Animal Abuse Laws and Irrationality

[Madeline]

For some reason, most people in America react to images of animals with so much emotion it crowds out all reason. One reason LBJ did not seek re-election is that a photo of him lifting his beagle onto its hind legs by its ears had outraged the voting public.

Study on the photo. Does it really look as if that dog is uncomfy...or does it look like play between an animal and its owner? The hysteria this whipped up surpassed the public's outrage that American kids were being drafted and sent to fight in Vietnam. Does that seem rational and balanced?

http://www.sss.gov/induct.htm.

I remember thinking at the time that some people were just batshit. WTF? Outrage over a dog who might have been uncomfy but none at all over dead American kids?

Dog fighting is one of those topics most people in America cannot talk about calmly. Cock fighting, bull fighting and dog fighting all have very deep roots in some cultures and those cultures are mixing into and assimilating with other American subcultures. If a "hillbilly" in Applachia can shoot a squirrel and feed the meat to his family, why can't a Brazilian in New York fight cocks? Or dogs? Are how are dogs more valuable than cocks (chickens)?

I don't entirely understand the cultural bias we Americans have shared for so long. Our habitual abuse of animals is okay, but nobody else's is. We use race horses in horrific ways, not the least of which a horse is a herd animal. When a colt is separated from other horses and has no contact with them apart from hearing them in the adjoining stalls, he grows very depressed. Monkeys socially isolated to this degree for study purposes have died from no other apparant cause than loneliness. This country tolerates horse racing, animal performers, circuses, zoos and aquariums, dog racing, rodeos and other abusive uses of animals...why are we in any position to condemn the "abusive" use of animals by folks with different backgrounds?

I would also like a an answer to this question: sadistic torture of animals is a HUGE predictor of future sadistic treatment of people. WHY it is that when we catch the local teenaged boy tying kittens in a sack and setting them on fire we cannot agree to confine him for a VERY long time in prison? This kind of behavior is the equivalent to running around shouting "Stop me before I kill someone!" Why, as a society, can't we get our shit together to impose long prison sentences on people we KNOW constitute a danger to humans?

I understand that a bond can arise between an animal and its owner. I also cried watching "Old Yeller" and "Black Beauty". But when I hear the term "pet parents", my skin just crawls. This Disney-fication of some animals and not others revolts me. If any of us really gave a DAMN about animal cruelty, we would burn down every Big Agriculture chicken farm and pig farm in the US.

Around here, we've had to lay off about a third of the firefighting force. Yet I can still stop by the local fire station and get my "a dog is here" sticker for my kitchen window. WTF? Are we seriously asking the men and women brave enough to fight fires despite unsafe staffing levels to risk their lives for even one additional nano-second to fetch out a fucking DOG? When the hell did we all decide, as a society, that Fido's life is more valuable than a firefighter's?

If you are spending $100's of dollars a month to feed that new brand of fresh, refrigerated, organic food to your pet I say -- FUCK YOU. Feed the damned dog Alpo and give the excess cash to your local Food Bank to feed hungry kidlets.

We get all misty and weepy and indulge ourselves over some animals -- and this childishness self-indulgence ends up stressing and perverting our system of laws, our society and our resources.

Okay, I've had my say. Let the PETA nutters commence to hate on my POV.

 

[boedicca]

You know, you post some thread titles which indicate that the topic may be interesting - but I cannot stand reading that obnoxious large blue serif-style font.

So - no comment.

 

[Mr. H.]

At my age, the large font is a godsend. The blue I could do without.

 

[Big Black Dog]

I remember when LBJ lifted up the beagle by it's ears. I saw it on the 6 o'clock news the day it happened. People did think it was not a cool thing to do. I would say that LBJ decided not to seek reelection because of his lack of popularity due to the Viet Nam War rather than picking up this hound dog by it's ears.

 

[Madeline]

You know, you post some thread titles which indicate that the topic may be interesting - but I cannot stand reading that obnoxious large blue serif-style font.

So - no comment.

It required THIRTY words to say you have nothing to say? I'm not going to be bullied into changing back to the fucking default. If the Mods or Site Owner REQUIRES me to do so, I will conform. But merely to suit fussbudgets and officious intermeddlers? Nope.

Why the hell even bother to join a web site dedicated to airing different POVs if conformity is your God?

 

[Madeline]

At my age, the large font is a godsend. The blue I could do without.

Mr H, you have accessibility options to enhance visibility (and to compensate for other physical deficits) on your computer. Some are built into your Operating System, and others into your browser.

