Simple - Does it cost me money to feed it, or get rid of it?

What is it with felonies? If this must be criminal, surely it should be a misdemeanor! A felony marks you for life, and should be reserved for genuinely serious crimes.

The contradiction is glaring. As though the life of a dog has more intrinsic value than that of a cow. So far as I'm concerned, animals are property. There should be no criminal repercussions at all, except for those connected with the destruction of another's property.

Size! Have you tried a poodle too little meat! I am with Amy eat em but treat him right and kill him quick and painless as possible. That is why I have yet to try dog soup/bosingtong. Not until I can find a humane dog soup restaurant. Horrible practice here of wanting to beat the dogs before killing them - fear makes the meat taste better! Stupid!

As Amy knows, I don't eat meat, so you can probably tell when I stand on this. I think people who commit acts of cruelty against animals should experience that same cruelty as their punishment. But for people who don't think that way, it's also useful to note that those who torture animals, especially as children, are also more likely to commit acts of violence against people. Letting them off easily will hardly deter their behavior.

I don't know about the laws there. The laws I am familiar have exceptions for common practice farming/ranching activities. So if you go out and starting hacking at a cow just for the heck of it - or maybe to get back at the owner or whatever - the fact it is a cow that would eventually have been slain for meet does not matter. Same sentence as if it was a dog - well, theoretically - the jury could have less of a reaction and so give a lessor sentence within the same legal range.

Kishke, I really hope you don't have any pets.

Catherine says "I think people who commit acts of cruelty against animals should experience that same cruelty as their punishment."

I know it'll never happen but I agree w/ you. I am still devastated over the loss of Deniro, a gorgeous Boxer boy who was starved and infested with parasites. He was rescued the other day by the AMAZING angels at Boxer Buddies (a New England-based Boxer rescue organization) and was immediately placed in the care of a vet. Unfortunately, the whip worms caused his red blood cells to die or something and he passed away Monday morning.

No one knows who his shithead "owner" was so charges won't be filed. I don't know what kind of soul-less, sociopathic piece of shit eating cunt-face asshole prick could look into the sweet, innocent face of a dog and KILL IT. Honest to dogs, if I ever witness animal cruelty in-person god help that fucker. I will rip their esophagus out of their throat with my bare hands. Maybe not. But s/he might have to shit out of a bag for the rest of his/her life.

Deniro was a sweet boy according to the rescuers and would have made someone a loving companion.

If you're into it look him up: http://www.boxerbuddies.org/Available%20Dogs/deniro.htm

No, I don't have pets. Not that I would be cruel to them if I did; I don't approve of cruelty to animals, but I don't think it should be a criminal matter.

Kishke, I am not trying to be rude in any way, but I think it's hard to imagine the utter joy a dog can bring to you if you aren't a dog lover. They are pure love. Even the mean ones are like that because a human probably abused them. Dog lovers will know what I mean. It's such a unique thing that they bring to the table. I am also a cat person but the relationship with my cat is totally different than the one with my dog. My dog is truly my most loyal and biggest fan.

It *should* be criminal to intentionally inflict pain on an animal that clearly has the capacity to develop an emotional bond with other animals, including their human guardians, and can suffer because of pain. Amy's right that we should respect and treat the animals we eat well. Just because they're going to wind up shrink wrapped in your grocery store's meat department doesn't mean we should allow them to be hurting and suffering before hand. Kind of like how I don't think dying humans should languish in pain before their time comes. There's a humane way to go about things and there's an inhumane way.

Castrating an animal w/o anesthetic or smashing it against the floor and causing its death are cruel ways to treat feeling creatures. Just because they are lower thinking animals and can't argue with you about this doesn't mean they don't deserve a pain-free life full of comfort.

Well, I disagree with a lot of what you're saying. While it's true that I don't have the experience of bonding with an animal, I also don't have the bias that comes as a result. At any rate, I definitely agree that there's no such thing as just being cruel to animals. A person who is cruel to an animal is just cruel, period, and will be the same to a human if he can get away with it.

...ok. So animal cruelty vs. human cruelty...it's just phrasing.

If someone beats up/hurts a person for no reason we all agree that the perp should be punished.

If someone beats up/hurts an animal for no reason then, well, that person's just a big ol' meanie but nothing should happen to him/her?

There was some punk kid shooting paintballs at a dog with a gun. The kid was, like, hunting the dog and the dog was covered with welts and terrified. That kid should just get a stern talking to that maybe it's not nice to do that?

My only question in regard to the actual article is what experience Bittman has with actual farming practices. I don't disagree with him that large corporate farms often mistreat their animals. In my experience, however, family owned farms (on which I worked as a teenager, because they were close and I got credit through 4-H) are usually much more humane.
Also, there has to be a distinction made between pets and animals that are raised for food. Not that the distinction should be, "we can be cruel because it's just going to wind up dead anyway."
For example, we kept pet cats and dogs. We also raised ducks and rabbits for food. The distinction was made clear to my brothers and sisters and I, that some of the animals were for food, and that was the purpose to which they were eventually put. While they alive, however, we were never cruel to them.
IMO, the biggest issue society at large has with animals and farms is the failure to make that distinction. Yes, people can keep pigs as pets, but the vast majority of them are not kept that way, and there is not the "emotional attachment" that there would be if, say, we suddenly decided to eat the family dog.

Sorry, read the rest of the article after posting, and he does make the concession at the end that small farms usually treat their animals humanely.

Yeah, Gretchen, that's what I believe. Animals don't get the same rights as people.

Oh Gretchen - the Deniro story broke my heart! He was just a baby...he still had his puppy bump!

sorry kishke, dogs are actually i much higher life form than man. When i look into my dog's eyes (any of the five of them), I see God

"When i look into my dog's eyes (any of the five of them), I see God"

Have you consulted an optometrist?

sorry kishke, dogs are actually i much higher life form than man.

Really? In what way?

Go to YouTube and search on the Eddie Izzard skit "evil giraffe."

*chuckle* Love Eddie Izzard.
That said, anyone that can deliberately cause a living creature pain is a douche. Anyone that can deliberately take the life of a living creature, for any reason other than food or self defense, regardless of size or sentience is probably a psycopathic douche. It has been documented repeatedly that the inability to empathize and torture of animals is a common trait of serial killers. So, did this chick do something waaay wrong? Yes. Did she do something that deserves felony charges? That, I'm not so sure, but she sure does need help, as well as her whole bag-of-crazy family. I'd seriously like to know how the hell the cops found out she killed a frelling *hamster*, maybe her mom's way of trying to get that help if her other attempts have failed? Not a real bright move, but....

Well, criminy...

What's that saying? "With great power comes great responsibility."

That's not really advanced by insisting that an ever-expanding assortment of creatures have "rights". Hey, Zhaan on Farscape is a plant. You know, the hot blue chick?

Where do you draw the line?

Just show some respect, and insist that others do so to the extent that you can show them, and we'll be fine. Idiots reap what they sow. After all, it's not like prizewinning people are attracted to brainless cruelty.

The thing is, no one wants to pay for what it actually costs to raise and slaughter animals humanely.

I LOVE bacon, burgers and eggs, but this is why I don't eat much meat or eggs - industry meat is horrifying. Even so-called "cage free" eggs or "grass-fed" beef probably isn't humane, unless it's pretty expensive. I pay a dollar per egg, and $12.00 per lb of meat, because I only buy from farms I can visit. At prices like that, meat is a once a month treat. I can't wait until I have my own yard so I can get some chickens of my own, and eat eggs whenever I want.

(Michael Pollan said in Omnivore's Dilemma that if slaughter-houses had glass walls, this problem would be solved in a day. I don't know if I believe that though.)

The point the law is getting and some commenters are not, is that sociopaths kill animals for fun, not food, and catching them early when they're just killing animals is helpful. This girl is a murderer-to-be, and now she's in the system. That's a good thing.

I do agree animals should be raised for food humanely, and I enforce that by using my buying dollars for things raised humanely. If we all did that, factory farming would not be an issue.

momof4 has a good point. In this day and age, it is surprisingly easy to find out where your food came from. I know that not all of us have the money to afford to shop at those places like Whole Foods that only buy from cruelty-free farms, but you can buy cage free eggs and hormone free dairy at all major grocery stores. It's a start.

