That's the highest percentage for voter turnout seen throughout our area (and throughout PA) yesterday. That means for every 100 registered voters, only 25 of them (and in many cases, far fewer) actually took the time to vote. Unlike the 2008 Presidential election, where people stood in lines to vote, this time there were no delays to worry about, the sun was shining across the state, and important choices needed to be made.
Sadly, we know that most of our "base" - environmentally-concerned, compassionate people who care about (among many other things) animal protection, preserving wildlife habitats, cleaning up the watershed, and regulating those who make their living breeding, raising, and slaughtering animals - did NOT show up in great numbers. How do we know this? By looking at the candidates who won and lost. The winners? The candidates with no positive records and/or stated support for these issues. The losers? All of us. And unless those of us who care about these issues take the time - and we're talking MINUTES here, folks - to pressure the officials and judges who won yesterday to do the right thing, we'll all be paying for this atrocious bout of complacency for decades to come. Local elections - for supervisors, commissioners, mayors, etc... - actually have a greater impact on everyone's daily lives than the national elections do. But less than 25% of us care enough to make a 10-minute stop on the way to or from work, over the lunch hour, or after dinner? That's not only sad, it's terrifying.
Yesterday, we had a chance to fill our courts with responsible judges who care about all life on this planet, but we let them - and therefore ourselves - down. We had the chance to break up the old white boys network and elect progressives (not "liberals", per se, but people who look to the future and don't feel disappointment that it's no longer 1950 - or worse, 1850), and we failed to do it.
I cannot express my disappointment adequately in this format, not without using language that doesn't belong in a civilized forum. I hope and pray that the winners in yesterday's election aren't as regressive as I fear they are, and I'm truly willing - as are all the other leaders of PA LOHV chapters - to work with whoever is now in a position to make the world a better place. In the coming months, we'll be making efforts to get to know the newly-elected better and to present our issues to them, and will hope for the best.
Now... let's focus on 2010 and getting a MUCH higher percentage of the voters out, to elect legislators and other officials who'll do some GOOD. If we fail, yet again, we only have ourselves - every voter who doesn't bother to vote - to blame.
Showing posts with label judges. Show all posts
Showing posts with label judges. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Monday, November 2, 2009
Election Day, Tuesday, November 3rd
It's not just a midterm election, which people tend to get less excited about -- it's an off year entirely. But that doesn't mean it's not CRUCIAL that we all get out and vote. Here in PA, there are key elections happening for important judges, and for local officials.
Why is this particularly important to animal protection organizations and voters who care about animal protection? Because judges who take animal cruelty cases seriously make all the difference. You can have all sorts of laws and regulations in place, but if the judges who hand out sentences, or in the case of the Supreme Court, decide if they're legitimate, aren't on board with making animal cruelty a serious offense that results in serious penalties, all the laws and regulations don't do any good. We need people who are willing to put some teeth into the laws we have.
Local officials are also important to animal protection advocates. They decide on things like supporting spay & neuter programs, zoning issues, and regulation of kennels, shelters, and even residents' in terms of the way they treat the animals in their care. They even make decisions about wildlife issues, as we learned here in Lancaster just a few years ago -- it took a long time, but humane solutions won out in our "management" of migratory crows, and poisoning was ended in favor of non-lethal tactics to move crow roosts. So local politics are VERY important, too. And don't forget -- lots of politicians who end up in the House and Senate start out in local roles, as commissioners, supervisors, etc... -- so getting to know them now, and getting them on board for animals, allows us to keep them on our side once they're bigger fish in bigger ponds.
That said, get to the polls tomorrow. Don't put it off and risk forgetting. And please check our endorsements before you head out -- we're endorsing several judges, and two candidates in local races for Mayor of Lancaster City and a supervisor in East Hempfield Township. While, coincidentally, all of our endorsed candidates are Democrats, this is not usually the case -- so PLEASE don't just blindly vote for one party -- as neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have great records, party-wide, on animal protection. A candidate, as an individual, either cares and is sympathetic to our issues, or he/she isn't. That's why we're non-partisan, and when it comes to the animals, that's why voters need to be, too. Vote for the candidate who'll do the best job on the issues you care about. If you're a subscriber to this blog, a key issue for you is animal protection, and our choices this time around are clear:
http://www.lohvpa.org/elections.html
Thank you! And PLEASE VOTE!!!!!
Why is this particularly important to animal protection organizations and voters who care about animal protection? Because judges who take animal cruelty cases seriously make all the difference. You can have all sorts of laws and regulations in place, but if the judges who hand out sentences, or in the case of the Supreme Court, decide if they're legitimate, aren't on board with making animal cruelty a serious offense that results in serious penalties, all the laws and regulations don't do any good. We need people who are willing to put some teeth into the laws we have.
Local officials are also important to animal protection advocates. They decide on things like supporting spay & neuter programs, zoning issues, and regulation of kennels, shelters, and even residents' in terms of the way they treat the animals in their care. They even make decisions about wildlife issues, as we learned here in Lancaster just a few years ago -- it took a long time, but humane solutions won out in our "management" of migratory crows, and poisoning was ended in favor of non-lethal tactics to move crow roosts. So local politics are VERY important, too. And don't forget -- lots of politicians who end up in the House and Senate start out in local roles, as commissioners, supervisors, etc... -- so getting to know them now, and getting them on board for animals, allows us to keep them on our side once they're bigger fish in bigger ponds.
That said, get to the polls tomorrow. Don't put it off and risk forgetting. And please check our endorsements before you head out -- we're endorsing several judges, and two candidates in local races for Mayor of Lancaster City and a supervisor in East Hempfield Township. While, coincidentally, all of our endorsed candidates are Democrats, this is not usually the case -- so PLEASE don't just blindly vote for one party -- as neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have great records, party-wide, on animal protection. A candidate, as an individual, either cares and is sympathetic to our issues, or he/she isn't. That's why we're non-partisan, and when it comes to the animals, that's why voters need to be, too. Vote for the candidate who'll do the best job on the issues you care about. If you're a subscriber to this blog, a key issue for you is animal protection, and our choices this time around are clear:
http://www.lohvpa.org/elections.html
Thank you! And PLEASE VOTE!!!!!
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Penalties for Animal Cruelty
Our current poll asks if PA's animal cruelty penalties are sufficient. Right now, it's 100% saying no, they're not. What are they, you ask? Well, as of 1995, when PA made animal cruelty (some forms thereof) a felony, here they are:
Animal cruelty is only a felony if (A) the victim is a zoo animal (for the 1st offense) or (B) if it's the second offense and the victim is a dog or a cat. Even then, it's only a 3rd degree felony. Also, the cruelty must be determined to be deliberate, so something that the perpetrator's attorney can make look like it was accidental, borne out of ignorance, or unintended will allow the person to escape serious penalty. First offenses on dogs or cats are considered misdemeanors (virtually no penalty or fine whatsoever). So in PA, if you want to beat your dog or throw a litter of puppies in the trash, you can only do it once and not really pay the price for your sadistic behavior. Second time, if they catch you, you may be in trouble.
Read a current article about the demand for tougher penalties by clicking HERE. (thanks to North Penn Puppy Mill Watch for sending the link)
The maximum jail time for a 3rd degree felony conviction is 7 years, and the maximum fine is $15,000. As we've seen in recent puppy mill cases, the sentences are much lighter -- in terms of jail time (virtually none is ever given) and fines (they're rarely over $1000 per incident). MOST of the cruelty cases that make it to court in PA end up being treated as misdemeanors, which is why while it LOOKS like a lot -- 7 years, $15,000 -- you never see that happen. It's all hinging on the abuse/cruelty being intentional -- and a good defense attorney and a "yeah, it's just a dog" judge will combine to assure the abuser a very light sentence.
So, yes, PA's animal cruelty laws are NOT sufficient, nor is the zeal with which judges apply them as they are. The "it's only an animal" mindset is quite prevalent, even in the minds of judges, who should know better. As stated in an earlier post, even if you don't care about animals, the studies prove over and over that people who are cruel to animals will eventually turn that sadism on people -- in the form of domestic abuse, crimes that involve assault or weapons, and in extreme (but sadly, not rare) cases, murder. A capacity for cruelty NEVER remains something that someone only exhibits toward animals.
PLEASE contact your legislators -- in the PA House and Senate -- and let them know that you want PA's laws to be tougher. And when there's a cruelty case in your area, contact the judge to let him or her know you want the toughest sentence possible to be given if the person is convicted. You also want to remind the judge that a lenient approach in determining the intent of the abuser won't be tolerated by the voters. That's the up-side of PA having judges be elected, rather than appointed. The voters get to speak and have an impact on the judicial branch of our state government.
Not sure who your state legislators are? Visit our legislation page for links to find out:
http://www.lohvpa.org/legislation.html#findlegislators
To find contact info for a judge who'll be deciding an animal cruelty case in your area, simply Google his or her name, and you'll find the number for their offices. A call to the judge (NOT an email) is best -- and you'll probably end up talking to an assistant, and that's fine -- the point of your call WILL be passed along.
Animal cruelty is only a felony if (A) the victim is a zoo animal (for the 1st offense) or (B) if it's the second offense and the victim is a dog or a cat. Even then, it's only a 3rd degree felony. Also, the cruelty must be determined to be deliberate, so something that the perpetrator's attorney can make look like it was accidental, borne out of ignorance, or unintended will allow the person to escape serious penalty. First offenses on dogs or cats are considered misdemeanors (virtually no penalty or fine whatsoever). So in PA, if you want to beat your dog or throw a litter of puppies in the trash, you can only do it once and not really pay the price for your sadistic behavior. Second time, if they catch you, you may be in trouble.
Read a current article about the demand for tougher penalties by clicking HERE. (thanks to North Penn Puppy Mill Watch for sending the link)
The maximum jail time for a 3rd degree felony conviction is 7 years, and the maximum fine is $15,000. As we've seen in recent puppy mill cases, the sentences are much lighter -- in terms of jail time (virtually none is ever given) and fines (they're rarely over $1000 per incident). MOST of the cruelty cases that make it to court in PA end up being treated as misdemeanors, which is why while it LOOKS like a lot -- 7 years, $15,000 -- you never see that happen. It's all hinging on the abuse/cruelty being intentional -- and a good defense attorney and a "yeah, it's just a dog" judge will combine to assure the abuser a very light sentence.
So, yes, PA's animal cruelty laws are NOT sufficient, nor is the zeal with which judges apply them as they are. The "it's only an animal" mindset is quite prevalent, even in the minds of judges, who should know better. As stated in an earlier post, even if you don't care about animals, the studies prove over and over that people who are cruel to animals will eventually turn that sadism on people -- in the form of domestic abuse, crimes that involve assault or weapons, and in extreme (but sadly, not rare) cases, murder. A capacity for cruelty NEVER remains something that someone only exhibits toward animals.
PLEASE contact your legislators -- in the PA House and Senate -- and let them know that you want PA's laws to be tougher. And when there's a cruelty case in your area, contact the judge to let him or her know you want the toughest sentence possible to be given if the person is convicted. You also want to remind the judge that a lenient approach in determining the intent of the abuser won't be tolerated by the voters. That's the up-side of PA having judges be elected, rather than appointed. The voters get to speak and have an impact on the judicial branch of our state government.
Not sure who your state legislators are? Visit our legislation page for links to find out:
http://www.lohvpa.org/legislation.html#findlegislators
To find contact info for a judge who'll be deciding an animal cruelty case in your area, simply Google his or her name, and you'll find the number for their offices. A call to the judge (NOT an email) is best -- and you'll probably end up talking to an assistant, and that's fine -- the point of your call WILL be passed along.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
