[wfmynews2.com – 4/2/19]
After a person’s first Animal Abuse offense, they would be put on the registry for the next two years. If they have another offense they would be put on the registry for five years.
If you are convicted of an animal abuse crime this bill reiterates you may be forced to give up any animals you own.
If you are a repeat offender and are put on the registry multiple times the proposed bill says you would have to give up your animals, and would not be able to own animals for the next five years.
As I’ve stated here many times the electronic blacklists will continue to expand into other spheres. The lists will lead to unnecessary abridging liberty based upon perception of necessity rather than actual need. Social movement will be hindered. The lists are about political control not safety. Safety is the excuse.
What exactly is the reasoning for creating a registry like this? What purpose does it serve? I’m not pro-animal abuse, but is community safety really diminished unless they know Billy Bob four houses down kicked his dog? Seriously?
Can we start a registry for legislators and politicians who write or support idiotic laws that ultimately serve no purpose?
The fallacy of a registry for animal abusers is that obviously the officials don’t understand the mind set of some of those they are targeting. Dog fighters are surely one of the most deranged people. Those people that host dog fights, train dogs to fight and make a profit from it surely have deep seated mental and emotional issues. And what the legislators fail to understand is that these people are so twisted they actually gain street creed by having a few convictions. Animal abuse sentences, even for something as violent and heinous as dog fighting are so slight that getting caught is of little consequence and the registry could actually help promote these individuals. They all have criminal records so they could care less, and in that culture criminal records are not of any consequence, and as I said can actually be favorable.
I guess the legislatures are thinking along the lines of the typical animal abuser who beats their pet and a registry will prevent them from buying a pet at a pet store or private seller. But is a pet seller actually going to check the registry for every buyer? We can’t even agree on firearm background checks. No, I believe the premise of this registry is the same as ours, to publicly shame and humiliate people, and somehow that is supposed to do something. It sounds good around election time.
If I rape an elephant will I be on both registries?
NC BILL: CONVICTED ANIMAL ABUSERS WILL BE ADDED TO AN ONLINE REGISTRY; MUCH LIKE SEX OFFENDERS – paroled child abusers and murderers breathe sigh of relief.
Failure to Register