Responsible Pet Owners Alliance Press Release Words can hurt you if you ignore these extremists! They’ve been telling us their agenda to end all interaction with animals for years, but few believed them. Animal “rights” groups profess to work for improved animal treatment while their ultimate goal is to abolish the following: 1) breeding and ownership of pets; 2) use of animals in biomedical research; 3) raising farm animals for food, clothing, by-products such as insulin; 4) use of animals in education and entertainment, including zoos, aquariums, circuses and rodeos; and 5) all forms of hunting (including field trial competition, trapping and fishing), according to Capital Research Center. http://capitalresearch.org Gary Francione and Tom Regan, “A Movement’s Means Create Its Ends,” were quoted in Animals’ Agenda: “There are fundamental and profound differences between the philosophy of animal welfare and that of animal rights … Thus welfare […]
Animal “Rights” is About Abolition, Not Animal Cruelty, Says Responsible Pet Owners Alliance of Texas
Special Court For Pets. What Possibly Could Go Wrong?
Hat tip to reader “James” for the link.
Please read and consider. The city of San Antonio, Texas has created a special court just to deal with pet cases. This is a function of the state’s court system, not a separate judicial entity. The special court has been functioning for 10 months and has collected $250,000 in fines.
Here is one example of a recent court case. A six-year-old boy went to school and told the school nurse that his dad’s chihuahua had bit him. The boys father was brought up on charges and a guilty finding resulted in a fine of $269.
Some probably will find not only the charge and fine ridiculous but the entire concept of the state creating a special court just to deal with pet issues beyond the scope of sensibility. Others will complain that animals are being either singled out for special treatment or singled out for special prosecution, along with the owners.
However, fear not! The city is considering creating special and crime-specific courts in order that judges can become “specialized” in a certain field of judicial expertise.
But the 10-month-old court is part of a larger trend in which cities are forming specialized tribunals to deal with distinct populations, such as drug addicts or the mentally ill. The goal is to allow judges to develop a deeper understanding of certain kinds of offenses, and better fashion appropriate punishments for those who commit them.
I repeat! What possibly could go wrong?
