The Right Way to Catch an Abuser
When I hear stories about people who rescue animals (whom they do not own) from their suffering and then end up getting charged with a crime, several things come to mind:
- It’s truly twisted that it’s a crime to liberate an animal from abuse.
- The only viable alternative is to intentionally allow the animal to suffer more, while building a legal case.
In Hungry, Ill Horses Taken from Farm (Washington Post, 10/04/06), Dan Morse reports that an animal cruelty investigator quietly snapped pictures and took notes for three days at a farm near Washington, documenting what she calls the worst case she has ever seen of neglect in 20 years.
Russell Hughes, 75, owned 18 horses, 14 had suffered from malnutrition. He was given the opportunity to sign over the horses or be charged with animal cruelty. He agreed to sign them over, although he did ask if they could "leave a couple." (So he could finish the job of killing them slowly?)
You all know how I feel about laws; I have little respect for many of them and, given the proper circumstances, would have no trouble breaking a few. But our society is very clear on one thing that I wouldn’t mess with: animals are property and you can pretty much treat the ones you own however you want, but if you’re ever going to help one that’s owned by someone else, you’d best go about it in the right way.
The animal cruelty investigator in this case did it right, although there are still lots of holes:
- Shouldn’t Mr. Hughes be prohibited from owning any more horses?
- Why did they offer him a deal immediately?
- Shouldn’t they have impounded the horses AND charged him with neglect?
- Why isn’t this man considered a criminal?
That’s all the principled, purist in me reacting to injustice. But in the real world, we must settle for far less.
For a moment, imagine one of the many cases you’ve heard of parents neglecting their children. The children are removed and the parents are charged with neglect. That’s because children aren’t owned by their parents. Parents do not have the right to treat the children as they choose because children have the right NOT to be abused.
Animals do not have the right NOT to be abused, because they are considered property with no individual value. And this, my friends, is the heart of the animal rights (as opposed to animal welfare) movement.