There was nothing stopping ward from amending the bill.

There is nothing wrong with having a bill protecting pets and it would hopefully stop some of the violent acts committed against them. The question here is whether Mr. Wards bill will be something that will further enrich government or will it produce a fine that would go to the pet owner for replacement or burial of his loss.
If your bill is going to be anything similar to Nathan’s Law, please go fishing or golfing as the publlic doesn’t need anymore government enrichment laws.

Unless you are interested in being able to kick a dog, I fail to see what possible opposition there would be to a bill like what was proposed.  Anyone care to tell?

FWIW, animal cruelty is already a misdemeanor, so it’s not like there is no law against this.  I’m working from memory, but I believe a CL story said you could get a year in jail for it.  I’m not sure how important or useful adding the felony designation is.

It seems to me that persons guilty of animal cruelty should probably be sentenced to see a shrink.  Stopping them from abusing animals is worthwhile, but keeping them from expanding to humans is even more important.

Elwood, the maximum jail time is six months.  I’m sorry, but setting an animal on fire should carry more jail time than that. Better yet, steal my dog to feed to a pit bull and you’ll wish it was six months in jail.

Unless you are interested in being able to kick a dog, I fail to see what possible opposition there would be to a bill like what was proposed.  Anyone care to tell?

SECTION 1. The following shall be codified as Section 97-41-25, Mississippi Code of 1972:

97-41-25. If any person shall knowingly or with criminal negligence torment, unjustifiably injure, deprive of necessary sustenance, food or drink; or cruelly beat or mutilate; or cause or procure to be tortured, unjustifiably injured, tormented, or deprived of necessary sustenance, food or drink; or to be cruelly beaten or mutilated or killed, any living vertebrate creature, except human beings and fish, every such offender, for each offense, shall be guilty of cruelty to animals, which is a misdemeanor punishable by not more than one (1) year in jail, a fine of not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00), or both.

JD, what is your point?

I suppose you are OK with serving 1 year for every mouse or rat you kill

Please.  The bill had exceptions.  Quit the scare tactics.

scare tactics?

quoting the bill is a scare tactic?

please quote me the “exceptions” as they pertain, unless that’s too scary

Go to jacksonjambalaya.com.  It’s well documented there.  You’re all over that site too, so I’m guessing you just can’t interpret the bill.  I don’t have time to teach you how to read correctly.

In other words, you can’t quote it because it doesn’t exist.

Hi, JD!  Here are the exceptions that you like to pretend never existed in the bill:

SECTION 3. The following shall be codified as Section 69 97-41-29, Mississippi Code of 1972: 70 97-41-29.
(1) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as prohibiting a person from:
(a) Defending himself or herself or another person from physical or economic injury being threatened or caused by an animal;
(b) Injuring or killing of an unconfined animal on the person’s property if the unconfined animal is reasonably believed to constitute a threat of physical injury or damage to any animal under the care or control of the person;
(c) Acting in accordance with the provisions of Section 95-5-19;
(d) Engaging in practices lawful under the Mississippi Veterinary Practice Act, Section 73-39-51 et seq., or engaging in activities by any licensed veterinarian while following accepted standards of practice of the profession, including, but not limited to, the euthanizing, spaying or neutering, earcropping, taildocking, declawing, or debarking of an animal;
(e) Humanely killing an animal that is suffering from an incurable or untreatable illness or condition or if there appears to be no reasonable probability that the life or usefulness of the animal can be saved;
(f) Rendering emergency care, treatment or assistance to an animal that is abandoned, ill, injured or in distress related to an accident or disaster if the person rendering the care, treatment or assistance is:
(i) Acting in good faith; and
(ii) Not receiving compensation;
(g) Performing accepted agricultural and animal husbandry practices on livestock or poultry, including, but not limited to, slaughter, butchering, food processing and marketing practices;
(h) Performing professional pest control activities in a lawful manner;
(i) Training for or participating in a rodeo, equine activity, or competitive event, any lawful animal exhibition or competition practice, or any lawful zoological practice;
(j) Engaging in normal or accepted practices of animal identification, including, but not limited to, use of microchips, tatoos, eartags, branding, ear notching, or any similar practice to identify ownership of an animal;
(k) Engaging in lawful hunting, trapping, fishing, wildlife management, or any activity regulated by the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks;
(l) Any lawful scientific research or medical practice, or activities undertaken by research and education facilities or institutions that are:
(i) Regulated under the provisions of the Animal Welfare Act, 7 USC 2131 et seq., as in effect on July 1, 2010;
(ii) Regulated under the provisions of the Health Research Extension Act of 1985, Public Law No. 99-158; or
(iii) Subject to any other applicable state or federal law or regulation governing animal research as in effect on July 1, 2010;
(m) Activities involving the training and deployment of dogs for the purpose of hunting and pursuit of game;
(n) Any conduct which is otherwise permitted under the laws of this state or of the United States.

