Let's say your next door neighbor becomes angry at his dog. To punish the animal, he puts him in an oven and cooks him for five minutes at 200 degrees. The dog lives but will bear physical scars of the incident for the rest of his life. The next day this same neighbor is arrested for sexually abusing a minor. For what crime should your neighbor receive the severest punishment: torturing a dog or sexually abusing a minor?
According to Utah animal rights activists, torturing a dog should receive a harsher sentence. Thankfully, for the time being, the Utah state legislature disagrees.
Yesterday, the Utah state legislature balked on voting for a measure that would make acts of animal torture, now a Class A misdemeanor, a third degree felony and punishable by up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine.
This all sounds good until you learn, thanks to Republican Sen. Jon Greiner, that under Utah law such crimes as child abuse, sexual abuse of a minor, assault of a police officer and assault of a school employee are still Class A misdemeanors. "How do we get to a third-degree felony [for animal torture] when we don't have enough respect for human life, sexually abused children, that we don't have a higher standard of care for them?" he told the Salt Lake Tribune.
How, indeed.
The fact that the legislature is seriously considering this bill shouldn’t come as a surprise. For years, militant animal rights activists have told us that animals have at least the same rights as people: we shouldn’t eat them, perform scientific experiments on them or even consider building homes, roads or bridges where it might disturb them. Their goal has been to get us to treat animals as equals. Now it seems they want us to treat them as our superiors.
Think about the message the proposed Utah law would send state residents about the value of humans when stacked up against man’s best friend. Stick a dog in the oven and get five years behind bars. Assault a teacher or abuse a child and, at least in the eyes of the law, a lesser sentence is required.
Those who torture animals are cruel, sadistic and should be punished; however, the punishment should not be greater than for harming a person. If Utah state legislators want to make it a third-degree felony to torture animals, they need to increase the punishments for abusing and assaulting people as well.
People are more important than animals. This is something our laws should reflect and something the Utah legislators should keep in mind when they reconsider this bill next January.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Clavos
As you say, cruelty and sadism perpetrated on animals is reprehensible and should be punished, but animal rights activists are way beyond the pale when they advocate that animals have rights.
Valuing animal lives above those of humans is inhuman and asinine.
2 - Che
I think you're forgetting that a crime against an animal is often also a crime against another human. The human that owns, loves and is deeply emotionally attached to that animal. I got no kids, I want no kids, but my cats - at least in my life -ARE my children. What does it say that I was unwilling to leave them during Katrina?
I'm by no means some crazed animal rights activists. I eat meat and I like to hunt. But people can and do form relationships - close ones - with animals, and to harm said animals is to harm the people that love them. And in cases of animal cruelty I think the relationship should be taken into consideration when meting out punishment.
But what do I know? I'm just a crazy cat lady. My feelings - and the feelings of those like me - don't count for shit. There's still no legislation in place to care for pets in the case of disaster. No care for pets means more humans suffer and die.
I think it is stupid to assume that the torture of an animal harms no one but the animal. If you care about people as you claim, then you'll realize that some people can be deeply harmed by animal cruelty and perpetrators should be punished accordingly.
3 - Doug DeLong
Well said, Che!
4 - Howard Ross
Good logic, but one way to end animal abuse is the jack up the punishment. I am not so sure if higher level mammals should not be given human being level status in the courts, some are more intelligent that the lowest level of the human family.
5 - Franco
Nice work and kudos to ya for bringing it up.
Hear are some bits from the Salt Lake Tribune August 6, 2007
Alex Pacheco, cofounder of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, has stated, "Arson, property destruction, burglary and theft are 'acceptable crimes' when used for the animal cause."
Tom Daley, a member of the British Animal Liberation Front, goes further: "In a war you have to take up arms and people will get killed, and I can support that kind of action ... and probably at a later stage, the shooting of vivisectors on their doorsteps."
The Foundation for Biomedical Research in Washington tracks the activities of animal rights activists nationally. The group documented a dramatic increase in vandalism and threats across the country during the past five years.
Congress has recognized the increasing level of terrorism by animal rights activists by passing the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act in November 2006. The FBI is investigating animal rights terrorism around the country.
Given this larger picture, the University of Utah is pursuing a range of measures to better protect our faculty and staff from these serious threats.
Interesting article
6 - Dr Dreadful
It's natural that humans should assign greater importance to their own species than to others. However, we should consider this:
1. Other animals don't know we think we're more important than them.
2. They think they're more important than anything.
Respect that.
7 - Clavos
Doc,
"1. Other animals don't know we think we're more important than them.
2. They think they're more important than anything."
With rare exceptions, other animals don't think.
8 - RJ
"Let’s say your next door neighbor becomes angry at his dog. To punish the animal, he puts him in an oven and cooks him for five minutes at 200 degrees. The dog lives but will bear physical scars of the incident for the rest of his life. The next day this same neighbor is arrested for sexually abusing a minor. For what crime should your neighbor receive the severest punishment: torturing a dog or sexually abusing a minor?"
Define "sexual abuse" and define "minor."
If "sexual abuse" means consensual sex that violates statutory rape laws because it was with a minor, and "minor" means a 17-year old who turns 18 next month, I would have to say cooking a dog alive is worse.
Wouldn't you?
9 - alessandro nicolo
C'man Doc, only Tarzan knows what animals think just like Aquaman is the only one who understands fish. Everyone knows this. Duh.
"No care for pets means more humans suffer and die."
Che? As in what?
10 - RJ
"I think it is stupid to assume that the torture of an animal harms no one but the animal. If you care about people as you claim, then you'll realize that some people can be deeply harmed by animal cruelty and perpetrators should be punished accordingly."
That's actually a great point.
Which is worse:
A) Sicko child predator lures 9-year old into his home and fondles his genitals for a few seconds
or
B) Sicko animal hater lures 9-year old child and the child's pet dog into his home, and then cooks the dog alive in front of the child
???
I believe both would be permanently damaging to the child, and should be punished severely. But the latter is arguably worse than the former, because there is the aggravating circumstance of an innocent animal being tortured in the process.
11 - Zedd
You know Brits and their dogs.
Although as a major dog lover myself........
Clav:
How do you define thinking?
Doc:"2. They think they're more important than anything.
Respect that."
Actually with the pets that I have had, namely dogs, they don't care about the species, it is the status of the pack member that is paramount. If I have the alpha position in the household, what I say is gold.
12 - Dr Dreadful
Clavos: OK... for think, read assume.
Zedd: Not a cat person, then?
13 - bliffle
Sounds like Utah is soft on child molesters.
14 - Ray Ellis
This isn't an either/or issue. People who abuse animals are of the same mindset as people who abuse children, or people who rape or murder. Those people have power issues. Obviously, the punishment for abusing an animal shouldn't be greater than that for abusing a child. But when you dismiss it as people are more important than animals, you're not recognizing that people of that abusive bent don't often make such distinctions.
15 - Clavos
The important distinction here should be a definition of what constitutes animal abuse. I think we can all agree that the really egregious practices such as those outlined above (e.g. "cooking" a dog), or, from current headlines, dogfighting, beating an animal, etc., are indisputably animal abuse.
The real debate lies in what is appropriate use of animals for the benefit of humans; food, clothing, medical, etc., particularly as to the use of animals in laboratory experiments for the advancement of science.
Another issue is in the preservation of endangered species; to what lengths should humanity go to preserve species, particularly when the benefit of humanity is at stake? What constitutes an appropriate balance between the two goals?
Have at it, folks!
16 - Che
Obviously alessandro, you didn't read the context of my statement or you would know that particular paragraph was in reference to disaster situations. Duh.
And thanks RJ, thats just the point I was trying to make. I read some months ago (can't find the article now) about a man who kicked his children's pet puppy to death in front of them. Heinous despicable animal abuse to be sure. But it was ALSO child abuse. Someone tell me that man should not be charged with both.
17 - Zedd
Good questions Clav,
I grapple with most of them as I do eat meat.
I am also not certain about using animals for laboratory testing.
My question is, what benefit is it to be at the top of the food chain if we don't behave like the top "dogs" that we are. However since we have the ability to reason and are far more adaptable than most other species, we could survive without killing other animals. However, why shouldn't we not kill other animals, if we are part of nature?
While I couldn't watch a cow being slaughtered, I certainly eat beef and enjoy it. I just made roast for the fam and it was delish... oh goodness now I feel bad.
Anyway, since I cant contribute in a meaningful way to this discussion, I will wait until I am struck by something that someone else posts before I reach any conclusions. But great questions!
The question is probably, "what is gratuitous?" then stop just short of that.
18 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Let's say that child abuse was made a more serious felony than animal torture and that animal torture was a felony requiring prison.
Let's say that both laws were actually enforced in America. My only question is: how would the eighty percent of the population that was NOT in jail be able to feed and support the twenty percent that would be in jail?
19 - Nancy
As far as I'm concerned, penalties for both should be about the same: you kill/torture a person or an animal, you die the same way. If the other entity lives, you are sold into slavery/hard labor for life in prison, and the proceeds support that other entity for the rest of ITS life. For abuse, persons should be barred from ever having pets again, for any reason, with violation bringing automatic stiff prison sentences - again, let the punishment fit the crime: perhaps the criminal serving time cleaning stables or cages in shelters, always wearing a monitor & under scrutiny. With, I think an electric prod applied liberally to the genitalia for any infractions. Sounds like justice to me.
However, I think Bliffle has it right: sounds like Utah (& everywhere else) is soft on crimes like child abuse & molestation. Most of the worst criminals start off with animal abuse & torture/killing & progress from there to humans. That they might have been abused themselves as kids is no excuse for them perpetuating the behavior. Invariably they know it's wrong, otherwise they wouldn't bother to hide it or do it furtively.
Personally, I object to supporting large numbers of human vermin in prisons. The crimes they have committed should bring them swift & automatic death, for most of them. The only reason it's so costly to apply the death sentence is because of all the BS unlimited appeals these assholes get at public expense. Cut out the unlimited appeals, & the cost drops radically.
So - give 'em one appeal, then fry 'em. As to how they die, I don't care if it hurts or they die slowly. In most cases, their victims didn't get the same consideration. If there were true justice, they'd die in just the same way, for the same length of time, experiencing the same horror, fear, & pain - which is as it should be.
20 - RJ
Nancy:
I'm pretty conservative, and I support the death penalty, but your comment is simply frightening. Hitler would have shuddered reading that.
21 - Matthew T. Sussman
Try this one, RJ: I support the death penalty, but only for people I don't like.
Pol Pot just flinched.
22 - Ray Ellis
Zedd, I think you live in the Dallas area, so I'm sure you heard about the punk-ass who thought it would be fun to set fire to his pit bull puppy. That should be enough to tell you where abuse begins.
Nancy-- I'm right there with you-- we "liberals" are a dangerous sort, aren't we?
23 - dogbegone
Pit bull puppies cook up great in my microwave. Dont like the smell of burning hair but thats the price one pays for Friday night fun.
24 - Dr Dreadful
#23: Trust sr to inject his own particular brand of sophistication into the debate.
25 - alessandro Nicolo
che, you're right. mea culpa.
but it's still an awkward sentence. to me anyway.
duh.