• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Animal Abuse Registry

Is a State Animal Abuse Registry a good idea?


  • Total voters
    53
Nice twist, but no cigar. He was talking about the information like residence and name begin publicly available for the wako fringe of the animal rights crowed to get a hold of. Of course you knew that.



Yea I pretty much got that from your post too.



Pot meet kettle.

More over the top hyperbole. You really are out there on this so far that you stopped making any rational sense a long time ago.
 
And having your name on this registry takes away your freedom to do what exactly? How you feel about yourself is no freedom. The stigma you have on you for your own actions is not freedom. You do not have any right to be free of guilt of consequences from your own illegal actions.

Sieg Heil!

PS: this is a perfect example of what this supposed law is REALLY about...revenge. Our system of law is about justice, not revenge.
 
Last edited:
Sieg Heil!

Your lack of any rational response speaks volumes about you and your abilities to defend your position.

Your inability to refute my point stands before all.
 
Your lack of any rational response speaks volumes about you and your abilities to defend your position.

Your inability to refute my point stands before all.

:lamo

Oh man, this is so silly and delusional, it is not even worth responding to.
 
Aha! So now you are reduced to the ultimate in over the top hyperbole. A bill which says a pet store or breeder must check to make sure a convicted abuser is not on a list now suddenly becomes a threat to life itself.

Just when you think you have read the most desperate attempt to stretch something beyond the breaking point, out comes something like this. It is truly digging a basement under the bottom of the barrel.

It is obvious you have a shred of objectivity on this issue.

As Blackdog said, nice twist. I'm quite sure that you know that.
 
:lamo

Oh man, this is so silly and delusional, it is not even worth responding to.

You allege violations of your freedom.

I challenge you to point out which freedoms of yours are being violated.

Your response is to discuss your own self image and other freedoms which you do not have.

I point this out.

You reply with a Nazi slogan.

Yes, you are being silly and delusional.
 
And having your name on this registry takes away your freedom to do what exactly? How you feel about yourself is no freedom. The stigma you have on you for your own actions is not freedom. You do not have any right to be free of guilt of consequences from your own illegal actions.

Isn't this why we have a court system with a set of punishments already outlined? What you and those working on this law are saying is that those punishments are not enough. That people deserve more punishment. If you're going to add more punishment then why not just increase the punishment for animal abuse by adding to their court appointed punishment?

And I'm going to ask you this question again....How does this list stop people from abusing animals? Which is where the actual solution is.

Edit note: made a clairification.
 
Last edited:
Isn't this why we have a court system with a set of punishments already outlined? What you and those working on this law are saying is that those punishments are not enough. That people deserve more punishment. If you're going to add more punishment then why not just increase the punishment for animal abuse?

And I'm going to ask you this question again....How does this list stop people from abusing animals? Which is where the actual solution is.

I have no problem with the idea that this is part of the punishment for the crime.

If a convicted abuser tries to buy an animal through the normal outlets - a shelter, a kennel, a breeder, a pet store, a rescue center, a humane society - they will have to undergo a check and they will not be allowed to obtain one. That step will save animals.
 
You allege violations of your freedom.

I challenge you to point out which freedoms of yours are being violated.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
 
I have no problem with the idea that this is part of the punishment for the crime.

A punishment which does not solve the problem.

If a convicted abuser tries to buy an animal through the normal outlets - a shelter, a kennel, a breeder, a pet store, a rescue center, a humane society - they will have to undergo a check and they will not be allowed to obtain one. That step will save animals.

No it won't. One a person can get an animal via private sales, something which you cannot touch without running into constitutional problems. It also does not stop someone from finding stray animals and bringing them home. It also does not stop someone from going to the next state and getting an animal via those sources. AKA it does not solve the problem.
 
Last edited:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

I would also add this...

Amendment 8 - Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Ratified 12/15/1791.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
 
I would also add this...

