×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

404 comments

Sounds Good To Me (4, Insightful)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377614)

There will always be a stigma associated to certain types of crimes. Animal abuse is one of them. Long after they serve their far too short sentences they will still get to live with what they've done ... and we'll get to share the knowledge of their past with them.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (5, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377634)

Do we get to add the person that raised and killed your dinner on that list?

Re:Sounds Good To Me (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377686)

You assume the GP poster eats meat and other animal products.

Maybe you shouldn't presume other people have as little moral consistency as you do.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377724)

Do we get to add the person that raised and killed your dinner on that list?

Maybe you need to understand the difference between farming and abuse.

As long as the animals are treated humanely, it's not abuse, and therefore the farmers are not abusers.

And BTW, I'm a vegetarian.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377922)

Apparently you have not paid any attention on how actual farming is implemented recently.

It's not quite the land of sunshine that is painted on the tele.

No, I'm afraid farming today is fairly beyond the concept of humane.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31378002)

You really need to stop paying attention to PeTA. Respectable slaughterhouses inflict a minimum of suffering. After all, a suffering animal is more difficult to handle, so it's a better business model to not cause the thousand-pound walking meat sacks to attempt to stampede, or to make the flapping squawking things try to scratch and peck your eyes out.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (5, Insightful)

terraformer (617565) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377756)

This is where those people want to take this. How much animal abuse is by teenagers with a thing for cats and how many of these convictions are for farmers. How many are serious convictions and how many are you forgot some technicality when constructing the horse shelter? As it stands today, in MA, professional licenses are pulled when you are a felon, on a sex registry (you don't have to be a felon...), under a RO, owe child support, etc. By doing this it allows them to exert control over people who have served their time. These registries are bad news.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (0, Troll)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378028)

"By doing this it allows them to exert control over people who have served their time. These registries are bad news."

Not to those of us who want to ensure they never hire or patronize such folk.

What SHOULD be included is specific case info so viewers can sort bullshit convictions from appropriate punishment.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31378104)

Just to let everyone know, the parent poster (Slashdot#175151) is a known jaywalker. Disregard any attempts he makes at sounding civic-minded. He's a disgrace to society and his mother is ashamed of him. Additionally, a girl thought he was approaching her inappropriately at a party three years ago.

CAPTCHA is 'chilling'

Re:Sounds Good To Me (4, Informative)

FooAtWFU (699187) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377784)

Maybe, but if so we certainly could also consider adding some of those PETA loonies [petakillsanimals.com] .

Re:Sounds Good To Me (3, Interesting)

Dahamma (304068) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378094)

I can't stand PETA in general, but (hypocritical as they are) this is one of their few campaigns I *do* support. The fact is, most unwanted pets are not going to find homes, so it's better to take them in, make an effort to place them, and then humanely euthanize them (which no, is NOT animal abuse) than to abandon them at a trash dump, throw them off a pier, or beat them with a club.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (1)

pclminion (145572) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377802)

If the animals were abused, under the definition of "abuse" propounded by this law (I assume it specifically defines abuse), then why not? This is why I buy my meat from local farmers, and I'm completely aware of how it's raised and slaughtered. Meat's way more expensive this way, but I don't eat that much meat in the first place, and I figure if I can buy some humane treatment for the animals, why not.

It depends (2, Informative)

weston (16146) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378032)

on if they torture it to death to make it taste better [iliketoask.co.cc] . Or cut its throat and let it bleed to death [wikipedia.org] . Or maybe just forced to live in the livestock equivalent of cube farm 24/7 [themeatrix.com] .

(I'm making these remarks somewhat tongue-in-cheek... I'm not particularly zealous about animal rights. There's certain ones I like to eat, and I don't feel too horrible about animals food with humane handling while they're alive. But I do think that systemically perpetrated suffering while the animals are alive presents a moral problem, and realize we have a system that, well, presents it.)

Re:Sounds Good To Me (1, Insightful)

NervousNerd (1190935) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377654)

Animal abuse and a sex offender are in entirely different leagues. I can see if people want to know if their neighbor touched children in the past, but this? What next? A public "traffic violation registry"? What happens after that?

Re:Sounds Good To Me (1)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377728)

Animal abuse and a sex offender are in entirely different leagues.

