man arrested for sex with a dog

[taintfutcha]

http://www.ksn.com/news/local/15807462.html


WICHITA, Kansas, Feb. 20, 2008 -- Wichita police
say they're working a case they don't often see:
a man accused of having sex with a dog. And it's
not the first time the man's been in this type of trouble.

Twenty-year-old Joshua Coman is now in jail accused
of having sex with a Rottweiler.

"We don't see any cases like this," said Lt. Sam Hanley
with the Wichita Police Department. "I'd never seen
any cases like this and I hope we don't see any more."

[impqueen]

i'm front-paging this. it has to be done. the guy's mugshot is priceless.

[Kathy]

i'm front-paging this. it has to be done. the guy's mugshot is priceless.

Woo hoo! Another one for our bestiality category!

[Pirelli Jones]

a man accused of having sex with a dog.

That's illegal?

No but seriously, a Rottweiler? Was this a suicide attempt?

[LadyValkyrie37]

Evidently the dog was a willing participant or else it would have chewed him to peices.

[gprime]

That's illegal?

In the state of Kansas, it has been since 1993, under K.S.A. @2103506, and is classified as "Aggravated criminal sodomy", which is a security level two felony. But 21 states have no formal laws against it.

Frankly, I find this absurd. Punish him for theft or vandalism if the situation so warrants it. But don't prevent him from getting his rocks off with the dog. This situation isn't the best example, but I think that so as the animal is public property, owned by the fucker, or used with the owner's consent, then it is not the business of the law.

[TalkingJesus]

In the state of Kansas, it has been since 1993, under K.S.A. @2103506, and is classified as "Aggravated criminal sodomy", which is a security level two felony. But 21 states have no formal laws against it.

Frankly, I find this absurd. Punish him for theft or vandalism if the situation so warrants it. But don't prevent him from getting his rocks off with the dog. This situation isn't the best example, but I think that so as the animal is public property, owned by the fucker, or used with the owner's consent, then it is not the business of the law.

The reason this case doesn't work so well for your argument is that it wasn't his dog or his house. Which I gather you knew since you said this situation wasn't the best example.

Many Rotties are docile dogs, so just its lack of killing the guy doesn't imply consent on the part of the animal.

[dop]

I wish the dog was a Great Dane, since the guy is the living embodiment of Shaggy it would had been priceless.

[gprime]

Many Rotties are docile dogs, so just its lack of killing the guy doesn't imply consent on the part of the animal.

The question though is whether or not it is entitled to issue or deny consent. I have a fairly atypical view on animal rights, and therefore hold that consent is not an issue. That is, I believe than animals are peices of property that are entitled to no rights at all, and may be used by the owners however they see fit. So, had he owned the dog, consent would have been a non-issue. But as both you and I acknowledged earlier, this wasn't his dog to fuck.

[impqueen]

... this wasn't his dog to fuck.

Gprime, i just have this feeling i'm gonna use that line for all kinds of situations. Like "yeah, well, it wasn't his dog to fuck, was it?"

Awesome. Thanks, man. ;)