8 comments

  1. Icarus says:

    The last time I remember an animal cruelty bill before the GA House, (2000, I think), I witnessed an exchange between a ranking house member and an animal rights advocate/lobbyist pushing the bill.

    He told her he couldn’t support the bill, because as written, it would make something as simple as “swallowing a goldfish” a felony. She responded that something like that would be “one in a million” to prosecute.

    He paused for a minute and said, “Well, there’s about 7 million Georgians now, so are you telling me we’re going to convict seven Georgian’s a year for fellony swallowing of goldfish?”

    Point being, when these laws have been presented in the past, the groups pushing them refuse any attempt at “common sense” language, and instead adopt language as if written by PETA, where animals tend to have more rights and protections than humans.

    And as us bubbas like to say, “that dog won’t hunt.”

  2. Chris says:

    Well, It seems to me that the lack of laws on dog fighting aren’t a big deal.

    Vick is under indictment by the Feds, so obviously there are some federal laws he broke. All that a lack of state laws means is that there won’t be any publicity-whore DAs indicting dog fighters. Only publicity-whore US Attorneys.

    Ob disclaimer: DAs & US Attorneys are publicity whores by their nature, and their whoreishness has nothing to do with the fact they might indict dog fighters. Personally I hope the execute Vick – one so I never have to hear about this case, and two for what he did.

  3. David says:

    Why doesn’t some legislator simply write a bill that includes prohibitions against watching or participating in dog or cock fighting thereby cutting the legs out of the argument put forth by the legislator who was concerned about swallowing the goldfish? Pretty simple.

  4. rugby_fan says:

    Because PETA would argue that doesn’t go far enough.

    Far enough by PETA standards means writing a bill that goes too far for normal people and thus, will not become a law.

  5. David says:

    To heck with PETA. This is a win for whatever legislator introduces the dog and chicken fighting bill only.

  6. Nicki says:

    What’s up with the PETA bogeyman?

    The anti-cruelty laws should be pretty straightforward. But they aren’t because those who kill animals for a living are worried a) that the laws will apply to them or b) will erode the legal situation relative to animals such that eventually the laws will apply to them.

    Right now it’s exceptionally difficult to prosecute anyone for dogfighting, or to prosecute anyone for activities related to dogfighting, because activities related to dogfighting are legal and dogfighting itself is practically unprosecutable unless the participants are actually caught in the act. That should be changed.

Comments are closed.