Not if the offense was bestiality, from a conservative point of view, though it's difficult to argue that a male horse or dog was "harmed" by being fellated by a human.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (1)

tecnico.hitos (1490201) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377860)

Not if the offense was bestiality, from a conservative point of view, though it's difficult to argue that a male horse or dog was "harmed" by being fellated by a human.

But what if the animal was penetrated? The harm would not be so easy to dismiss in such a situation.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (2, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377806)

The question is will it be as easy to get on the animal abuser list for things that have nothing to do with harming animals as it is to get on the sex offender list for things that have nothing to do with a sex offense?

Re:Sounds Good To Me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31378000)

What next? A public "traffic violation registry"? What happens after that?

No, a public "He didn't go straight home to his wife" list.

It will be highly amusing to most of the population.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378024)

My guess is with the way things are going a "gateway drug" list, after all we know that anyone who has ever smoke, drank or even did pot is now snorting coke right? And if we have an alcohol and cigarette list we will know that our kids aren't being exposed to second hand smoke and we can monitor parties! After all, its not like its a constitutional right to be able to have people to gather peacefully and do what they are legally allowed to do...

Re:Sounds Good To Me (1)

Al Dimond (792444) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378086)

I guess the point of the registry would be that pet stores and humane societies would be able to check prospective owners against the list. In that sense we have "traffic violation registries" in that our driving records are kept and used by, for example, insurance companies.

As with sex offender registries, there is lots of potential for abuse by heavy-handed prosecutors trying to rack up impressive conviction and registry stats. From what I've read about sex offender registries, the concept of these sorts of registries is not mature or well-vetted. Until protections for the accused are strongly built into the system as is the case with the normal criminal justice system I can't in all honesty support registries for anything. And I guess that includes traffic records.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377776)

> There will always be a stigma associated to certain types of crimes. Animal abuse is one of them.

Screw 'stigma', that is outmoded moralist bullshit. The only really important thing to know is how much of a risk the person is to society - even after they've done their time or paid their fine.

Christ, what's next? A "National Nose-Picker Registry"??

Re:Sounds Good To Me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377878)

Christ, what's next?

The end of the world, better known as Armageddon.

"Bhwaaaah ha ha ha ha ha erhg"

Re:Sounds Good To Me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377824)

yeah..and then when that person realizes you've pulled all the control rods out, he can blow up and take you out with him...along with all the other self righteous assholes like yourself. once the time is served, let him have a clean slate. labels like 'felon' and lists like these only serve to keep those on them from reintegrating into society, thus driving them back to the crmie that got them there in the first place so we can do it to them again. the desire for retribution needs to stop at the point where it prevents re-integration. otherwise it isn't justice, it's vengeance.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (0)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377828)

There will always be a stigma associated to certain types of crimes. Animal abuse is one of them. Long after they serve their far too short sentences they will still get to live with what they've done ... and we'll get to share the knowledge of their past with them.

On the other hand, when you attempt to elevate animals to having the same status and rights in our society as human beings ... you have a problem. A person who abuses an animal is not on a par with a person who abuses another human, and should not be treated in the same way. You have to think this through a little. Animals are what they are, and the net effect of trying to make lower animals into virtual human beings is to degrade and demean our humanity. We treat corporations as if they were people, and look how well that's worked out for us.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (0, Flamebait)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377904)

I see how it is... you are one of those species-ist human supremists.

Now go add your name to the registry of animal haters :)

...j/k

Re:Sounds Good To Me (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377916)

I see how it is... you are one of those species-ist human supremists.

Now go add your name to the registry of animal haters :)

...j/k

Okay, right after I finish my quarter-pounder.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377832)

and we'll get to share the knowledge of their past with them.

... says someone who hasn't shown up on a list ... yet.

We used to be a nation where there was an opportunity for a second chance. No more -- now you're haunted (and hunted) for life by all these forms of permanent, extra-judicial punishment. "I paid my debt to society" is a thing of the past, because the nannies and tsk-tskers among us can't have their punishment-lust satisfied.

Do you know what happens with the sex offender lists? People have been hunted down and had the shit beaten out of them just for appearing on the list.

