Animal abuse registry in works

Animal abuse registry in works

www.glendalenewspress.com

Under the bill introduced last week by California Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez (D-Shafter), anyone convicted of felony animal abuse would have to register with local law enforcement and provide personal information, including a picture and home address, to be listed on a website, similar to the current registries for sex offenders.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Okay so the state wants another registry for animal abusers. Now im not thinking that animal abusers are any better than scum however there is a catch to this bill. People who do care for their animals will have to pay a tax.

Yet there is a "bite" to this bill. The cost for maintaining the Web site would be passed to consumers, specifically to dog and cat owners.

Every sack of dog chow and every morsel of cat food would be slapped with a tax, as much as 3 cents per pound.
abclocal.go.com.../state&id=7291980

I know it is a small tax now but once that tax is added it will never be taken off even if this new registry falls flat on it's face. It is becoming apparent in california that they can't even mannage a human sex offender registry, Phillip Garrido recently was put in jail for doing what repeat sex offenders do and right now we have John Albert Gardner who is being held for the suspected murder of a missing girl. So the state has done such a bang up job with keeping track of sex offenders now they want to take a crack at keeping track of animal abusers and they want you to pay for it.

www.glendalenewspress.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by zaiger


Related Links > WCPO.com
Teen Charged With Killing Alpaca
BUTLER COUNTY, OHIO -- Two more people are under arrest in Butler County after an alpaca was stolen and killed last week.

The animal was taken from behind a home in Madison Township. Its remains were found in Montgomery County.

Detectives say they learned about the animal cruelty because rumors were going around Madison High School that teenagers from the area had done something horrible to an alpaca.

Police arrested one teenager Friday and a second teen on Monday. They are both charged with theft and animal cruelty.

Police also arrested 20-year-old Stacie Mullin and charged her with complicity. She was booked into the Middletown Jail and released after posting bond.

Alpacas are exotic animals, much like llamas, and are coveted for their fine wool. The one that was killed is valued at about $8,000.
end report.

I think animal abusers should be profiled the same as sex abusers. The reson being that animal abuse often leads to human abuse or serial killing. Anyone who abuses animals is clearly a sick individual who must be watched by society. In the above story, the sad thing is that alpacas are considered livestock and the penalty is not as strict as it would be for a domestic pet, which is a shame. These people kidnapped an alpaca and beat its head in until it was dead. They stole it from a farm and just beat it to death for no reason. YES there needs to be an accounting of animal abusers.

reply to post by Magantice


Yes it does sound like a good idea, but it has been shown that the registry system really has not stopped offenders from repeating crimes. I posted two recent examples of how the registry failed. Phill Gorrido was a registerd sex offender and held a kidnapped girl for 18 years while getting visits from his PO.
This new registry would be paid for by people who buy food for their pets, so people who take care of the pets will have to pay to keep a registry going for people who abuse animals. All the registry does is make it easier for cops to find a suspect the registry does not in anyway stop people from committing crimes.

[edit on 2-3-2010 by zaiger]

I see animal abusers as one of the lowest forms of scum and everybody knows most youths who abuse animals later go on to hurt humans. I wouldn't object to paying tax in order to prevent these people but i'm sure there must be another way round it so that it doesn't come back down on our pay checks.

reply to post by Everton


Well they are playing on people's emotions, that is the trick. The want to add a a tax but they need people to be okay with it, so they give them a reason that is hard to argue. Lets "add a tax that will keep animals safe". Its a farce made up to tax people. This registry will not stop anything, people who are going to abuse animals will have to register as an animal abuser. It does not in anyway preven people from abusing animals or stop people from doing it again. So people are going to abuse animals and then you are going to have to pay to keep their names on a meaningless list.

Check out www.pet-abuse.com
Or click HERE

Click on the "Cruelty Database" link
on the left of that page.

You can search by last name, crime, date,
country/state/city/etc.

15,629 abusers listed thus far.



Make sure you uncheck the "Convicted Only" box when you
search by name - because there are more cases that have been
listed as statuses other than "Convicted" - such as acquitted, not
charged, dismissed, etc.
Unchecking that box will guarantee a complete listing of all persons
with that name - convicted or not.

reply to post by zaiger


Very smart way of seeing it, let's just hope the majority of people see it this way to and are not to easily led by being made to believe they are paying towards a very "worthy" cause. Surely just making warnings of tougher prison sentences and fines would be alot more effective.

