A lot of people here seem to give animals more rights than the law actually does here. I mean going by the law I can run down any dog or cat I see come my way and face no legal charges. (Not that I would I love animals and would never do such a thing but still you get the idea). Although technically in a few situations you shouldn't stop if you see a cat or dog on the road as it could cause a traffic accident.

Of course it really, really, really sucks when your pets die I've experienced it first hand, but if your such an animal rights activist why should your only solution be to kill it because it killed this? People are trying they say how valuable this animals life is yet they want another animals life gone. The dog can't help it, just like a cat can't help it, animals kill. If someone killed a human I wouldn't even be calling the death penalty unless it was such an extreme situation.

The dog didn't attack any human here, and it looks like it could of had quite the haul if it did want to from all the people seeing what's what. Dogs are known to be hostile towards cats, and just because it killed cat does not mean it's gonna hunt down any kid it sees on the street.

While charges of sort will faced here (nothing major), as long as it doesn't happen again, I don't think they're going to kill the dog over it.

Too be fair, people in the united states elected Donald Trump as president....I thought it was kinda obvious that Mankind is screwed.

I'm not changing the subject. I bolded that part of your message as that's what I'm applying to. The species does matter. 

I don't think he was being disrespectful when he said that he obviously knows it's sad and said he feels bad for the owner and wouldn't mind paying for any damages, or new cat etc. 

If we are talking about a species hierarchy, I'd rank the species that tortures other species, puts other species in zoos, causes hundreds if not thousands of other species to go extinct as well as tortures/enslaves their own species much lower than those that don't.

Now things change if we are talking about a specific human, or dog, or whatever, but in general that is how I see it.

My cat was killed by a car a few years ago, but the driver wasn't put down. He just said sorry, and that was it. I don't think he needed to be punished for it.

I just don't get why people would want the dog to be killed. Don't you guys have any empathy? If you want him dead, you're more bloodthirsty and dangerous than he was.

Or a spring to keep the door shut even if someone forget to lock it.

Yes, that would be fair and considerated. If you like your pet you can assume the other guy liked his as well and think what would you appreciate being done if it was your pet being killed.

1- Yes he could. And one day the cat would die and he would probably get a new one either way. The new cat can't be used as reparation, but also can't be said as if nothing would ammend.

2- Any animal (human included) can potentially kill others, so they may kill bear because a bear that drinked human blood is said to be more propense to kill again, but just basing that something can attack X because attacked Y is flawed. You are assuming he doesn't even know his dog and saw how it get along with humans, kids, dogs, etc... he even said his dog doesn't like cats.

3 - he does give a fuck if you read his replies.

and 4 - it was his father's dog and he seems to terminate the dog, so he isn't totally sincere in the thread.

5 - So if someone kill a person pet should he be killed as well? Or if he kills another human being?

If your father kill someone do you suggest he is killed since he killed someone that another one loved?

If someone of your family kills a pet or another human and is killed in vengeance would you also accept it?

Nope... he said it's natural that dogs hunt cats (which are smaller) as much as is natural that cats hunt birds and mices. He said he is biased because it's his dog, not because dogs are better than cats... improve your interpretation skills.

Yes you are right... I want to know what would these people do in the same situation... and if they will accept any punishment if their child did something wrong since they would be responsible for the child.

Frankly, pay the guy and tell him you will make sure your dog doesn't go out again by himself (Maybe some infrastructure changes in your house idk), make sure your guests follow the rules of the house to avoid something like this again.

I find it an exageration to kill a dog because he killed a cat, maybe in the US it's common to put down dogs but I don't know. Anyway, it's clear that it's your responsability for being the dog owner, but as I said, killing the animal seems way too exagerated.

Anything you have to pay charge it later to your friend

Have you put your name on a extermination list so you don't do these horrible things human does?

So you think killing innocent lives is a solution?  Disgusting...

You are though. Your original reply was about criticizing a position I didn't take on hierarchies, and your 2nd reply was "WHATS SO HARD ABOUT UNDERSTANDING THAT A DOG KILLING A CAT IS LIKE A CAT KILLING A BIRD". Both of them had to do with hierarchies, but they're individual points, and completely different from one another.

"Really so a dog mauling a cat and a dog mauling a 5 year old girl is the same thing?"

"A cat that kills a bird is completely different to a cat that kills another cat. How is that difficult to understand?"

They're too seperate points and while they both lead back to hierarchy, it's a definite shift in goal posts. Either way it doesn't matter, because of course you completely misunderstood anything I said and failed to read my original comment. Clearly. You know I don't know about you, but I take topics of death and animal rights pretty seriously. Maybe you should read someones comment before you misrepresent their point? Because I never said what your original post said, and your 2nd post I literally agreed with in my original comment.

" I don't think he was being disrespectful when he said that he obviously knows it's said and said he feels bad for the owner and wouldn't mind paying for any damages, or new cat etc. "

His entire attitude in this thread has been to justify something because of the perspective of an animal. There's nothing wrong with taking the power chain of the animal kingdom into consideration, but he has practically acted like he didn't even care about the death of the cat. The troubling thing isn't that he's saying the dog shouldn't be put down, the troubling thing is that he is so quick to defend it without showing any remorse for the cat. You can take one or two sentences he wrote but look at the context and how he carries himself - it's clear that no real sympathy is felt for the owner. Anyone can say "I'll fix that with money - i'm super duper sorry!" But when your dog kills a cat, you shouldn't treat the situation like you accidently drove your car into another person's car. You should treat it with respect and care. I'm sure he's going to reply to criticizers of his post with "oh no I was super sad!" or "I apologized super hard!" but ultimately all we have to go on is his demeanor which isn't a good sign and it's easy to defend yourself past-tense. I'm sure you'll say something like "We can't judge OP just based on what he's typed" in which case i'd say : Why did he even bring this to VGChartz in the first place? No one has a definitive answer and this entire discussion is pretty pointless.

In the end, the heirarchy of the animal kingdom is a valid reason to give some leaway to the dog, but to human beings cats and dogs have practically the same relevance. The reason why nobody cares if a cat kills a bird is because a wide majority of people don't care about birds. If more people cared about birds maybe cats would get put down after killing birds. A dog killing a cat is ok for the dog but not okay for the people in society who own the cats. From the perspective of nature it's fine but for society a dog and a cat are about the same from a priority perspective, and the owner should have put more care in thinking about how the owner feels instead of being instantly defensive because "nature says it's okay". His original post is just so unbalanced as a whole.

I don't want to make this into a big argument because this isn't the thread for it, but I feel like I have to justify my feelings on this for no reason because someone(you) wants to be argumentative for no reason. Seems like if you just read my post we would have agreed a lot.