Do you know what it takes to get on the list? Do you understand that some drunk guy can get on because he got drunk, went into an alley and pissed against the wall? Yeah, you merciless son of a bitch -- they nail him for indecent exposure. Right, now he can't get (or loses) any job involving contact with kids or anywhere in a lot of professions.

Hey, asshole -- I'll indecently expose myself so you can suck me dry.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (4, Insightful)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377910)

Do you know what it takes to get on the list? Do you understand that some drunk guy can get on because he got drunk, went into an alley and pissed against the wall? Yeah, you merciless son of a bitch -- they nail him for indecent exposure. Right, now he can't get (or loses) any job involving contact with kids or anywhere in a lot of professions.

The only way to control a nation of free men is to turn them into criminals. And that's exactly what is happening. It's not just punishment-lust (although that is most certainly a factor) it's the desire for power. Our Founders tried to codify limits to that power in the highest law of our land. Unfortunately, zealots and sociopaths (and the two are not mutually-exclusive) are doing an end-run around those limits.

Re:Sounds Good To Me (0, Flamebait)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377836)

Who cares about animals. Seriously. I'd much rather be alive with some pain then to go to a "shelter" where they kill you. Hm, sounds like one nice shelter, one moment you are enjoying a nice existence in the streets, the next your entire reason for existence is taken away from you (entire life-purpose of animals is to reproduce) and then you are dead. Sounds like some shelter right?

Re:Sounds Good To Me (4, Insightful)

zach_the_lizard (1317619) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377852)

If their punishment is too short, then extend the sentences. If the jails are too crowded, stop sending non-violent people there for the "crime" of ingesting non-state approved substances. Otherwise, stop condemning people to a lifetime of harassment by vigilantes. This goes for sex offenders and for this new animal abuse registry. If none of this persuades you, then perhaps you should consider: a)there are those who are convicted that are innocent (and are exonerated later) b)what makes it onto the registry is determined by politicians and judges, who will add things such as drunk men urinating in public to the sex offender list. Who is to say the same cannot happen for animal abuse?

Re:Sounds Good To Me (5, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378044)

Mod parent up.

Exactly. What we really need to do is stop using jails as "time out" and start only keeping violent people there. If the crime was non-violent and they don't pose a threat to society, put them on probation and make them pay restitution. If there was no one harmed to pay restitution to, how was it a crime in the first place? On the same vain, we need to elect our executive branch by allowing for the direct election, supervision and removal of police officers and make every move they make public record so we can end police brutality and abuse.

What is next? A list of people who bought cigarettes, drinks and porn?

Re:Sounds Good To Me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377954)

They'll still have to live with what they've done, but only if there's a registry? So what you're really saying is that people on the registry should be abused by other members of society (prank calls, graffiti on their car, etc).

You're really advocating vigilante justice. Please leave the USA and go somewhere else where this shit is encouraged. Seriously, get the fuck out of my country you fucking sack of shit. You are damn lucky to live in a country where justice is actually a priority for EVERYONE rather than a select few. If you have a problem with this then get the fuck out.

What do you tell a cat with two black eyes? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377628)

Nothing. You already told it twice.

It would be nice for conversation purposes (5, Funny)

SlappyBastard (961143) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377632)

I hate to discover only after the fact that someone I'm having a conversation with likes to beat a dead horse.

Re:It would be nice for conversation purposes (2, Funny)

anss123 (985305) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377716)

VHS is better than Beta! People often compare high quality beta players with cheap VHS players, but that's not fair at all. The better VHS players have just as good an image as Beta and has longer playtime too.

...nothing quite like revisiting an old horse I'm afraid.

HD-DVD was better than Blu-Ray (1)

SlappyBastard (961143) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377736)

Be careful. There's a slippery slopes that goes from beating a dead horse all the way down to turning the horse into cube steak.

Re:It would be nice for conversation purposes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31378014)

That's nowhere near as bad as finding out that someone you're shaking hands with has just finished spanking the monkey.

Just wait... (3, Insightful)

EmagGeek (574360) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377642)

It won't be long before we have public registries of parents whose kids misbehave in school, registries of people who buy pr0n, and registries of people who do anything else the masses of paranoid freak helicopter soccer moms don't like...

