Connecticut bill would require record-keeping of animal abuse cases

No Gravatar

A bill in the Connecticut legislature would establish a cross-posting of animal abuse cases between the Department of Children and Families and the Commissioner of Agriculture’s office.

The Waterford Patch cites a 1998 study that found in 21 percent of 1,600 cases of animal abuse, involved family violence as well. But 71 percent of women who had pets and were abused reported their partners had threatened their pets.

One elected official is quoted as being opposed to the bill. Why? – They claim one form of abuse is “worse than the other.” Talk about missing the point. What kind of warped logic is that? It is not the function of the bill to legislate a ranking of the two forms of abuse.

By this line of thinking, police shouldn’t investigate the drug use of someone accused of domestic violence because one is worse than the other. Can someone offer State Rep. John Shaban a class in common sense?

And then he claims being cited for leaving a dog in hot car will impact a person’s rights regarding their kids. Again, some people can’t apply common sense to anything.

What Shaban fails to understand is the following from the Waterford Patch article:

“” “”

Emily Todd and Lexi Brown of the Center for Youth Leadership, at Norwalk’s Brien McMahon High School recently told the Select Committee on Children why they too support the bill.

“We cannot begin to tell you how many times we have heard 5-6-7 year-old children talk about how their abusive parent kicks, punches, and slaps the family pet just as he kicks, punches, and slaps mommy,” they said in written testimony. “The number of drawing we’ve seen that show a child hurting an animal because “…it seems like fun” or because “…I saw my daddy do it…”

“” “”

And finally, we have a comment under the piece from someone who states – “The purpose of law is to distinguish human beings from animals.”

I could only laugh when I read this. So this is the basis of our legal system? So early on in the development of our laws, elected officials thought – “Let’s see – bank robbery. Cats can’t do that so let’s make it illegal.” Or – “Since birds can’t drive, we’ll make sure only humans can get a drivers license.”

 

One Response to “Connecticut bill would require record-keeping of animal abuse cases”

  1. melinda chaviraNo Gravatar says:

    yes record keeping would help everyone, know who abused animals and who will do it again.

Leave a Response