Now, for those of you just joining the fun (it’s been going on a LONG TIME at JJ), Mr. Berry will now do the following:
1) Get obsessed with the inclusion of the word “vertebrate) in Section 1;
2) Claim that his non-attorney legal opinion is superior to that of anyone who has a law degree;
3) Claim that anyone who disagrees with him must be a fringe animal-rights flake.

Sad, really.  Classic nutcase conspiracy-theorist in the making.  I look forward to your upcoming posts about the faked moon landing.

While being a bonifide pet lover/protector/provider and benificiary(see Trust agreement) if there is sufficient law currently to protect animals from acts of cruelity why do we need another law?  Now, getting law enforcement to comply has always been the problem.  Deer hunters and/or poachers are a nightmare for me nearly year ‘round and I get no help whatsoever!  Getting paid Game Wardens or Sheriff deputies to take these issues seriously.......that’s the crux of the issue.  The nut running the Fish and Game Department is hell bent on ignoring the obvious serious needs state-wide and determined to spend $$$$ tax dollars on his whims instead. (Pheasant hunting anyone?) He needs to go.  That would be the first step in the protecting all animals.

JacksonAM,

I did not pretend that exceptions didn’t exist.  I asked to “please quote me the ‘exceptions’ as they pertain” to “serving 1 year for every mouse or rat you kill.” The average citizen is not a veterinarian nor a professional in pest control, and no other exception reads as to allow someone to kill a pest animal without being a criminal.

As far as the rest of your ad hominem comments, surely you don’t think suggestively lying promotes any cause you have.

JD clearly doesn’t stand for Juris Doctorate.  I can see the sheriff’s departments now rolling out the guns for a mouse.

Idiot.

So, why have that part of the law on the books if you think it won’t be enforced?

It’s not worth bothering explaining.

If our legislators want do it for a child as per Nathans law, possibly they will have more compassion for animals.

Sorry, JD Berry, you quoted the wrong section of the MS Code.

97-41-16, which deals with dogs and cats only (as you can tell by reading the code, section 15 provides a felony conviction for doing the same thing to livestock (cows, chickens, pigs, goats, animals generally raised for slaughter)

(1) Any person who shall maliciously, either out of a spirit of revenge or wanton cruelty, or who shall mischievously kill, maim or wound, or injure any dog or cat, or cause any person to do the same, shall be fined not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or be imprisoned not exceeding six (6) months. 

For dogs or cats - for less than torture - its six months. For chickens, its a felony and a year to five.

The issue is to take people off the street who will pour gasoline on a dog and set it on fire. Give them a felony conviction so that they won’t go on to do some heinous act to a vulnerable adult.  But some members of our MS legislature seem to think that while mistreating a chicken should be a felony, doing it to a dog or cat isn’t as serious.

Go figure.

OK, let’s break this down.

1) 3/15, at 10:36 a.m. and 1 p.m., JD asks for “exceptions.” Now, he’s been provided those exceptions ad nauseum over at JJ, but, what the hell.

2) 3/15, at 4:08 p.m., I paste the exceptions DIRECTLY from the legislation in question.  Having observed the back-and-forth over at JJ and learned that sensible arguments fail to gain his attention, I throw in a few fun bits.  BTW, ad hominem is a logical fallacy when it is used in place of actual argumentation—when it accompanies informed arguments, it’s there for entertainment.

3) 3/15, at 5:04 p.m., JD responds by being all, Whoa, I never said that exceptions don’t exist.  (See JD post at 1 p.m. same date, in reference to exceptions: “In other words, you can’t quote it because it doesn’t exist.").  Oh, and he references the WRONG exceptions in arguing that the bill will lead to mass arrests of anyone who purchases D-CON or mouse traps.

Here’s the exception that matters: “(n) Any conduct which is otherwise permitted under the laws of this state or of the United States.”

Now, please take a look at §17-17-19 of the Mississippi Code: 

“VERMIN CONTROL: Rodents and insects of public health importance, as rats, flies, mosquitoes and the like shall be controlled in a manner satisfactory to the health department; and the closing out or conversion to sanitary landfill operations of existing open dumps shall, where deemed necessary by the health officer, be accompanied by an adequate rat eradication program to prevent the spread of rodents to nearby properties.”

Controlling the rat population is a given under public health laws.  That’s CONDUCT OTHERWISE PERMITTED UNDER THE LAWS OF THIS STATE.

Please also note the phrase “and the like.” Nuisance animals such as racoons, possums, etc., are disease carriers and are of importance to public health.

The Health Department isn’t going to get its panties in a wad because someone gets rid of nuisance animals in a reasonable manner.