Animal cruelty needs to be criminal. People who kick cats are a gnat's breath away from kicking children, if they're not there already.

As a health care professional, the only place where I draw the line is when the PETA people get all violent about animals used for necessary medical experiments. I know that sometimes these animals suffer from exposure to drugs, radiation, and chemicals...but if that saves one child's life, so be it.

Torturing and abusing a defenseless animal, and a sibling...isnt this often a sign of a potential psychopath of the future? Future serial killer potential...awful.

This girl is a murderer-to-be ... People who kick cats are a gnat's breath away from kicking children

So the reason we criminalize cruelty toward animals is because it might lead to cruelty toward people? Well, I don't believe in punishing people for future crimes.

I'm a vegetarian, so obviously I support free range farming (hunting too!). But ultimately I don't think it can produce enough meat to meet everyone's needs, especially if we were all eating Taubes-style like Amy recommends. I feel the same way about organic fruits and vegetables. Yes, eating organic is ideal, but it's not going to feed the world. Meat and fresh produce are already incredibly expensive and inaccessible relative to cheap carbohydrates for many people, and I can't condone widening the gap between those who can afford to eat well and those who can't.

As far as this particular issue goes...well I don't eat animals and I can still clearly understand the difference between raising an animal for food in a culturally-accepted way and torturing a pet. I don't see how this is even up for debate. When I first saw Amy's blog post my thought was "give the kid a break, it was probably just poor impulse control" but then I clicked on the link and the girl is 19--DEFINITELY old enough to know better and be tried as an adult. It doesn't necessarily mean she's a sociopath, but that's irrelevant--she committed a crime, she should pay.

I have something of a theory here, which I won't expound, based on the notion that, well, volitional self-awareness isn't an on-off have-it-or-don't thing, and just because humans have the highest level of it on the planet doesn't mean that it's our exclusive property.

(And let me tell you, this is a hard theory to live with, because as a deontologist rights-come-with-volitional-self-awareness libertarian, it makes all kinds of ethical questions vastly harder to resolve.)

But I'm going to talk a little about dogs, because this is where it gets personal. (And, so you know, this is something that came as something as a surprise to me. I was never all that fond of animals, period, before I got married and got a dog in the family in the bargain. Soon thereafter, I was convinced.)

I would agree that they don't enjoy the same rights as humans. The aforementioned theory aside, it's obvious that they don't have that capacity in a sufficient manner to be fully participating members of society. No argument there.

What they are, in a very real sense, are our dependents. Quite apart from the responsibilities we freely assume in taking them into our homes, we, as a species, made them. Our ancestors self-consciously and deliberately shaped them from earlier canids, and made them what they are: creatures which look to us with love, infinite trust, and what is for all intents and purposes worship. We - humanity - set ourselves up as the dogs' gods.

On the former alone, I might be willing to argue that abusing them is more akin to child or elder abuse than the relatively innocent assaults perpetrated amongst peers. But when you consider the true depth of the relationship we, as a species, set out to create and succeeded in creating -- well, there's a very special hell awaiting anyone who can deliberately betray a trust and obligation that deep.

And yes, before you ask, I'd be more than willing to send that kind of bastard there personally.

***** So the reason we criminalize cruelty toward animals is because it might lead to cruelty toward people? Well, I don't believe in punishing people for future crimes.*****

Kiske, do I really need to hand you a map and a flashlight to get you to pull your head out of your ass? Because I suspect it's WAAAAY the hell up there.

Read on, Oh Unenlightened One:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/425882/the_link_between_animal_abuse_and_serial.html?cat=17

http://www.peta.org/issues/Companion-Animals/animal-abuse-and-human-abuse-partners-in-crime.aspx

http://www.pet-abuse.com/pages/abuse_connection.php

Animals are DEFINITELY a gateway to people. If we don't stop people from torturing animals, they most likely WILL graduate to torturing people. I really hope to all that is Holy that it's not one of your friends/relatives.

I have owned birds, and cats, and dogs. I cannot, for the life of me, imagine how you cannot see how man has domesticated these animals to be companions.

My cat is NOT a piece of meat. She has feelings, and a personality, and quite frankly, I get a kick out of her calico quirkiness.