Control Panel -> All Control Panel Items ->Ease of Access Items.

I use Google Chrome as my browser. Hit "Ctrl" and "+" and the image on the screen will enlarge -- you just have to remember to do it every time you log on.

Sorry you don't care for blue. It's easier for me to see, sir.

 

[Madeline]

I remember when LBJ lifted up the beagle by it's ears. I saw it on the 6 o'clock news the day it happened. People did think it was not a cool thing to do. I would say that LBJ decided not to seek reelection because of his lack of popularity due to the Viet Nam War rather than picking up this hound dog by it's ears.

I suppose we all have our perceptions of how folks reacted. The adults around me behaved as if LBJ had set the White House on fire.

Whatever we recall, Count Dracula, I hope we can agree that photo was a high water mark in American stupidity where animals are concerned.

 

[George Costanza]

For some reason, most people in America react to images of animals with so much emotion it crowds out all reason.We get all misty and weepy and indulge ourselves over some animals -- and this childishness self-indulgence ends up stressing and perverting our system of laws, our society and our resources.

(Snipped ---- content worthless.)

Okay, I've had my say. Let the PETA nutters commence to hate on my POV.

Ihopehefails - is this you? I see a similar, disconnected type of logic here . . .

Specifically what type of animal abuse laws do you feel are "irrational"?

 

[Madeline]

For some reason, most people in America react to images of animals with so much emotion it crowds out all reason.We get all misty and weepy and indulge ourselves over some animals -- and this childishness self-indulgence ends up stressing and perverting our system of laws, our society and our resources.

(Snipped ---- content worthless.)

Okay, I've had my say. Let the PETA nutters commence to hate on my POV.

Ihopehefails - is this you? I see a similar, disconnected type of logic here . . .

Specifically what type of animal abuse laws do you feel are "irrational"?

I am not here under any other nicks, George. Certainly not ihopehefails, for Christ's sake. No offense to anyone.

Let's start with the laws classifying even the most extreme animal abuse as a misdemeanor. I'm not talking about Michael Vicks and his benighted dog fighting ring. I mean cases like this:

Juvenile assaults two people, abuses dog and will get light sentence-this should anger all of us.

Or the laws prohibiting dog and cock fighting, while rodeos and circus acts are legal. We are attempting to alter cultural behaviors towards ANIMALS...shouldn't we instead be focused on altering culturally-inculcated abuse of women and children by new immigrants?

The nation has only so many dollars to spend on any law enforcement initiative. The animal abuse laws we have now distort what ought to be a rational priority of those initiatives.

 

[strollingbones]

anyone who thinks lbj didnt run due to lifting the beagle by the ears....is an idiot.

 

[strollingbones]

i am one of those people you are addressing...and as a hillbilly i cant remember the last time anyone offered me squirrel....and you do not see the difference in blood sports and hunting to put the food on the table...i dont have time to explain...

when the dog/cat food scare from china was going on...i fed my animals human quality food.

o and i donate to food banks....

my dogs/cats never are all over blue font or large font...they dont get on my nerves by being stupid...they dont betray me....the dogs are willing to take a bullet for me...the cats ...not so much

 

[George Costanza]

For some reason, most people in America react to images of animals with so much emotion it crowds out all reason.We get all misty and weepy and indulge ourselves over some animals -- and this childishness self-indulgence ends up stressing and perverting our system of laws, our society and our resources.

(Snipped ---- content worthless.)

Okay, I've had my say. Let the PETA nutters commence to hate on my POV.

Ihopehefails - is this you? I see a similar, disconnected type of logic here . . .

Specifically what type of animal abuse laws do you feel are "irrational"?

I am not here under any other nicks, George. Certainly not ihopehefails, for Christ's sake. No offense to anyone.

Let's start with the laws classifying even the most extreme animal abuse as a misdemeanor. I'm not talking about Michael Vicks and his benighted dog fighting ring. I mean cases like this:

Juvenile assaults two people, abuses dog and will get light sentence-this should anger all of us.

Or the laws prohibiting dog and cock fighting, while rodeos and circus acts are legal. We are attempting to alter cultural behaviors towards ANIMALS...shouldn't we instead be focused on altering culturally-inculcated abuse of women and children by new immigrants?

The nation has only so many dollars to spend on any law enforcement initiative. The animal abuse laws we have now distort what ought to be a rational priority of those initiatives.

OK - I think I see where you are going with this now.

