What about the hassle of the honest citizen? The hassle to the seller? Price is not always a cash value. The opportunity cost of the time to enact and legislate and enforce it could be much better spent elsewhere.
A state legislator in Michigan is proposing that the State enact an Animal Abuser registry modeled after other states Sex Offender Registry system.
Legislator from Detroit introduces bill to create an animal abuser registry | Detroit Free Press | freep.com
In Wayne County alone, the Humane Society investigated over 5,000 cases of animal abuse in 2011. No other state has this although similar legislation has been introduced in at least five states.
Is this an idea whose time has come?
Absolutely an idea whose time has come. Why not use the internet to mark animal abusers with a scarlet letter? I'm allll for it. Not only would it identify these horrible people, it would raise awareness for the rest of us to report it when we see it.
Is this an idea whose time has come?
Precisely... and there's the problem.As long as the government uses such registries in a reasonable manner then there's no problem.
Precisely... and there's the problem.
As just one example, the 'sex offender' lists. It is pretty much universally agreed that there are people on sex offender lists that pose absolutely no threat to anybody anywhere. I.e.: the 18yr old boy with the 16 yr old girlfriend, the college student who went streaking while drunk when he was 19, (drunk) public urination, and so on. And while pretty much everybody agrees these people should not be lumped in with those who actually are legitimate threats, virtually every politician lacks the political backbone to correct these injustices.Could you please elaborate. I would like to take criticism back to the bill author.
As just one example, the 'sex offender' lists. It is pretty much universally agreed that there are people on sex offender lists that pose absolutely no threat to anybody anywhere. I.e.: the 18yr old boy with the 16 yr old girlfriend, the college student who went streaking while drunk when he was 19, (drunk) public urination, and so on. And while pretty much everybody agrees these people should not be lumped in with those who actually are legitimate threats, virtually every politician lacks the political backbone to correct these injustices.
Unless the bill's author is willing to stand up for what is right, and risk being labeled "soft on crime" for doing the right thing, and fix the lists that we already have, then I have no reason to expect that this list will become nothing but more of the same... an overly broad and unfair emotional response that panders to the close-minded and loud people clamoring for this stuff. I'd rather they have no list at all than one that goes too far.
Fix the stuff we know we're doing wrong first, then tackle new issues.
I realize there are shortcomings to the sex offender list. While the inspiration comes from that list, please, this is a different thing. Animal abuse is a problem. As laid out here by others, there is a statistically significant connection between animal abuse and violence against people.
I am not questioning that there are animal abusers out there. I am questioning the wisdom of creating more problems... which I believe to be politically inevitable, given our history, I'm sorry... in the quest to solve problems. It sounds good. It feels good. Is it wise and well thought out? No, I don't think it is.I realize there are shortcomings to the sex offender list. While the inspiration comes from that list, please, this is a different thing. Animal abuse is a problem. As laid out here by others, there is a statistically significant connection between animal abuse and violence against people.
these people are already on a database... assuming they have been convicted of a crime against animals.
why do we need another database to put them on?
what is going to qualify these people to be on the list?.. misdemeanors? felonies? rumors? merely an investigation?
how do you ever get off the list?.. or is this a perpetual scarlet letter punishment?
who can gain access to this database?... law enforcement or the general public?
...and getting off one, even when proven innocent, is too often extremely difficult if not downright impossible.This continual employment of big brother tactics is rather dangerous as well. As pointed out, these lists aren't foolproof and there's no real regulation or oversight. If you get on one, even if by mistake, it can have devastating consequences. There is no continual need to database the whole of the American citizenry.
I think it's an excellent idea, and here's why. Out where I live, there are all kinds of calls about animal abuse, usually from neighbors who see emaciated horses, goats and cattle in the field, starving dogs tied to a stake and the like. Once animal control steps in and takes charge of the animals, a report is issued. These reports should be collated so that breeders, animal shelters, livestock auctions can make a simple check of the registry to make certain they aren't selling or adopting out animals to people who have been ticketed for abuse.
For example, our local animal shelter tries to screen potential adoptive parents, but there's no way to know if that nice guy who took an entire litter of kittens really loves cats, or has a history of using kittens as bait to train fighting dogs. The cost would be minimal. A couple of people statewide to perform some routine data entry, or write software that makes entries automatically when such reports are generated.
I'm for it.
I am not questioning that there are animal abusers out there. I am questioning the wisdom of creating more problems... which I believe to be politically inevitable, given our history, I'm sorry... in the quest to solve problems. It sounds good. It feels good. Is it wise and well thought out? No, I don't think it is.
What is the bill's author doing to fix the sex offender's list?* That is more important, IMO, and would also alleviate much of my fears regarding any new lists they may want to create.
*- My guess is nothing.
No, just what he CAN do... and he can affect the wrongs of imperfect laws within his own jurisdiction.Perhaps the author of the bill should find a cure for cancer or achieve world peace as well?
Perhaps the author of the bill should find a cure for cancer or achieve world peace as well?
i'm not so sure the cost would be minimal....we've all been sold that story before.
and really, if a dude abuses animals in one state.. and tries to adopt in another.. then what?
the state scenario goes out the window and folks will try to make it federal... and the costs go up quite a bit with that scenario.
states have different laws concerning animal cruelty.. for instance, in some states it's illegal to kill and eat dogs or cats ( companion animals).. in others , it's not.
if it sticks to the state level.. well, i really don't care what people do in other states.... if they want to pay for such a program and they feel it serves a valid public interest.. good for them... enjoy your new database.
I like the sentiment of it all ( i'm very pro animal)... but the implementation and operation of it..well, i'm not excited over it. ... we already have too many databases, lists, and registries.
i'm surprised no one , as of yet, has floated the idea of simply making a database for each individual person and filling it with as much information about us as possible and then having it be publicly available.
but i'm sure i'll see that before I die.
No, just what he CAN do... and he can affect the wrongs of imperfect laws within his own jurisdiction.
Are you advocating that collateral damage is acceptable? Seems like it.
A state legislator in Michigan is proposing that the State enact an Animal Abuser registry modeled after other states Sex Offender Registry system.
Legislator from Detroit introduces bill to create an animal abuser registry | Detroit Free Press | freep.com
In Wayne County alone, the Humane Society investigated over 5,000 cases of animal abuse in 2011. No other state has this although similar legislation has been introduced in at least five states.
Is this an idea whose time has come?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?