Animal abuse registry?

[manifold]

I believe this one was co-sponsored by Ang and bones.

California Animal-Abuse Registry: Lawmakers Propose Bill - TIME


Excerpt...

Cruelty to animals, it is said, is often a precursor to graver crimes. So would there not be some usefulness to a registry of individuals convicted of felony animal abuse? Legislators in California want the Golden State to be the first to establish such a record — just as California was the first in the nation to create a registry of sex offenders.

 

[keee keee]

Now it is against the law to yell at or hit the dog for shitting on the floor!!!!

 

[keee keee]

you have to give your dogs time outs now!!!

 

[manifold]

Or you could just not own one if you don't have the patience for it.


Just sayin...

 

[uscitizen]

What is next? a "self abuse" registry?

 

[random3434]

I hope Knee-Knee doesn't have any pets.

I think it's a good idea, because almost all serial killers started out torturing animals.

When looking for a criminal that has deviant behavior, that registry would be a good place to start.

Plus, it would keep them from getting other animals to abuse in the future from legit places.

 

[xotoxi]

I hope Knee-Knee doesn't have any pets.

I think it's a good idea, because almost all serial killers started out torturing animals.

When looking for a criminal that has deviant behavior, that registry would be a good place to start.

Plus, it would keep them from getting other animals to abuse in the future from legit places.

I think that they should have a Serial Killer Registry.

 

[Dr Gregg]

I believe this one was co-sponsored by Ang and bones.

California Animal-Abuse Registry: Lawmakers Propose Bill - TIME


Excerpt...

Cruelty to animals, it is said, is often a precursor to graver crimes. So would there not be some usefulness to a registry of individuals convicted of felony animal abuse? Legislators in California want the Golden State to be the first to establish such a record — just as California was the first in the nation to create a registry of sex offenders.

This is a violation of privacy IMO. Although I think it kind of is for pedophiles and other sex offenders, they are a danger to people and their kids, and their extremely high chance of repeat offending makes it justifiable. THis just goes to far IMO, as much as I love animals and think these people are scum that would abuse animals

 

[goldcatt]

I have no problem with maintaining a database of convicted animal abusers if it's used, say, by animal shelters to try to keep these people from getting another pet to abuse. After all, that information is public record - it's just being put into one place to access it more easily and effectively.

But the whole premise of using it to predict future behavior is wrong. Dead wrong. While many violent felons (murderers, kidnappers, rapists, etc.) start out abusing animals, not all animal abusers go on to bigger and better things. In fact most don't.

 

[manifold]

I think it's a good idea, because almost all serial killers started out torturing animals.

That smells an awful lot like the argument that criminalizing weed is a good idea because almost all meth and heroin addicts started out smoking weed.

And of course it's bogus.

If you want to convince me, find out how many people that have abused animals actually graduate to being serial killers. Like pot smokers, I'd guess it's a tiny fraction of a fraction of a percent.

 

[random3434]

I think it's a good idea, because almost all serial killers started out torturing animals.

That smells an awful lot like the argument that criminalizing weed is a good idea because almost all meth and heroin addicts started out smoking weed.

And of course it's bogus.

If you want to convince me, find out how many people that have abused animals actually graduate to being serial killers. Like pot smokers, I'd guess it's a tiny fraction of a fraction of a percent.

Are we talking about pot or animals?

I never said all people who torture animals are serial killers, but most serial killers start out torturing animals, until they move onto humans.

It's a slippery slope, but like Goldcatt said, it's also a good idea to keep these freaks from getting another animal from a legit place.

 

[Big Black Dog]

Seriously. I shot and killed a cat this morning. Is there a 12-Step program for me?

 

[manifold]

I think it's a good idea, because almost all serial killers started out torturing animals.

That smells an awful lot like the argument that criminalizing weed is a good idea because almost all meth and heroin addicts started out smoking weed.

And of course it's bogus.

If you want to convince me, find out how many people that have abused animals actually graduate to being serial killers. Like pot smokers, I'd guess it's a tiny fraction of a fraction of a percent.

Are we talking about pot or animals?

I never said all people who torture animals are serial killers, but most serial killers start out torturing animals, until they move onto humans.

It's a slippery slope, but like Goldcatt said, it's also a good idea to keep these freaks from getting another animal from a legit place.

And I'm saying that is a meaningless stat.

The statistic of value is the percentage of people who abuse animals that go on to become serial killers. And, if as I suspect, that is a teeny tiny number, then it's not justification for this particular invasion of privacy IMO.


Edit: Most terrorists are Muslims EZ. By your logic we should maintain a registry of Muslims.

 

[Brubricker]

I think that they should have a Serial Killer Registry.

Death row not good enough for you?

 

[manifold]

I'm not sure animal shelters need this law.

We always adopt pets from shelters/rescues and believe me, they make you jump through some seriously fucking ridiculous hoops. We've even been turned down once because we had a puppy that caught pnemonia and died.

 

[xotoxi]

I never said all people who torture animals are serial killers, but most serial killers start out torturing animals, until they move onto humans.

I torture my sons...with tickling!

 

[goldcatt]

I'm not sure animal shelters need this law.

We always adopt pets from shelters/rescues and believe me, they make you jump through some seriously fucking ridiculous hoops. We've even been turned down once because we had a puppy that caught pnemonia and died.

That must be a local thing. Here they don't even always take the time to get your address. But they could still check the public record to see if somebody's been convicted of animal abuse, a database just puts the information that's already public in one place. I don't have a problem with that, since it's public anyway. See the theme here?

But if you're talking about a registry that will be used to predict who's going to be a serial killer, whoa! Very different and scary thing.

 

[random3434]

That smells an awful lot like the argument that criminalizing weed is a good idea because almost all meth and heroin addicts started out smoking weed.

And of course it's bogus.

If you want to convince me, find out how many people that have abused animals actually graduate to being serial killers. Like pot smokers, I'd guess it's a tiny fraction of a fraction of a percent.

Are we talking about pot or animals?

I never said all people who torture animals are serial killers, but most serial killers start out torturing animals, until they move onto humans.

It's a slippery slope, but like Goldcatt said, it's also a good idea to keep these freaks from getting another animal from a legit place.

And I'm saying that is a meaningless stat.

The statistic of value is the percentage of people who abuse animals that go on to become serial killers. And, if as I suspect, that is a teeny tiny number, then it's not justification for this particular invasion of privacy IMO.


Edit: Most terrorists are Muslims EZ. By your logic we should maintain a registry of Muslims.

First pot, now Muslims!

Yeah, put some more words in my mouth!

You think it's an invasion of privacy for people who abuse animals to be on a "list"-I don't.

It it keeps them from torturing more animals, I'm all for it.

 

[manifold]

Are you sure this is already public information?

 

[manifold]

Are we talking about pot or animals?

I never said all people who torture animals are serial killers, but most serial killers start out torturing animals, until they move onto humans.

It's a slippery slope, but like Goldcatt said, it's also a good idea to keep these freaks from getting another animal from a legit place.

And I'm saying that is a meaningless stat.

The statistic of value is the percentage of people who abuse animals that go on to become serial killers. And, if as I suspect, that is a teeny tiny number, then it's not justification for this particular invasion of privacy IMO.


Edit: Most terrorists are Muslims EZ. By your logic we should maintain a registry of Muslims.

First pot, now Muslims!

Yeah, put some more words in my mouth!

You think it's an invasion of privacy for people who abuse animals to be on a "list"-I don't.

It it keeps them from torturing more animals, I'm all for it.

You're entitled to your opinion. I'm just glad to see you finally backed off the serial killer nonsense.