Should this pet shop owner have been fined £1,000 and be electronically tagged?

[MyOwnDrum]

Here's the story: Great-grandmother is tagged for selling a goldfish | Mail Online

Her offence was to unwittingly sell a goldfish to a 14-year-old boy taking part in a trading standards 'sting'.

At most, pet shop owner Joan Higgins, 66, expected a slap on the wrist for breaking new animal welfare laws which ban the sale of pets to under-16s.

Instead, the great-grandmother was taken to court, fined £1,000, placed under curfew - and ordered to wear an electronic tag for two months.

Read more: Great-grandmother is tagged for selling a goldfish | Mail Online

Under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 it is illegal to sell pets - including goldfish - to children under the age of 16 unless they are accompanied by an adult. Pet shops must also provide advice on animal welfare to buyers.

The maximum penalty is imprisonment for up to 12 months, or a fine of up to £20,000, or both.

 

[jamesrage]

I think the British authorities have too much time on their hands. I guess rummaging through trash and spying on citizens(or are they subjects) with cameras out in public must not keep them that busy.

 

[The Mark]

I think the British authorities have too much time on their hands. I guess rummaging through trash and spying on citizens(or are they subjects) with cameras out in public must not keep them that busy.

Not only do I think the British authorities have too much time on their hands, but I also think that the British lawmakers have too much time on their hands...

Stupid law.

Trying to legislate something that should be at the discretion of the shop owner – who to sell a pet too.

I’m sure there are under-16 kids who can handle the care of a pet, and I’m also sure there are over 30 “adults” who can’t.

 

[MyOwnDrum]

Not only do I think the British authorities have too much time on their hands, but I also think that the British lawmakers have too much time on their hands...

Stupid law.

Trying to legislate something that should be at the discretion of the shop owner – who to sell a pet too.

I’m sure there are under-16 kids who can handle the care of a pet, and I’m also sure there are over 30 “adults” who can’t.

And something that the parents ought to be able to handle as well. Junior comes home with an unapproved pet purchase, Mom or Dad make him march back to the store and return it, end of story...

 

[1069]

The only justification I can think of is that some more exotic pets- especially those of the cold-blooded persuasion- can be dangerous, and children under 16 might not be equipped to handle them appropriately.

Even some you wouldn't think of, like turtles, can be dangerous to children.
They commonly carry salmonella, and must be handled with extreme caution.
A child could get extremely- possibly fatally- ill if he handled a turtle and didn't wash his hands adequately afterward.

That sort of thing would be the only reason I'd find these laws justifiable.

 

[MyOwnDrum]

I think the motivation behind the law is probably that the Brits are gagga about pets and animal welfare. They do practice more humane animal husbandry than here in the States, but they also go overboard, this case being a prime example.

 

[MyOwnDrum]

If you read the article, the shopkeeper was also convicted of neglecting a bird with a broken leg, which may have contributed to the severity of the sentence.

Still, making her wear an electronic bracelet?

 

[The Mark]

The only justification I can think of is that some more exotic pets- especially those of the cold-blooded persuasion- can be dangerous, and children under 16 might not be equipped to handle them appropriately.

Even some you wouldn't think of, like turtles, can be dangerous to children.
They commonly carry salmonella, and must be handled with extreme caution.
A child could get extremely- possibly fatally- ill if he handled a turtle and didn't wash his hands adequately afterward.

That sort of thing would be the only reason I'd find these laws justifiable.

It seems to me that a reasonable pet shop owner would check when selling those types of animals anyway, to avoid a possible lawsuit.

No law needed, other than the probably pre-existing laws allowing someone to sue the pet shop owner if a situation arose.