people in real situations that have the thought that an animal did nothing wrong after attacking/killing a human decide to put the thing down,… more to end its life like its a worthless mindless being that cant think for itself..
i like to think that animals probably arent robots that follow a specific code, that perhaps the human(s) did something to provoke such behavior (im talking about domesticated animals- dog, bear, tiger)
i see what your saying. but maybe there comes a point where you have to own up to the actions your body took, even if it didnt go through the strainer. maybe im just cold
It doesn't mean they're a mindless husk. It isn't opinion either. Someone can be completely "Normal" so much of the time and in a snap they ca… moren't control their actions if something sets them off. The reason insane people are in asylums is to protect them as much as it's to protect others
no, i get that. ive wondered it myself, and ive decided that if someone attacks me to the death, my first choice would be to maim the person. if that isnt something i can do with a clear head, then the attacker must die, because i cant forfeit my life.
i wouldnt finish off the attacker with a clear head though
Guy comes toward you with an axe. You're holding a knife. Never killed someone before and never would willingly. In a flash you'll probably ac… moret on your instincts without even realising what you're doing. Sorry if this example sucks, I'm not sure how to phrase it
Killing Sam is straight up mercy on a very human level. This game is supposed to invoke very real feelings, and it certainly does.
I'm a veterinary technician in an emergency clinic that focuses on stray animals. I see stuff you don't even want to imagine. When the veterinarians can't save an animal that's been shot, hit by a train, stabbed in the throat, lit up by a blowtorch, etc you name it; it's a mercy to ease their suffering and pain.
Back to Walking Dead Land. Sam is impaled near his femoral artery on his back leg. It's damaged and rupturing. The other spike appears to be through both lungs. So not only is he bleeding to death, he's quite possibly drowning in his own blood as well. To add to that suck salad, he's panicking, starving, confused, and dying. A very horrid death.
In his mind's eye he was fighting for survival, just like Clementine. She was taking his food supply away, so he fought for it; and paid for it with his life, whichever choice you made. Leaving him to drown in his own blood and possibly get ripped apart by walkers isn't merciful. Putting him down so he doesn't have to suffer longer; is mercy.
TL;DR You can't take the wolf out of the smallest Chihuahua. A dog will fight for food when faced with starvation. Ending suffering quickly is merciful.
If there is no "karma" or afterlife, then theres no point in leaving the dog there in agony, because the dogs pain would end with it; i would kill it and put it out misery to satisfy my own mind.
but if there is some sort of truth in repentance, i want the dog to have the chance at it.
If there is no "karma" or afterlife, then theres no point in leaving the dog there in agony, because the dogs pain would end with it; i would … morekill it and put it out misery to satisfy my own mind.
but if there is some sort of truth in repentance, i want the dog to have the chance at it.
Was trying to do a second play through with different choices and was going to leave the dog but i couldn't leave it to suffer even thought i was going for different choices.
The concept of a mercy kill is to deliver a quick and painless death, compared to the horrible pain that the person might encounter if he dies in other ways, like being eaten by a walker is one example. While impaled.
Animals are animals. That's why they are called animals. Why would they be called animals if they were people? Sorry if this comes across as making fun of you, it just kinda screwed with my head for a while.
My opinion is if i tried to murder someone in cold blood, and was bested; i wouldnt expect mercy nor deserve it.
"we must never treat any part of God’s creation with contempt." animals are people too
I put the dog down for 2 reasons:
1). It bit me and proved it was no friend of mine; and
2). It's wimpering/whining and bleeding would/could attract walkers.
I put the dog down for 2 reasons:
1). It bit me and proved it was no friend of mine; and
2). It's wimpering/whining and bleeding would/could attract walkers.
I love dogs, but if they turn they die.
Animals are animals. That's why they are called animals. Why would they be called animals if they were people? Sorry if this comes across as making fun of you, it just kinda screwed with my head for a while.
Ok, I don't know why you thinking letting the dog live was merciful. That is rather sick, and I even let the dog stay alive. There are are many other reasons to let the dog live, such as to draw walkers away from where you're going, to make sure you don't get bitten while killing the dog, and also simply out of spite as the animal just tried to kill you. Anyway, if you don't survive the sequence the dog ends up killing you, why would you let it live! I can understand lots of people around here like dogs, so I get that you may not want to see it suffer, but even disregarding the like and dislike of the type of animal, there are many more benefits to letting the dog live than killing it. That's my opinion at least, sorry for rambling off in the middle, but hopefully I get my point across lol
Ok, I don't know why you thinking letting the dog live was merciful. That is rather sick, and I even let the dog stay alive. There are are man… morey other reasons to let the dog live, such as to draw walkers away from where you're going, to make sure you don't get bitten while killing the dog, and also simply out of spite as the animal just tried to kill you. Anyway, if you don't survive the sequence the dog ends up killing you, why would you let it live! I can understand lots of people around here like dogs, so I get that you may not want to see it suffer, but even disregarding the like and dislike of the type of animal, there are many more benefits to letting the dog live than killing it. That's my opinion at least, sorry for rambling off in the middle, but hopefully I get my point across lol
Ok, I don't know why you thinking letting the dog live was merciful. That is rather sick, and I even let the dog stay alive. There are are man… morey other reasons to let the dog live, such as to draw walkers away from where you're going, to make sure you don't get bitten while killing the dog, and also simply out of spite as the animal just tried to kill you. Anyway, if you don't survive the sequence the dog ends up killing you, why would you let it live! I can understand lots of people around here like dogs, so I get that you may not want to see it suffer, but even disregarding the like and dislike of the type of animal, there are many more benefits to letting the dog live than killing it. That's my opinion at least, sorry for rambling off in the middle, but hopefully I get my point across lol
I wasn't a big fan of sharing food with a dog in the first place and the attack left me pretty angry at the dog but it was dying either way and hadn't acted out of malice as a human might have done so I put it out of it's misery as an act of mercy.
Had a human done what it did I'd have left him to ponder his mistake. It's easier to forgive an animal for acting in it's nature. You could even argue Clementine shared blame for not reading the dog right.
That's called the Fallacy of Equivocation - you're using "people" in two different ways. When you want to ascribe moral qualities to them, you use it to refer to the plural of "persons", but here you're quoting another definition, that of "a people".
The funny thing is, you're still wrong. Even if we accept the definition you're using, Sejborg is right - dogs aren't persons. What a shame for you.
That's called the Fallacy of Equivocation - you're using "people" in two different ways. When you want to ascribe moral qualities to them, you… more use it to refer to the plural of "persons", but here you're quoting another definition, that of "a people".
The funny thing is, you're still wrong. Even if we accept the definition you're using, Sejborg is right - dogs aren't persons. What a shame for you.
If there is no "karma" or afterlife, then theres no point in leaving the dog there in agony, because the dogs pain would end with it; i would … morekill it and put it out misery to satisfy my own mind.
but if there is some sort of truth in repentance, i want the dog to have the chance at it.
~ Then Judas, His betrayer, seeing that He had condemned, was remorseful and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, "I have sinned by betraying innocent blood." ~
What terrible destruction we can cause when we proudly act on our own private interpretations
Not killing the dog because you don't want to kill an animal is selfish; you ended up becoming more of a monster if you don't kill Sam, because all you succeeded in doing is letting the dog die slower.
Comments
We all follow codes. I disagree with putting animals down for that but from what I've heard once they get a taste for it they could do it again
How is it mercy?
i see what your saying. but maybe there comes a point where you have to own up to the actions your body took, even if it didnt go through the strainer. maybe im just cold
Killing the dog is ending it's pain, by not killing it you're letting it suffer in pain.
no, i get that. ive wondered it myself, and ive decided that if someone attacks me to the death, my first choice would be to maim the person. if that isnt something i can do with a clear head, then the attacker must die, because i cant forfeit my life.
i wouldnt finish off the attacker with a clear head though
sorry, i meant a robot following code like how an assembly line machine must do its action, and nothing else because there IS nothing else
" In a legal sense, a defendant having been found guilty of a capital crime may ask for clemency from being executed. "
True. Dogs are probably thinking we go by the same code though. They don't know our laws and morals
You think the dog would want to be left impaled on spikes?
Killing Sam is straight up mercy on a very human level. This game is supposed to invoke very real feelings, and it certainly does.
I'm a veterinary technician in an emergency clinic that focuses on stray animals. I see stuff you don't even want to imagine. When the veterinarians can't save an animal that's been shot, hit by a train, stabbed in the throat, lit up by a blowtorch, etc you name it; it's a mercy to ease their suffering and pain.
Back to Walking Dead Land. Sam is impaled near his femoral artery on his back leg. It's damaged and rupturing. The other spike appears to be through both lungs. So not only is he bleeding to death, he's quite possibly drowning in his own blood as well. To add to that suck salad, he's panicking, starving, confused, and dying. A very horrid death.