Re:Just wait... (1)

ToastBusters (1247286) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377858)

It won't be long before we have public registries of parents whose kids misbehave in school

Probably not, but I wouldn't be surprised by a registry for teachers who taught kids who misbehave in school and were blamed by the parents for said students behavior.

Always remember: It's the teachers fault. Parents had nothing to do with it.

Re:Just wait... (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377888)

"Paranoid freak helicopter soccer moms"

What, exactly, does "helicopter" mean here? I mean I get the rest... but that one is just way out there in left field.

Re:Just wait... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31378018)

They are constantly hovering over their kids (Simpsons reference, although the phrase may pre-date that episode).

Re:Just wait... (1)

debrisslider (442639) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378022)

It means someone who is constantly hovering over their kid's shoulder (in some cases almost quite literally) as in overprotectively smothering them and often interfering with school and other activities.

Re:Just wait... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31378100)

"Paranoid freak helicopter soccer moms"

What, exactly, does "helicopter" mean here? I mean I get the rest... but that one is just way out there in left field.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=helicoipter+parent [lmgtfy.com]

buying pr0n (1)

Mistakill (965922) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378088)

It won't be long before we have public registries of parents whose kids misbehave in school, registries of people who buy pr0n, and registries of people who do anything else the masses of paranoid freak helicopter soccer moms don't like...

wait... people buy pr0n? what???? doing it wrong ;)

End run? (5, Insightful)

headkase (533448) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377660)

Is this an end-run around the "served your time" part? I thought our theory of law was that once you served your punishment you were a Citizen again (yeah like convicts can't have guns...). So, is this indefinite punishment? And this is coming from someone who thinks animal abusers have serious psychological problems: the real problem is what when 1000's of different "registries" exist?

Re:End run? (1)

mog007 (677810) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377830)

I'm not sure about the finite punishment bit, but as far as creating a list, and retroactively adding people to it goes, the Supreme Court has ruled that it doesn't violate the "ex post facto" clause of the Constitution. I imagine they've also judged these lists as not violating the eighth amendment.

Re:End run? (5, Insightful)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377844)

the real problem is what when 1000's of different "registries" exist?

. I think they already exist, it's just that most of us aren't aware of them, or at least don't have access to their contents (the TSA's "no-fly" list being a prime example.)

Re:End run? (0)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378056)

Your sig, sir:

"Beware those who would deny you Information. For in their heart they dream themselves your master."

Convictions for animal abuse are public record. They should be available so those of us who wish to know their employees, neighbors, or renters background can avoid being blindsided by some psycho. "Paying your debt to society" doesn't in any way equate to "being a permanently changed person".

History repeats itself (5, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377664)

For reference, see Les Miserables.

Re:History repeats itself (2, Interesting)

martas (1439879) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377950)

can you explain please?

yes i'm illiterate.

Re:History repeats itself (4, Informative)

wizardforce (1005805) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378038)

The title means "miserable ones" It's about a guy that was in jail, served his time and had to carry a document identifying him as a former criminal. Then pretty much everyone in society that knew he was a former criminal because of that identification made his life outside of prison a living hell. There is a lot more to it that comes later but that is the gist of the beginning.

Crime Statisitics (1)

Dartz-IRL (1640117) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377676)

IIRC all crime statistics are public knowledge anyway. If a person is convicted of a crime, this is recorded and this record is made available to the public.

It wouldn't be impossible to establish a 'registry of serious criminals' using only scannings on newspaper articles and the like. The data is already public, it just needs to be collated together.

Of course, I know I'm being simplistic... there's a lot more to it than that, but I don't want to right an essay on the implimentation, merely point out that it is possible.

Re:Crime Statisitics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377876)

The "information" isn't the interesting part. Nobody really cares if you kicked a dog, and if they did care, then like you said, they can look it up.

The entire purpose of the registry is to continue punishing the people on them by passing laws banning registered people from living in certain places, requiring them to check in with the cops on a regular basis as if they were on parole, requiring them to update their address, etc.