Amendment 8 - Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Ratified 12/15/1791.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Like we give a **** about that one....though we don't seem to give a **** about the 4th either. More and more government, more and more watching, more and more control; and people just don't see what it is that they're calling for.
 
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

So what?

My turn. Two plus two is four.
 
I would also add this...

Amendment 8 - Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Ratified 12/15/1791.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

There is nothing excessive nor cruel and unusual.
 
A punishment which does not solve the problem.



No it won't. One a person can get an animal via private sales, something which you cannot touch without running into constitutional problems. It also does not stop someone from finding stray animals and bringing them home. It also does not stop someone from going to the next state and getting an animal via those sources. AKA it does not solve the problem.

It will help. I am not looking for perfection in human endeavors.
 
It will help. I am not looking for perfection in human endeavors.

If you don't look for perfection then you will never find it.

Besides, you don't need perfection to solve a problem, you just need a solution.
 
You allege violations of your freedom.

I challenge you to point out which freedoms of yours are being violated.

Your response is to discuss your own self image and other freedoms which you do not have.

I point this out.

You reply with a Nazi slogan.

Yes, you are being silly and delusional.

That is what you sound like, a totalitarian Nazi. I call it like I see it. I also already addressed your question and others have covered it as well...

Not be punished beyond serving time or paying a fine by being marked with a scarlet letter and branded for 5 years beyond. Then having my name and residence made public plus being charged $50 for the pleasure of having my right to privacy stripped away so you can feel better about an abused animal. - http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/121434-animal-abuse-registry-28.html#post1060319938

You do not have any right to be free of guilt of consequences from your own illegal actions. - Haymarket

As I have already stated this quote pretty much sums up what this garbage piece of legislation is... revenge, and nothing more.

It's useful idiots that take away more of our rights every day in the name of "protecting us from ourselves" and they are nothing more than the same kind of people that eventually ran Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany. History has and always will bear this out.
 
Apparently I've changed my mind. I fully support the registry and I suggest that abusing or shooting domestic animals have the penalties doubled.
 
It is punishment beyond that of what the court system sets as such it could be deemed excessive.

But it will not be. Serving ones prison time, serving ones parole time, being placed on a registry is perfectly part of the court system.
 
Apparently I've changed my mind. I fully support the registry and I suggest that abusing or shooting domestic animals have the penalties doubled.

Good luck with being a vegetarian, lol.
 
Blackdog

Can you explain how ranting and raving about non existent rights bolsters any point you are trying to make?

Can you explain how using over the top hyperbole and bringing up Nazi's and totalitarianism bolsters your case?

Please do try to restrict yourself to the issues at hand. You started out that way and I handled an answered your objections. When you had nothing left in the way of rational argument, you went the way of hyperbole and gross exaggeration.

It's useful idiots that take away more of our rights every day in the name of "protecting us from ourselves" and they are nothing more than the same kind of people that eventually ran Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany. History has and always will bear this out.

Nobody is trying to protect you from yourself. I would not bother. We are trying to protect animals from abusers. The rest of your rant is hyperbole and silliness in the extreme.
 
Last edited:
But it will not be. Serving ones prison time, serving ones parole time, being placed on a registry is perfectly part of the court system.

No it is not. You want to tack on another fine and penalty.
 
Blackdog

Can you explain how ranting and raving about no existent rights bolsters any point you are trying to make?

Can you explain how using over the top hyperbole and bringing up Nazi's and totalitarianism bolsters your case?

Please do try to restrict yourself to the issues at hand. You started out that way and I handled an answered your objections. When you had nothing left in the way of rational argument, you went the way of hyperbole and gross exaggeration.

Right after you can refute even one thing I said. I know you can't because you would rather shuck and jive your way around when anyone was serious. You reap what you sow.

In fact I think so little of your ahem debate, I will bid you good night because to be honest this legislation is just really REALLY stupid feel good legislation that is about as useful as tits on an abused beef bull. ;)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom