Perfectly logical to me, and same here. My wife and I have no children other than our pets, and that's what they are to us... children. I have gone without, and will continue to do so, to make sure they get what they need.Venus Pax wrote:The only movable property I can see myself defending is one of my pets. I know that doesn't seem logical to many, but my pets are my family.
Not if I (or my wife) was on the jury, and would have no problem of voting for the criminal to be treated in the very same manner as they treated your pet. When it comes to me I am a forgiving person, but when it comes to one of my "kids," it's an eye for an eye. I would be able to put myself in your position very easily, and it wouldn't be a good day for the criminal's defense to pick me to be on that jury, but would be happy to serve on a case like this.Venus Pax wrote:I realize that I would have a hard time defending myself in court on this one, but I would have a harder time sleeping at night if I didn't know the fate of one of my pets.
Same here, really, but in the heat of the moment if I were to actually catch the guy(s) in the act, they better be nicer to me than Mary Poppins and follow every directive without the slightest hesitation or I might be tempted to put a round in their rear, too!Venus Pax wrote:My car and my truck don't feel pain. They are also covered by insurance, and are replaceable. Those items aren't worth the time in civil court.