That said, some animals are pets, some are food. How many people do you know who keep a cow as a pet? Probably not many, I'd say. There's a reason for this: dogs and cats were domesticated by man to rid the area of vermin/protect the clan. Cows? Not really good in those categories. But they are really freaking tasty.

I love steak. That does NOT mean I want my cow of choice brutally murdered. I want that cow to exit this world in the most peaceful way possible. But, I still want to eat that cow. :D

I do NOT, however, condone some random asshole hacking at that cow with a machete, just because he can.

Can you really not see the difference?

The idea that animals of any stripe are a higher form of life than humans is ludicrous. No matter what they do, they'll never do more than perpetuate themselves. And they are incapable of sentient thought.

And by the way, dogs are predatory animals, they are not "pure love". I'm a dog person, but I have a realistic outlook towards their natures. Sweet little Rex wouldn't feel the least bit guilty about sinking its teeth into Bambi's mother and taking a chunk out of her neck.

Nature is a stone cold bitch.

Now as far as how we treat them, wanton cruelty ought to be punished, animal or otherwise, but the penalty for stomping a gerbil ought be much lighter by comparison to beating up a person.

I can't understand how someone can look at a dog and countenance abusing it. If they'd do that to a dog, they'd sure as hell do it to you.

Dogs are also good judges of character. If my dog doesn't like you, then I don't like you either. This has never led me astray.

Alistair is correct - we created Dog in our image. Your dog would gladly give its life for you. You should treat it well.

Cruelty to animals makes me furious, but I'm not sure the government should step in and prevent it. The government IMHO is responsible for protecting humans. FYI I have many pets that I cherish and love. I've worked for private organizations that help animals.

It's a big misconception that people who are cruel to animals grow up to be criminals. There is no proof in the scientific literature. Recently I was watching Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Remember the main character's sad memory of having killed a bird with a shovel as a child? Maybe he should have gone to jail and been stigmatized and told he was a budding psycho. That would have really made him psycho.

This whole thing reminds me of the overreaction towards sex offenders. To suggest we should stock our overcrowded jails with people cruel to rodents is absurd.

The incredible anger displayed here and in the NYtimes towards animal abusers "they should be abused too!" is a sign of a culture in decay. This weekend the NYtimes published an article about how government homes abuse disabled residents. The ratio of comments on that article to Bittman's piece? At least 1: 50.

Bittman et al know nothing about farming. I've worked on numerous small farms and there are huge variations to how animals are treated. I've been to small family farms that treat animals in a way that would make suburbanites blanch. I've slaughtered animals and there is frankly no way to do it without any suffering, though you can try to minimize it.

"The incredible anger displayed here and in the NYtimes towards animal abusers "they should be abused too!" is a sign of a culture in decay."

It's a sign of cultural decay because some people are outraged by animal abuse?

And you conclude this because you *think* people are *less* outraged by elder abuse?

WTF? Already tapping the lager on this lovely St. Paddy's day? Slow down; it's gonna be a long day.

No one is trying to argue that elder abuse is sometimes okay and no one has to qualify an elderly person as worthy of legal protection. We all agree on that. So when abuse happens it's disgusting and we prosecute the perpetrator. I've never encountered a single person who would turn cheek to elder abuse if they found out about it.

I get particularly outraged at abuse of pets because of the superiority many humans feel over animals. Because animals cannot communicate with us or build cities and do a lot of things based on instinct, not conscious thought, it makes them *inferior* to many people. If that were the logic we all agreed on, I could easily argue we torture people with Alzheimer's or one-year-olds (one year olds are pretty useless, right?!) or folks with mental retardation (I don't know the most current phrase, sorry if retardation is offensive).

I don't like the idea of thinking that something that can feel pain, understand betrayal, and display affection in a similar way that humans do shouldn't be protected from abuse. There's something MORE going on in those brains than simply "food; pee; sleep; chase tail". Should we protect them on the same level as humans? I doubt everyone would ever agree to it...so we should totally abandon the idea that these animals need protection at all?

Honest to fucking god. Make yourself another drink and watch one of these fun films without getting sick:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=skinning+dogs&aq=f

@ Alastair and Brian: I agree wholeheartedly!

