Tailkicker
UKC Forum Member
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Nicholasville, KY
Posts: 871 |
KENTUCKY PENAL CODE KRS 525.125
525.125 Cruelty to animals in the first degree.
(1) The following persons are guilty of cruelty to animals in the first degree
whenever a four-legged animal is caused to fight for pleasure or profit:
(a) The owner of the animal;
(b) The owner of the property on which the fight is conducted if the owner
knows of the fight;
(c) Anyone who participates in the organization of the fight.
(2) Activities of animals engaged in hunting, field trials, dog training, and other
activities authorized either by a hunting license or by the Department of Fish
and Wildlife shall not constitute a violation of this section.
(3) Cruelty to animals in the first degree is a Class D felony.
Effective:July 14, 1992
The amendment:
Any person who knowingly owns, possesses, keeps, breeds, trains, sells, or otherwise transfers a four-legged animal for the purpose of that animal or its offspring being used to fight for pleasure or profit is guilty of cruelty to animals in the first degree.
The Amendment is redundant to sections already in Law.
Who is guilty?
- The owner - The amendment adds that; Knowingly owns - guilty of animal cruelty in the first degree
- The owner of the property - The amendment adds that; possesses, keeps
- Anyone who participates - The amendment adds that; possesses, keeps, breeds, trains, sells, or otherwise transfers - guilty of animal cruelty in the first degree
Which begs the question why the amendment(s) were even added.
quote:
Other amendments considered:
- HFA (1, J. Fischer) - Specify that cruelty to animals in the first degree only applies to canine or porcine animals, rather than all four-legged animals.
- HFA (2, J. Hoover) - Delete "four-legged" from KRS 525.125 on cruelty to animals in the first degree to make all animal fighting activities a Class D felony, not just four-legged fighting; amend KRS 525.130 to conform, leaving vending and spectating at animal fights as a Class A misdemeanor.
- HFA (3, J. Bell) - Specify that the hunting exception includes hunting hogs and bears.
Jan 8-introduced in House
Jan 9-to Judiciary (H)
Feb 3-posting waived
Feb 4-reported favorably, 1st reading, to Calendar; floor amendment (1) filed
Feb 5-2nd reading, to Rules; floor amendment (2) filed ; taken from Rules; placed in the Orders of the Day
Feb 11-floor amendment (1) withdrawn
Feb 12-floor amendment (3) filed
The third amendment is probably most alarming as that would mean that these activities are not currently covered.... why would they need to add it.
Personally I would like to see the law amended to:
(1) The following persons are guilty of cruelty to animals in the first degree
whenever a canine is caused to fight another canine for pleasure or profit:
(a) The owner of the animal;
(b) The owner of the property on which the fight is conducted if the owner
knows of the fight;
(c) Anyone who participates in the organization of the fight.
(2) Cruelty to animals in the first degree is a Class D felony.
To me, (excluding our activities as hunters, competitors and hound enthusiasts) this is a bad bill. The bill will allow an elevated liberal action by law enforcement, giving more authority to them and, IMO, a more subjective evaluation of animals, property and circumstance. They would not have to catch the perps in the act... just be suspect.
If I own a Pit registered by UKC, I think that I would worried about this bill. If I breed a dog and the offspring are sold legally. that person that bought the animal could involve the animal in fighting activities... this bill makes me accountable to animal cruelty. Your word that, "I didn't know they were going to use the dog for fighting", probably won't hold up in court. Why would you want to put your customers through that mess.
Todd, you mentioned that you don't know how bills are written, or what it takes to add amendments. Well, we have our President Doug Morgan every week in Frankfort working with Reps and Senators on bills. He Lobbies for changes for Houndsmen and canine owners. Shooting him a letter along with other registries, gives him clout in negotiating OUR (UKC and Houndsmen) stance on the issue.
__________________
"A thorough knowledge of the Bible is worth more than a college education."
Theodore Roosevelt
Jeremiah CL Johnson
My Email
Johnson Branch Treeing Walkers Est. 1980
Kentucky Houndsmen Association Inc.
Kentucky Houndsmen Association Foundation for Sportsman Rights Inc.
"Dedicated to protecting the heritage of Kentucky Houndsmen"
KHA Website
Join the NRA
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
02-24-2015 08:19 PM
I still free cast hounds to aint a man on here big enough or tough enough to keep me from it. Now chickens? Not so much. I gave all that up buy I do not have a problem with it. This thread is about ukc supporting the tree huggers though. Not gamefowl.
