Tennessean Showing Its Bias Again

We already knew the Tennessean was a suck up for HSUS and Janis Sontany, but they really outdid themselves with this article: Animals suffer as TN balks at cruelty laws; Humane society says state ranks near bottom of nation. Not only is the article, by Brian Haas, incredibly biased, but it is full of statements that are factually untrue. Even the caption on the article's photo is inaccurate. There were not "hundreds" of dogs involved in the Warren County case. There were 121. It makes you wonder if Mr. Haas, or anyone at the Tennessean, checks any facts at all. Or cares about them.

I doubt they will print it (they never print anything I send them — gee, wonder why?), but here's my reply:


Dear Mr. Haas,

Wow, your information in this article is really incorrect. Re:

The Humane Society of the United States has labeled Tennessee one of the worst states in the nation for protecting animals. In addition to Tennessee’s having some of the weakest laws in the United States, its legislators are chided by the group for failing to pass meaningful new animal welfare laws.

According to both the Animal Legal Defense Fund, a California-based animal rights group, and HSUS itself, which releases a report on where the states rank in terms of their animal laws each year, Tennessee is in the mid to upper tier of states as far as animal protection laws. If you will check an interview with Wayne Pacelle, head of HSUS, in Nashville last week, you will see that he said the same thing about Tennessee.

When it comes to passing laws that protect animals, Pacelle says the Volunteer State is in the middle of the pack but there's room for improvement.

Now, I realize that your article is either accidentally or intentionally very biased in favor of HSUS and promoting the laws that Rep. Sontany wants, but please try to get your facts straight. Especially when they are so easy to check.

Tennessee does have over 40 counties without animal control or shelters. Do you know some good way for those counties to come up with funding to provide animal control or shelters in this poor economy? Are there some essential services to humans you would like to see discontinued?

As far as bills concerning agriculture, Rep. Niceley is quite correct. There are already plenty of bills that protect animals. The bills that Rep. Sontany and HSUS are pushing are often not in the best interest of farmers OR in the best interest of the animals. But that is hardly likely to concern HSUS since they are not a fan of agriculture, especially any agriculture that raises animals for meat. If you would check into them more carefully you would find that they would prefer to have people eating a vegan diet.

Concerning spay/neuter laws for cats and dogs, mandatory spay/neuter programs have been a failure everywhere they have been tried across the country. They result in owner abandonment of animals and higher euthanasia rates. They do not lower the numbers of animals in shelters.

If you are going to write about HSUS and what they say about Tennessee, please try to present all sides of the issues. HSUS tries to portray itself as a mainstream group but they are a radical animal rights organization. Unfortunately, Rep. Sontany has been carrying their water for years. Rep. Sontany's bills for HSUS do not get out of committee and are not passed because the majority of Tennesseans do not support them.

For more information about HSUS you can visit the SAOVA web site.

Sincerely,
Carlotta Cooper
Tennessee Director, Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance

Are Tennessee animal cruelty penalties too lax?

Here's a recent posting from WATE-TV in Knoxville. It addresses the issue of mandatory minimum sentencing for animal cruelty convictions.

Are Tennessee animal cruelty penalties too lax?

Tuesday, May 17, 2011 5:48 PM EST

By HANA KIM

6 News Reporter

KNOXVILLE (WATE) - A Knox County assistant district attorney who has prosecuted her share of animal cruelty cases hopes the state Legislature will take a closer look at current laws.

There are about 20 active animal cruelty cases in the county and if history is any indication, most of the defendants will not spend any time in jail even if they're convicted.

ADA Joanie Stewart hopes lawmakers will perhaps implement a mandatory minimum sentence for anyone convicted of animal cruelty.

Jeffrey Coppock, 44, of Knoxville, was due for a preliminary hearing Tuesday on charges that he beat a Shih Tzu named Rosie to death. However, his hearing was reset to July 20.

Coppock was arrested in April after deputies got a call from his neighbor on Evening Star Lane.