Hahaha, Gretchen, lemme guess, you live alone with cats? Yes, I'm arguing it's part of cultural decay. People have transferred disproportionate amounts of affection onto animals, often at the expense of humans.

Are you also vegan? Why are pets so special? At least vegans *try* to be consistent. Lemme tell you a pig is way smarter than most pets.

But we don't protect infants and disabled humans because of some properties they possess, we protect them because they are part of our species and are in a state we all could be subject to. We protect them because it's best for us.

I love animals, but it's not the government's job to collect our hard-earned money to protect them.

And I love the people citing PETA for evidence that people should be prosecuted because they might be more likely to commit a crime in the future. What nonsense. Take a look at the evidence in a real medical journal, there isn't any.

@ Melissa: guess I started the ad hom shit w/ the "are you drinking?" question. But that cultural decay thing seems really out of no where and I'm still not seeing a lot of convincing points...if I am indifferent towards abused old people then I am indifferent. Period. Affection isn't a finite resource and I don't think we can understand why many people seem to be more affected by animal cruelty than human cruelty using that theory alone. Maybe it could explain part of it but it definitely isn't the entire equation.

Negative on all those assumptions: Married to a hot carnivore and we have a dog. Wish we had the money and space for a million more. Our cat died last year. And if someone tried to intentionally harm our dog I'd fuck him/her up. Really.

I am not a vegan. Ate three slices of bacon for breakfast and just had Amy's specialty: "Green Beans DROWNING in Butter". I don't support veganism because it's pretty clean we're evolved to eat mostly fatty meats.

I just care about where my food comes from (seems like you do, too) and I don't think that we're such superior animals on the planet in such a way that gives us any sort of permission to intentionally inflict pain on them. Superiority is subjective: We're killing the planet, that doesn't seem all that intelligent to me. We bred dogs and cats and other furry guys to be our companion so we need to protect them but it seems you disagree with this based on the notion it's not evolutionarily advantageous.

I want to eat butter, but I don't think it's okay to beat the shit out of the cow, just 'cuz it doesn't know the alphabet or what a load bearing-wall is. I want the rib eye, too, but don't try and carve it out while the thing is breathing. This isn't Temple of Doom.

Just because something isn't evolutionarily advantageous doesn't make it disadvantageous, either. I also don't think that helping animals is somehow bad b/c they're not my species (which is an extension of your evolutionarily advantageous argument)...does that mean you don't believe in protecting endangered species? Tax $ is used for that.

It seems like you're upset that some tax monies are allotted to helping animals and you think it should be used in a way that directly and immediately helps humans (e.g: the elderly). Is that correct?

"I love animals, but it's not the government's job to collect our hard-earned money to protect them. "

Fine. Just give me permission and I'll use my own gun and ammo and take care of it for everyone - free of charge. I could use the target practice. Humans can be real pieces of shit. You can't say that about a dog (even the fucked up asshole dogs are like that for a reason and that reason is human inflicted abuse. Or rabies or some degenerative brain illness in which case the animal is humanely euthanized.).

To suggest we should stock our overcrowded jails with people cruel to rodents is absurd.

Absolutely.

To those who disagree, tell me, please, if you can, what real difference is there between a hamster and a mouse? Shall we press charges against people who kill mice? No? I didn't think so. But if it's a white mouse belonging to someone's sister - hey, throw the book at him!

You want a difference between dogs and other animals?

How's this?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/dog-in-japan-stays-by-the-side-of-its-ailing-friend-in-the-rubble

Show me any other animal that does this.

Would now be the wrong time to mention that video made me cry?

Nope. Did the same to my friend. I think that'll happen to most people. I almost cried. But I'm like that.

Kishke, there is no real difference between a hamster and a mouse, but there's a difference between killing a hamster and mouse. Mice eat your food and spread disease - killing them serves some function. If you took great joy in trapping and killing mice (my mother hates mice but never enjoys it when we have to trap them) I would be as concerned about you as this 19 year old girl who killed the hamster for no reason other than cruelty.

I don't understand why people are arguing about this. I'm not an animal nut and I do think people are different than animals, but cruelty is NOT ACCEPTABLE. I don't think slugs are sentient beings, but I sure as shit stopped my brother from pouring salt on them when he was a kid. This isn't a sign of a decaying society.

Oh and Brian - idk if you know but those two lovely pooches were rescued and as of yesterday the injured one was weak but holding on. No worries, though, no humans were left to die because the dogs were rescued and treated by a veterinarian...

Yeah, I think that since I came to that video via NRO, and he had the update right there and I saw it before the video it didn't hit me like it hit you.

And I pretty much figured that there weren't humans being left to croak. Veterinarians don't work on humans, and there's bound to be plenty of pets stranded by this catastrophe too.

Hopefully these dogs get matched back up with their people.

Weren't you against that CA law where the chickens would get enough space to move around?

I agree that cruelty is unacceptable, but I do not agree that it is or should be criminal.

Hey, Zhaan on Farscape is a plant. You know, the hot blue chick? -Radwaste

Its offical, Radwaste is now my favorite person on this board

I have owned birds, and cats, and dogs. I cannot, for the life of me, imagine how you cannot see how man has domesticated these animals to be companions. -Daghain

Companinonship was secondary to domestication, the primary purpose in domesticating most animals was labor and/or religious in nature.

Look, I dont think this girl should be charged with a felony. I think she shold be taken into the middle of her towns square let everone know she killed her sisters pet for no other reason then to hurt her sister and then shot her in the stomach with a beanbag gun.

Pain is somthing every creature understands, so make her feel some - it will be a far more effecitive punishment that a court proceeding(and I dont care how many animal rights nuts are on the jury, I gaurentee one person will find the trial stupid beyond measure and tank the case just to prove the point), probably avioded for a plea bargin, and a fine that her parents will have to pay on her behalf

I think she shold be taken into the middle of her towns square let everone know she killed her sisters pet for no other reason then to hurt her sister

What, now we need the public involved in family spats? She destroyed some of her sister's property. Very bad, very sad. Let her sister take her to small claims court if she likes; that's what it's for.

kishke I dont think she needs a criminal record, nor am I the type to advocate that aminals are equal to humans, but there is a difference between killing a creature capable of feeling pain in a manner meant to maximize that pain and destryoing an inanimate object

Gretchen, the good meat you cherish and enjoy will be outlawed by this movement against "animal cruelty." I work with many small farmers and have sat in many government committee meetings with "anti cruelty" folks. They know dogs and cats are the low-hanging fruit. Once they have laws against harming pets, they can slowly extend them to livestock by arguing that livestock aren't any different from pets biologically. They want us all to be vegans and they want to outlaw ALL animal agriculture. These are just baby steps.

"They know dogs and cats are the low-hanging fruit. Once they have laws against harming pets, they can slowly extend them to livestock by arguing that livestock aren't any different from pets biologically. They want us all to be vegans and they want to outlaw ALL animal agriculture. These are just baby steps."

Wow well in that case we should all start promoting animal abuse so that doesn't happen!

And we should abuse the gays, too. Because once the fags can all marry each other it's only a matter of time before everyone is butt fucking donkeys in the middle of the street . Talk about cultural decay!

Probably the most absurd argument I've heard against the criminalization of cruelty to animals. You're obviously smart and have a lot of background on this topic. I enjoyed checking out your blog. But that argument is really lame!

Outlawing is what a society does to things it finds unacceptable, Kiske, so I don't know how you can agree it's unacceptable and then say it should be legal. This is why our laws change over time-what we find acceptable does too.

@Gretchen -

No, Melissa's right. PeTA's agenda is to force everyone to be vegans, so we'll be as physically and mentally weak as they are, and then they don't have to feel bad about being idiot new-agers who can't accept reality as it is.

"If we don't stop people from torturing animals, they most likely WILL graduate to torturing people."

Indeed, if we don't stop dog fighting, people will eventually want to see people fight.

@ admin- where is the RSS for this blog? I like the theme, but more images and maybe video would be even better! Thanks!

Kiske, so I don't know how you can agree it's unacceptable and then say it should be legal.

There are many things I believe are unacceptable, but I still do not think should be illegal. I think it's unacceptable to call people rude names or to pick your nose in public. It's bad behavior. Nevertheless, neither should be criminalized.