What makes you think that animal abuse laws operate at the derogation of laws prohibiting "human abuse"? Law enforcement can be only spread so thin? I think most of the animal abuse cases are brought to justice by animal control officers or other, specialized branches of law enforcement designed to deal specifically with animal matters. True, "regular" cops often do make animal abuse arrests, but more often than not, when they see something that needs attention, they will call in the animal control officials.

I agree with you that the inconsistency between laws prohibiting cock fighting and the lack of laws governing animal cruelty in circuses should be addressed. Laws should be enacted prohibiting animal abuses in circuses.

 

[Madeline]

anyone who thinks lbj didnt run due to lifting the beagle by the ears....is an idiot.

I was 14 at the time LBJ make his announcement, strollingbones. I agree, the beagle photo was not the driving force behind LBJ's falling approval rates and decision not to seek re-election -- that most likely was his Civil Rights legislation. But where I lived, folks had just had it with LBJ because of the image of him "abusing" his dog.

"I'm not voting for a dog hater" was a commonplace remark I overheard adults make.

I'm not imagining the furor that broke out over this:

American Experience . The Presidents . Lyndon B. Johnson | PBS

There is STILL anger over what LBJ did with his freaking beagle -- and it has been FORTY TWO years.

Why did LBJ lift his dog by it's ears? - Yahoo!7 Answers

If this bizarre over-reaction does not qualify as "irrational" in your lexicon, then I submit you have attached no yardstick to that noun at all.

 

[Big Black Dog]

I remember when LBJ lifted up the beagle by it's ears. I saw it on the 6 o'clock news the day it happened. People did think it was not a cool thing to do. I would say that LBJ decided not to seek reelection because of his lack of popularity due to the Viet Nam War rather than picking up this hound dog by it's ears.

I suppose we all have our perceptions of how folks reacted. The adults around me behaved as if LBJ had set the White House on fire.

Whatever we recall, Count Dracula, I hope we can agree that photo was a high water mark in American stupidity where animals are concerned.

I raised, trained, bred, field trialed and showed beagles for nearly 18 years. Picking up a beagle by it's ears is NOT a very good thing to do. I hope nothing I said even implied that it was an "ok" thing to do. He could have done some serious damage to that beagles ears.

 

[Madeline]

i am one of those people you are addressing...and as a hillbilly i cant remember the last time anyone offered me squirrel....and you do not see the difference in blood sports and hunting to put the food on the table...i dont have time to explain...

when the dog/cat food scare from china was going on...i fed my animals human quality food.

o and i donate to food banks....

my dogs/cats never are all over blue font or large font...they dont get on my nerves by being stupid...they dont betray me....the dogs are willing to take a bullet for me...the cats ...not so much

Animals have value, even ones who have no "pet parent". The laws prohibiting their sadistic abuse are not STRONG ENOUGH to suit me.

What I cannot understand is why it is okay to confine a sperm whale in a tank at Sea World until it is driven insane, but it is NOT okay to fight cocks until one submits. (Cock and dog fighting, as practiced by some South Americans, might result in an animal's death from injury but USUALLY does not involve a "fight to the death".)

In both cases, the humans use the animals for entertainment. Why is one use okie-dokie and the other so terrible I have to divert law enforcement away from policing against crimes against people to find, arrest and prosecute the perps?

I'd be okie-dokie with banning ALL animal entertainment uses. What I'm not okay with is selecting only a few -- those that have been brought here by immigrants we do not favor -- and outlawing ONLY them.

And I'm okie-dokie with anyone who BOTH feeds luxury foods to his pet AND donates to a food bank. I am not okay with someone who can only afford to do one, and still chooses to buy luxurious pet food while his neighbor's kidlets go hungry.

It's not a question of whether any laws on animals are a good idea. It's a big picture question...have we chosen a system of laws regarding animals that best serves our need, or theirs?

IMO, no, we have failed in that endeavor miserably -- and we ALL pay for indulging the irrationality that led to these laws.

 

[editec]

The older I get the more I appreciate that dogs are better people than most people.

FWIW, I also find the very large blue type a bit of a problem.

But if you do that to save your eyes then post in whatever way works best for you.

 

[Big Black Dog]

After reading Madeline's last comments, I have a question... How do you know when a Sperm Whale at Sea World has been driven crazy? What's the tip-off? Just asking...

 

[Madeline]

Ihopehefails - is this you? I see a similar, disconnected type of logic here . . .

Specifically what type of animal abuse laws do you feel are "irrational"?

I am not here under any other nicks, George. Certainly not ihopehefails, for Christ's sake. No offense to anyone.

Let's start with the laws classifying even the most extreme animal abuse as a misdemeanor. I'm not talking about Michael Vicks and his benighted dog fighting ring. I mean cases like this:

Juvenile assaults two people, abuses dog and will get light sentence-this should anger all of us.

Or the laws prohibiting dog and cock fighting, while rodeos and circus acts are legal. We are attempting to alter cultural behaviors towards ANIMALS...shouldn't we instead be focused on altering culturally-inculcated abuse of women and children by new immigrants?

The nation has only so many dollars to spend on any law enforcement initiative. The animal abuse laws we have now distort what ought to be a rational priority of those initiatives.

OK - I think I see where you are going with this now.

What makes you think that animal abuse laws operate at the derogation of laws prohibiting "human abuse"? Law enforcement can be only spread so thin? I think most of the animal abuse cases are brought to justice by animal control officers or other, specialized branches of law enforcement designed to deal specifically with animal matters. True, "regular" cops often do make animal abuse arrests, but more often than not, when they see something that needs attention, they will call in the animal control officials.

I agree with you that the inconsistency between laws prohibiting cock fighting and the lack of laws governing animal cruelty in circuses should be addressed. Laws should be enacted prohibiting animal abuses in circuses.

The US history of child abuse laws is this: before we had ghettos and social workers, we had settlement houses and settlement house workers. A body of law was enacted prohibitting animal abuses such as working a carriage-pulling horse to death, etc. AFTER that body of law took hold and people began to give animal abuse the fish eye, a settlement worker pled for protection of a CHILD by reasoning that a human child should not be treated in a manner that was illegal for a turtle.

Child Abuse?A History - Abuse During The Industrial Revolution

ANY new criminal statute adds one more item to the list 'o things to do for law enforcement, DAs, courts and prisons. Maybe what Michael Vicks did was repugnant (I have not read the transcript of his trial and don't actually know exactly what he did). But why are we failing to confine a MURDERER for his entire prison term so as to make room for a DOG fighter?

The heirarchy of values, the priorities we demand our law enforcement, etc. adhere to is skewed badly, and not by any LOVE of animals generally -- but rather by elevating OUR love for OUR pets above the needs of our human neighbors and then turning a blind eye to the horrendous suffering of all other animals. By the Disney-fication of only SOME animals, sometimes. When it suits us, and when our "heart strings get plucked".

I have regulated pari-mutuel wagering in Florida. If people bothered to learn what the lives of the dogs and horses involved in the racing industry were really like, no one with any conscience would ever attend another race. If you've ever visited the Kentucky Horse Park you've seen the ginormous statute of Sea Biscuit. IMO, that staute should instead be of a human in eternal shame, and we visitors should be flinging poo at it -- because Sea Biscuit's life was miserable. And THAT horse was treated FAR better than any average race horse, all of which are FAR FAR FAR better treated than any racing dog.

 

[Madeline]

I remember when LBJ lifted up the beagle by it's ears. I saw it on the 6 o'clock news the day it happened. People did think it was not a cool thing to do. I would say that LBJ decided not to seek reelection because of his lack of popularity due to the Viet Nam War rather than picking up this hound dog by it's ears.

I suppose we all have our perceptions of how folks reacted. The adults around me behaved as if LBJ had set the White House on fire.

Whatever we recall, Count Dracula, I hope we can agree that photo was a high water mark in American stupidity where animals are concerned.

I raised, trained, bred, field trialed and showed beagles for nearly 18 years. Picking up a beagle by it's ears is NOT a very good thing to do. I hope nothing I said even implied that it was an "ok" thing to do. He could have done some serious damage to that beagles ears.

I cede your point Count Dracula...but I don't believe we should select our next president based on any accidental harm he might have done to a dog. I think we need more significant markers to judge who will best lead the nation.

If we can "overlook" murder in a candidiate's past (Ted Kennedy & Chapaquiddick), then surely we can overlook "dog accidents"?

 

[Father Time]

You know, you post some thread titles which indicate that the topic may be interesting - but I cannot stand reading that obnoxious large blue serif-style font.

So - no comment.

It required THIRTY words to say you have nothing to say? I'm not going to be bullied into changing back to the fucking default. If the Mods or Site Owner REQUIRES me to do so, I will conform. But merely to suit fussbudgets and officious intermeddlers? Nope.

Why the hell even bother to join a web site dedicated to airing different POVs if conformity is your God?

Well can you give us the cliffnotes version of it? My eyes hurt from reading that much blue.