Good Idea,
First if I were to bring this bill up I would try and make it
to where the abusers are the ones who have the money taken from them
for up keep of the site, out of their pay checks or community service
for the rest of their lives.

Second if that didn't go I wouldn't mind paying an extra few cents on cat and dog food to keep this going. As long as the tax was going to where it is supposed to go.

I think they should be registered,
I would hate to have a litter of puppies and or kittens and find out that later
the person that adopted it was charged with abuse.

Just out of curiosity,
as I write this post,
I wonder who funds the sex offender sites?
Do they tax condoms and other sexually related items
for the upkeep of them?

Oh yeah? I wonder if this registry will also include the many "researchers" and corporations in the US that continue arbitrary experimentation on animals for the excuse of "human medicine", resulting in an official count of 6,000,000 dead animals per year (not including farm animals or rodents though). Their research is nothing more than torture and most of their results have nothing to do with human health.

One experiment I recall is when researchers placed cats and dogs in glass boxes under the sun. They observed these animals going into a frenzy and eventually dying in the high heat environment. Their conclusion was that if these animals had access to water, they would fair better in heat stroke conditions.

good!

Time to make both halal and kosher meat illegal!
what they do is cut the animal extremely slow while singing prayers.

Personally, I wonder if you are torturing an animal or any living thing while singing prayers i'm just wondering who exactly are you praying to?

reply to post by EvilBat


Even the department of corrections in New Jersey (where Megan's Law cam from) authored a paper showing that the registry has no effect on anything thus it does not justify the ammount of money it uses.

The overall conclusion is that Megan’s law has had no demonstrated effect on sexual offenses in New Jersey, calling into question the justification for start-up and operational costs. Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual reoffending.
www.ncjrs.gov...

This will not change with animal offenders.
Nobody can tell me how having a registry people who have torured animals will.
a: keep your animals safe
b: Stop offenders from reoffending

reply to post by Everton


Thanks, i think you are the only one who has gotten it so far. These people who write the bills play on the emotions of others and as you can clearly see it works.
Personally i think the registry system does nothing (it has also been prooven to do nothing) , instead of making someone register for 5 years or register for life. Just give them the 5 years in prison or life in prison.

[edit on 2-3-2010 by zaiger]

reply to post by zaiger


I understand it wouldn't stop the abuse,
but it would do some good. Some might be stopped
from adopting a new pet, from the use of a site like that.

Only way to stop them from doing it again is to
end their life for doing it. But to some that's extreme.

Well one reason the europeans newer understand the americans is...that you treat running loose and homeless animals better than people

Originally posted by OddTimeSignature
Well one reason the europeans newer understand the americans is...that you treat running loose and homeless animals better than people

Well from my point of view to your statement
is I prefer the company of animals over humans.

They don't start arguments, though my cat might disagree about feeding time.

They don't start wars, though I do have wounds from animals when we ruff play.

They don't care what type of cloths I wear, or what I believe in.
The list could go on and on.

And yes I'm married and she feels the same way.
Sometimes we feel like we are the only ones ( in our area )
that care for the animals.

How can you not see the conspiracy in this?

Some of us knew that the sex offender registry will lead to more different kinds of registries and controls. This is a good example. Sooner or later the government will start to put GPS on people to keep track of them.

It will get worse. Mark my words.

reply to post by Deaf Alien


The sex offenders register was there to name and shame the scum bags and raise awareness of who to avoid and watch out for. I dont think it was created with the pure intention of expanding these registers further down the line to rake in more of the tax payers money BUT i do see how this animal abuse registery is irelevant to the actual cause in the sense that it wont prevent animal abuse.

reply to post by Everton


Well, we shall see. This might be an isolated case, but then again, it might not. Perhaps pretty soon there will be registries for drug dealers, thieves, robbers, then down and down to minor crimes then eventually there will be a registry for "troublemakers" who have committed no crime and so on.

It is a slippery slope.

reply to post by Deaf Alien


Waits for the conspiracy members registry...

He is completely right. And few others see it. They are moving towards centralization so command and control can be effective. Its a common sales trick being pulled.

If the what I dreamed last night does happen to come true you have my word not one dime will be spent on any of the registries. Their are a few more important problems then who did what. I also have problem with it based on this.

I thought if someone served their time they have been punished correct. Why the continued punishment. Does that not qualify as cruel and unusual?