When deputies got there, they found Rosie in the backyard with blood around her nose, broken bones and only taking shallow breaths. The dog later died.

In another case Knox County case, a three-year-old dog nicknamed the "Little Brown Dog" made national headlines in November 2009 after she was dragged nearly a mile behind a pickup truck.

She survived and her former owner, Jimmy Lovell, is awaiting trial. Because of the extent of Little Brown Dog's injuries, Lovell was charged with a felony.

"On the felony cases, the animal has been treated in a sadistic and depraved manner," Stewart explained.

"A lot of our offenders are first time offenders so they are eligible for programs that would be diversion, that would be probation if they don't have a lengthy criminal record," Stewart added.

If there is no bodily injury or death to the animal, most cases are deemed misdemeanors.

"You have so many crimes that have the minimum jail sentences. DUI is one, 48 hours and that's a misdemeanor," Stewart said.

Stewart believes a mandatory minimum sentence will send a stronger message and hopefully help protect animals.

If a person is convicted of his first animal cruelty charge and picks up a second charge, that second offense is automatically a felony.

Aside from the fact that the ADA in the article doesn't actually make a case for mandatory minimum sentencing, and only recites a short list of cases which are waiting to be tried, the article is fairly illogical in other ways.

Here are some problems with the article. While I don't have much respect for HSUS or the Animal Legal Defense Fund, those fun-loving people who are always demanding that animal cruelty laws be made tougher, both entities came out this year with reports that placed Tennessee in the mid to upper reaches of states having strong laws against animal cruelty. ALDF placed Tennessee in the top tier of states with animal cruelty laws. So there. Hey, you people who are always claiming that Tennessee is full of people who are cruel to animals! What do you think about that? (Nope, I won't give links to those groups. Not on this site.)

Another problem with this article, or with the thought process of the ADA mentioned in it, is that mandatory minimum sentences don't do what they are intended to do. Many animal cruelty cases which are charged as misdemeanors are carried out by children and teens. Do you want to have a mandatory minimum sentence for crimes committed by minors? Well, a lot of prosecutors don't. When it comes to charging minors with those crimes, they would rather not do it. So, faced with either prosecuting a kid with a very stiff mandatory sentence or not charging him at all, they let him go and they don't prosecute. The result is that when you have mandatory minimum sentences you often have fewer misdemeanor crimes prosecuted — exactly the opposite effect that people pushing for tougher laws want.

There is a bill in the Tennessee legislature right now concerning mandatory minimum sentencing for animal cruelty cases but if the legislators have any sense at all they will let it die and leave prosecution and sentencing to the courts.

How To Find Information About Animal Laws In Tennessee

For those of you interested in knowing more about animal laws in Tennessee, check out the Michie site for Tennessee laws. Title 43 and Title 44 concern agriculture/horticulture and animals. Most of the laws applying to livestock and to pets are in these sections. That's where you can get the straight version of Tennessee laws. If you go to some other sites I'm afraid you will get an animal rights interpretation of animal law, and that includes the UT web site on animal law. They have a link to the Animal Legal Defense Fund, one of the most hard core animal rights groups in the country. ALDF is the group behind the push for an animal abuser registry here in Tennessee and elsewhere. The Animal Law Coalition site also tends to be AR-leaning in its interpretation of animal laws.

And, what is wrong with an animal abuser registry, you may be wondering? Well, for one thing, it's good way to ruin the lives of youthful offenders. Do you really want to put a young teenager on an animal abuse registry? Kids sometimes do stupid things that they regret for the rest of their lives. It's not a true indication of who they are when they are adults. Even if someone's name is removed from such a registry 10 years later, there is no way to remove all of the places where their name has been posted on the Internet as an animal abuser. Should someone really have to pay for some crimes for the rest of their lives? I don't think so, and neither do many other people.

Secondly, there is every indication that these offender registries don't actually work, judging by the lack of success with sex offender registries.

HSUS, ALDF, and AR supporters have been pushing the animal abuse registry bill in Tennessee for the last several years. So far it hasn't gotten very far. Let's keep it that way.