Re:Crime Statisitics (2, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377880)

Yes, but have you seen the paranoia over these "sex" offender registries? People are afraid to move into houses because there might be a "sex offender" living on the next block. Never mind that these people don't seem to look at the real picture and look at the trial and see that his only crime was peeing in public and he is now 73 years old and wheelchair bound. The point is, taxpayer funds are being used for this completely stupid project that adds nothing (who the hell cares if someone kicked a dog? I sure as hell don't), adds more debt to an already bankrupt state (next thing you know my federal taxes are going to be "bailing out" financially challenged California) and takes away rights (once you have served time, you should be treated as a full citizen, taking away voting rights for felons is honestly tyranny because they have suffered more harm by the state than anyone else, and even taking away second amendment rights I believe is questionable).

In short, this is a terrible idea because taxpayers are going to have to foot the bill for yet another useless project from a bankrupt state.

there's a new tax too (4, Interesting)

wizardforce (1005805) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377690)

Apparently they estimate that it will take several hundred thousand dollars to run the registry annually and claim that the number of federal convictions for animal abuse in California is not large enough to levy enough fees on the convicted to fund the registry. In short, they want to levy a tax on pet food to pay for the registry.

Re:there's a new tax too (4, Insightful)

terraformer (617565) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377722)

Apparently they estimate that it will take several hundred thousand dollars to run the registry annually and claim that the number of federal convictions for animal abuse in California is not large enough to levy enough fees on the convicted to fund the registry. In short, they want to levy a tax on pet food to pay for the registry.

In a state that is bankrupt no less...

Re:there's a new tax too (1)

Bill Dog (726542) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377796)

Like passing resolutions banning cussing for a week, this is the Calif. legislature trying to do anything but face the problem that has the state in crisis.

Re:there's a new tax too (1)

techno-vampire (666512) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377956)

In a state that is bankrupt no less...

And now you know exactly why California's bankrupt. Remember: only in San Francisco would Nancy Pelosi be considered mainstream.

Re:there's a new tax too (1)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378106)

In a state that is bankrupt no less...

And now you know exactly why California's bankrupt. Remember: only in San Francisco would Nancy Pelosi be considered mainstream.

Funny I would have thought that it was because California and Californians basically pay the federal government a shitload more money than they get back in benefits.

Politicians and the public are.. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377734)

Cruelty to animals, it is said, is often a precursor to graver crimes.

Yeah, right. What orifice was that pulled out of.

It would also be a boon to law enforcement because animal abuse, the bill's authors' say, often escalates to violence against people.

I was once out with a woman who trained dogs. This rather large dog went ape shit towards this woman and child. The owner of the dog talked to the dog and "scolded" it for its behavior. That was it. The trainer said that the owner of the dog was an idiot because one day that dog is going to attack someone and maybe seriously hurt them or kill a child. The owner should have put that dog in a head lock, slammed it into the ground, and let in know by no uncertain terms that its behavior was wrong. I guess preventing deadly attacks by dogs is now illegal.

Abuses covered in the bill would include the malicious and intentional maiming, mutilation, torture, wounding or killing of a living animal.

Good bye pharmaceutical and any other animal based research in California! No more hunting. Oh, and when a heard of deer needs to be thinned out, does that mean they're going to ask the deer to take birth control and leave the state? Will they offer relocation to the deer? Just wanna know.

It would also target pet hoarders...

Good bye private animal rescue centers!

the issue is simple. Do Republican members ... really want to be seen on the side of animal abuse? I don't think they do."

Oh God. I'd rather have someone kick the shit out of their dog than beat the shit out of me.

Re:Politicians and the public are.. (2, Informative)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377874)

Good bye pharmaceutical and any other animal based research in California! No more hunting. Oh, and when a heard of deer needs to be thinned out, does that mean they're going to ask the deer to take birth control and leave the state? Will they offer relocation to the deer? Just wanna know.

Yeah, it's pretty messed up all right. A friend of mine who lived in California for many years recently suggested that I move there. It's when I read articles like this that I realize why I never did. Of course, this is nothing new. I remember reading about how LA's government doesn't allow the use of the word "slave" in technical documentation. This is just an extension of that same mental illness, and I hope it doesn't spread Eastward.

Re:Politicians and the public are.. (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377934)

No more hunting. Oh, and when a heard of deer needs to be thinned out, does that mean they're going to ask the deer to take birth control and leave the state?

Yes, actually that is what they do. I'm from the midwest and in a city (I think it was near Kansas City) they were proposing opening a small (like 1 week) hunting season in this park that was overwhelmed with deer (far beyond the carrying capacity and people kept hitting deer left and right) and they seriously proposed putting birth control or something in the food to stop this overpopulation. And this is in Missouri where the first day of deer season practically is a state holiday! Let alone what the idiots in California are thinking.

