• 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
Why not make a drug abuse registry?
 
DiAnna said:
. 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.
Click to expand...

Underreaction/blind dismissal. Look at the no-fly list and the sex offender's lists, the same idea is spouted, but the truth is quite the opposite - or at least such where it feels like the exact opposite is true.
 
DiAnna said:
The database is already there. Everytime a citation for animal abuse is issued, it goes into a computer database. Just a question of combining those databases into a single website that can be accessed by the public.

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.
Click to expand...

if a database exists, there is no need for another one then....they just need to give access to qualified people or give a point of contact that people can call up and check **** out.... easy peasy. :)

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.
 
Travelsonic said:
Underreaction/blind dismissal. Look at the no-fly list and the sex offender's lists, the same idea is spouted, but the truth is quite the opposite - or at least such where it feels like the exact opposite is true.
Click to expand...

:lol: Quite a stretch comparing people who have been cited for animal abuse to keep them from getting more animals to sex offenders and the terrorist no-fly list! :mrgreen:

Props for panic, though!
 
digsbe said:
Why not make a drug abuse registry?
Click to expand...
.. as long as it's not a drug use registry... i never ever abuse my drugs, so i'm good:lol:


the ideas for public registries are limitless...you confer validity on one, ya might as well have em all...they all fall under the same principles.

i'm wondering about this animal registry thing...
their were facts floated about folks whom are cruel to animals gradually moving to cruelty towards humans... how does this list affect that?... i don't see how you use this list of animal abusers to help with human abusers.
 
What I would support is a registry for violent crime and place those who have violently abused animals on there as well. I don't know if I can support an animal abuse registry for every action of animal abuse/neglect. I do think criminals deserve some sense of privacy, but violent crimes against humans or animals would be an exception for me.
 
I agree with those who say it's ridiculous and that the sex registry list is misused enough already. And the point of a sex registry is to protect my children.
 
DiAnna said:
:lol: Quite a stretch comparing people who have been cited for animal abuse to keep them from getting more animals to sex offenders and the terrorist no-fly list! :mrgreen:

Props for panic, though!
Click to expand...
it's the same idea.... it's the same principle for every registry out there... and not one of them operates as advertised

I personally blame Santa Claus .. his damned "naughty registry" started it all.
 
Thrilla said:
if a database exists, there is no need for another one then....they just need to give access to qualified people or give a point of contact that people can call up and check **** out.... easy peasy. :)

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.
Click to expand...

There are literally hundreds of individual animal control-type agencies in a single state. Each has a database. It would require those databases to be consolidated into a single site to be useful.

There are certainly ways one could limit access to breeders, animal rescue organizations, those who buy/sell livestock. The public doesn't have access to no-fly lists, after all, and as for sex-offender lists, that's a whole 'nother topic. A good idea, peppered by idiocy run amuck by including someone caught urinating in public with pedophiles and rapists. The mind boggles.

Anyway, this sounds inexpensive and useful, and if it keeps one sadistic freak from getting hands on an innocent animal, I'd like to see it tried.
 
digsbe said:
What I would support is a registry for violent crime and place those who have violently abused animals on there as well. I don't know if I can support an animal abuse registry for every action of animal abuse/neglect. I do think criminals deserve some sense of privacy, but violent crimes against humans or animals would be an exception for me.
Click to expand...

there was a time I would have agreed... but that was back when you could get in a schoolyard or barroom fight and not be hauled off to jail for it....

it doesn't help that I would be on your violent criminals list too.... for beating up my brother in law when he was tweaking at my house.
my record, before expungement, said i was convicted of domestic violence I... no context, no backstory, no nuthin.
that particular list kept me from my 2nd amendment right for a little while... no telling what a public list would keep me from... it can be used however the person accessing it wants to use it.
 
DiAnna said:
Anyway, this sounds inexpensive and useful, and if it keeps one sadistic freak from getting hands on an innocent animal, I'd like to see it tried.
Click to expand...
Took several posts to get around to it, but it appears you do approve of collateral damage. The end justifies the means, innocence is irrelevant, and as long as branding 2 people as criminals... "keeps one sadistic freak from getting hands on an innocent animal"... so be it.
 
radcen said:
Took several posts to get around to it, but it appears you do approve of collateral damage. The end justifies the means, innocence is irrelevant, and as long as branding 2 people as criminals... "keeps one sadistic freak from getting hands on an innocent animal"... so be it.
Click to expand...

