+- Twitchin Kitten - conversation community (https://twitchinkitten.com)
+-- Forum: The Club House (https://twitchinkitten.com/forum-6.html)
+--- Forum: Animal Kingdom (https://twitchinkitten.com/forum-18.html)
+---- Forum: Victory Lane (https://twitchinkitten.com/forum-47.html)
+---- Thread: Animal Abusers make the A (abusers)- List (/thread-2054.html)
RE: Animal Abusers make the A (abusers)- List - Havoc - 01-02-2011
It cost me 160.00 to adopt a puppy from the animal shelter here, it was this little guys last day to live, I paid the money and saved him, but no matter how you slice it abuse is already in the system, the new list will accompany that abuse and bullshit not change it, and those of us who help the needy animals in our neighborhoods without actual ownership will be targeted by the list.
I have about a dozen cats outside who depend on me for food twice a day, I don't claim ownership of any of them, I try to treat them if they are sick, I feed them and I give them water, since they hang out in my yard who's responsible if animal control wants to say they aren't getting all the care they should have?
RE: Animal Abusers make the A (abusers)- List - Twitchin Kitten - 01-02-2011
I didn't see anywhere in the wording where this is going to target anyone like me or you Havoc. I will admit I did not read the bill proposed in Ca but the article did say it's going to be hard to pass it with taxes on pet food and other things not palatable in there.
I'll go read it and see.
RE: Animal Abusers make the A (abusers)- List - Twitchin Kitten - 01-02-2011
OK I just read the whole boring, redundant thing. First of all, this bill is for CALIFORNIA only right now. There is no bill making this a federal list. This is pretty much set up like the sex offender registry. There is nothing in there saying someone has to be reported by another citizen to be investigated. Any of the worries that people will start giving anyone grief in the way you guys are worried about have already been going on and whether this "list" is implemented in every state, it will continue just like it is now.
There is nothing in this bill that provides for shelters to start sending investigators out to anyone with a pet.
I do not like the fact that Ca is going to make a new agency over this. That is one thing I already expressed as a worry that some bureaucrat is going to nick the money to pay for something else, bankrupting the system.
This part I found to be bullshit. There is no provision that I could find in the text of the bill saying what these "provisions" are where one can earn the right to be removed from said list.
The bill, on or before January 1, 2012, would require the
department to make available information, concerning persons who are
required to register as a result of felony animal abuse convictions,
to the public via an Internet Web site, as specified. The department
would be required to update the Internet Web site on an ongoing
basis. The name or address of the person's employer and the listed
person's criminal history other than the specific crimes for which
the person is required to register would be prohibited from being
included on the Internet Web site. The registration information that
would be required to be published on the Internet Web site would
include, but not be limited to, his or her name and known aliases, a
photograph, a physical description, including gender and race, date
of birth, criminal history, the address at which the person resides
or the county in which the person is registered as a transient, and
any other information that the Department of Justice deems relevant.
The bill would require that the department make a reasonable effort
to provide notice to affected offenders that the department is
required to make information about those people available to the
public. A person would be removed from the Internet Web site if he or
she were relieved of the duty to register, as specified.
I'm hoping this part means any asshole using this list/info to commit a crime against a registered offender. I'm doubting that though.
The bill would also (1) provide that any person who uses
information disclosed pursuant to the Internet Web site to commit a
misdemeanor is punishable by a fine of not less than $10,000, nor
more than $50,000, and that the use of that information to commit a
felony is punishable by an additional 5-year term of imprisonment;
this whole thing is no good. Find a different way to fund it.
This bill would require a person who purchased pet food to pay an
unspecified charge per pound to be collected by the store at the time
of sale. The bill would establish the Animal Protection Fund in the
State Treasury and would require a store to quarterly remit the
moneys collected to the State Board of Equalization for deposit into
that fund. The board would be required to administer and collect the
charges imposed on pet food, as specified. The bill would
continuously appropriate the moneys in the fund, and would require
that they be expended by the department for creating, administering,
and updating the Internet Web site as required by the act, and by
local governments for spay and neuter programs.