Here is a link about it: (can't find primary source but this is as good as any that helps show how stupid these people are) http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2009/sep/17/protests-deer-hunt-shawnee-mission-park-continue/ [shawneedispatch.com]

Re:Politicians and the public are.. (1)

wizardforce (1005805) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377936)

The registry is just a new way to levy another tax (on pet food) that said, the registry applies to *felony convictions of animal abuse* in California. Unless hunting is now a felony in California, it will not show up on this list.

Re:Politicians and the public are.. (2, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378076)

This is from a state that requires warning labels to be put on anything more than pure water (and even then they are probably attempting to pass a bill with a warning sticker "This product contains Water a chemical known to the state of California to cause drowning and water poisoning"), who basically is bankrupt, who thinks they need to tax everything for the little they do to help the people and now have this. The people running California, I'd have to say, are basically brain-dead idiots.

Re:Politicians and the public are.. (2, Informative)

Itninja (937614) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378090)

Cruelty to animals, it is said, is often a precursor to graver crimes.

Yeah, right. What orifice was that pulled out of.

Um, that's kind of like basic criminology [wikipedia.org] and stuff. Just read through the histories of a few killers on Wikipedia and see how many 'got their start' killing neighbors cats (Edward Emil Kemper lll) or burning the eyes out of crabs with matches (Andrew Cunanan).

Animals, eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377752)

Does that include politicians and lawyers who authored the bill?

This could be quite useful (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377786)

Sheep farms could background check employees against this type of list.

If someone's puppy goes missing they could use these lists to interview suspects.

And if a dead squirrel is found, detectives might be able to rule out natural causes if an abuser is found.

They should be careful not to take it so far. Many birders could be put at risk merely for taking a picture of a young chick.

Let's Make A Public Registry... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377788)

Lets make a public registry for every felony. We might able to digress to more grievances in order to keep the public safe. By the end of two decades worth of charades, I think it would be a great idea to start giving certain groups clothes for them to wear in public which identifies their past offenses. *Sarcasm* I do not enjoy posting forums with the obvious Nazi agenda, the comparison is too hard to neglect, I'd feel ignorant if I did not point this out. Heck the Sex Offender Registry does not help anyone anyways. All it does is identify where the person lives and has difficulty in getting passed prior offenses in order to maintain life. What is going to stop him from going on a stroll in the park to pick up his next victim if he is not rehabilitated? Nothing.

Re:Let's Make A Public Registry... (1)

Bill Dog (726542) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377850)

Let's make a public registry for people who propose public registries... and the nuisance to society created therein.

Re:Let's Make A Public Registry... (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#31378082)

"Lets make a public registry for every felony"

An excellent idea.
Practical enough, and the very public knowledge of criminal tendencies would leave criminals fewer places to hide.

Just another scarlet letter to maintain (1)

ishmalius (153450) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377792)

Does the country really need yet another list like this? How much more of the shun/banish behaviour must we exhibit in our increasingly shrill nation?

Re:Just another scarlet letter to maintain (1)

game kid (805301) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377862)

How much more of the shun/banish behaviour must we exhibit in our increasingly shrill nation?

LOL gb2/4chan fgt

Re:Just another scarlet letter to maintain (2, Interesting)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377902)

As always, the problem is that the overwhelming majority of people do not think about anything. Nobody stops to think about the other registries we have, or the fact that we are publicly shaming people for less and less serious crimes, or the fact that people who are released from prison are supposed to have the right to put the past behind them.

This is not a system that can last forever, but it is going to get a hell of a lot worse before it falls apart.

Re:Just another scarlet letter to maintain (2, Interesting)

Stumbles (602007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377928)

This type of thing is starting sound like a witch hunt. Let's shame them in public before we see if they will float... erm weight less than a duck... or was that wood?

Won't Someone Please Think of the Puppies? (4, Funny)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377800)

That is all.

Re:Won't Someone Please Think of the Puppies? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31378046)

Wont Someone Please Think of the Puppies?

fap fap fap...?

