Proposal eagerly awaited
Posted on Sunday, October 5, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/239429/
Kind souls everywhere are awaiting
the results of Attorney General
Dustin McDaniel’s negotiations over strengthening Arkansas’ inadequate animal abuse laws. At a news conference last week, Mc-Daniel said he has been working with folks on opposing sides of the issue in the hope of drawing up a first-offense felony proposal that all of them can get behind in the legislation session beginning in January. His aim, he said, is to establish the offense of aggravated animal cruelty that would apply to extreme cases involving dogs, cats and horses, making it a felony on the first offense; increase the penalties in lesser animal cruelty cases—currently Class A misdemeanors punishable by no more than a year in jail and a $ 1, 000 fine, although counseling may be ordered—so that a fourth conviction would be subject to a felony penalty; and make cockfighting a felony on the fourth offense. “I think that by working together we’re going to be very proud of what we send to the people after the next legislative session,” he told reporters. I beg to differ with McDaniel. People who engage in fighting roosters—or dogs, or any other animal for that mattershould not be given a keep-out-of-jail pass until the fourth established transgression. Three-strikes-and-you’re-out is as lenient as he should be. Arkansas is one of only a few states that doesn’t have a felony provision for animal cruelty—at least, cruelty to some animals. The Humane Society of the United States says that we are one of only five, but that’s not exactly correct. Under the animalabuse provisions of the Arkansas Code, it is a Class D felony to damage or destroy agricultural and research animals. Generally, what Arkansas lacks is a felony penalty for abusing or killing animals whose flesh is not considered foodstuff for humans in this culture, e. g., dogs, cats and horses. According to its Web site, HSUS believes that a good felony law should:
Apply to all animals;
Apply to first-time offenders;
Have large fines and lengthy prison time as penalties;
Have no exemptions; Allow or require convicted abusers to get counseling at their own expense; and Prohibit abusers from possessing animals or living where animals are present. Additionally, it says, statutes should be combined with a strong commitment to enforce the law. Amen to that. But. If someone hurt my dog or any other pet in my care, I’d be hard-pressed not to try to hurt that someone back, so as much as it pains me to say it, I can’t go along with every item on the HSUS list. There has to be some flexibility in the law, particularly when it comes to incarceration. Believe it or not, some people just aren’t competent to choose between doing right and doing wrong. For example, the section on farm animals and research facilities in the Arkansas Code includes an “effective consent” clause exempting from prosecution anyone who, “by reason of youth, mental disease or defect, or intoxication,” is unable to make “reasonable” decisions. I’m not wild about that blanket intoxication excuse—whether you consider substance abuse a disease or an addiction, not every person who abuses alcohol, drugs or other intoxicating substances suffers from either oneotherwise it’s seems like a reasonable provision to me. State Sen. Sue Madison of Fayetteville, who last year failed to persuade the Legislature to buck the Arkansas Farm Bureau and pass a bill that would have made animal cruelty a felony on the first offense, was quoted as saying she has seen McDaniel’s draft proposal and likes it. Like the AG, she expressed confidence that a felony provision will be enacted next year. Steve Eddington, a spokesman for the Farm Bureau, told our reporter Andy Davis that the organization would support a first-offense-felony law only if it (1 ) is applied only to “extreme cases of animal cruelty” and (2 ) only law enforcement officers can make arrests in such cases. Currently, state law allows organizations incorporated for the purpose of preventing animal cruelty to make arrests. Both Madison and Farm Bureau personnel have conferred with McDaniel on the anticipated legislation, and McDaniel says he and his staff are “meeting and speaking over the phone to everyone we can think of who has had an interst in this legislation in the past, whether they’ve supported it or opposed it.” “ I’m trying very diligently to bring all sides together on something that can be agreed upon as good, sound policy, and we are very, very close. ” I haven’t seen McDaniel’s draft, but as soon as he has a proposal to submit to legislators, I’ll try to share it with you.
—–––––•–––––—Associate Editor Meredith Oakley is editor of the Voices page.