simply because he was caught and it went viral.

[The Black Forrest]

...Okay, what? This is like something out of a cartoon.

No, really - TVTropes literally refers to needless acts of cruelty designed specifically to get the audience to dislike a character as "Kick[ing] the Dog".

To quote:

Authors make characters kick the dog. When this happens they needlessly commit an offence. The audience then subconsciously grow a dislike for them.
...
It is the fact that it had no other point than to be evil, that puts them on the bad side of the Rule of Empathy.
...
This trope is common in horror-based Monster of the Week shows, often to set up the Asshole Victim for the Karmic Twist Ending. Anthologies are especially prone to this, as they have to set up their villains really quickly, since they only have one episode to tell their story. ... At the very least, it is designed to let you know who is going to lose at the end.

Generally, if a writer might have a cartoon character take a particular action to tell small children that the character is evil, it's probably not a nice action.

EDIT: You know what, I'm putting this story on TVTropes myself.
EDIT #2: Well, they don't appear to have a "Real Life" section for that particular trope (probably a good idea, frankly), so I dropped it on the discussion page.

And your point is......what?