Monday, June 25, 2007

OK, This is Insane

Bill seeks to save pets from abuse in disputes | ScrippsNews I know everybody loves their pets, but more restraining orders? They don't keep the people safe. Shouldn't we worry about keeping the people safe BEFORE we worry about keeping the pets safe? (Is PETA behind this?)
Man biting dog?

To keep that from happening, pets soon may be eligible for restraining orders to keep a human away.

Proposed California legislation is targeting a twisted form of domestic violence in which abusers attack loved ones by hurting or killing their pets.
OK, if you kill or injure my pet, that is probably against the law from a cruelty to animals standpoint and is definitely against the law from a destruction of personal property standpoint. Why do we need this?

Do we really need to burden the courts with even more stuff? Shouldn't we worry about keeping the people safe first? (See this link for the long list of posts on domestic violence, and restraining orders.)

No surprise that this is in California, the land where they can't tell what should be protected under law and what should not be protected.

No comments: