"Are you kidding me?" / Facepalm Thread (pt 2)

[2A_Tom]

I figured I'd come out from under my bridge.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I just hope that none of you that are against this law own pets. They must live a miserable existence. Probably kept chained outside with no shelter, food or water. I mean, they're just animals after all.

 

[MarkC]

Many of the same people who decry the power of the federal government are arguing that we should increase the power of the federal government into an area traditionally regulated by the states, animal cruelty law.

There should be, and are, strong state laws against animal cruelty. Last legislative session Indiana passed HEA 1615, increasing protections for animals.

See what a great job the feds are doing in the area of firearms laws? And you want to bring companion animal laws under this same purview?

This is yet another area where the federal government is creeping into daily life that used to be solely regulated by state and local government. I am passionate about my companion animals, and Mrs. MarkC and I are essentially running a rescue out of our house. But creating yet another set of federal crimes is not the answer.

 

[2A_Tom]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to MarkC again.

Anyone who does not see this escalating to factory animals is blind.

Strange that the peeps that say they are the tolerant ones somehow have areas where they are not tolerant.

 

[MarkC]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to MarkC again.

Anyone who does not see this escalating to factory animals is blind.

Strange that the peeps that say they are the tolerant ones somehow have areas where they are not tolerant.

Anyone who has to trumpet about how tolerant he or she is, isn't.

 

[nonobaddog]

 

[rhino]

If they want dog fighting illegal, fine. Should be a state issue, not federal.

...and then a low level misdemeanor, not a felony. Fines.

They are animals. We refrain from cruelty because we are humans, not them.

Many of the same people who decry the power of the federal government are arguing that we should increase the power of the federal government into an area traditionally regulated by the states, animal cruelty law.

There should be, and are, strong state laws against animal cruelty. Last legislative session Indiana passed HEA 1615, increasing protections for animals.

See what a great job the feds are doing in the area of firearms laws? And you want to bring companion animal laws under this same purview?

This is yet another area where the federal government is creeping into daily life that used to be solely regulated by state and local government. I am passionate about my companion animals, and Mrs. MarkC and I are essentially running a rescue out of our house. But creating yet another set of federal crimes is not the answer.

Regardless of one's opinions regarding the severity of the crime and its penalties, I agree with the guys. The idea of the Federal gov't being allowed to meddle in more things is a very, very bad idea.

 

[actaeon277]

Nobody said anything about pre-crime. If you are convicted, you deserve to be punished.

But, why on the Federal level?

 

[nonobaddog]

It shouldn't be at a Federal level. That is overreach above and beyond the powers granted to the Federal government, which means it should be at the state level.

But on the other hand I feel the states should be pretty consistent from state to state and there is nothing that drives that. So maybe a guideline at the Federal level as a suggestion?

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Okay, I will concede that it should be at the state level, but also be consistent across the states. Sorry fellas... I tend to get my hackles up when it comes to animal cruelty. Ultimately as long as the abusers are being severely punished, I'm perfectly happy with the states doing the punishing.

I get that some people only see animals as "property" or "things". Don't understand it, but I get that those people exist. I also love me some meat. What I hate is cruelty.

 

[jamil]

So leave it to the states as long as they do it your way? Conceptually, how is that any different from a federal law? Who gets to define what cruelty is?

Haggles notwithstanding, what’s the rationale for a heightened sensitivity to “animal cruelty”? Of course I’m not endorsing cruelty, but different people have different ideas about that.

 

[two70]

Okay, I will concede that it should be at the state level, but also be consistent across the states. Sorry fellas... I tend to get my hackles up when it comes to animal cruelty. Ultimately as long as the abusers are being severely punished, I'm perfectly happy with the states doing the punishing.

I get that some people only see animals as "property" or "things". Don't understand it, but I get that those people exist. I also love me some meat. What I hate is cruelty.

I think you are missing a key point here, you and those like you, won't be the ones ultimately defining what cruelty is. This is very similar to the gun control zealots using the "gun safety" ruse as a way to confuse the issue and get something passed that they can add to over time. Once a Federal animal cruelty law is passed it is only a matter of time until the definition of cruelty gets reinterpreted and it won't be well meaning people like you that reinterpret or enforce it. It'll be people that think meat is cruelty, who think pet ownership is cruelty who do. Look to the more liberal states here and to the UK for examples of how these things progress and even those aren't the end goals. Some of the local laws are already more than enough to give me pause.

 

[Dead Duck]

OK I'll admit it.

