Starve a dog and pay only $1750

It’s interesting how often people require those with strong views about a specific issue to justify what they do for the greater good. Suffice to say that I am confident I do more than the average bear in contributing to the battle against child abuse, famine, social inequity and (of course going by my original post) animal cruelty.

Sorry Weezie, I’m with Longshanks at #18. I’m not favouring animal cruelty by any means, but if you’re this motivated about a Canberra puppy, i hope you’re sparing a thought for child famine victims in the sahel and other actual people. After all, “it’s a smaller step than you might think” from a puppy to a child, apparently.

weeziepops said :

Not double standards at all. She deliberately owned a pet which she mistreated. She didn’t accidentally injure it. She starved it. She had help from the RSPCA and she starved that dog.

And I bet her mental problems didn’t prevent her from ensuring that SHE ate. And if her mental problems were so profound, why the flap didn’t the RSPCA bloody do something sooner? There’s two wrongs here. Was the RSPCA being all PC because she had mental problems? I have a massive problem with that, their focus should be the welfare of animals, not people. That poor bloody dog.

Is it not the responsibility of the RSPCA to immediately remove animals from an irresponsible owner once it has been established that cruelty is apparent??

weeziepops said :

Boo, Holden – this person deserves no sympathy and no second chance. If the dog survives this abuse it will suffer from health problems, physical and mental, for the rest of its life. Would you have compassion for this poor soul if it had been a child? It’s a smaller step than you might think.

Hey weeziepops, you might not know, but we do actually live in a world where children are treated this badly. Worse in fact.

I mean sure, let’s feel sorry for the dog and all. But let’s try and keep a sense of perspective shall we?

Out of interest, given your response to this situation, how much time, energy and indignant anger and judgement do you direct at those who are responsible for the deaths of millions of people? Or do you genuinely feel more compassion for this dog than for the thousands of children currently starving to death throughout the world? (Of course, most of them are black, and not in our backyard, and even if they were they wouldn’t have the cute factor of an ill-treated animal. But still – as kids they surely have some appeal?)

Just wondering…

Kellie Ward of Ainslie. Prime candidate for a king hit.

weeziepops said :

Not double standards at all.

Nah, ‘course not.

Not double standards at all. She deliberately owned a pet which she mistreated. She didn’t accidentally injure it. She starved it. She had help from the RSPCA and she starved that dog.

weeziepops said :

Boo, Holden – this person deserves no sympathy and no second chance. If the dog survives this abuse it will suffer from health problems, physical and mental, for the rest of its life. Would you have compassion for this poor soul if it had been a child? It’s a smaller step than you might think.

Okay, I’ve no dramas at all with the sympathy for the dog, which we now understand is on the way to recovery thanks to the RSPCA.

Yet, if we take the CT article at face value, the defendant was involved in a car accident and has subsequently suffered mental health issues for 18 months. Yet, according to you, she deserves no sympathy or understanding that her health concerns could have contributed to her mistreatment of the dog.

Double standards much?

“Over a period of time the RSPCA sought to assist the woman to care for the animal appropriately.”

So they new the animal was being mistreated but let her keep it anyway? Surely this could have been avoided if they had properly intervened earlier.

Boo, Holden – this person deserves no sympathy and no second chance. If the dog survives this abuse it will suffer from health problems, physical and mental, for the rest of its life. Would you have compassion for this poor soul if it had been a child? It’s a smaller step than you might think.

Holden Caulfield said :

”I’m here today because I didn’t carry out my responsibilities and I should be punished for that,” she said.

Reckon she might deserve a second chance.

Please, any monkey can read a statement prepared by a legal representative. That poor dog, wasting away every day while the RSPCA could do nothing but ask the owner is he was being fed .. unbelievable. And given that there had been complaints about the animal – one can only assume that neighbours at some stage may have thrown food over the fence, hence why the poor dog didn’t end up as worm food earlier. Terrible.

boo said :

It seems she admitted responsibility and pled guilty. She has also undertaken not to own another animal. And I doubt $1,750 is a small amount to her. I think a little compassion for a woman at a low point in her life wouldn’t go astray.

There are a lot of good people, suffering from mental illnesss, who cherish their animals as companions during difficult times – who manage to walk them and feed them. I have no compassion for any individual who lets an animal get to such a state of neglect, despite the reported offers of assistance from the relevant animal welfare bodies. It’s just laziness, selfishness and all-round-dumb behaviour .. mental illness is not an excuse.

Fantastic that she will never own an animal again.

But mental illness is no excuse for starving an animal to death. It is pure hate and spite to do that to another living creature. There is no excuse for that.

Based on my admittedly limited experience with such matters (primarily confined to watching RSPCA Animal Rescue) I’ve often wondered why the RSPCA doesn’t take more decisive action. They always seem to give at least two or three notices to the owner. I imagine in some cases the owner complies but usually the situation just gets worse. So sad. At least the owner admitted guilt.

Banned from owning another pet? Maybe, but at least she wasn’t trying to weasel her way out of the charges:

”I’m here today because I didn’t carry out my responsibilities and I should be punished for that,” she said.

Reckon she might deserve a second chance.

As for the $1750 fine, what do you get for DUI or GBH?

If it was a kid, citing “mental illness” wouldn’t get her out of it, so I am buggered if I know why an animal that depends on her is different. It’s a shame the RSPCA didn’t take stronger action sooner. That poor animal, day after day after day, jesus.

Oh dear. ‘Emaciated’ is indeed an understatement.

She must be a public servant…

It seems she admitted responsibility and pled guilty. She has also undertaken not to own another animal. And I doubt $1,750 is a small amount to her. I think a little compassion for a woman at a low point in her life wouldn’t go astray.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/woman-fined-1750-over-emaciated-dog-20120718-22avf.html

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/woman-fined-1750-over-emaciated-dog-20120718-22avf.html

“… Seeing the pictures of the animal, its condition is apalling …”

What pics? Didn’t happen.