--"People who would abuse or torture innocent animals are people who would do the same (to humans) under the right circumstances," Fowle said.--
--Welcome to the Pre-Crime unit. 18 months is too harsh for animal abuse. Make the guy do a ton of community service and probation, toss in some counseling, maybe a month or two behind bars. 18 months is waaaaaaay out of line for killing an animal.--
18 months in prison does seem a bit excessive. I would have favored perhaps a couple of months in prison, a restraining order with severe consequences against repeats of such action, and a hefty, hefty financial fine. It gives both the prison record and hits him where he'll remember it -- in the pocketbook.
My fear on making this too excessive is that veal will eventually result in 18 months in prison before the activists are through using these laws. I love my animals and would want hefty retribution if they were tortured and killed by some moron, but I'd rather get financial compensation and see the courts make it a "he owes me" situation as opposed to a "he owes society" situation. It's obviously a different situation with people being harmed, but when it's an animal I expect it to be treated more as property than person.
I think some of these people were seconds in the movie called "Hang 'em High." Sort of scary for our jury system of justice.
Muleteam1
I love little doggies as much as the next person, but I agree with your assessment. It's getting to the point where people are so passionate about these things that they lose all sense of proportionality. A guy beats a dog to death and all of a sudden nothing short of breaking on the wheel will suffice for punishment. That he should be punished for cruelty isn't in question. The extent of his punishment, however, is legitimate grounds for debate. I think 18 months in prison is excessive. Hell, some people murder human beings and don't get that much. And domestic abusers often get away multiple times with nothing more than a slap on the wrist.