When my daughter's fish went belly up, I told her I'd take care of it. But the second I pushed down that lever, Mr Bubbles flipped over and swam laps like an olympic champ..... for a second. I think he would have made it too if it weren't for that morning log. Maybe he he just likes sleeping on his back.

Am I in trouble?

 

[MarkC]

OK I'll admit it.

When my daughter's fish went belly up, I told her I'd take care of it. But the second I pushed down that lever, Mr Bubbles flipped over and swam laps like an olympic champ..... for a second. I think he would have made it too if it weren't for that morning log. Maybe he he just likes sleeping on his back.

Am I in trouble?

From the Indiana Code section which creates exemptions to the animal neglect/cruelty laws:

IC 35-46-3-5 Exceptions from chapter; electrocution
Sec. 5. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) through (c), this chapter does not apply to the following:
…
(9) Destruction of or injury to a fish.
…


So, I think you're good.

 

[nonobaddog]

But that says "electrocution". Hopefully you don't have an electric toilet. That just doesn't sound good (unless you are in an extreme hurry).

 

[MarkC]

But that says "electrocution". Hopefully you don't have an electric toilet. That just doesn't sound good (unless you are in an extreme hurry).

"Electrocution" refers to one of the other provisions, that I did not include.

However, I have to agree on the desirability of an electric toilet.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I disagree. People that prey upon the weak and the helpless - two legs or four - for sport and take pleasure in the pain of others should not be allowed to walk among us. An MMA fighter gives consent, a dog cannot

While a dog can't give "consent", fighting is natural and instinctive in them. Hence why trainers emphasize "socializing" them. Same with roosters.

Not vegan. Earlier, I explicity said that "commercial animals" should be excluded from the law, as long as they are killed humanely. If you beat your cattle, pigs, chickens, whatever, just for jollies, then you should be charged accordingly.

If beating a dog, or a cat is what you do to get your rocks off, then you should be forced to eat the animal raw, fur, bones and all. And if you didn't die from choking on the bones, I'd be okay with putting you (rhetorical "you") to death, or at least be subjected to the equivalent torture you subjected the animal to. I'd be happy to administer that penalty, and I would sleep quite well at night.

Why should "commercial animals" be exempted? It's okay to commercially slaughter cow/pigs/etc by gassing them with co2/smacking them in the head with a hammer/bolt gun, or electrically stunned to render them unconscious then slitting their throat. Or for Kosher/Halal meat just slitting their throat without stunning/rendering unconscious along with a lot of poultry. But if wish to put down fluffy in the same manner it's illegal? And yes co2/electrocution are specifically forbidden outside commercial slaughterhouses. And just slitting their throat would get me charged as well.

Nobody said anything about pre-crime. If you are convicted, you deserve to be punished.

I believe he meant prior to animal cruelty/dog fighting/cock fighting being illegal and commonly practiced why didn't we have mass amounts of serial killers.

I would give my life, and take another if someone took the life of one of my pets without reason (as in one of my pets threatened your life). Sorry. Ridicule me if you must. Come armed if you care to test it.

No ridicule from me, I feel similar towards my pets. But not everyone one does.

I just hope that none of you that are against this law own pets. They must live a miserable existence. Probably kept chained outside with no shelter, food or water. I mean, they're just animals after all.

I've got a couple, one dog is curled up on the couch the other in a chair. Food and water bowls full. But yep they're just animals.

OK I'll admit it.

When my daughter's fish went belly up, I told her I'd take care of it. But the second I pushed down that lever, Mr Bubbles flipped over and swam laps like an olympic champ..... for a second. I think he would have made it too if it weren't for that morning log. Maybe he he just likes sleeping on his back.

Am I in trouble?

Nah you're safe, fish are exempted. Torture at will.

 

[nonobaddog]

"Electrocution" refers to one of the other provisions, that I did not include.

However, I have to agree on the desirability of an electric toilet.

It might help get pit-stop times down to Formula 1 levels - like sit-ZAP-done.

 

[2A_Tom]

From the Indiana Code section which creates exemptions to the animal neglect/cruelty laws:

IC 35-46-3-5 Exceptions from chapter; electrocution
Sec. 5. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) through (c), this chapter does not apply to the following:
…
(9) Destruction of or injury to a fish.
…


So, I think you're good.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to MarkC again.

So the question remains, is fishing with a TA-312/pt field telephone legal or not?

 

[Timjoebillybob]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to MarkC again.

So the question remains, is fishing with a TA-312/pt field telephone legal or not?

In your own fish tank, sure. In a privately owned pond, possibly. "Public waters", no. But you won't get hit with animal cruelty charges unless you hit a turtle or muskrat...