ReikiAnge Posted September 26, 2009 Report Share Posted September 26, 2009 The sentences handed down are truly pathetic. The law needs to change. I agree, at least they did get sentences near/to the maximum end of what can be given, but they are ridiculously short. I know it wouldn't stop things completely - as the US seems to have harsher sentencing and still dog fighting goes on - but hopefully it would help the problem somehow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReikiAnge Posted September 26, 2009 Report Share Posted September 26, 2009 And the "these dogs are not pet dogs" bit - obviously none of those eejits has ever seen any footage of Michael Vick's dogs: some of these are PAT dogs now!! Bloody ignorance .... :( Do you mean the judge's comment? I read the BBC article yesterday - link - District judge Richard Blake said: "There's widespread public objection at these sorts of offences; of the sadistic abuse of animals for entertainment. "The dogs in this case are not in any way pets - they are animals used for sadistic entertainment and perverted pleasure." and I saw his comments more as a judgment about the b******s involved rather than the dogs - ie the poor dogs are not kept and cared for as pets but used in a horrid way. The animal cruelty laws in this country are appallingly lenient I think. I'm really not convinced that they serve as much of a deterrent - not that any decent person would need a deterrent of course. Poor dogs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReikiAnge Posted October 2, 2009 Report Share Posted October 2, 2009 The last guy in this case - the one that got attacked in court (shame ) - has been jailed for 23 weeks and banned from keeping animals for life. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8284892.stm Utter scum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts