I'm not much for looking at "slippery slope" arguments. If something sounds reasonable and helps to protect something I believe should be protected without unreasonable cost, I say do it. If folks want to cross state lines, they will... but the vast majority won't bother. The abuse I see of animals out here in "the country" is appalling. Every damned month some ass is going to trial for starving his animals, or beating them, or flinging a litter of kittens into a river, or taking a meat cleaver to a screaming baby possum... so yeah, if something as simple as a website data base keeps those same freaks from adopting or purchasing other animals, I'm all for it.
I mean, this isn't life altering. If someone's name ends up on there and he/she has never received such a citation, then there would be channels to go through to get the name removed, and the mistake remedied. You're acting like people will be ruined for life. Overreaction.
Why not make a drug abuse registry?
Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
Nationalism in high dosages may be hazardous to your health. Please consult a psychiatrist before beginning a regular regimen, and if feelings of elitism and douchbaggery continue, discontinue immediately before you become unable to do so on your own.
not sure if i want it to be a public list though....I don't trust the public with this information,....well, i don't trust PETA-types, and other wackos , to not go nuts on folks whom have been cited for any of the varying animal laws.
what public interest does it serve to make it public?... and if you don't mandate background checks for animal purchases /adoptions.. it's all for naught anyways.
I used to be against slippery slope arguments... but too many have come true over the course of my life to discount them out of hand.