The absolute least convincing argument to me would be to try to appeal to my sympathy for animal abusers. I have none.
 
Goshin said:
No.


What's next, an index of habitual speeders? Seatbelt scofflaws?


We've arguably abused the sex offender registry already.
Click to expand...

Consarn it, I was trying for like 10 minutes to figure out how to say exactly that. My thoughts precisely.

I'm all for society taking a stand against animal abuse, but creating a new underclass of social pariahs might not be the way we want to go.
 
Last edited:
RadicalModerate said:
Consarn it, I was trying for like 10 minutes to figure out how to say exactly that. My thoughts precisely.

I'm all for society taking a stand against animal abuse, but creating a new class of social pariahs might not be the way we want to go.
Click to expand...

Then why did you vote that it was a good idea? Just curious.
 
I would have to say no to it. Even if it is not exactly like the sex registry in implementation there will always be those that will be put on it when they shouldn't have been. And I agree with the person that mentioned PETA. PETA folks are....for lack of a better word "insane" when it comes to animals and I have no problem seeing them use it in a malicious way. Such as finding the person and beating them to near death if not death period. Hell, that happens with the sex registry...not often granted...but then most people are not like those in PETA.

I also agree with the person that mentioned making registries for such things as not wearing ones seatbelt. Where does it stop? Our government makes enough damn laws and ways to keep people sucking on its teet. We don't need more ways...no matter how well intentioned. Which reminds me of that old saying..."The road to hell is paved with good intentions".
 
Absolutely not. People shouldn't have mistakes dogging them for the rest of their lives.
 
X Factor said:
radcen said:
Took several posts to get around to it, but it appears you do approve of collateral damage. The end justifies the means, innocence is irrelevant, and as long as branding 2 people as criminals... "keeps one sadistic freak from getting hands on an innocent animal"... so be it.
Click to expand...
The absolute least convincing argument to me would be to try to appeal to my sympathy for animal abusers. I have none.
Click to expand...
If that's what you gleaned from my comment(s), then your reading comprehension is a HUGE FAIL.
 
DiAnna said:
The database is already there. Everytime a citation for animal abuse is issued, it goes into a computer database. Just a question of combining those databases into a single website that can be accessed by the public.

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.
Click to expand...

I do not believe there is any rational reason for support of something like this. We’ve already seen problems with other lists that we have such as the sex offender list, the no fly list, etc. They cause problems. If a person has gone through the court system, then there is public record of that and you can look it up. There is zero necessity to compile this into a single database.

People do have the right to privacy in the end, and after one has completely fulfilled their punishment; they should be afforded the full of their rights again. Not this pathetic forever punishment people keep pushing because of fear and other things.
 
DiAnna said:
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.
Click to expand...

If it's like all the other government run databasing of the People, then no it's not that easy. It may not be as devistating as being on the sex abuse registry; but that one also is incredibly hard to get off of if you find yourself on it falsely.
 
Silly waist of time and money. Jeeees.
 
hazlnut said:
Is it really that big of a problem in Michigan?
Click to expand...

In Wayne County alone there were over 5,000 reported cases of animal abuse last year.
 
haymarket said:
In Wayne County alone there were over 5,000 reported cases of animal abuse last year.
Click to expand...

Did you look up that number? Then that means the stats and data is already being tracked.
If the FBI wants to investigate potential mass murderers with this data, they just have to get a warrant to examine the information. With this database/registry, no warrant would be required.
 
haymarket said:
In Wayne County alone there were over 5,000 reported cases of animal abuse last year.
Click to expand...

And how many of those reported cases was of an animal that wasn't actually being abused? Our court system sends innocent people to prison for murder, a much more serious offense. That is of course assuming that those 5,000 reported cases are actual court convictions and not just "reports" where someone is just accused of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom