Comments regarding MS-FACT

 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments

  • 8/11/2011 2:01 AM Doll Stanley wrote:
    I'm not well enough acquainted with MS-FACT to respond to this change in representation. However, I see this too often within the "Humane" movement and ponder on our power struggles and motivations.

    I do wish to comment on the strides made for animals with the passage of this year's legislation. I have been in court many times over the years and I'm astounded to see that the humane community is boasting the passage of a bill that defines the protection of cats and dogs as those domesticated, disallows multiple affidavits and charges of cruelty leaving all but one victim without justice, and was most likely implemented to prevent the 2nd offense felony everyone was so hopeful for, and very importantly has completely taken the word sustenance out which would have upheld an affidavit for failure to provide the grooming and medical care vital to the well being of dogs and cats. What do we do for failure to provide medical care for a suffering dog or cat. What if 50 of the 187 dogs in a puppy mill cannot eliminate or see because their coat is so matted? Did we get what we wanted or did the special interest groups embedded in our legislature pull one over on us?
    Reply to this
Leave a comment

Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Enter the above security code (required)

 Name

 Email (will not be published)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.