Would You Support A National Registry for Animal Abusers?

Family has new baby which is allergic to cats. Family places ad to give away cat. Sadistic animal torturer responds to ad. Family checks registry and knows not to send their cat home with sadistic animal torturer. I'd like to ask the people who had to experience the horror of finding out their cats were tortured to death how they would feel about a registry of animal abusers.

@Mitch This is the very reason a so-called registry will never work. People across this country call them selves "breeders" when they are not, at least they shouldnt be. Most will sell to anyone with enough money.
Others just simply do not spay and neuter pets. You get thousands of pets who will be givin away for free at local walmarts and grocery stores. I highly doubt someone, with five to six puppies/kittens running amok in their homes, would be: "Hmm let me check the registry..." It'll never work.

Also I agree with the others, 'What constitutes abuse?' Being a Vet Tech for over 12 years I have seen the front lines of what should constitue as abuse.
This includes but is not limited to: that 'nice' old lady down the block with 6 dogs(even one would be too many) kept inside while she smokes her 4 packs of cigarettes a day IS abusing her animals. They get all kinds of infections of every part of the body just from being around this for their short little lives. Many might not call that abuse. I do. I could go on and on about what people do to pets that is just unbelievable. I just dont think there is any getting away from this unfortunate issue.

Spay Neuter Adopt.

Btw im not against smokers, but you have to think of the poor little dogs/cats that live indoors that never wanted to start.

Sorry for the rant, did not expect this kind of post and i try to avoid controversial posts like this but i could not help but comment.

I thought there might be something "neat" on here today.

It would be idiotic unless the registry only included people whose offenses were so egregious that they are barred from having animals, such as hoarders, those who have exhibited extreme neglect (such as having their animals starve), and that sort of thing.

Otherwise, it'll be just another thing like nonviolent sex offenders. Someone who takes a leak in public, a minor who sends another kid a nude photo, or someone who just gets spotted being naked (but not acting in a lewd or perverted manner) is not a risk to society, and who cares where they are living?

People who have demonstrated they can't treat animals appropriately should be only on lists to make sure if they get caught having animals again, their animals are rescued from them without delay. The subset of a$$holes who abuse animals who become psycho serial murderers is so tiny that to say that the purpose of establishing a registry to protect the public from serial murderers is just foolish.

Yes, some serial killers begin as animal abusers. Key word = "begin", as in "when they're young". That runs smack into laws that protect the identities of minors. Not gonna happen.

Whether or not you agree with this analysis; I think people are abusive to animals because it gives them a sense of control. The sense of control can be formulated more accurately as a sense of concretion granted to the self. If a person feels uncertain about their identity and its role in the social fabric this can create a tension which gets "ventilated" in the act of abusing the animal (small child, or other adult). It's definitely not rational because the act can only serve to damage one's self in the long run, but in the short term it feels good.

Now, thing is, we pretty much all do this in whatever capacity we can. For some IT people it involves blocking internet services or "hacking" another person's or a company's computer. This gives them that sense of concretion to the self that the animal abuser gets. Pretty much anyway a human being can "pull rank", "put their foot down" or assert the concreteness of their self, we do it.

So, it's not so much a problem of people abusing animals as it is a problem of people ventilating to compensate for an incomplete consciousness of reality and understanding of their own selves. Many do not even realize what the sub-conscious motives are for their actions. Fact is most people are suffering, even while they deny it, and that suffering gets ventilated through physical abuse, drugs and other forms of ego-based satisfaction. It's all about feeding the self affirmative feedback, granting it a definable place in existence.

This is sort of a novel idea but if you think about the self as being this tension between an ideal self (what I want to be) and the fact that the self is entirely arbitrary, the activity of the self can be given as; the act of granting concretion to the self in the pursuit of an ideal self. Since the self fundamentally has no concrete (definite) place in the world except as this tension.

I know what you are thinking "Liberal bullshit!" or maybe "Religious freak!" or "There is no excuse for abusing animals or people", but all of these are themselves of the same nature as the abuse of the animal. It is an abuse of other people through the medium of differentiated social identities and of the character of denigration. Why? To feel better about yourself, to give concretion to your self.

How does the human spirit endure in times of tragedy?

Remedial activities designed to re-affirm one's self-concept/world-view:

• Ignore/distort facts to make them more congruent with one's preferred story
• Avoid situations that draw one's preferred story into question
• Withdraw from situations that pose significant threat to one's preferred story

etc..

• Beat up something defenseless

Absolutely I would support this move - it is proven that animal abusers are simply a small step from moving on to homicide of humans!

Yes, by all means start a national registry... Animal abuse is the same as child abuse.

Humans are the species that revels in torture and brutality. Reading these comments is sickening, Animal abusers should be punished and ostracized, The lack of empathy here, and the constant use of PETA's misdeeds as an excuse for sanctioning cruelty is loathsome.
"Get your priorities straight..." the right wingers go to position, IDIOT. My priorities is to try and save those creatures who suffer at the hand of you and yours. I imagine your priorties are to see how many small animals you can crush.

What constitutes as "animal abuse" is absurd today. Somebody who can't afford 100$ "humane" shots and chooses to put their animal down with a firearm (instantly, equally humane, albeit messy) they are classified as an animal abuser.

Yet, big companies mistreat animals and keep them in absolutely reprehensible living conditions. Yet, when they are caught, they're fined a nominal fee, a true slap on the wrist.

Keep in mind, the guy shooting his poor dog with a rifle loved his dog for years, they were the best of friends, but he just doesn't agree with spending the money at the vet? The animal lovers have gone too far, can't wait for the pendulum to swing back. Hipsters.

I'd support it. Barry Herbeck used "free to a good home" ads to get cats to torture to death.

For the past four or five decades we've had an obession with the potential to be the victim of crime. Politicans have exploited this to get elected while we've grown to have an expensive prison system that is by far the largest in the world. Now that we can't afford to throw more people in prison for long terms each time election season rolls around, we get these registries instead. It's another form of "tough on crime" that doesn't have to actually evaluated for effectiveness. And those who pass the laws don't have to deal with the financial consequences like they do when required for find more money to build and operate another prison.

It's true that we don't have registries for most crimes but that doesn't mean it's not going to happen. The sex offender registery has seen only limited opposition which is very attractive to those who want to get reelected. Sadly once the trend starts really rolling, you'll find politicans trying hard to out do each other. "My opponent only created two criminal registries while I created over a dozen. How can we trust to families will be safe in the world with so few registries?"

Isn't Facebook serving just fine as a National Registry of behaviors?

I think national registries only work to continue to punish someone that has already paid their debt to society and just wants to get on with their lives.

There is no national registry for murderers, violent criminals, thieves or con men but we want a registry for animal abusers.

We as a country need to get our priorities straight.

I see two problems here:

1. The definition of animal abuse. According to some, anyone who owns a pet - no matter how good you are to that pet, should be hauled in front of a firing squad. It's only a matter of time before some nitwit slips in a definition that doesn't belong there. Actually, this would probably happen from day one.

2. The second problem is NeatORama's continual pushing of articles that have absolutely nothing to do with what this site is/was about. It's their site and they can ruin it as much as they want, but they ARE turning it from "NeatORama" to "Controversial Issues O Rama". May I suggest starting another site instead? I come here to get away from all that crap.

I agree with you about the sex offenders shadowfirebird. They really need to redefine who is classified as a sex offender, rapists and child molesters, yes, streakers and public urinators, no.

On the other hand, retch, being against animal abuse doesn't make you a PETA supporter.

Given how much the sex offenders register has been abused, no.

(Example: however disgusting you think pissing in an alley is -- it's not a sex act.)

Do they count the Hassidic butchers who kill animals from blunt trauma? Or the Hallel butchers who do the same? How about hunters, they kill too. Seriously, this is too much. The head of PETA takes medication that is known to be animal tested, yet that's justified, since it's her I guess. A registry like this will only serve to hurt the person who has a name on it, they'll always be guilty long after sentence is served.