Slashdot Mirror
California To Create Public Animal Abuser Registry
An anonymous reader writes "California legislators are moving forward with plans to create a public, online, animal abuser registry identical in function to the public sex offender registry. Is this the slippery slope to further government mandated lists and registries?"
There will always be a stigma associated to certain types of crimes. Animal abuse is one of them. Long after they serve their far too short sentences they will still get to live with what they've done ... and we'll get to share the knowledge of their past with them.
I hate to discover only after the fact that someone I'm having a conversation with likes to beat a dead horse.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
It won't be long before we have public registries of parents whose kids misbehave in school, registries of people who buy pr0n, and registries of people who do anything else the masses of paranoid freak helicopter soccer moms don't like...
Violent bestiality with a minor?
Is this an end-run around the "served your time" part? I thought our theory of law was that once you served your punishment you were a Citizen again (yeah like convicts can't have guns...). So, is this indefinite punishment? And this is coming from someone who thinks animal abusers have serious psychological problems: the real problem is what when 1000's of different "registries" exist?
Shh.
For reference, see Les Miserables.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
IIRC all crime statistics are public knowledge anyway. If a person is convicted of a crime, this is recorded and this record is made available to the public.
It wouldn't be impossible to establish a 'registry of serious criminals' using only scannings on newspaper articles and the like. The data is already public, it just needs to be collated together.
Of course, I know I'm being simplistic... there's a lot more to it than that, but I don't want to right an essay on the implimentation, merely point out that it is possible.
So there I was, scribbling down some notes off the PC screen by hand, when I reached for the keyboard and Ctrl-S'd.
Apparently they estimate that it will take several hundred thousand dollars to run the registry annually and claim that the number of federal convictions for animal abuse in California is not large enough to levy enough fees on the convicted to fund the registry. In short, they want to levy a tax on pet food to pay for the registry.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
I'd like to see you try tell a Liger twice...
To do something right, you often have to roll up your sleeves and get busy.
Cruelty to animals, it is said, is often a precursor to graver crimes.
Yeah, right. What orifice was that pulled out of.
It would also be a boon to law enforcement because animal abuse, the bill's authors' say, often escalates to violence against people.
I was once out with a woman who trained dogs. This rather large dog went ape shit towards this woman and child. The owner of the dog talked to the dog and "scolded" it for its behavior. That was it. The trainer said that the owner of the dog was an idiot because one day that dog is going to attack someone and maybe seriously hurt them or kill a child. The owner should have put that dog in a head lock, slammed it into the ground, and let in know by no uncertain terms that its behavior was wrong. I guess preventing deadly attacks by dogs is now illegal.
Abuses covered in the bill would include the malicious and intentional maiming, mutilation, torture, wounding or killing of a living animal.
Good bye pharmaceutical and any other animal based research in California! No more hunting. Oh, and when a heard of deer needs to be thinned out, does that mean they're going to ask the deer to take birth control and leave the state? Will they offer relocation to the deer? Just wanna know.
It would also target pet hoarders...
Good bye private animal rescue centers!
the issue is simple. Do Republican members ... really want to be seen on the side of animal abuse? I don't think they do."
Oh God. I'd rather have someone kick the shit out of their dog than beat the shit out of me.
Be careful. There's a slippery slopes that goes from beating a dead horse all the way down to turning the horse into cube steak.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
Does that include politicians and lawyers who authored the bill?
*Whew!*
Sheep farms could background check employees against this type of list.
If someone's puppy goes missing they could use these lists to interview suspects.
And if a dead squirrel is found, detectives might be able to rule out natural causes if an abuser is found.
They should be careful not to take it so far. Many birders could be put at risk merely for taking a picture of a young chick.
Lets make a public registry for every felony. We might able to digress to more grievances in order to keep the public safe. By the end of two decades worth of charades, I think it would be a great idea to start giving certain groups clothes for them to wear in public which identifies their past offenses. *Sarcasm* I do not enjoy posting forums with the obvious Nazi agenda, the comparison is too hard to neglect, I'd feel ignorant if I did not point this out. Heck the Sex Offender Registry does not help anyone anyways. All it does is identify where the person lives and has difficulty in getting passed prior offenses in order to maintain life. What is going to stop him from going on a stroll in the park to pick up his next victim if he is not rehabilitated? Nothing.
Next time they will create a public online registry of slashdotters.
Does the country really need yet another list like this? How much more of the shun/banish behaviour must we exhibit in our increasingly shrill nation?
That is all.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
I like to think I am as objective as they come. I am for privacy. I hate "for the children" mentality.
But when it comes to animal abuse, I loose some of that rationality. Animal abusers are dangerous and cant be trusted. And I believe it is a behavior that once practiced may never leave a person. They may suppress it for the rest of their lives, but underneath the potential is there to harm people, especially given a one in a million encounter.
From Wikipedia: "Cruelty to animals is one of the three components of the Macdonald triad, indicators of violent antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. According to the studies used to form this model, cruelty to animals is a common (but not with every case) behavior in children and adolescents who grow up to become serial killers and other violent criminals. It has also been found that animal cruelty in children is frequently committed by children who have witnessed or been victims of abuse themselves. In two separate studies cited by the Humane Society of the United States roughly one-third of families suffering from domestic abuse indicated that at least one child had hurt or killed a pet.[41]".
Sure, let animal abusers serve their time. Even give'em a job. Good luck feeling inner piece when your daughter says she is going camping with him, when his little discresion in life was nailing a cat to a plank of wood while performing some autopsy while it was still alive. Over the course of an hour.
In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
Also reported was the decision not to make a mass-emailer's registry. Since they self-announce the list was deemed redundant and scrapped.
However THE PEOPLE WHO ALWAYS TYPE IN CAPS registry will continue as planned.
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
Hopefully all the would be serial killers will get caught and put in the registry when they're teenagers.That way the police will have access to some record of their perverted and sick minds.
When a place get's so large it requires registries and licenses it's time to move somewhere else. (Paraphrased).
Sounds like it's time to move off this planet.
21st Century Renaissance Man
How is this a yro, and how the hell does it relate to news for nerds? I mean come on. Give me some more apple and google stories. Slow news day I guess.
21st Century Renaissance Man
Internet Trolls!
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
on if they torture it to death to make it taste better. Or cut its throat and let it bleed to death. Or maybe just forced to live in the livestock equivalent of cube farm 24/7.
(I'm making these remarks somewhat tongue-in-cheek... I'm not particularly zealous about animal rights. There's certain ones I like to eat, and I don't feel too horrible about animals food with humane handling while they're alive. But I do think that systemically perpetrated suffering while the animals are alive presents a moral problem, and realize we have a system that, well, presents it.)
Tweet, tweet.
I forgot to mention the People Who Reply to Their Own Posts registry.
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
Fuck California!
It won't be long before we have public registries of parents whose kids misbehave in school, registries of people who buy pr0n, and registries of people who do anything else the masses of paranoid freak helicopter soccer moms don't like...
wait... people buy pr0n? what???? doing it wrong ;)
They may be 'just animals' to most people, but that's like saying it's 'just cruelty.' There is something inherently wrong with enjoying inflicting pain on a helpless victim. In that sense, it is not different than abusing or molesting a human child. The principles are the same. Blah blah blah about putting animals and humans on the same level. That's just a runaround argument people who don't understand the full scope of the problem use.
People who abuse animals include those who fight dogs- who also run other illegal activities and make money this way, instead of getting an honest job, and getting to inflict their dissatisfaction with the world on an animal that they bred and raised only to kill for sport. Maybe having a public registry won't matter- look at Michael Vick, he's doing as well as he ever has, despite having been responsible for the unnecessarily cruel and violent death of dogs that didn't want to fight. And then people continue to condemn pitbulls as killers, when it's humans that kill them.
The issue is not, at its root, how animals are being treated. The issue is what kind of behaviors we will condone in society. Killing for a purpose- like farming, is utilitarian, necessary for people who eat meat. Vegetarians kill vegetables. Something has to die for something else to live. But killing for pleasure, killing to see the pain and suffering of a victim, is inhumane, it's sick and people who do it should be publicly flogged, not quietly chided. And yes, some workers in meat production plants should also be thrown in jail. Torture isn't necessary in the death of a food animal, and some of those workers do horrific things in addition to a necessary death. People who do these kinds of things aren't functioning members of society and if they lived on my block, I would want to know about it. People treat each other like shit, and that will never change until we start respecting smaller forms of life.
I'm sick of people who wave away responsible citizenship as overkill. Especially in a city where dogs are stolen from backyards to be bait for some worthless piece of crap's blood sport.
Once cat-torchers have served their time, they should have a fair chance at living a useful life. Which is why people who are cruel to animals should have much longer sentences than are currently meted out. It's very typical to see these broken, soulless, irretrievable individuals laughing on their way into trivial jail terms. No empathy whatsoever.
But yeah, if we must ever let them out, by all means keep them off these lists. They've got human rights, after all. Just install a skunk-scent anklet to protect the neighborhood pets.
The problem with "lists" and "registrys" is that they quickly become so broad, they are pointless. See our various "no fly" and "watchlists" which seemigly snags everyone and anyone because they have a common name. Its not uncommon to hear stories about babies named John or whatnot strip searched and interrogated because they are on the no fly list. While the real potential terrorists such as the gentleman over christmas who tried, and failed, to blow up an airliner had no problems purchasing his ticket at the last minute, get accompanyed to the gate by a unrelated relative, and get on an airplane. And again the same logic goes for our sex offender registries. I can pull up the list for my neighborhood, and on the map they are everywhere! Oh the horrors! When in reality, the law is so broad it not only gets the violent ones whom probally should be under close guard, but anyone for even the pettiest of sex crimes (Such as gentleman who 20 years ago when they were 18 had sex with a 17 year old, whom is probally now his wife). We dont have a registry of other convicted felons, whom most i would be more worried about than the majority of people on the sex offender registry.
Please sign me up.
(RTFA? All I need to read is the /. headline.)
Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
I cannot begin to express my frustration with my state legislators. I'm living in a state that is not only one of highest taxed states in the union (and in many cases *THE* highest taxed state), but also the state with one of the worst budget problems in the union! Every penny spent on this exercise could be better used paying off it's $6 billion budget gap (soon to be $20+ billion next year) PER YEAR!. It's quite possible we'll default on some of our bond's this year!
Look -- I'm all for harsh punishment for ANYONE who causes sadistic pain on man or beast -- but for the love of all that's holy, I don't need to know that there's a guy who bagged and drowned a cat living within a 1/4 mile of me! Not at any cost. And not in this economy.
So they want to track PETophiles? Go for it.
a state that every American, with any kind of attention span, knows is broke and needs to CUT spending is creating more financially wasteful bureaucracy. California you truly love to live up to your title as the land of fruits and nuts, don't you?
..idiotic politician registry. Fortunately, it will be very easy to create. Just add up every the names of the politicians in the every congress, house, senate, and parliament in the world. Throw in the presidents and kings, delete all the dupes, and you're done. Now you know if an idiot lives near you!
Responsibility is an addiction
Virtue is a temptation
Community is a cartel
ode to the folly of men.... when they demanded that all pedophiles register, i said nothing for i was not one of them. when they demanded that all the criminals register, i said nothing for i was not a criminal. when they demanded that all immigrants register, i said nothing for i was not a immigrants. when they demanded that all superheroes register , i said nothing for i was not a superhero. when they demanded the super scientists to register, i said nothing for i was not a super scientist. then they demanded i register and there was nothing i could do, for all the others were already under their thumbs.
As somebody who (a) values privacy and finds government's invasion of it abhorrent; but (b) has seen some of the results of chronic animal abuse, I feel a bit like the proverbial Christian Scientist with an appendicitis attack.
From the animal-rescue point of view, the world is full of crazy and vicious people who cruise around "adopting" animals for subsequent abuse. This includes dogfighters looking for bait, people who produce crush films, hoarders, puppy mill operators, crazed cat ladies, people who practice killing and torture rituals, and even idiots who just want a fresh puppy every year or so. Most animal adoptions take place on a sort of honor system, the potential for abuse is huge, the actual amount of abuse going on is both shocking and sickening, and there simply isn't any money for any investigation or follow-up.
From the invasion of privacy standpoint, it should be observed that there are also plenty of animal-loving lunatics abroad in the land. That would be the folks who think that animal abusers should be tortured, castrated, deprived of their children, burned out of their homes, or otherwise "suitably" punished for their misdeeds. People exist who believe that the death penalty as it's administered here is too mild for animal abusers. Such a list in their hands would be downright dangerous.
There must be a way that law enforcement could share information regarding convicted abusers with licensed shelters and rescue groups without making such information readily and publicly available in a one-stop database.
Sigh.
"Here's what's happening. You're starting to drive like your Dad..." - Red Green
Another list seems relatively pointless.
Chelsea King's murderer was nicely listed. Now an innocent 17 year old girl is dead, having probably spent the last moments of her short life in terror and misery, because she was foolish enough to go for a run.
How, precisely, did the list help her?
Personally, I think the lvl 3 sex offender list should be retitled to the "no legal consequences for murdering the scumbags on this list" list, but that's just me.
-Styopa
I don't understand the outcry of privacy advocates here.
All matters of criminal law are matters of public record, as they should be.
Making this information easily searchable is just technology, folks.
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
As much as I hate more government, someone needs to be the voice that speaks for those who can not speak for themselves. I'll have to side with the abused on this issue.
What about those who eat meat ?
Isn't eating meat animal abuse ?
Land of the free ?
Exception Duck - may or may not contain chicken.
I don't see how is that any useful, I attend a cockfight atleast 1 per week here in California LA county, and there is plenty of dogfihting, but I don't attend those.
Usually when the cops show up they don't arrest anybody they just give ticket to the property owner and they tell the 100s of people to just go home. Most of the times they don't even confiscate the animals. People go to this things by the 100s maybe that is why the cops don't bother arresting people.
You know what else is in that psychobabble worthless triad of predictors?
Bed Wetting as a kid.
So, time to sign yourself into the registry of maybe evil people that need to be tracked!
It's just a side effect of our state government being so flush with cash they don't even know how to spend it all! Huzzah!
*Goes back to spanking his monkey*
Because the world is nowhere near judgemental enough these days.
traffic violations are more about revenue then stuff like that.
We could have a registry for all people who abuse the laws and their political positions. I guess we already have one, that being the list of anyone who's ever served in office.
Then sure... everyone has the right to be warned you're a douchebag.
Will they put everyone who eats meat on the list?
Just a thought.
Don't give them to the Humane Society of the US (the ones that advertise abused animals on TV). They were people were caught in NC killing animals and dumping their bodies in dumpsters after being given them. Because there was no evidence of cruelty and the animals were willfully given, they only got convicted of illegal dumping. The more you find out about them, the weirder and less humane they sound.
no. the beginning of the slippery slope was the introduction of sex-offender registers. as has been amply proven by this new register.
...the proverbial Christian Scientist with an appendicitis attack.
Which Proverb was about a Scientist with appendicitis? If only George Carlin was still around to show us the correct bible verse.
R.I.P. Mr. Carlin...
Sigh
It's fact, not flamebait. The rural, conservative states tend to be the ones that receive more money from the federal government than they pay in federal taxes. It's somewhat hilarious for people in those states to complain about taxes and government spending when that stuff is what's keeping their states afloat.
It's probably more important than a sexual abuse registry, since animal abuse is a strong sign of those who will become abusers and serial killers (and if you cross-reference you're probably going to get a very good handle on who you really need to be watching).
When I think about various sexual compulsions vs. a compulsion to kill the innocent and defenseless I'm going to go with the later as being far more frightening.
I'm far less frightened of the government having a database of criminals than a government that has figured out how to lock people up even after they've served their sentence.
I don't really see the comparison to the sex offender registry.
You can tell your children not to go near the bad mans house, but thats not going to work so well for your cat. (And dogs have to be kept on a leash in public)
A business that works with animals can already check a prospective employees criminal background.
Its not going to prevent people abusing stray or wild animals.
The vegetarian animal rights hippie in me thinks this is a great idea.
The rest of me is going on about slippery slopes as usual.
Look who's talking? You are responsible for so many animal cruelities and torture due wrong eating habbits. And yet u like to talk about animal cruelity! Lord is watching and justice would be done.
The follow up law will ban animal abusers from living within 1000' of any animals!
Some sicko tied up a cat's tail to his car and dragged it to death. I'm usually not a violent person but I still feel the urge to beat up that low-life badly, years after it happened.
California should be more concerned with the fact that the state is just about bankrupt with one of the highest unemployment rates in the country.
Drug offender registries are next...
-Myke
Are the meat, dairy, puppy mill, and zoo industries going to be included on this list? If not, it's worthless.
...After California goes bankrupt during a Republican watch, you still blame another party. But you're "insightful".
Will this also open a precedent which will allow other types of registry to be created any time soon? I'm thinking: employee abuser registry; tax evader registry; etc. Let's rat on everyone else!
My sig is better than your sig.
Also means indefinite servitude to the government since you cant get a job..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
... the real problem is what when 1000's of different "registries" exist?
We have a registry of people who are against the registry. You've just been registered. We want EVERYBODY to know who all the people are, that are against our righteous and noble cause.
If you don't have anything to hide, then you should be happy to be on our Registry. Look for your name on a telephone booth or Website near you.
"there are no atheists in foxholes," except sort of the reverse of that, which really makes you think.
I've always thought that there should be a registry for people who repeatedly drive drunk. a few years ago I read a paper that compared stats. For every child that was kidnapped by a non-family member, 18 children were killed by a drunk driver in a vehicle other than the one they were in.
The Humane Society in my neck-of-the-woods tries to adopt an animal for 20 days. Then the are given to Animal Control, which tries to adopt the animal for 10 more days.
PETA, on the other hand, often puts animals to sleep right away.
It is as always a matter of considering all the options available - something that neither politicians not slashdotters seem overly familiar with. And I am not saying that I would like to have a register or registers of offenders of this or that kind; in fact I am not stating any preference.
It is not difficult to see why keeping a register is attractive or imagine who might be most against it. The question is how much of this "for or against" is actually anything but than smoke and mirrors?
On the one hand, would having a register really make our life better and more secure? It seems doubtful, seeing how all these security measures always turn out to be full of holes that the criminals soon find - so it ends up being yet another chain around the legs of ordinary citizens, while doing nothing to protect; pretty much like a talisman or a superstition.
On the other hand, when people are against being registered and supervised, how much difference does it make? If you carry a mobile, then you are already being followed in rather minute detail; if you use a credit or debit card, then your buying habits are already registered, if you have health insurance, then... well, you get the picture. You all seem to accept this as a natural part of life; so what the hell is the whining about? Yeah, a DNA register could be abused, certainly, but it could also be hugely beneficial.
The point I am trying to make here is - start looking at the real facts, not the scaring imagery that some try to paint, or the ever more hollow repetitions of lofty ideals about freedom. You've got that pint of jelly in your skull; start using it for something.
People peeing on bushes are the rare outliers that no one is really gunning for. Removing them from any lists should be a priority.
The problem is that it is not a priority to correct errors in these lists, and I'm under the impression that the bureaucracy involved can take years or decades, just from stories about false credit reports.
What this boils down to is circumvention of libel law. If you publicly accuse someone of being a closet pedophile or a Bernie Madoff and you can't substantiate your claim, you're in for a world of litigation. If someone ends up on one of these lists, and later it is discovered the person never should have been on this list in the first place, or the conviction was subsequently overturned, does this person have redress under libel law? Ideally for millions of dollars, which is how much I would want for damage to my reputation if someone put my name on a public list of pedophiles or wife-beaters.
Ordinarily, when these public lists are created, such as credit reports, provision are enacted under law which partially or fully suspends libel protection, otherwise these lists would tend to be very short, once every possible risk of being wrong was fully considered.
Let's suppose you become a convicted pedophile because a witness lies under oath. You go on the list, your life is hell, but then something comes to light that overturns your conviction, and provides compelling evidence that the witness against you was acting on malice. Do you then have the right to sue the false witness for damages to your reputation that would ordinarily accrue from libel law?
Or, a not uncommon scenario, what is the libel exposure when the prosecution withholds evidence favorable to the defense?
Convicted by doodles, Masters is freed by DNA
I can live with the lists so long as there is absolutely someone to be sued for significant personal damage if the process leading to a person's name being added to the list is negligent or corrupt. I fear this is hardly ever the case in how these lists are implemented under legislation, or that the resources required to win such a battle are intended to be prohibitive.
I'm a bit of bleeding heart liberal when it comes to prosecuting people for shooting someone under false assumptions. I don't believe the paranoid discharge of a lethal weapon enjoys constitutional protection. So carry the gun if it makes you feel secure, but don't expect to see much light of day for twenty years if your judgement proves faulty. Responsibility in proportion to capacity to harm.
Yoshihiro Hattori
Since I'm already being inflammatory, was the persecution of crypto-Jews under the Spanish Inquisition a stepping stone on the slippery slope toward the Holocaust? Perhaps 2000 Jews burned at the stake on the basis of utterances under extreme torture, and property confiscated for the betterment of the state. Imagine if they had been more organized.
Which brings us back to pedophiles. *Finally* the society for the protection of known pedophiles lost a few stone buildings for their misdemeanours. How sad.
Here's a trio of movies to put anyone in a somber mood about the making of lists.
Good Night, and Good Luck
The Thin Blue Line
Twist of Faith
The third movie in that list was irritating on some level and is not a movie I would watch again. What all these movies have in common is the imbalance of power between the accuser and the accused.
Law enforcement is legitimately shielded from aspects of libel law so that they can do their jobs without constant fear of legal harassment (drug lords have unlimited legal resources). This is
Check your facts... that was PETA.
This is assinine. Sex offenders are frequently predators. They will hunt down children, women, etc. to victimize. Therefore, the registries serve the purpose of making harder for them to hunt. The Sex Offender registries do not in fact exist for the purpose of continued punishment.
Animal abusers on the other hand don't hunt for victims. They are usually people who lack the empathy to see why abusing animals is wrong (young kids, gang members, etc.). Once they are convited, it is easy to prohibit them from ever owning a pet in the future as part of their release. With that being the case, the purpose of an animal offender registry would be to ensure that even after they are tried, convicted and pay for their crime, the punishment will continue indefinitely.
We seem to have forgotten that people can do bad things and after being punished, regret their actions. Sex Offender Registries are justifiable due to the high recidivism rate of offenders. They frequently feel a compulsion to commit their crimes. I've never heard of any studies on the recidivism rate of animal abusers, and the absence of any data, find it hard to believe that they feel any compulsion toward their transgressions. Once the abuser has been punished, we need to learn to forgive. If you feel that they haven't paid enough, then change the law to allow for harsher punishment. Don't make it so that they have to go on some registry for the rest of their life for an act that they may have commited while suffering from a temporary laps in judgement, or for somethin they may never do again.
Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
...I have nothing to worry about, it doesn't affect me...
With apologies to Pastor Martin Niemöller
When something so off the wall starts getting put together, the irrationalities and contradictions inherent in it make it obvious the problems are severe if not fatal, and it gets shut down. Unfortunately we're talking California where it's weird's job to outdo itself. So how are they going to handle:
Cruel killing -- we can't have Dr. Kevorkian's assisted suicide for creatures with the ability to make up their own minds and say so, so who's going to speak up for the creatures unable to speak for themselves and protect them from the Death Vet?
Unbreaking the circle -- my cultural heritage places a high value on maximal participation in the Circle of Life. This means using as much of every animal as possible. I eat meat and wear leather and fur for this reason and expect to have these things available. So when an anti-fur PETA vegan acts to make these less available to me, can I level charges of racism? Better yet, will I be able to use this law to have the activists prosecuted for direct violation for attempting to prevent said creatures from achieving their full potential by being prevented from riding the Circle of Life all the way around?
Even in California people tend to fall into classifications of 'animal, vegetable, or mineral'. We can talk about getting a rock protection law in bit (igneous is no excuse) but for now, since my kids are definitely animal (in this life at least) if they get abused, will I be able to get the prep listed on this? Likewise, if I catch a dog abusing a cat or a person, can I get them listed? After all if we're going to give them the rights they deserve, shouldn't we also get ours and make sure others get theirs?
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
Damn you Steve Jobs!
Psychopaths often go on to bigger and better things... Like people.
memory is only established through repetition.
Unlike humans of course. Who's memory springs into existence in a magical and unexplained manner. Given by god perhaps.
These animals are not people. They are food.
People eat people. People are meat. People are food. It's generally frowned upon in polite society, but people like Jeffrey Dahmer eat people like you. You are food to them.
Deleted
People's crimes, their prosecution, and their punishment are all matters of public record. They always have been, and they should, as the last thing we want is a secret judicial system.
The difference was pre-internet, it was hard to find this information. Now, it's easy.
If people judge you because of a past criminal history, well, that's life.
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
Having dogs myself, I get sickened when I see an obvious neglect for a dog, let alone abuse, I think this would be a good thing, however, it might get used to get back at someone or play pranks, as long as there is a starting of a case, then someone is assigned to go
observe the environment to see if it is a real case of abuse or not. Sometimes people are neglectful and not on purpose, getting a wake up call with someone declaring them anonymously, is all it takes sometimes to make them realize although dogs are not humans, they are animals that deserve to live as much as we do, and that existence should not be to in a cage 8 hours a day, followed by "go sit in your corner" for the rest of it......seriously.
I hope that this can help the organizations like the SPCA get better results, however, let's say this does a better job and we take away abused pets more now then before, the SPCA has a policy of putting to sleep dogs after a period of time, and this is not acceptable, we need to also dedicate some resources towards finding a better solution to helping us find good homes for those animals.
Please people, regardless of the benefits a /statewide/ animal control registry provides ( on the assumption that CA govt can provide anything effectively ) you have to balance that against maintaining funding for school programs, criminal justice programs ( like State appointed attorneys ), environmental protection programs.
The state has been in the red for eight years, how can any elected official there justify creating any new program?
#-#
Ad Astra Per Aspera
A rough road leads to the stars
the state let's people go hungry. IMO there are higher priorities of problems...