In his mind's eye he was fighting for survival, just like Clementine. She was taking his food supply away, so he fought for it; and paid for it with his life, whichever choice you made. Leaving him to drown in his own blood and possibly get ripped apart by walkers isn't merciful. Putting him down so he doesn't have to suffer longer; is mercy.
TL;DR You can't take the wolf out of the smallest Chihuahua. A dog will fight for food when faced with starvation. Ending suffering quickly is merciful.
If there is no "karma" or afterlife, then theres no point in leaving the dog there in agony, because the dogs pain would end with it; i would kill it and put it out misery to satisfy my own mind.
but if there is some sort of truth in repentance, i want the dog to have the chance at it.
IS, is such a final word...
I think Both choices offer mercy in their own way
Lol everyone who thumbed down the post thumbed up your comment
Could it repent on spikes though?
Was trying to do a second play through with different choices and was going to leave the dog but i couldn't leave it to suffer even thought i was going for different choices.
The concept of a mercy kill is to deliver a quick and painless death, compared to the horrible pain that the person might encounter if he dies in other ways, like being eaten by a walker is one example. While impaled.
Animals are animals. That's why they are called animals. Why would they be called animals if they were people? Sorry if this comes across as making fun of you, it just kinda screwed with my head for a while.
I put the dog down for 2 reasons:
1). It bit me and proved it was no friend of mine; and
2). It's wimpering/whining and bleeding would/could attract walkers.
I love dogs, but if they turn they die.
Turn?
Heh that's funny.
people - The body of persons who compose a community, tribe, nation, or race; an aggregate of individuals forming a whole; a community
animal - An organized living being endowed with sensation and the power of voluntary motion
Do you enjoy being wrong?
Here's a tip: a dog is not a person.
Ok, I don't know why you thinking letting the dog live was merciful. That is rather sick, and I even let the dog stay alive. There are are many other reasons to let the dog live, such as to draw walkers away from where you're going, to make sure you don't get bitten while killing the dog, and also simply out of spite as the animal just tried to kill you. Anyway, if you don't survive the sequence the dog ends up killing you, why would you let it live! I can understand lots of people around here like dogs, so I get that you may not want to see it suffer, but even disregarding the like and dislike of the type of animal, there are many more benefits to letting the dog live than killing it. That's my opinion at least, sorry for rambling off in the middle, but hopefully I get my point across lol
I think leaving it to draw walkers is kind of weird. I mean without it being an obvious decision e.g. you hear walkers first
I think leaving it to draw walkers is kind of weird. I mean without it being an obvious decision e.g. you hear walkers first
I wasn't a big fan of sharing food with a dog in the first place and the attack left me pretty angry at the dog but it was dying either way and hadn't acted out of malice as a human might have done so I put it out of it's misery as an act of mercy.
Had a human done what it did I'd have left him to ponder his mistake. It's easier to forgive an animal for acting in it's nature. You could even argue Clementine shared blame for not reading the dog right.
That's called the Fallacy of Equivocation - you're using "people" in two different ways. When you want to ascribe moral qualities to them, you use it to refer to the plural of "persons", but here you're quoting another definition, that of "a people".
The funny thing is, you're still wrong. Even if we accept the definition you're using, Sejborg is right - dogs aren't persons. What a shame for you.
Nothing there says they are people. When you're in a hole, why do you dig yourself deeper?
Do you quote definitions because you do not understand them yourself?
cant argue with that logic
you might be getting carried away.. i know dogs arent human. my point is dogs shouldnt be thought of as lesser
judas did jesus a favor by stabbing him so he would die quicker
I think saying Sam deserved the mercy kill is people thinking of dogs as equals, not lesser
~ Then Judas, His betrayer, seeing that He had condemned, was remorseful and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, "I have sinned by betraying innocent blood." ~
What terrible destruction we can cause when we proudly act on our own private interpretations
i think most people on this forum think of sam as JUST a dog
I don't, I killed Sam because even though he had just attacked me, I didn't want him to feel more pain. After all, he was just trying to survive.
a lot of people do nasty things "just to survive" that dosent make it acceptable in my opinion. i understand how people just want the pain to end tho
What else can the dog do?
Not killing the dog because you don't want to kill an animal is selfish; you ended up becoming more of a monster if you don't kill Sam, because all you succeeded in doing is letting the dog die slower.