[QUOTE=Lady Eboshi;7939530]
I have a different take on it. As per the publicity this case has already received, this horse is now a “Poster Boy” for exactly the outcome everyone wants–very vigorous prosecution of cases of neglect and abuse such as this one! His value on Facebook is to be used as an egregious example of HOW LACKING our system is when people at the extremes of uncaring irresponsibility are allowed to continue owning animals. He is probably also State’s evidence right now in the event that prosecution goes forward, therefore they likely couldn’t euth. him if they wanted to in the absence of a catastrophic condition such as a broken leg.
As someone up-thread mentioned, a major problem is our patchwork quilt of Town, County, State and Federal regulations with regard to animal cruelty, and the spotty enforcement thereof. Perhaps a horse like this LIGHTING UP social media will finally result in a critical mass toward ZERO TOLERANCE of people who treat animals this badly. One can hope!
Meanwhile, I’m sure the vets are keeping him comfortable; his injuries as of now are not immediately life-threatening, and his care will likely be crowd-funded.
I suggest everyone stand back and look at the bigger picture before setting the manure spreader on Maximum Flail. ;)[/QUOTE]
In every state I’m aware of criminal behavior is defined by state law. Local jurisdictions can have local ordinances that regulate behaviors. In some places this includes the ability to incarcerate but sometimes not.
In short, there is no “patchwork” of law and/or regulation. It’s very clearly defined.
There may be a “patchwork” of enforcement. This is because law enforcement resources are invariably limited. The hard truth is that in the modern world there is a hierarchy of case importance, with crimes against persons being at the top of the heap and crimes against property (where animal cruelty laws live) being lower down. Some folks brindle at this but that’s the way it is, particularly once you get out of the “suburbs,”, either by moving into the “city” or outwards to the “country.”
I’m an avid opponent of “zero tolerance advocacy.” To me “zero tolerance” means “zero thought.” Anytime you relegate “thought” to a secondary position (generally somewhere behind “tear jerking”) you’re going to have bad results. This is not a defense of or advocacy for “animal cruelty.” It’s a recognition that life has all manner of twists and turns in it. We ignore that reality at our peril.
Putting a horse down because it has suffered dramatic injury and will likely suffer dramatic pain over the course of its life is an honorable thing.
There is a second, equally honorable reason, for euthanasia. That is a dollar spent on this horse, whose prospects for anything like a life of “equine quality” are poor mean that those dollars are not available to spend on horses whose injuries are less severe and have a reasonable chance to be returned to a life of decent “equine quality.”
Put another way, triage in these situations is both honorable and necessary.
I’ve no sympathy for the pond scum that created this situation. IMO they should get the bill for either euthanasia or treatment and not be “saved” that burden by the generosity of strangers. They suffer nothing for actions; they are deprived of the opportunity to learn from them. They will like likely repeat them in some fashion. An others who watch learn a dangerous lesson that goes, “we can do this, too, and we won’t suffer as generous strangers will save us, too.” Bad public policy, this.
G.
I couldn’t even open the link–just reading about it was horrific enough. From the description of his injuries, it certainly does seem like this poor guy needs to be released from his pain and suffering.
