A news story out of Edmonton, Canada has me thinking about our own criminal justice system and its slap-on-the-wrist mentality where animal-cruelty cases are concerned.
A woman has pleaded guilty to “causing an animal distress” after more than a thousand rabbits where found living in and around her home, many of them in very poor health. Half of them were later euthanized due to their condition.
This paragraph in the Global Edmonton article jumps off the page – “” In addition to the $8,500 fine, the court also employed a rarely used section of the animal protection act. It essentially allows the court to put Zenner on probation for the rest of her life. “”
The woman is also banned from having rabbits and henceforth can only have one spayed or neutered dog or cat as a pet. And she can only go into pet stores to buy food for that pet.
On the downside, I don’t like the idea that a person who has been found guilty of this level of cruelty can have a pet at all. But the lifetime ban for those convicted or who have pleaded guilty to animal cruelty is something the US needs to enact. I’m sure the degree of animal cruelty needs to be factored into the system.
This story also makes me think that the Canadian system of justice is conflicted in many ways, where animal cruelty is concerned – as is the case in our system in the US. In this case, an individual who probably allowed her hoarding to get way out of hand gets a pretty stiff sentence and basically has been told to stay clear of animals, save one at a time.
But in other areas of Canada, the nation’s government fully supports and promotes the brutal beating deaths of thousands over thousands of baby seals every year.