I support this. (2, Interesting)

stimpleton (732392) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377870)

I like to think I am as objective as they come. I am for privacy. I hate "for the children" mentality.

But when it comes to animal abuse, I loose some of that rationality. Animal abusers are dangerous and cant be trusted. And I believe it is a behavior that once practiced may never leave a person. They may suppress it for the rest of their lives, but underneath the potential is there to harm people, especially given a one in a million encounter.

From Wikipedia: "Cruelty to animals is one of the three components of the Macdonald triad, indicators of violent antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. According to the studies used to form this model, cruelty to animals is a common (but not with every case) behavior in children and adolescents who grow up to become serial killers and other violent criminals. It has also been found that animal cruelty in children is frequently committed by children who have witnessed or been victims of abuse themselves. In two separate studies cited by the Humane Society of the United States roughly one-third of families suffering from domestic abuse indicated that at least one child had hurt or killed a pet.[41]".

Sure, let animal abusers serve their time. Even give'em a job. Good luck feeling inner piece when your daughter says she is going camping with him, when his little discresion in life was nailing a cat to a plank of wood while performing some autopsy while it was still alive. Over the course of an hour.

Re:I support this. (2, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377906)

But when it comes to animal abuse, I loose some of that rationality. Animal abusers are dangerous and cant be trusted. And I believe it is a behavior that once practiced may never leave a person. They may suppress it for the rest of their lives, but underneath the potential is there to harm people, especially given a one in a million encounter.

Same thing could be said for any number of behaviours. Let me reword your post.

But when it comes to porn watching, I loose some of that rationality. porn watchers are dangerous and cant be trusted. And I believe it is a behavior that once practiced may never leave a person. They may suppress it for the rest of their lives, but underneath the potential is there to have sex with someone, especially given a one in a million encounter.

And hopefully you will see how stupid it sounds.

Sure, let animal abusers serve their time. Even give'em a job. Good luck feeling inner piece when your daughter says she is going camping with him, when his little discresion in life was nailing a cat to a plank of wood while performing some autopsy while it was still alive. Over the course of an hour.

Who cares? Guess what? Everyone has done strange things in their life. Does that mean we get to label those who got caught and classify them as "dangerous"? No, of course not. The entire point of justice is you serve time and you are free and don't have to keep serving it forever. The other way is tyranny.

Re:I support this. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31378012)

You are trying to establish a reverse causality link. It doesn't work like that. How many people that commit an act of "animal abuse" grow up to be serial killers? There is no data on that, but I would imagine it to be pretty small. Obviously, I can't substantiate my claim, but neither can you. So in the end, you are giving no better argument than the "for the children" one that you claim to hate.

Biased against zoophiles (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377896)

For people who are psychopaths that are killing and abusing animals this is a good idea. I am tired of reading about people who buy a bunch of animals and let them waste away, or hurt them, or do stupid things like dogfighting. Animal abusers almost always human abusers.

However for people who are zoophiles this will shame them in a very public way. Imagine having a public registry for homosexuals who are arrested for sodomy, for example. I'm not equating the two, other than saying it can be used to humiliate people who have tastes that aren't accepted by society (sodomy is illegal in several states, as is bestiality). Of course anyone committing violent sex acts should be registered, but then again those people are not zoophiles.

I hope they restrict this registry to those who commit violent crimes. People who don't understand zoophilia are too quick to lump together somebody who wants to kill an animal along with somebody who has found a partner in one.

The other lists... (1)

CODiNE (27417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377908)

Also reported was the decision not to make a mass-emailer's registry. Since they self-announce the list was deemed redundant and scrapped.

However THE PEOPLE WHO ALWAYS TYPE IN CAPS registry will continue as planned.

Serial Killers violate animals (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31377944)

Hopefully all the would be serial killers will get caught and put in the registry when they're teenagers.That way the police will have access to some record of their perverted and sick minds.

Robert A Heinlein (1)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377952)

When a place get's so large it requires registries and licenses it's time to move somewhere else. (Paraphrased).

Sounds like it's time to move off this planet.

Your rights online? (1)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | more than 4 years ago | (#31377984)

How is this a yro, and how the hell does it relate to news for nerds? I mean come on. Give me some more apple and google stories. Slow news day I guess.

Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31378058)

Fuck California!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...