(2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse
local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no
reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that,
if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains
costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall
be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
(3) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately
as an urgency statute.
Vote: 2/3. Appropriation: yes. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
I found one lie regarding juveniles convicted. Seems like a lie to me considering this is supposed to be for adults 18 and over.
There is also the provision saying "for life". I'm hoping that 'for life' shit pertains to certain crimes presented in the first paragraph in that second section
(2) Any person who is convicted in any court in this state of
animal abuse shall be required to register, in accordance with the
provisions of this section, for the rest of his or her life.
© Any person required to register pursuant to this section who
is discharged or paroled from a jail, prison, school, road camp, or
other penal institution, or from the Division of Juvenile Justice
where he or she was confined because of the commission of animal
abuse, shall, prior to the discharge, parole, or release, be informed
of his or her duty to register under this section by the official in
charge of the place of confinement. The official shall require the
person to read and sign the form as may be required by the Department
of Justice, stating that the duty of the person to register under
this section has been explained to him or her. The official in charge
of the place of confinement shall obtain the address where the
person expects to reside upon his or her discharge, parole, or
release and shall report the address to the Department of Justice.
The official in charge of the place of confinement shall give one
copy of the form to the person, and shall, not later than 45 days
prior to the scheduled release of the person, send one copy to the
appropriate law enforcement agency having local jurisdiction where
the person expects to reside upon his or her discharge, parole, or
release; one copy to the prosecuting agency that prosecuted the
person; and one copy to the Department of Justice. The official in
charge of the place of confinement shall retain one copy. All forms
shall be transmitted in time so as to be received by the local law
enforcement agency and prosecuting agency 30 days prior to the
discharge, parole, or release of the person.
And here are certain protections for those on the list. I'm sure some will be abused depending on the way it's set up in other states but this is in accordance to California law as no other state has this going into effect or on the books yet. The only exception I know right now is Suffolk County in NY. And that is for ONE county in ONE state.
(i) (1) A person is authorized to use information disclosed
pursuant to this section only to protect an animal at risk.
(2) Except as authorized under paragraph (1) or any other
provision of law, use of any information that is disclosed pursuant
to this section for purposes relating to any of the following is
prohibited:
(A) Health insurance.
(B) Insurance.
© Loans.
(D) Credit.
(E) Employment.
(F) Education, scholarships, or fellowships.
(G) Housing or accommodations.
(H) Benefits, privileges, or services provided by any business
establishment.
(3) This section shall not affect authorized access to, or use of,
information pursuant to, among other provisions, Sections 11105 and
11105.3, Section 8808 of the Family Code, Section 14409.2 of the
Financial Code, Sections 1522.01 and 1596.871 of the Health and
Safety Code, and Section 432.7 of the Labor Code.
(4) (A) Any use of information disclosed pursuant to this section
for purposes other than those provided by paragraph (1) or in
violation of paragraph (2) shall make the user liable for the actual
damages, and any amount that may be determined by a jury or a court
sitting without a jury, not exceeding three times the amount of
actual damage, and not less than two hundred fifty dollars ($250),
and attorney's fees, exemplary damages, or a civil penalty not
exceeding twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000).
(B) Whenever there is reasonable cause to believe that any person
or group of persons is engaged in a pattern or practice of misuse of
the information available via an Internet Web site established
pursuant to this section in violation of paragraph (2), the Attorney
General, any district attorney, or city attorney, or any person
aggrieved by the misuse is authorized to bring a civil action in the
appropriate court requesting preventive relief, including an
application for a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining
order, or other order against the person or group of persons
responsible for the pattern or practice of misuse. The foregoing
remedies shall be independent of any other remedies or procedures
that may be available to an aggrieved party under other provisions of
law, including Part 2 (commencing with Section 43) of Division 1 of
the Civil Code.