After a long long time away from here, now i come back to introduce a new thought i wondered when i was going to my work and i saw an uncommon situation which is not relevant to tell now.

To you, reader, what kind of guilt does someone have when it´s dog attack someone else?

If you tell me None, then i might argue about. If you tell me All, then i might argue too. But if you tell me i don´t know, then close this window and go back to your “business”. I don´t wanna be rude, so let´s keep it on it´s way.

So, as i was saying, in my point of view, dog´s owners should be more than simply responsible for the attack, they should go to a courtyard and answer to law like murderer. As long as animals are considered by law unable to think and so unable to be rational, owner´s have the entire guilt from the attack to it´s end, no matter what kind of circumstances were involved in.

But, if you tell me, hey, the dog did that not the owner, for example, then you are accepting that the dog has it´s feelings even though not so clear and rational as the humans are supposed, but well, still have it. And if it act like that, like a living being it is, so it MUST have any kind of inteligence.

Then, are they really irrational?

Here goes the most scaring thing i can´t measure how cruel it is, if they got feelings, thoughts and intelligence itself, so they are not too far from us as most insist to believe in. If we compare animals with dumb humans, then we can realize that the reason which motivated humanity to kill animals and eat their meat should be the same reason we could use to eat dumb humans too. Why don´t we do that so? What makes them better than those animals? Are we going against nature´s law?