John Fleet, 33, was allegedly upset by a pit bull puppy when it nipped at his kids. That is understandable. His reaction was not. He allegedly rubbed alcohol on the puppy (not the one shown) and set it on fire in front of the kids.
Fleet’s kids told a school counselor about the incident in their Philadelphia school. The puppy may lose sight in one eye and had severe burns on his neck and ears. Fleet is now charged with animal cruelty.
If true, this is another case of a parent with a rather grotesque sense of punishment recently, here
I suppose his O’Keefe defense would have him silenced. Hopefully this one would. Not to say the hot water that he’s in or just to mention Hot Dog in the same sentence.
Some countries would just consider this flambé, even here.
This wasn’t your average rage response. This was calculated. Something tells me he also has occasion to lose control when disciplining his children too.
This felon should be in jail for a long time and his kids need new supervision!
Undoubtedly has done this all his life. This doesn’t spring up out of the blue without a history of sociopathic behavior.
Can’t say more,you guys all said
I suggest neutering in this case — for Fleet, of course.
I’m sorry, but when I see things like this, it strikes me that “punishment fits the crime” penalties would be neither cruel nor unusual, but just.
Although “cruel and unusual” is proscribed by the Constitution, can anyone really argue that life imprisonment or the death penalty are anything but cruel? And what’s “unusual” ceases to be so when it’s done routinely.
Some may think I’m a radical nut, but I can’t help believing that certain crimes against any living creatures would be drastically reduced – if not eliminated – if those contemplating them were assured the exact same fate to which they’d subject their victims would befall them.
Sue me.
I’m with mespo.
A good set of scissors, local anesthetic optional.